dean22029/WTO_Docs huggingface dataset:
ARGENTINA – MEASURES AFFECTING THE EXPORT OF BOVINE HIDES AND THE IMPORT OF FINISHED LEATHER
Document: Panel Report Action by the Dispute Settlement Body
Date: 26 February 2001
Document codes: WT/DS155/5; WT/DS155/R; WT/DS155/R/Corr.1
Complainant: EU
Respondent: Argentina
Third parties: U.S.
Dispute stage: Consultation
Agreements cited: Art. XI:1, X:3(a), III:2  GATT 1994

ARGENTINA – MEASURES AFFECTING THE EXPORT OF BOVINE HIDES
AND THE IMPORT OF FINISHED LEATHER
Panel Report
Action by the Dispute Settlement Body
At its meeting on 16 February 2001, the Dispute Settlement Body adopted the Panel report on
""
( and ).
ARGENTINE – MESURES VISANT L'EXPORTATION DE PEAUX DE
BOVINS ET L'IMPORTATION DE CUIRS FINIS
Rapport du Groupe spécial
Groupe spécial intitulé "Argentine – Mesures visant l'exportation de peaux de bovins et l'importation
de cuirs finis" ( et ).
DE PIELES DE BOVINO Y A LA IMPORTACIÓN
DE CUEROS ACABADOS
Informe del Grupo Especial
Actuación del Órgano de Solución de Diferencias
En su reunión de 16 de febrero de 2001, el Órgano de Solución de Diferencias adoptó el
bovino y a la importación de cueros acabados" ( y ).
ARGENTINA – MEASURES AFFECTING THE EXPORT OF BOVINE HIDES AND THE IMPORT OF FINISHED LEATHER
Document: Request by the European Communities for Arbitration under Article 21.3(c) of the DSU
Date: 17 May 2001
Document codes: WT/DS155/6
Complainant: EU
Respondent: Argentina
Third parties: U.S.
Dispute stage: Consultation
Agreements cited: Art. XI:1, X:3(a), III:2  GATT 1994

ARGENTINA – MEASURES AFFECTING THE EXPORT OF BOVINE HIDES
AND THE IMPORT OF FINISHED LEATHER
Request by the European Communities
for Arbitration under Article 21.3(c) of the DSU
The following communication, dated 14 May 2001, from the Permanent Delegation of the
European Commission to the Chairman of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated at the request of
that delegation.
On 16 February 2001, the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) adopted the recommendations and
rulings contained in the panel report in the proceeding "" (DS 155).
At the meeting of the DSB held on 12 March, Argentina indicated that they intended to
implement the recommendations and rulings of the DSB. The European Communities and Argentina
further informed the DSB of their ongoing bilateral consultations on the period of time for
implementation.
However, it has not been possible to reach an agreement with Argentina on a period of time
pursuant to Article 21.3(b) of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement
of Disputes (DSU). Therefore, the European Communities hereby request that the reasonable period
of time be determined through binding arbitration pursuant to Article 21.3(c) DSU.
The representatives of the European Communities will immediately open discussions with
Argentina in order to agree on an arbitrator.
GUATEMALA – DEFINITIVE ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES ON GREY PORTLAND CEMENT FROM MEXICO
Document: Request for Consultations by Mexico
Date: 8 January 1999
Document codes: WT/DS156/1; G/L/289; G/ADP/D14/1
Complainant: Mexico
Respondent: Guatemala
Third parties: EU, Ecuador, El Salvador, Honduras, U.S.
Dispute stage: Panel
Agreements cited: Art. 5, 12, 1, 6, 7, 18, 2, 3, 9  Anti-dumpingArt. VI  GATT 1994

GUATEMALA – DEFINITIVE ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES ON
GREY PORTLAND CEMENT FROM MEXICO
Request for Consultations by Mexico
The following communication, dated 5 January 1999, from the Permanent Mission of Mexico
to the Permanent Mission of Guatemala and the Chairman of the Dispute Settlement Body, is
circulated in accordance with Article 4.4 of the DSU.
On instructions from the corresponding authorities of the Government of Mexico, I hereby
request formal consultations under Article 17.3 of the Agreement on Implementation of Article VI of
the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 (the Anti-Dumping Agreement), Article 4 of the
Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes, and Article XXIII of
the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994, of the .
The consultations requested refer to the definitive measure to collect definitive anti-dumping
duties (definitive anti-dumping measure) imposed by the authorities of your Government on imports
of grey portland cement from the Mexican firm Cooperativa La Cruz Azul S.C.L., as well as the
actions that preceded it.
In the view of the Government of Mexico, the definitive anti-dumping measure and the
actions that preceded it:
(a) Are incompatible with, inter alia, Articles 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 9, 12 and 18 and Annexes I
and II of the Anti-Dumping Agreement, and also with Article VI of the General
Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 (GATT 1994); and
(b) nullify or impair benefits accruing to Mexico under the GATT 1994.
Mexico reserves the right to include other issues of fact and/or legal claims in the course of
the consultations.
GUATEMALA - DEFINITIVE ANTI-DUMPING MEASURE ON GREY PORTLAND CEMENT FROM MEXICO
Document: Request for the Establishment of a Panel by Mexico Corrigendum Please insert the following changes in document WT/DS156/2, in the English  version:
Date: 5 August 1999
Document codes: WT/DS156/2/Corr.11; WT/DS156/2
Complainant: Mexico
Respondent: Guatemala
Third parties: EU, Ecuador, El Salvador, Honduras, U.S.
Dispute stage: Panel
Agreements cited: Art. 5, 12, 1, 6, 7, 18, 2, 3, 9  Anti-dumpingArt. VI  GATT 1994

