反倾销·信息网络传播权

 以下四套丛书共18种书稿，已完稿6种，供出版。作者李昌奎，电话13718447297，电子信箱：wtobook#126.com，wtobook#gmail.com。

    ★信息网络传播权丛书(4种，正在编写)
    ①《信息网络传播权指南》，讲述程序、实务以及经验，注重操作性。
    ②《信息网络传播权案例精选》，剖析信息网络传播权经典案例。
    ③《案释<信息网络传播权保护条例>》，以案说法，逐条解析《信息网络传播权保护条例》。
    ④《保护信息网络传播权：我的经验与教训》，讲述著作权人诉方正阿帕比及其用户、超星图书用户侵权系列案件，独家讲述如何取证，披露侵权证据，讲述过程，提供的宝贵经验，供后来者参考。
    本书作者具有丰富的信息网络传播权经验。法制日报、中国图书商报等媒体都曾对作者的活动做了专题报道。

    ★WTO反倾销丛书(5种)
    ①《WTO反倾销争端案例2005》(已完稿)
    ②《WTO反倾销争端案例2006》(已完稿)
    ③《WTO反倾销争端案例2007•美国卷》
    ④《WTO反倾销争端案例2007•欧共体卷》
    ⑤《WTO反倾销法律与实务(2008)》(已完稿)
  
    ★美国反倾销丛书(6种，2008年完稿)
    ①《美国反倾销法》(25万字，已完稿)
    ② 《美国对华反倾销案例集》
    ③《美国国际贸易法院反倾销案例(1999～2007)》
    ④《美国联邦巡回上诉法院反倾销案例(2004－2007)》
    ⑤《美国反倾销应诉指南》
    ⑥《美国反倾销与WTO争端》(已完稿)

    ★美国337调查丛书(3种，2008年完稿)
    ①《美国337调查法律与实务》(40万字，已完稿)
    ②《美国对华337调查案例(1986－2008)》
    ③《美国联邦巡回上诉法院337调查案例(1993～2007)》

    作者已出版的反倾销方面作品有《WTO<反倾销协定>释义》、《世界贸易组织反倾销争端案例：1995～2003，美国卷》、《世界贸易组织反倾销争端案例：1995～2003，欧盟卷》、《世界贸易组织反倾销争端案例：1995～2003，其他国卷》、《WTO反倾销争端案例2004》和《美国反倾销实务》等6种，已出版其他方面的图书有《中外职业资格认证和语言考试指南：规划你的职业生涯》、《职业资格证书时代：40种职业资格考试介绍》和《国际通行职业资格认证考试指南》等3种。

近日，收到多个关于反倾销问题的邮件，有的要求笔者提供有关反倾销的资料，有的询问如何购得尚未出版的反倾销图书《WTO反倾销争端案例2005－2008》各卷(法律卷、调查卷、复审卷、执行卷)和《WTO反倾销法律与实务2008》，有的要求提供最新的反倾销数据，有的要求提供反规避资料，有的要求帮助写论文，如此等等，不一而足。来函者既有大学生，也有硕士研究生，博士研究生，而且研究生都来自知名高校。因笔者精力所限，就这些问题，一并回答如下：

一、就已经出版的六种反倾销图书，即《WTO<反倾销协定>释义》、《世界贸易组织反倾销争端案例(1995～2003，美国卷)》、《世界贸易组织反倾销争端案例(1995～2003，欧盟卷)》、《世界贸易组织反倾销争端案例(1995～2003，其他国卷)》、《世界贸易组织反倾销争端案例2004》、《美国反倾销实务》，如果对内容有任何疑问，欢迎探讨，各书序言中也明确说明欢迎探讨反倾销问题。尤其欢迎对以上六种图书的批评意见。

二、对于反倾销调查数据，可请教自己的老师或者指导教师，或咨询国家有关部门，他们会提供有关的资料，满足您的要求。

三、对于反规避问题，笔者没有更多的资料，可参考美国的反规避法律与实践。

四、因为自由职业者的身份所限，有些问题不适合作出回答。

五、笔者近来的精力多在信息网络传播权方面，于反倾销问题仅关注WTO最新的反倾销案例和美国的反倾销法律与实践，并没有关注反倾销其他方面的问题。

六、有关专业网站、刊物上有最新的反倾销信息，可供参考。笔者也非常感谢某部某局自2005年以来一直赠阅其主办的某刊物。

以上答复，敬请谅解。

李昌奎

二〇〇八年五月十八日

 

