New OECD publications have been uploaded to the OECD iLibrary, a comprehensive digital repository of books, papers, and statistics from the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). Titles recently added include:
These volumes and more are accessible from the OECD iLibrary by WTO staff and WTO Library patrons.
New OECD publications have been uploaded to the OECD iLibrary, a comprehensive digital repository of books, papers, and statistics from the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). Titles recently added include:
These volumes and more are accessible from the OECD iLibrary by WTO staff and WTO Library patrons.
Recent years have witnessed a surge in discussions relating to data and data flow in trade fora. This was predictable given the importance of data for trade in the digital economy, especially e-commerce. However, there is a major discord between WTO members on issues relating to data flows and data localization. This article sets out to understand how data flows across borders and the types of trade restrictive data localization measures members use. The analysis of various restrictions on data flows imposed by states reflects the different objectives behind them, targeting all or specific types of data. Such regulations potentially violate existing WTO commitments. The article concludes with a call for issuing a multilateral amendment of existing norms, and undertaking a data differentiated approach to resolve the deadlock at the WTO.
https://doi.org/10.1093/jiel/jgy021
Disclaimer
Please note that external content will only work for subscribers who have access either using a log-in and password or associated with their IP Address.
No other access is implied or intended.
If you find anything you consider should not be available, even in this limited form, please leave a comment below.
Find the latest research via Google Scholar
2018-02-20 Negotiating bots : the Art of the deal (ambitai.com)
2018-02-01 How AI is changing Contracts (hbr.org)
2017-09-11 How AI could negotiate better deals for humans (sciencemag.org)
2017-07-10 Can Robots Write Treaties? Yes, They Can! (Wolfgang Alschner)
2017-06-14 Deal or no deal? Training AI bots to negotiate (code.facebook.com)
2017-06-15 Facebook tried teaching bots art of negotiation – so the AI learned to lie (theregister.co.uk)
2017-08-05 How Facebook’s AI bots learned their own language and how to lie (newsweek.com)
2017-06-15 Facebook training AI bots to negotiate with humans (nvidia.com)
2011-07-27 Artificial Intelligence and Negotiation (www.uv.es)
Disclaimer
Please note that these links will only work for subscribers who have access either using a log-in and password or associated with their IP Address.
No other access is implied or intended.
If you find anything you consider should not be available, even in this limited form, please leave a comment below.
Find the latest research via Google Scholar
2018-04-30 Busier Than Ever? A Data-Driven Assessment and Forecast Of WTO Caseload (Pauwelyn & Zhangb CTEI working paper)
2018-03-30 Making Sense of Legal AI: What It Means for Your Practice and What’s Ahead (law.com)
2018-03-28 AI Trends Driving the Legal Industry (lawtechnologytoday.org)
2018-03-18 Justice by Algorithm: Do Machines Help Humans Make Better Decisions? (legalexecutiveinstitute.com)
2018-03-08 Practicing artificial intelligence in legal (thomsonreuters.com)
2018-02-20 AI: How Will It Change The Business Of Law In 2018? (lawyer-monthly.com)
2018 AI predictions 8 insights to shape business strategy (pwc.es)
2017-11- 29 AI in Law and Legal Practice – A Comprehensive View of 35 Current Applications (techemergence.com)
2017-11-15 AI Can Be Made Legally Accountable for Its Decisions (technologyreview.com)
2017-11-08 Law, Technology and Access to Justice (law-tech-a2j.org)
2017-05-25 The Data-Driven Future of International Economic Law (Alschner, Pauwelyn & Puig in Journal of International Economic Law)
2017 Artificial Intelligence: The ethical and legal implications (aitech.law)
Disclaimer
Please note that these links will only work for subscribers who have access either using a log-in and password or associated with their IP Address.
No other access is implied or intended.
If you find anything you consider should not be available, even in this limited form, please leave a comment below.
With the growing importance of the internet, digital trade, or electronic commerce, has become a key issue in international trade regulation. As the home to some of the largest internet companies in the world, the USA took the lead in bringing the issue into the WTO and has been the leading proponent on the issue. In contrast, the developing countries were quite sceptical and reluctant to engage on discussions on the issue. Recently, however, several developing countries have changed their positions and become more active participants. Chief among them is China, which has raised some interesting proposals both within and beyond the WTO. The issue also emerged as one of the main issues discussed at the 11th Ministerial Conference of the WTO. This article provides a critical examination of the contrasting approaches of the US and China on the issue. It argues that, the US approach tends to focus more on the ‘digital’ nature of digital trade, while the Chinese approach prefers to address the issue from the traditional ‘trade’ perspective. The article analyses the reasons for the different approaches, and provides some suggestions on how to move forward on the issue at MC11 and beyond given the differences between the two approaches.
https://doi.org/10.1093/jiel/jgy015
Disclaimer
Please note that external content will only work for subscribers who have access either using a log-in and password or associated with their IP Address.
No other access is implied or intended.
If you find anything you consider should not be available, even in this limited form, please leave a comment below.
Individuals, businesses, and governments increasingly use data to create new services delivered via the internet. In so doing, they are creating a new economy built on cross-border data flows. The USA, the European Union, and China are using domestic and foreign policies to reap data-based economies of scale and scope. Essentially, they have created three distinct data realms with different approaches to data governance. As a result, they have fostered a new digital divide: between the three data behemoths and other countries that are rule takers. This situation presents the WTO with a challenge and an opportunity. These three data realms could undermine the ability of the WTO to govern trade in data flows, but it also creates pressures for the three data realms to use WTO mechanisms to find common ground among their approaches. Moreover, it could provide an incentive to WTO members to create new rules governing trade in data.
https://doi.org/10.1093/jiel/jgy019
Disclaimer
Please note that external content will only work for subscribers who have access either using a log-in and password or associated with their IP Address.
No other access is implied or intended.
If you find anything you consider should not be available, even in this limited form, please leave a comment below.