GUATEMALA - DEFINITIVE ANTI-DUMPING MEASURE ON
GREY PORTLAND CEMENT FROM MEXICO
Request for the Establishment of a Panel by Mexico
Corrigendum
Please insert the following changes in document , in the English version:
1. In Section D, paragraph 6, third line, add 2 after the word "paragraphs";
2. In Section F, page 6, first line after GATT 1994, add "and the".
GUATEMALA – DEFINITIVE ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES ON GREY PORTLAND CEMENT FROM MEXICO
Document: Constitution of the Panel Established at the Request of Mexico Note by the Secretariat
Date: 2 November 1999
Document codes: WT/DS156/3
Complainant: Mexico
Respondent: Guatemala
Third parties: EU, Ecuador, El Salvador, Honduras, U.S.
Dispute stage: Panel
Agreements cited: Art. 5, 12, 1, 6, 7, 18, 2, 3, 9  Anti-dumpingArt. VI  GATT 1994

GUATEMALA – DEFINITIVE ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES ON
GREY PORTLAND CEMENT FROM MEXICO
Constitution of the Panel Established at the Request of Mexico
Note by the Secretariat
1. At its meeting on 22 September 1999, the DSB established a panel pursuant to the request by
Mexico (WT/DS/156/2 and WT/DS/156/2/Corr.1).
2. At that DSB meeting, parties agreed that th e Panel should have standard terms of reference.
The terms of reference of the Panel are the following:
"To examine, in the light of the relevant provisions of the covered agreements cited by Mexico
in documents WT/DS/156/2 and WT/DS/156/2/ Corr.1, the matter referred to the DSB by
Mexico in that document and to make such fi ndings as will assist the DSB in making the
recommendations or in giving the rulings provided for in those agreements".
3. On 12 October 1999, Mexico requested the Dir ector-General to determine the composition of
the Panel, pursuant to paragraph 7 of Article 8 of the DSU. This paragraph provides:
"If there is no agreement on the panelists within 20 days after the date of the establishment of a
panel, at the request of either party, the Director-General, in consultation with the Chairman of
the DSB and the Chairman of the relevant Council or Committee, shall determine the
composition of the panel by appointing the pane llists whom the Director-General considers
most appropriate in accordance with any relevant special or additional rules or procedures of the
covered agreement or covered agreements which are at issue in the dispute, after consulting
with the parties to the dispute. The Chairman of the DSB shall inform the Members of the
composition of the panel thus formed no later than 10 days after the date the Chairman receives
such a request."
4. The Director-General composed the Panel as follows:
Chairman: Mr. Johannes Human
Members: Mr. Antonio Buencamino
Mr. Oscar Hernández
5. Ecuador, El Salvador, the European Communities, Honduras and the United States have
reserved their rights as third parties to the dispute.
GUATEMALA - DEFINITIVE ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES ON GREY PORTLAND CEMENT FROM MEXICO
Document: Panel Report Action by the Dispute Settlement Body
Date: 22 November 2000
Document codes: WT/DS156/4; WT/DS156/R
Complainant: Mexico
Respondent: Guatemala
Third parties: EU, Ecuador, El Salvador, Honduras, U.S.
Dispute stage: Panel
Agreements cited: Art. 5, 12, 1, 6, 7, 18, 2, 3, 9  Anti-dumpingArt. VI  GATT 1994

GUATEMALA - DEFINITIVE ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES ON
GREY PORTLAND CEMENT FROM MEXICO
Panel Report
Action by the Dispute Settlement Body
At its meeting on 17 November 2000, the Dispute Settlement Body adopted the Panel report
on ""

GUATEMALA - MESURES ANTIDUMPING DÉFINITIVES CONCERNANT
Rapport du Groupe spécial
du Groupe spécial intitulé "Guatemala - Mesures antidumping définitives concernant le ciment
Portland gris en provenance du Mexique" ().
GUATEMALA - MEDIDAS ANTIDUMPING DEFINITIVAS APLICADAS
AL CEMENTO PORTLAND GRIS PROCEDENTE DE MÉXICO
Informe del Grupo Especial
Actuación del Órgano de Solución de Diferencias
En su reunión de 17 de noviembre de 2000, el Órgano de Solución de Diferencias adoptó el
informe del Grupo Especial sobre "Guatemala - Medidas antidumping definitivas aplicadas al
cemento Portland gris procedente de México" ().
GUATEMALA – DEFINITIVE ANTI-DUMPING MEASURE ON GREY PORTLAND CEMENT FROM MEXICO
Document: Request for Consultations by Mexico Corrigendum In document WT/DS156/1, which was an original Spanish document, the second paragraph should, in the English and French versions, reproduce the words used in Article 17.4 of the Anti- Dumping Agreement, as is the case in the Spanish original. In other words, the English version should read: "The consultations requested refer to the final action to levy definitive anti-dumping duties(definitive anti-dumping measure) imposed by the authorities of your Government on imports of grey portland cement from the Mexican firm Cooperativa La Cruz Azul S.C.L., as well as the actions that preceded it".
Date: 18 February 1999
Document codes: WT/DS156/1/Corr.21; WT/DS156/1; G/L/289/Corr.2; G/ADP/D14/1/Corr.2
Complainant: Poland
Respondent: Czech Republic
Dispute stage: Consultation
Agreements cited: Art. 4  AgricultureArt. I, II, XXIII  GATT 1994