李昌奎

一、数字图书版权纠纷此起彼伏

近年来，随着互联网技术的发展，数字图书产业逐渐成长、壮大起来，涌现出了许多知名的数字图书制作商(或称运营商、提供商，下同)，数字图书用户也迅速扩大，几乎所有的高校图书馆和大多数公共图书馆都成为了数字图书的用户。然而，在数字图书的发展过程中，存在一个致命的问题，也就是版权问题。很多数字图书没有取得著作权人的授权，没有解决版权问题，数字图书制作商不断被推上法院的被告席，数字图书用户也因通过网络传播未经授权的数字图书而屡次成为被告。

2002年北京大学法学院陈兴良教授诉中国数字图书馆有限责任公司侵犯著作权后，该公司数字图书业务一蹶不振。国内知名的超星图书、书生图书和方正图书，近年来都遇到了著作权纠纷。据不完全统计，自2002年至今，书生公司和超星公司在北京一地即分别遭到了14起和19起著作权诉讼。2004年中国社会科学院法学研究所郑成思等7位研究员诉书生公司侵犯著作权的案件，更是轰动一时。超星公司在上海等地也遇到了著作权纠纷。

以“所有电子书均由出版社正式授予信息网络传播权，彻底解决版权问题”而著称的方正数字图书，2006年在北京也遭到了6起著作权诉讼，原告包括大学教授和作家。2007年2月，方正数字图书的运营商北京方正阿帕比技术有限公司又被某作者起诉至北京市海淀区人民法院。这次被起诉的，还有其用户南山图书馆。（本案，原告向法院提交的公证书见http://wtobook.blog.sohu.com/38770897.html）路学涛先生在2006年5月份《中华工商时报》撰文中提出的“虽然目前应用方正数字图书馆的用户还没有被卷入官司，但是系统问题不解决，随着著作权人著作权意识的不断增强，这只是个时间问题”不幸被言中。

在已审结的这些数字图书侵权案件中，除了原告和被告自行和解而结案的外，法院无一例外地判决被告承担侵权责任，赔偿原告的经济损失。而在文物出版社诉北京世纪超星信息技术发展有限责任公司一案中，文物出版社与超星公司庭外达成和解，约定超星公司向文物出版社支付30万元，原告以此为由提出撤诉。在北京市海淀区人民法院作出的民事裁定书中，非常罕见的将这一内容写了进去。法院因当事人自行和解撤诉而出具的裁定书中，很少写入双方的和解内容。法院的这一做法，是否有其他的含义呢？

数字图书制作商不断被推上被告席的根本原因是没有取得著作权人的授权，侵犯了著作权人包括信息网络传播权和获得报酬权在内的著作权。如果不彻底解决版权问题，随着著作权人意识的不断增强和法律环境的逐渐完善，数字图书的前景不容乐观。

二、我国对信息网络传播权的法律保护

互联网的发展为数字图书的迅速传播提供了方便，同时也对传统的著作权保护制度带来了巨大的冲击。如何维护网络环境下的著作权，保护著作权人的合法利益，成为世界各国和国际社会认真对待的一个重要问题。1996年世界知识产权组织通过了《世界知识产权组织版权公约》和《世界知识产权组织表演和录音制品公约》，对信息网络技术措施和权利管理信息作出了明确规定，对网络环境下的著作权保护进行了协调。此后，美国、欧盟等修改法律，对网络环境下的著作权进行保护。

我国对网络环境下的著作权保护，经历了较长的发展过程。我国1991年的《著作权法》并没有关于信息网络传播权的明确规定。在司法实践中，人民法院通过判决，认定未经许可在互联网上传播作品，侵犯了著作权人的合法权利。在1999年知名作家王蒙诉世纪互联通讯技术有限公司侵犯著作权一案中，原告诉称被告在其网站传播原告的作品，侵犯了原告的著作权。北京市海淀区人民法院认为，“科学技术的发展，必然引起作品载体形式、使用方式和传播手段的变化，但这种变化并不影响作者对其作品享有的专有权利”。“一部作品经过数字化转换，以数字化方式使用，只是作品载体形式和使用手段的变化，并没有产生作品。作品的著作权人对其创作的作品仍享有著作权。因此，在国际互联网环境中，原告作为其作品的著作权人，享有著作权法规定的对其作品的使用权和获得报酬权。”因此，判决被告公开道歉，赔偿原告经济损失和诉讼的合理支出。二审法院维持了一审法院的判决。