GUATEMALA – DEFINITIVE ANTI-DUMPING MEASURE ON
GREY PORTLAND CEMENT FROM MEXICO
Request for Consultations by Mexico
Corrigendum
In document , which was an original Spanish document, the second paragraph
should, in the English and French versions, reproduce the words used in Article 17.4 of the Anti-
Dumping Agreement, as is the case in the Spanish original.
In other words, the English version should read:
"The consultations requested refer to the final action to levy definitive anti-dumping
duties(definitive anti-dumping measure) imposed by the authorities of your Government on imports of
grey portland cement from the Mexican firm Cooperativa La Cruz Azul S.C.L., as well as the actions
that preceded it".
GUATEMALA – DEFINITIVE ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES ON GREY PORTLAND CEMENT FROM MEXICO
Document: Request for Consultations by Mexico Corrigendum The word "MEASURES" in the title of document WT/DS156/1 - G/L/289 - G/ADP/D14/1 should read "MEASURE".
Date: 15 January 1999
Document codes: WT/DS156/1/Corr.11; WT/DS156/1; G/L/289/Corr.1; G/ADP/D14/1/Corr.1; G/L/289; G/ADP/D14/1
Complainant: Poland
Respondent: Czech Republic
Dispute stage: Consultation
Agreements cited: Art. 4  AgricultureArt. I, II, XXIII  GATT 1994

GUATEMALA – DEFINITIVE ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES ON
GREY PORTLAND CEMENT FROM MEXICO
Request for Consultations by Mexico
Corrigendum
The word "MEASURES" in the title of document - -
should read "MEASURE".
ARGENTINA – DEFINITIVE ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES ON IMPORTS OF DRILL BITS FROM ITALY
Document: Request for Consultations by the European Communities
Date: 19 January 1999
Document codes: WT/DS157/1; G/ADP/D15/1
Complainant: EU
Respondent: Argentina
Dispute stage: Consultation
Agreements cited: Art. 1, 5.10  Anti-dumping

ARGENTINA – DEFINITIVE ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES ON
IMPORTS OF DRILL BITS FROM ITALY
Request for Consultations by the European Communities
The following communication, dated 14 January 1999, from the Permanent Delegation of the
European Commission to the Permanent Mission of Argentina and to the Chairman of the Dispute
Settlement Body, is circulated in accordance with Article 4.4 of the DSU.
On behalf of the European Communities, I hereby request consultations with Argentina
pursuant to Article 4 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of
Disputes and Articles 1, 5.10 and 17.3 of the Agr eement on Implementation of Article VI of the
GATT 1994 (the "Anti-Dumping Agreement", ADA), with regard to the definitive anti-dumping
measures imposed by Argentina on imports of drill bits from Italy.
On 12 September 1998, Argentina imposed definitive anti-dumping measures on the above
imports. The investigation which led to the imposition of these measures had been initiated on
21 February 1997.
Article 5.10 ADA provides that "[I]nvestigations shall, except in special circumstances, be
concluded within one year, and in no case more than 18 months, after their initiation". In this case,
Argentina's investigation exceeded 18 months. Consequently, Argentina has not complied with this
provision and, thus, has also violated Article 1 ADA.
I look forward to receiving your reply to this request from the European Communities and to
setting a mutually convenient date for these consultations.
A copy of this letter has been sent to the Chairman of the Dispute Settlement Body and to the
Chairman of the Anti-Dumping Committee.
EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES – REGIME FOR THE IMPORTATION, SALE AND DISTRIBUTION OF BANANAS
Document: Request for Consultations by Honduras, Mexico, Guatemala, Panama and the United States
Date: 25 January 1999
Document codes: WT/DS158/1; G/L/290; G/LIC/D/27; S/L/65
Complainant: Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Panama, U.S.
Respondent: EU
Dispute stage: Consultation
Agreements cited: Art. 6  Import Licensing

EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES – REGIME FOR THE IMPORTATION,
SALE AND DISTRIBUTION OF BANANAS
Request for Consultations by
Honduras, Mexico, Guatemala, Panama and the United States
The following communication, dated 20 January 1999, from the Permanent Missions of
Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Panama and the United States to the Permanent Delegation of the
European Commission and to the Chairman of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated in
accordance with Article 4.4 of the DSU.
The 15-month reasonable period of time for the EC to implement the Dispute Settlement
Body's recommendations and rulings in "" ended on 1 Januar y 1999. Regrettably, during this period, the EC
modified its regime in a manner that will not permit this dispute to conclude at this time on the basis
of a solution that is acceptable to our governments.
In order to try to achieve a mutually-acceptable solution consistent with the WTO Agreement,
our governments, jointly and severally, request consultations with the EC concerning the EC banana
regime established by EC Regulation 404/93, as amended and implemented by Council Regulation
1637/98 of 20 July 1998 and EC Commission Regulation 2362/98 of 28 October 1998. We are
making this request pursuant to Article 4 of the Dispute Settlement Understanding, Article XXII of the
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 (GATT 1994), Article XXII of the General Agreement
on Trade in Services (GATS), and Article 6 of the Agreement on Import Licensing Procedures (to the
extent it incorporates by reference Article XXII of GATT 1994).
Our objective is to clarify and discuss in detail with the EC the various aspects of the EC's
modified banana regime, including their effect on the market, our concerns about their WTO-
inconsistency, and ways that the EC might modify its regime in order to produce a satisfactory
settlement of this dispute. Article 3.7 of the WTO Dispute Settlement Understanding makes clear that
the aim of dispute settlement is to secure a "positive solution" to the dispute and that "a solution
mutually acceptable to the parties to a dispute and consistent with the covered agreements is clearly to
be preferred." Such a negotiated solution is clearly preferable to simply pursuing additional dispute
settlement procedures.
This request for consultations is without prejudice to our rights as individual Members to
pursue any procedures under the Dispute Settlement Understanding.
WT/DS158/1, G/L/290,
S/L/65, G/LIC/D/27

In light of our objective of seeking a mutually acceptable solution consistent with the WTO
Agreement, please advise us promptly of the possible dates on which EC representatives would be
available to engage in a meeting with our governments to consult on the issues described above.
EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES – REGIME FOR THE IMPORTATION, SALE AND DISTRIBUTION OF BANANAS
Document: Request to Join Consultations Communication from Ecuador
Date: 27 January 1999
Document codes: WT/DS158/2
Complainant: Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Panama, U.S.
Respondent: EU
Dispute stage: Consultation
Agreements cited: Art. 6  Import Licensing

EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES – REGIME FOR THE IMPORTATION,
SALE AND DISTRIBUTION OF BANANAS
Request to Join Consultations
Communication from Ecuador
The following communication, dated 25 January 1999, from the Permanent Mission of
Ecuador to the Permanent Delegation of the European Commission and the Chairman of the Dispute
Settlement Body, is circulated in accordance with Article 4.11 of the DSU.
I refer to the communication submitted by the Permanent Representatives of Guatemala,
Honduras, Mexico, Panama and the United States on 20 January 1999 requesting consultations with
the European Communities on the EC banana import regime established under Regulation 404/93 as
amended by Regulations 1637/98 and 2362/98.
Ecuador wishes to be joined in these consultations pursuant to the rights accruing to it under
Article XXII of GATT 1994 and Article 4.11 of the DSU.
I should be very grateful if you would let me know the date on which these consultations are
to be held.
EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES – REGIME FOR THE IMPORTATION, SALE AND DISTRIBUTION OF BANANAS
Document: Request to Join Consultations Communication from Belize
Date: 10 February 1999
Document codes: WT/DS158/3
Complainant: Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Panama, U.S.
Respondent: EU
Dispute stage: Consultation
Agreements cited: Art. 6  Import Licensing

EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES – REGIME FOR THE IMPORTATION,
SALE AND DISTRIBUTION OF BANANAS
Request to Join Consultations
Communication from Belize
The following communication, dated 4 February 1999, from the Permanent Mission of Belize
to the Permanent Delegation of the European Commission and the Chairman of the Dispute
Settlement Body, is circulated in accordance with Article 4.11 of the DSU.
The Mission of Belize to the European Communities and Permanent Mission to the presents its complimen ts to the Permanent Delegation of the
European Communities to the and makes reference to the request from the
Permanent Representatives of Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Panama and the United States of
20 January 1999 for consultations with the European Communities on the EC Banana Regime
established under Regulation 404/93 as amended by Regulations 1637/98 and 2362/98.
The Government of Belize wishes to be joined to these consultations given its substantial
interest in the measures being adopted by the European Communities in respect of its banana regime
and as evidenced by Belize's participation along with members of the ACP Group of states in the
previous panels established under GATT and the WTO.
The Mission of Belize to the European Communities and Permanent Mission to the avails itself of this opportunity to renew to the Permanent Delegation of the
European Communities to the the assurances of its highest consideration.
HUNGARY – SAFEGUARD MEASURE ON IMPORTS OF STEEL PRODUCTS FROM THE CZECH REPUBLIC
Document: Request for Consultations from the Czech Republic
Date: 27 January 1999
Document codes: WT/DS159/11; G/L/291; G/SG/D5/1
Complainant: Czech Republic
Respondent: Hungary
Dispute stage: Consultation
Agreements cited: Art. I, XIX  GATT 1994

HUNGARY – SAFEGUARD MEASURE ON IMPORTS OF
STEEL PRODUCTS FROM THE CZECH REPUBLIC
Request for Consultations from the Czech Republic
The following communication, dated 21 January 1999, from the Permanent Mission of the
Czech Republic to the Permanent Mission of Hungar y and to the Chairman of the Dispute Settlement
Body, is circulated in accordance with Article 4.4 of the DSU.
My authorities have instructed me to request consultations with the Government of Hungary
pursuant to Article 4 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of
Disputes (DSU) and Article XXIII:1 of the Ge neral Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 (GATT
1994) with regard to the imposition of quantitative restrictions by Hungary on imports of a broad
range of steel products from the Czech Republic.
Upon Resolution by the Ministry of Economic Affairs of the Republic of Hungary, published
in the Industry and Trade Bulletin, the official gazette of the Ministry of Economic Affairs, No. 22,
Hungary imposed a safeguard measure in the form of import quotas on imports of a broad range of
steel products of the Czech Republic's origin (HS codes 7211, 7213, 7214, 7215, 7216 10-50, 7217,
7306, 7314, 7317) effective as of 1 January 1999. The only country subject to this measure is the
Czech Republic.
The Government of the Czech Republic considers that the quantitative restrictions are in
breach of Hungary's obligations under the provisions of GATT 1994, including, but not limited to,
Article I and Article XIX, and are inconsistent with respective provisions of the Agreement on
Safeguards. The Government of the Czech Republic reserves the right to raise additional factual
claims and legal matters in the course of the consultations.
I look forward to receiving a prompt reaction of your authorities to this request so that we can
arrange a mutually convenient date and place for consultations.
UNITED STATES – SECTION 110(5) OF THE US COPYRIGHT ACT
Document: Recourse to Arbitration under Article 25 of the DSU Communication from the Arbitrators
Date: 9 November 2001
Document codes: WT/DS160/17; WT/DS160/ARB25/1; IP/D/16
Complainant: Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, U.S.
Respondent: EU
Dispute stage: Consultation
Agreements cited: Art. II, XVI, XVII  Services (GATS)Art. I, II, III, X, XIII  GATT 1994Art. 1, 3  Import Licensing

UNITED STATES – SECTION 110(5) OF THE US COPYRIGHT ACT
Recourse to Arbitration under Article 25 of the DSU
Communication from the Arbitrators
The following communication, dated 9 November 2001, from Mr. Ian F. Sheppard, Chairman
of the Arbitrators, addressed to the Chairman of the Dispute Settlement Body and the Chairman of the
Council for Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights, is circulated in accordance with
Article 25.3 of the DSU.
It is my honour to notify to you the Award of the Arbitrators in United States - Section 110(5)
of the US Copyright Act - Recourse to Arbitration under Article 25 of the DSU
(), in accordance with paragraph 3 of Article 25 of the DSU. The Award will be
circulated to Members today, 9 November 2001.
UNITED STATES – SECTION 110(5) OF THE US COPYRIGHT ACT
Document: Panel Report Action by the Dispute Settlement Body
Date: 31 July 2000
Document codes: WT/DS160/8; WT/DS160/R; WT/DS160/R; IP/D/16
Complainant: Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, U.S.
Respondent: EU
Dispute stage: Consultation
Agreements cited: Art. II, XVI, XVII  Services (GATS)Art. I, II, III, X, XIII  GATT 1994Art. 1, 3  Import Licensing