2000年11月20日，最高人民法院出台了《关于审理涉及计算机网络著作权纠纷案件适用法律若干问题的解释》。该解释第二条明确规定，“受著作权法保护的作品，包括著作权法第三条规定的各类作品的数字化形式”。《著作权法》修改和《信息网络传播权保护条例》公布后，最高人民法院分别于2003年12月23日和2006年12月20日对该司法解释做了相应修改。

在我国加入世界贸易组织前夕，第九届全国人民代表大会常务委员会第二十四次会议于2001年10月27日对《著作权法》进行了修改，在该法第十条中明确增加了“信息网络传播权”， “即以有线或者无线方式向公众提供作品，使公众可以在其个人选定的时间和地点获得作品的权利”。修改后的《著作权法》将著作权延伸到信息网络这个虚假空间，为遏制网络侵权，解决网络著作权纠纷，维护著作权人的合法利益，提供了明确的法律依据。我国《著作权法》关于信息网络传播权的表述，与世界知识产权组织上述两个条约的相关内容基本一致。2002年8月2日，国务院公布了《中华人民共和国著作权法实施条例》。2002年10月12日《最高人民法院关于审理著作权民事纠纷案件适用法律若干问题的解释》公布。2005年4月29日，国家版权局和信息产业部公布了《互联网著作权行政保护办法》。

我国修改后的《著作权法》确定了保护信息网络传播权的基本制度。在修改《著作权法》的过程中，考虑到信息技术的迅速发展和权利人、使用者与公众之间的复杂关系，并没有对信息网络传播权作出更详细的规定。《著作权法》第58条规定：“计算机软件、信息网络传播权的保护办法由国务院另行规定。”2006年5月10日，国务院第135次常务会议通过了《信息网络传播权保护条例》，以“保护著作权人、表演者、录音录像制作者（以下统称权利人）的信息网络传播权，鼓励有益于社会主义精神文明、物质文明建设的作品的创作和传播”。至此，我国建立了较为完善的关于信息网络传播权保护的法律体系。

根据上述法律、法规，除了规定的情形外，未经著作权人许可，擅自通过网络传播在著作权保护期内的作品，当属侵犯著作权无疑。在这种背景下，笔者不禁对数字图书的版权产生了六个疑问。

三、数字图书版权六问

（一）数字图书运营商：踩着地雷的游戏好玩吗？

几年前，在互联网利好的大背景下，数字图书纷纷上马，数字图书制作商埋头掘金。有的数字图书制作商直接拿纸书扫描制作数字图书，有的则直接从出版社拿图书的电子文本制作数字图书。在这个过程中，制作商似乎都对版权问题注意不够；否则，就不会官司缠身了。

数字图书首先要解决的一个问题就是版权问题，正常的模式是“先授权，后传播”。目前，我国一年出版十几万种图书，要一一获得著作权人的许可，似乎是一个很大的问题。于是，很多数字图书制作商采取了拿来主义的做法，不管三七二十一，先制作数字图书，再考虑版权问题，或者根本不考虑版权问题，等作者找上门来，再想办法应对。即使到了法院，也大不了赔钱了事。由于我国法律没有对侵犯信息网络传播权的赔偿金额作出明确规定，法官有一定的自由裁量权，加之著作权人的意识不强、能力薄弱或者根本就不知道自己的图书被侵权，很少进行活动，维护自己的著作权。数字图书运营商支付的赔偿金额相对于侵权获得的收益，简直是九牛一毛。在侵权成本低、获利高的情况下，有些数字图书制作商无视法律的存在，肆无忌惮，公然侵权。

面对日益增多的版权纠纷，某数字图书运营商开始不断变换公司名称，使著作权人难以。2006年，该数字图书运营商更将其网站的所有人备案为个人。即使这个网站大面积侵权，著作权人也很难维护自己的著作权，因为根本不知道这个人是谁(虽然可以查到姓名)。即使知道了这个人的住址和联系电话，到了法庭上，该人被判承担侵权责任，那么，他有能力执行吗？为了避免著作权人找上门来，费尽苦心想出这个办法逃避法律责任，也很值得“佩服”。这个数字图书运营商是以扫描图书起家的，据说还准备到法院起诉他人侵犯其图书的著作权，说我辛辛苦苦扫了这么多年，却被别人盗版了。当时在法院听到一位法官说出这句话，笔者哭笑不得。这是典型的贼喊捉贼。