UNITED STATES – SECTION 110(5) OF THE US COPYRIGHT ACT
Panel Report
Action by the Dispute Settlement Body
At its meeting on 27 July 2000, the Dispute Settlement Body adopted the report on
"" ().
Rapport du Groupe spécial

ESTADOS UNIDOS – ARTÍCULO 110(5) DE LA LEY DE
DERECHO DE AUTOR DE LOS ESTADOS UNIDOS
Informe del Grupo Especial
Actuación del Órgano de Solución de Diferencias
En su reunión de 27 de julio de 2000, el Órgano de Solución de Diferencias adoptó el informe
titulado "Estados Unidos – Artículo 110(5) de la Ley de Derecho de Autor de los Estados Unidos "
UNITED STATES – SECTION 110(5) OF US COPYRIGHT ACT
Document: Request to Join Consultations Communication from Australia
Date: 15 February 1999
Document codes: WT/DS160/2
Complainant: EU
Respondent: U.S.
Third parties: Australia, Brazil, Canada, Japan, Switzerland
Dispute stage: Panel
Agreements cited: Art. 9.1  Intellectual Property (TRIPS)

UNITED STATES – SECTION 110(5) OF US COPYRIGHT ACT
Request to Join Consultations
Communication from Australia
The following communication, dated 11 February 1999, from the Permanent Mission of
Australia to the Permanent Delegation of the European Commission and to the Chairman of the
Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated in accordance with Article 4.11 of the DSU.
Pursuant to paragraph 11 of Article 4 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures
Governing the Settlement of Disputes, the Government of Australia hereby notifies that, in light of the
substantial trade interest of Australia, it desires to be joined in the consultations under Article 64.1 of
the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights requested by the European
Communities and their member States in a communication circulated to WTO Members on
4 February 1999 (, ), entitled "Uni ted States – Section 110 (5) of US Copyright
Act".
Australia has a substantial trade interest in the payment of royalties for the public
performance in overseas markets of musical works subject to copyright owned by Australian right
holders.
UNITED STATES – SECTION 110(5) OF US COPYRIGHT ACT
Document: Request to Join Consultations Communication from Canada
Date: 17 February 1999
Document codes: WT/DS160/3
Complainant: EU
Respondent: U.S.
Third parties: Australia, Brazil, Canada, Japan, Switzerland
Dispute stage: Panel
Agreements cited: Art. 9.1  Intellectual Property (TRIPS)

UNITED STATES – SECTION 110(5) OF US COPYRIGHT ACT
Request to Join Consultations
Communication from Canada
The following communication, dated 12 February 1999, from the Permanent Mission of
Canada to the Permanent Mission of the United States, the Permanent Delegation of the European
Commission and to the Chairman of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated in accordance with
Article 4.11 of the DSU.
Pursuant to Article 4.11 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the
Settlement of Disputes, the Government of Canada hereby notifies you of its desire to be joined in the
consultations requested by the Permanent Delegation of the European Commission under Article 4 of
the DSU and Article 64.1 of the Agreement on Trade- Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights
in the matter of "United States - Section 110( 5) of US Copyright Act". The 26 January 1999
communication from the Permanent Delegation of the European Commission to the Permanent
Mission of the United States was circulated to WTO Members on 4 January 1999 (,

Canada has a substantial trade interest in the consultations because the non-dramatic musical
works of many Canadian copyright owners are communicated to the public in the United States. In
particular, Canadian musical works are often communicated in bars, restaurants and dance clubs. This
is especially true in light of our common language and our shared border, which makes Canadian
music a desirable commodity in the United States.
UNITED STATES – SECTION 110(5) OF US COPYRIGHT ACT
Document: Request to Join Consultations Communication from Switzerland
Date: 17 February 1999
Document codes: WT/DS160/4; WT/DS160/1
Complainant: EU
Respondent: U.S.
Third parties: Australia, Brazil, Canada, Japan, Switzerland
Dispute stage: Panel
Agreements cited: Art. 9.1  Intellectual Property (TRIPS)

UNITED STATES – SECTION 110(5) OF US COPYRIGHT ACT
Request to Join Consultations
Communication from Switzerland
The following communication, dated 15 February 1999, from the Permanent Mission of
Switzerland to the Permanent Mission of the United States and to the Chairman of the Dispute
Settlement Body, is circulated in accordance with Article 4.11 of the DSU.
Pursuant to paragraph 11 of Article 4 of the Understanding on Rules of Procedures Governing
the Settlement of Disputes (DSU), Switzerland here by notifies that it considers to have a substantial
trade interest in the consultations requested by the European Communities in document
circulated on 4 February 1999, entitled "United St ates – Section 110(5) of US Copyright Act".
Switzerland consequently notifies hereby its desire to be joined in these consultations.
UNITED STATES – SECTION 110(5) OF THE US COPYRIGHT ACT
Document: Constitution of the Panel Established at the Request of the European Communities Note by the Secretariat
Date: 6 August 1999
Document codes: WT/DS160/6; WT/DS160/5; WT/DS160/5
Complainant: EU
Respondent: U.S.
Third parties: Australia, Brazil, Canada, Japan, Switzerland
Dispute stage: Panel
Agreements cited: Art. 9.1  Intellectual Property (TRIPS)

UNITED STATES – SECTION 110(5) OF THE US COPYRIGHT ACT
Constitution of the Panel Established
at the Request of the European Communities
Note by the Secretariat
1. At its meeting on 26 May 1999, the DSB established a panel pursuant to the request by the
European Communities (), in accordance with Article 6 of the DSU (WT/DSB/M/62).
2. At that meeting, the parties to the dispute agreed that the Panel should have standard terms of
reference. The terms of reference are the following:
"To examine, in light of the relevant provisions of the covered agreements cited by the
European Communities in document , the matter referred to the DSB by the
European Communities in that document and to make such findings as will assist the DSB in
making the recommendations or in giving the rulings provided for in those agreements."
3. On 27 July 1999, the European Communities made a request, with reference to paragraph 7 of
Article 8 of the DSU, to the Director-in-charge to determine of the composition of the Panel.
Paragraph 7 of Article 8 provides:
"If there is no agreement on the panelists within 20 days after the date of the establishment of
a panel, at the request of either party, the Director-General, in consultation with the Chairman
of the DSB and the Chairman of the relevant Council or Committee, shall determine the
composition of the panel by appointing the panelists whom the Director-General considers
most appropriate in accordance with any relevant special or additional rules or procedures of
the covered agreement or covered agreements which are at issue in the dispute, after
consulting with the parties to the dispute. The Chairman of the DSB shall inform the
Members of the composition of the panel thus formed no later than 10 days after the date the
Chairman receives such a request."
4. On 6 August 1999, the Director-in-charge composed the Panel as follows:
Chairperson: Carmen Luz Guarda
Members: Arumugamangalam V. Ganesan
Ian F. Sheppard
5. Brazil, Australia, Canada, Japan and Switzerland reserved their rights as third parties to the
dispute.
UNITED STATES - SECTION 110(5) OF THE US COPYRIGHT ACT
Document: Communication from the Chairman of the Panel
Date: 10 February 2000
Document codes: WT/DS160/7
Complainant: EU
Respondent: U.S.
Third parties: Australia, Brazil, Canada, Japan, Switzerland
Dispute stage: Panel
Agreements cited: Art. 9.1  Intellectual Property (TRIPS)

UNITED STATES - SECTION 110(5) OF THE US COPYRIGHT ACT
Communication from the Chairman of the Panel
The following communication, dated 3 February 2000 and addressed to the Chairman of the
Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated in accordance with Article 12.9 of the DSU.
Article 12.8 of the DSU stipulates that the period in which a panel shall conduct its
examination, from the date that the composition and terms of reference of the panel have been agreed
upon until the date the final report is issued to the parties shall, as a general rule, not exceed six
months. Pursuant to Article 12.9 of the DSU, when a panel considers that it cannot issue its report
within six months, it shall inform the DSB in wri ting of the reasons for the delay together with an
estimate of the period within which it will issue its report.
The Panel on "United States – Section 110(5) of the US Copyright Act" was established by
the DSB on 26 May 1999 with the standard terms of reference, and its composition was determined
on 6 August 1999. I wish to inform you that the Panel will not be able to complete its work within the
six months provided for in the DSU. The complex nature of the matter and the need to seek
information pursuant to Article 13 of the DSU are responsible for this delay.
The Panel intends to finalize its work in April 2000.
UNITED STATES – SECTION 110(5) OF THE US COPYRIGHT ACT
Document: Communication from the United States
Date: 31 August 2000
Document codes: WT/DS160/9
Complainant: EU
Respondent: U.S.
Third parties: Australia, Brazil, Canada, Japan, Switzerland
Dispute stage: Panel
Agreements cited: Art. 9.1  Intellectual Property (TRIPS)

UNITED STATES – SECTION 110(5) OF THE US COPYRIGHT ACT
Communication from the United States
The following communication, dated 24 August 2000, from the Permanent Mission of the
United States to the Chairman of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated at the request of the
United States.
At the 27 July 2000 meeting of the Dispute Se ttlement Body (DSB), the United States
indicated that it disagreed with that portion of the Panel Report in "United States – Section 110(5)
US Copyright Act" that dealt with Section 110(5)B of that Act. However, because my delegation
agreed with the Panel findings upholding Section 110(5)(A) of the Copyright Act, the United States
did not appeal, and the report was adopted by the DSB.
Now that the report has been adopted, my authorities have instructed me to advise the DSB of
my delegation's intentions in respect of implementation of the recommendations and rulings of the
DSB, as is our responsibility under Article 21.3 of the Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU).
It is the intention of the United States to implement the recommendations and rulings of the
DSB in a manner which respects US WTO obligations, and we have begun to evaluate options for
doing so. The United States will need a reasonable period of time in which to do this. Accordingly,
pursuant to Article 21.3(a), the United States proposes that such reasonable period of time shall be
15 months.
My delegation also stands ready to discuss with the European Communities this proposal for
the implementation period, in accordance with Article 21.3(b), if necessary.
UNITED STATES – SECTION 110(5) OF THE US COPYRIGHT ACT
Document: Surveillance of Implementation of Recommendations and Rulings Appointment of Arbitrator under Article 21.3(c) of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes
Date: 22 November 2000
Document codes: WT/DS160/11; WT/DS160/10
Complainant: EU
Respondent: U.S.
Third parties: Australia, Brazil, Canada, Japan, Switzerland
Dispute stage: Panel
Agreements cited: Art. 9.1  Intellectual Property (TRIPS)