在法律有明确规定的情况下，数字图书制作商首先应彻底解决版权问题。如果未经授权就可以制作数字图书销售盈利而不受法律制裁，那么，岂不人人都可以制作数字图书来盈利了。因为从现在的情况看，制作数字图书并没有多少技术含量，不需要很高的技术水平。数字图书的关键是内容。

数字图书制作商未经授权制作数字图书并盈利的做法，跟普通的盗窃无异。如果说有区别的话，只能说在盗窃对象上有区别，数字图书制作商窃取的是无形的知识产权。

踩在自己埋下的版权地雷上运作数字图书，这个游戏并不好玩。因为这个地雷并不是哑雷，总会爆炸的。现在是偶尔爆炸，给个警告；惹急了，就大面积爆炸，估计数字图书制作商会死得很惨。

（二）图书馆用户：采购的是数字图书还是随时会喷发的活火山？

目前，我国数字图书的主要用户是高校图书馆和公共图书馆。此外，还有部分中小学图书馆用户、科研机构图书馆用户、行业用户、个人用户和其他用户。

我国对高等学校的办学条件提出了严格的指标，其中对生均图书册数、生均年进书量作出了明确的规定。根据教育部2004年发布的《普通高等学校基本办学条件指标(试行)》，综合、师范、民族院校，工科、农、林院校，医学院校，语文、财经、政法院校，体育院校，艺术院校等六类院校本科合格的生均图书册数(册/生)分别为100、80、80、100、70、80，高职(专科)合格的生均图书册数(册/生)分别为80、60、60、80、50、60。在监测办学条件指标的合格要求中，除医学院校外，对生均年进书量都提出了本科3~4册、高职(专科)2~3册的指标。据教育部统计，2005年全国共有普通高等学校1792所，成人高等学校481所，共2273所。2006年，全国研究生、普通本专科和成人本专科在校生规模分别达到110.5万人、1738.8万人和524.9万人，总规模达到2374.19万人，比上年增加279.22万人，增长13.33%。办学条件对生均图书册数和生均年进书量的严格要求，不断扩大的在校生规模，要求高等学校具备大量的图书存量，并不断购入新书。同时，高校要改善办学条件，提高科研水平，也要不断购入各种图书。很多学校由于经费的限制，在大量采购纸质图书的同时，纷纷引进价格低廉的数字图书。

然而，高校图书馆在购买数字图书时，似乎并没有特别注意版权问题。高校购入数字图书，一般要跟数字图书制作商签署协议，约定所有因数字图书引起的版权问题由数字图书制作商负责。但在现实中，情况并不是很乐观。由于很多高校的数字图书馆面向公众开放，公众可以免费在高校图书馆的网站上阅读、下载数字图书，如果这些图书未经授权，高校图书馆也是侵权人。即使是在校内局域网上传播未经授权的图书，也不在法律规定的免责范围之内。2005年，中国人民大学和北京交通大学等高校都曾因数字图书涉嫌侵权被起诉，案件最后以庭外和解而告终。佛山图书馆等公共图书馆也曾因数字图书问题被告到法院。

高校图书馆大量采购未经授权的数字图书并在网上传播，存在巨大的法律风险。高校采购数字图书，往往数量巨大，一般是几十万册；并且，同时购买多家数字图书制作商的图书。据悉，有的高校就一下子购买了某数字图书制作商的90多万册数字图书，放在该校图书馆网站上供阅读、下载。在这样的情况下，如果有十分之一的图书存在侵权，一旦被起诉到法院，该高校就会面对巨额赔偿。如果以一本书20万字、每本赔偿1万元计算，该高校就要赔偿9亿元。这是一个令人吃惊的数字！如果著作权人选择逐个高校起诉，后果更不堪设想。当然，由于种种原因，估计这种情况短期内不会出现。

高校采购的不是数字图书，分明是一座可能会随时喷发的活火山！这是比高校目前的贷款危机更加严重的问题。虽然高校可以向数字图书制作商追偿，但很显然，任何一家数字图书制作商都没有能力偿付高校的损失。说不定数字图书制作商早就在此之前被它自己埋下的地雷给炸死了。