UNITED STATES – SECTION 110(5) OF THE US COPYRIGHT ACT
Surveillance of Implementation of Recommendations and Rulings
Appointment of Arbitrator under Article 21.3(c) of the
Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes
The following communication, dated 22 November 2000, from the Permanent Mission of the
United States and the Permanent Delegation of the European Commission, to the Director-General, is
circulated pursuant to Article 21.3(c) of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the
Settlement of Disputes.
We refer you to the communication from the European Communities and its Member States,
dated 23 October 2000 (), requesting bind ing arbitration under Article 21.3(c) of the
Understanding on Rules and Procedures Go verning the Settlement of Disputes ("DSU") to determine
the reasonable period of time for the United States of America to implement the recommendations and
rulings of the Dispute Settlement Body ("DSB") in the matter (WT/DS160), adopted on 27 July 2000.
The parties to the dispute, the United States and the European Communities, have agreed on
an arbitrator, pursuant to footnote 12 to Article 21.3(c) of the DSU: Mr. Julio Lacarte-Muró. We are
writing to request you to officially convey to Mr. Julio Lacarte-Muró our request that he act as
arbitrator in this matter. We would also appreciate that, if he accepts, he be assisted in his functions
as arbitrator under Article 21.3(c) of the DSU by the staff of the Appellate Body Secretariat.
With respect to the time-period for this binding arbitration, Article 21.3(c) of the DSU
requires that the reasonable period of time for implementation be determined through binding
arbitration within 90 days after the date of adoption of the recommendations and rulings of the DSB.
As the DSB adopted its recommendations and rulings in this dispute on 27 July 2000, this 90-day
period has expired. We, the parties to this dispute, have agreed to extend the period of time for this
binding arbitration until 26 January 2001. We have agreed that the award of the arbitrator, made no
later than 26 January 2001, shall be deemed to be the award of the arbitrator for the purposes of
Article 21.3(c) of the DSU in determining the reasonable period of time for the United States to
implement the recommendations and rulings of the DSB.
We are grateful for your assistance in this matter.
UNITED STATES – SECTION 110(5) OF THE US COPYRIGHT ACT
Document: Arbitration under Article 21.3(c) of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes
Date: 15 January 2001
Document codes: WT/DS160/13
Complainant: EU
Respondent: U.S.
Third parties: Australia, Brazil, Canada, Japan, Switzerland
Dispute stage: Panel
Agreements cited: Art. 9.1  Intellectual Property (TRIPS)

UNITED STATES – SECTION 110(5) OF THE US COPYRIGHT ACT
Arbitration under Article 21.3(c) of the
Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes
The following communication, dated 15 January 2001, from the Arbitrator,
Mr. Julio Lacarte-Muró, to the Chairman of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated in accordance
with Article 21.3(c) of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of
Disputes.
I am pleased to send you a copy of my Arbitration Award in , pursuant to Article 21.3(c) of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures
Governing the Settlement of Disputes. It will be circulated to the Members of the WTO today.
UNITED STATES - SECTION 110(5) OF THE US COPYRIGHT ACT
Document: Proposed Modification of the Reasonable Period of Time Under Article 21.3 of the DSU On 12 July 2001, the Chairman of the Dispute Settlement Body received the following communication from the Permanent Mission of the United States.
Date: 18 July 2001
Document codes: WT/DS160/14
Complainant: EU
Respondent: U.S.
Third parties: Australia, Brazil, Canada, Japan, Switzerland
Dispute stage: Panel
Agreements cited: Art. 9.1  Intellectual Property (TRIPS)

UNITED STATES - SECTION 110(5) OF THE US COPYRIGHT ACT
Proposed Modification of the Reasonable Period of Time
Under Article 21.3 of the DSU
On 12 July 2001, the Chairman of the Dispute Settlement Body received the following
communication from the Permanent Mission of the United States.
With regard to the dispute ""
(WT/DS160), the United States proposes that the "reasonable period of time" for implementation of
the recommendations and rulings of the Dispute Settle ment Body (DSB) be modified so as to expire
on 31 December 2001, or on the date on which the current session of the U.S. Congress adjourns,
whichever is earlier. The United States believes that such an extension of time would promote a
principal aim of the dispute settlement system, which is to provide mutually satisfactory solutions to
disputes. The United States is consulting with the European Communities regarding this proposal.
The United States requests that the DSB approve this proposal at its meeting on 24 July 2001.
UNITED STATES – SECTION 110(5) OF THE US COPYRIGHT ACT
Document: Recourse to Article 25 of the DSU Constitution of the Arbitrator Note by the Secretariat
Date: 13 August 2001
Document codes: WT/DS160/16; WT/DS160/15.
Complainant: EU
Respondent: U.S.
Third parties: Australia, Brazil, Canada, Japan, Switzerland
Dispute stage: Panel
Agreements cited: Art. 9.1  Intellectual Property (TRIPS)

UNITED STATES – SECTION 110(5) OF THE US COPYRIGHT ACT
Recourse to Article 25 of the DSU
Constitution of the Arbitrator
Note by the Secretariat
1. On 23 July 2001, the United States and the European Communities notified to the Dispute
Settlement Body (DSB) their agreement to resort to arbitration pursuant to Article 25 of the DSU
regarding the matter defined by both parties in document
2. The following individuals will serve as arbitrators:
1
Chairman: Mr. Ian F. Sheppard
Members: Mrs. Margaret Liang
Mr. David Vivas-Eugui
Chairperson of the original panel, Mrs. Carmen Luz Guarda, and one member, Mr. A. V. Ganesan, were no
longer available. In accordance with the agreed proced ures for the arbitration pr oceedings (), the
Director-General appointed two arbitrators to replace them.
UNITED STATES – SECTION 110(5) OF THE US COPYRIGHT ACT
Document: Status Report by the United States
Date: 7 December 2001
Document codes: WT/DS160/18
Complainant: EU
Respondent: U.S.
Third parties: Australia, Brazil, Canada, Japan, Switzerland
Dispute stage: Panel
Agreements cited: Art. 9.1  Intellectual Property (TRIPS)