目前，高校图书馆应居安思危，慎重处理现有数字图书可能存在的版权问题，并在新购入图书时严格把关，严禁新的未经授权的图书进入自己的订单，进入自己的服务器。

（三）有关主管机关：是否注意到了数字图书存在的侵权问题？

数字图书产业的发展，涉及到众多行政主管机关，如新闻出版机关、版权机关、互联网管理机关和教育行政机关。

数字图书也是图书的一种形式，只不过是在存储介质和阅读方式上同传统的纸质图书存在区别。众所周知，在我国，出版图书要履行一定的审批程序。由于数字图书是近几年出现的新事物，新闻出版行政机关和版权机关并没有对数字图书的出版作出较为明确、可行的具体规定，规范数字图书的版权问题和数字图书“出版商”的运作。国家版权局虽然在1999年出台了《关于制作数字化制品的著作权规定》，但目前侵权情况依然很严重。新闻出版主管机关和版权机关宜根据修改后的《著作权法》和《信息网络传播权保护条例》，出台关于数字图书出版、发行的具体规定和措施，引导数字图书行业健康、有序地发展。

很多数字图书都通过网络传播，数字图书用户(例如，高校图书馆、公共图书馆等)通过网络向公众提供阅读、下载或借阅数字图书服务。如果数字图书未经授权，就这构成侵犯信息网络传播权的典型案件。信息产业主管机关应加强对提供数字图书阅览、下载或借阅的网站的管理(包括高校网站)，依法查处违规传播数字图书的网站。国家版权局和信息产业部虽然于2005年4月29日出台了《互联网著作权行政保护办法》，但似乎对保护数字图书版权的力度不够，主管部门好像一直没有重视数字图书的版权问题，任其自生自灭。

高校是数字图书的重要用户，根据我国目前的实际情况，教育主管部门应对各高校使用数字图书进行指导、监督，引导高校合法使用经授权的数字图书，遵守国家法律法规。教育部曾多次就高校使用外国教材涉嫌侵权问题作出明确规定。2006年11月10日，教育部办公厅更出台了《教育部办公厅关于加强高等学校使用外国教材管理的通知》，对高校使用外国教材提出了严格的要求，估计能解决使用外国教材过程中存在的部分侵权问题。有保护外国教材版权的经验，教育主管部门也应就高校采购数字图书作出严格规定，要求合法使用数字图书，将未经授权的数字图书挡在图书馆的大门之外。如果用户不再购买存在版权问题的数字图书，数字图书制作商估计就会认真地解决版权问题了。毕竟，高校图书馆在数字图书用户中具有决定性地位。

（四）著作权人：意识淡薄吗？

目前，被数字图书制作商侵犯图书著作权的作者不少，但像陈兴良教授那样挺身而出维护自己合法权利的作者却比较少，陈兴良教授还曾将书生公司起诉至海淀法院，可谓维护图书信息网络传播权的典范。著作权人疏于有以下几个方面的原因。

——“天随我愿，听之任之”。有些作者认为，数字图书有利于其作品的传播，扩大了图书的影响，提高了作者的知名度，因而乐于其作品被制作成数字图书出版，不考虑追究数字图书制作商的法律责任。持这种态度的作者为数不少，尤其以高校教师居多。

——“一无所知”。由于数字图书存在于虚拟空间中，作者很难发现自己的信息网络传播权被侵犯，更谈不上了。

——担心“赔了夫人又折兵”。侵犯信息网络传播权的证据易于灭失，维护著作权首先要进行公证，保全证据。目前，网络证据保全的公证费最少是1000元，有些公证处最少收2500元，有的可能更多。如果委托律师代理案件，还要支付不菲的律师费。目前，对于此类案件，法院判决的赔偿金额相对较低，一般只判赔几十元/千字加合理的诉讼支出。而作者首先要支出公证费和诉讼费。一个案子下来，花费了大量精力、物力，最后所得很少，从经济上讲往往得不偿失。因为成本较高，很多著作权人明知自己的权利被侵犯，也只好作罢。

——“不识庐山真面目”。如果发现网站非法传播图书，首先要找到网站的所有人，才有可能维护自己的著作权。然而，很多网站根本没有备案，找不到侵权人，无法从法律上维护自己的著作权。即使涉嫌侵权的网站备案，有时候也无法。

2005年，中共中央党史研究室某研究员发现自己的六种图书被搬到某著名数字图书网上，于是将某公司起诉。然而，被告并非侵犯其著作权网站的所有人，法院依法裁定驳回其对某公司的起诉。如前文所述，这个网站目前已经备案为个人所有，作者根本就找不到这个人的相关资料。在这种情况下，怎么呢？

——“无从下手”。有些著作权人有很强的意识，但因为缺乏必要的法律知识，面对侵权，往往一头雾水，不知道如何维护自己的著作权，不知从何做起。

著作权人很少维护自己的信息网络传播权，还有其他方面的原因，不是一句意识淡薄就能够概括的。

（五）出版社：或侵权？

如上文所述，我国的数字图书目前大多数是通过直接扫描纸书或通过出版社提供的电子文本转换而制作，后者在版式设计上同纸质图书完全相同，只是省略了扫描步骤，文字更加清晰。出版社在其中扮演以下两种角色之一：被侵权者或侵权者。

出版图书时，出版社要同著作权人签订出版合同，获得对图书的专有使用权。一般情况下，出版社获得以纸质图书出版作品的专有使用权。出版数字图书，出版社要另行取得著作权人的许可。目前，在实践中，也有出版社与作者商定取得包括数字图书在内的专有使用权，数字图书另行计算支付报酬的方法(一般是按比例分成)。也有出版社在出版合同中跟著作权人签订这样的内容：著作权人将数字图书的专有使用权授予出版社，或者授权出版社作为著作权人的代理人，将数字图书的专有使用权授予他人，同时约定支付报酬的方法。

如果数字图书制作商未经出版社和作者许可，直接拿纸书扫描，制作数字图书，就侵犯了作者的著作权和出版社的版式设计权。这是现实中常见的情况。中国大百科全书出版社近年来曾因数字图书版权问题在北京起诉过2家数字图书制作商，很好地维护了自己的著作权，其行为值得称赞。

有时候，出版社也因无数字图书的专有使用权却授权他人出版数字图书而侵犯作者的著作权，成为侵权人。出现这种情况，有很多原因，如疏于管理、法律意识淡薄，如此等等，不一而足。这种情况，以方正阿帕比数字图书最为典型。因为它直接从出版社拿电子文本，制作数字图书。如果出版社本身就没有信息网络传播权，出版社和方正阿帕比公司都侵犯了作者的著作权。方正阿帕比绕过作者“取得”出版社“授权”的思路，是存在问题的，因为就某些图书而言，出版社根本就没有授权他人制作数字图书的权利。即使现在有权，合同到期后，如果继续使用，仍然会引发版权地震。

出版社在授权他人出版数字图书时，一定要认真核对出版合同，核实是否有权出版数字图书。在实践中，这个问题是很容易解决的。而且，“店大欺客”，大多数作者同出版社签订的是出版社已经印制好的“格式”出版合同。只有极少数作者才可能做到“客大欺店”。因为对大多数作者来说，出版社是处于强势地位的。当然，还有很多图书是出版社通过作者自费的方式出版的。

在数字图书版权问题中，出版社处于被侵权或侵权的境地，多少显得有些尴尬。而笔者本人，有图书被数字图书制作商直接侵权，同时出版社的版式设计权也被侵犯，也有图书被出版社无权而“许可”数字图书制作商制作数字图书，是为无权代理。因为有多家数字图书制作商，笔者的同一本书也曾同时出现过上述两种现象。

（六）如何有效解决数字图书的版权问题？

根据现行法律，制作数字图书，首先要取得著作权人的授权，解决版权问题。如果不解决版权问题，随着著作权人意识的增强和各种条件的改善，数字图书制作商迟早要陷入版权诉讼的泥潭。

在目前的环境下，取得著作权人的许可，根据不同的情况，可采取如下两种方法。

——直接取得作者的授权。对于数字图书版权仍然在作者手中的图书，只能够联系作者，取得作者的书面授权。通过出版社查找作者，不失为一种比较好的办法。目前，我国一年出版十几万种新书，作者的情况千差万别，有时候不通过出版社很难找到图书的作者。而且，数字图书制作商很难绕过出版社，因为出版社对纸质图书享有版式设计权，除非数字图书制作商重新设计版式。

——通过出版社或版权代理机构取得作者的授权。对于作者授予出版社数字图书专有使用权或授权出版社代理数字图书版权的图书，直接跟出版社联系就好了。这个相对比较方便，因为全国只有五百多家出版社。有些作者则委托版权代理机构代理数字图书版权，在这样的情况下，数字图书制作商要通过版权代理机构取得授权。