UNITED STATES – SECTION 110(5) OF THE US COPYRIGHT ACT
Status Report by the United States
The following communication, dated 6 December 2001, from the Permanent Mission of the
United States to the Chairman of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated pursuant to Article 21.6
of the DSU.
Status Report Regarding Implementation of the
DSB Recommendations and Rulings in the Dispute

(WT/DS160)
The United States submits this report in accordance with Article 21.6 of the Understanding on
Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes (DSU).
On 24 August 2000, the United States informed the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) that it
intended to implement the recommendations and rulings of the DSB in United States - Section 110(5)
of the US Copyright Act. The "reasonable period of time" for implementation expires on the date that
the current session of the US Congress adjourns or 31 December 2001, whichever is earlier. The
United States has been engaged in discussions with the European Communities to find a mutually
acceptable resolution of the dispute. In connection with those discussions, the United States and the
European Communities took the unprecedented step of resorting to arbitration under Article 25 of the
Understanding on Rules and Procedures Go verning the Settlement of Disputes in order to determine
the level of nullification or impairment of benefits caused by Section 110(5)(B) of the US Copyright
Act.
In light of the award of the Arbitrators, the European Communities and the United States are
engaged in productive discussions with a view to resolving the dispute.
UNITED STATES – SECTION 110(5) OF THE US COPYRIGHT ACT
Document: Status Report by the United States Addendum
Date: 22 January 2002
Document codes: WT/DS160/18/Add.1
Complainant: EU
Respondent: U.S.
Third parties: Australia, Brazil, Canada, Japan, Switzerland
Dispute stage: Panel
Agreements cited: Art. 9.1  Intellectual Property (TRIPS)

UNITED STATES – SECTION 110(5) OF THE US COPYRIGHT ACT
Status Report by the United States
Addendum
The following communication, dated 21 January 2002, from the Permanent Mission of the
United States to the Chairman of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated pursuant to Article 21.6
of the DSU.
Status Report Regarding Implementation of the
DSB Recommendations and Rulings in the Dispute

(WT/DS160)
The United States submits this report in accordance with Article 21.6 of the Understanding on
Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes (DSU).
On 27 July 2000, the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) adopted its recommendations and
rulings in United States - Section 110(5) of the US Copyright Act . At the DSB meeting on 24 August
2000, the United States informed the DSB that it intended to implement the recommendations and
rulings in connection with this matter. The DSB agreed that the "reasonable period of time" for
implementation expired on the date of the conclusion of the then current session of the US Congress
or 31 December 2001, whichever was earlier. The United States has been engaged in discussions
with the European Communities to find a mutually acceptable resolution of the dispute. In connection
with those discussions, the United States and the European Communities took the unprecedented step
of resorting to arbitration under Article 25 of the DSU in order to determine the level of nullification
or impairment of benefits caused by Section 110(5)(B) of the US Copyright Act.
In light of the award of the Arbitrators, the European Communities and the United States have
been engaged in productive discussions with a view to resolving the dispute. Those discussions are
continuing.
UNITED STATES – SECTION 110(5) OF THE US COPYRIGHT ACT
Document: Status Report by the United States Addendum
Date: 26 February 2002
Document codes: WT/DS160/18/Add.2
Complainant: EU
Respondent: U.S.
Third parties: Australia, Brazil, Canada, Japan, Switzerland
Dispute stage: Panel
Agreements cited: Art. 9.1  Intellectual Property (TRIPS)

UNITED STATES – SECTION 110(5) OF THE US COPYRIGHT ACT
Status Report by the United States
Addendum
The following communication, dated 25 February 2002, from the Permanent Mission of the
United States to the Chairman of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated pursuant to Article 21.6
of the DSU.
Status Report Regarding Implementation of the
DSB Recommendations and Rulings in the Dispute

(WT/DS160)
The United States submits this report in accordance with Article 21.6 of the Understanding on
Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes (DSU).
On 24 August 2000, the United States informed the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) that it
intended to implement the recommendations and rulings of the DSB in United States - Section 110(5)
of the US Copyright Act . The United States has been engaged in discussions with the European
Communities to find a mutually acceptable resolution of the dispute. In connection with those
discussions, the United States and the European Communities took the unprecedented step of
resorting to arbitration under Article 25 of the DSU in order to determine the level of nullification or
impairment of benefits caused by Section 110(5)(B) of the US Copyright Act.
In light of the award of the Arbitrators, the European Communities and the United States
continue to engage in productive discussions with a view to resolving the dispute.
UNITED STATES – SECTION 110(5) OF THE US COPYRIGHT ACT
Document: Status Report by the United States Addendum
Date: 5 April 2002
Document codes: WT/DS160/18/Add.3
Complainant: EU
Respondent: U.S.
Third parties: Australia, Brazil, Canada, Japan, Switzerland
Dispute stage: Panel
Agreements cited: Art. 9.1  Intellectual Property (TRIPS)

UNITED STATES – SECTION 110(5) OF THE US COPYRIGHT ACT
Status Report by the United States
Addendum
The following communication, dated 4 April 2002, from the Permanent Mission of the United
States to the Chairman of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated pursuant to Article 21.6 of the
DSU.
Status Report Regarding Implementation of the
DSB Recommendations and Rulings in the Dispute

(WT/DS160)
The United States submits this report in accordance with Article 21.6 of the Understanding on
Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes (DSU).
On 24 August 2000, the United States informed the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) that it
intended to implement the recommendations and rulings of the DSB in United States - Section 110(5)
of the US Copyright Act . The United States has been engaged in discussions with the European
Communities to find a mutually acceptable resolution of the dispute. In connection with those
discussions, the United States and the European Communities took the unprecedented step of
resorting to arbitration under Article 25 of the DSU in order to determine the level of nullification or
impairment of benefits caused by Section 110(5)(B) of the US Copyright Act.
The parties remain engaged in productive discussions with a view to resolving the dispute.