在目前的环境下，其他取得数字授权的方法好像可行性不大。取得数字图书的授权，可能耗费大量的精力，但数字图书制作商万万不可因为取得授权存在这样那样的困难就采取“先传播、再解决版权问题”的模式。如果长期下去，数字图书产业只有死路一条。当然，根据现行法律，如果作者在世及去世后50年内数字图书一直侵权而没有人就此主张权利，则另当别论。但又有多少人能对这么长时期内可能发生的事情作预测呢？数字图书制作商能存活这么久吗？在目前的中国，存活一百年以上的企业屈指可数。

四、著作权人如何切实维护著作权？

在著作权人被侵犯信息网络传播权的情况下，首先要对侵权事实进行公证，保全证据。证据灭失后，著作权人无法提供对方侵权的证据，就很难真正自己的权利了。保全证据后，著作权人可以先跟对方沟通，看能否通过协商解决。如果沟通不能解决问题，私力救济失败，就可以考虑走法律程序，到法院起诉了。这就是所谓的公力救济。当然，也可以不经沟通而直接起诉。私力救济有时候也很能解决这一类问题。因为侵权事实是客观存在的，有争议的可能只是赔偿数额多少的问题了。

采取法律手段解决著作权纠纷，从程序上讲，著作权人要解决以下几个问题：①告谁；②公证；③到哪个地方的法院告；④到哪一级法院告；⑤怎么告；⑥缴纳多少诉讼费。这里简要解答这几个问题。

——确定被告。采取法律手段维护自己的著作权，要确定被告。目前，数字图书多通过网络传播。数字图书的制作商、销售商、传播者等，都是数字图书的侵权人。传播未经授权的数字图书的网站的所有人，也是侵权人。可通过免费查询信息产业部的备案登记的方法，确定网站的所有人。

——保全证据。因为网络证据易于灭失和伪造，当事人要对侵权事实进行公证，保全证据。否则，立案后，被告接到起诉状副本，有可能删除涉嫌侵权的图书，如果被告不认可原告未经公证的侵权证据，法院可能判决原告因举证不能而承担败诉责任。在实践中，很多法院明确告知当事人，要对侵权事实进行公证。

——地域管辖。确定了被告，到哪个地方的法院起诉呢？这就是民事诉讼中的地域管辖问题。根据有关规定，因侵犯著作权行为提起的民事诉讼，由侵权行为地、侵权复制品储藏地或者查封扣押地、被告住所地人民法院管辖。因为数字图书多采取网络传播的形式，很少存在复制品，多是网络著作权纠纷，一般由侵权行为地或被告住所地人民法院管辖。对涉及不同侵权行为实施地的多个被告提起的共同诉讼，原告可选择其中一个被告的侵权行为实施地人民法院管辖；仅对其中某一被告提起的诉讼，该被告侵权行为实施地的人民法院有管辖权。例如，甲公司未经许可制作数字图书，乙高校购买该数字图书后通过该高校图书馆网站传播，原告可选择甲公司所在地或乙高校所在地人民法院管辖。当然，原告可以单独起诉甲公司或单独起诉乙高校。

——级别管辖。目前，我国人民法院分四级，各级人民法院都受理一审民事纠纷案件。那么，著作权民事纠纷案件由哪一级人民法院管辖呢？这就是级别管辖问题。根据有关规定，著作权民事纠纷由中级以上人民法院管辖。各高级人民法院也指定了若干基层人民法院管辖第一审著作权民事纠纷案件。例如，目前，在北京，就有海淀、朝阳、东城、西城、丰台五个基层人民法院(后三个法院是2007年3月新增加的)，两个中级人民法院和北京市高级人民法院共8个法院可以受理著作权民事纠纷案件。

——提交起诉状。确定了被告和有管辖权的法院后，就是怎么告的问题了。到法院起诉，要有起诉状(也可以口头起诉)。起诉状一般以“民事起诉状”为标题，写明原告、被告的详细情况，包括姓名、性别、出生年月日、住址、联系方式等信息；被告是单位的，要写明单位名称、住所地、联系方式、法定代表人等信息。接下来写案由，即著作权纠纷；再写诉讼请求；然后写明事实与理由；提交的证据名称等。最后在民事起诉状上签名。起诉状要按照被告的数量提供副本。

——交纳诉讼费用。当事人进行民事诉讼，要交纳诉讼费用。根据2007年4月1日开始实施的《诉讼费用交纳办法》，知识产权民事案件，没有争议金额或者价额的，每件交纳500元至1000元；有争议金额或者价额的，按照财产案件的标准交纳。财产案件根据诉讼请求的金额或者价额，按照比例分段累计交纳：不超过1万元的，每件交纳50元；超过1万元至10万元的部分，按照2.5％交纳；……。这较之前的不满1000元交50元和1000元至50000万元部分交4％的比例有所降低。接下来，就是法院审理的问题了。

当然，并不是所有的数字图书制作商都在玩版权地雷的危险游戏，有些数字图书制作商在解决版权问题方面还是做得不错的。

彻底解决数字图书的版权问题，需要一个良好的法律环境和社会环境，需要数字图书制作商和用户遵守法律，保护知识产权，尊重著作权人的合法权利。只有这样，数字图书产业才能够健康发展、茁壮成长。这，还有一段很长的路要走。(全文10059字)

[未经作者书面许可，禁止任何媒体转载、摘编，违者必究。联系方法：电子信箱fqxbook@gmail.com；电话/传真 (010)80502350]

 

 

 

       2006年11月21日，美国商务部公布决定，宣布对原产于中国的铜版纸进口发起反补贴税调查。

       这是美国商务部自1991年对吊扇发起调查以来对中国发起的首次反补贴税调查。 发起这次调查，要求美国商务部审查其长期以来不对非市场经济国家适用反补贴税法律的政策。 然而，在发起反补贴税调查时，美国商务部没有就可抵消补贴税法律对非市场经济国家的适用问题作出任何裁定。 美国商务部将在调查中作出这个裁定。

       新纸业公司(NewPage Corporation, OH)是这次调查的申请人。

       调查的范围包括用于书写、印刷或其他类似用途的未涂布纸张和纸板。

       以下产品排除在可抵消补贴税调查范围之外：(1) coated free sheet paper that is imported printed with final content printed text or graphics; (2) base paper to be sensitized for use in photography; and (3) paper containing by weight 25 percent or more cotton fiber。

       未涂布纸编入美国协调关税计划(HTSUS)以下税则：4810.13.1900, 4810.13.2010, 4810.13.2090, 4810.13.5000, 4810.13.7040, 4810.14.1900, 4810.14.2010, 4810.14.2090, 4810.14.5000, 4810.14.7040, 4810.19.1900, 4810.19.2010和4810.19.2090。 美国协调关税计划税则号为方便和海关统计的而提供，美国商务部对调查范围的书面说明具有决定意义。

 

下一步措施：

美国国际贸易委员会预计于2006年12月15日左右作出其初步损害裁定。

如果美国国际贸易委员会确定有合理的迹象说明来自中国的进口对国内产业造成了实质损害和实质损害威胁，继续调查；美国商务部预计于2007年1月作出其初步可抵消补贴税裁定。

预测的可抵消补贴率：

国家	补贴率
中国	高于微不足道的水平*

*微不足道的水平＝发展中国家低于1％；发达国家低于2％。

案件日历

事件	日期
提交申请	2006年10月31日
美国商务部发起调查日期	2006年11月20日
美国国际贸易委员会初步裁定	2006年12月15日
美国商务部初步裁定*	2007年1月24日
美国商务部最终裁定*	2007年4月9日
美国国际贸易委员会最终裁定**	2007年8月7日
签发反补贴税令***	2007年8月14日

*这些最后期限可根据有关法律延期。

**只有在美国商务部作出最终肯定裁定后才发生。

***只有在美国商务部和美国国际贸易委员会都作出最终肯定裁定后才发生。

进口统计

中国	2003	2004	2005
数量(千克)	49,576,970	29,281,506	99,181,692
价值(美元)	$37,026,173	$21,499,613	$80,876,145

来源：U.S. International Trade Commission, Dataweb (HTS 4810.13.1900, 4810.13.2010, 4810.13.2090, 4810.13.5000, 4810.13.7040, 4810.14.1900, 4810.14.2010, 4810.14.2090, 4810.14.5000, 4810.14.7040, 4810.19.1900, 4810.19.2010, and 4810.19.2090)

（摘自www.usitc.gov）

李昌奎：公开发表的反倾销方面文章
(1)《亟须培养我国反倾销人才》，《时代经贸》，2003年第2期
(2)《解读<反倾销措施协议>中的正常贸易过程》，《中国反倾销反补贴保障措施信息择要》，2005年第13期
(3)《民营企业应对反倾销十二策》，《经济日报，2005年6月3日，被新华网、《物资信息报》、《消费日报》等报刊转载
(4)《家具反倾销案的得与失》，《经济日报》，2005年6月3日
(5)《世贸组织反倾销争端解决的十大特征》，《远东经济画报》，2006年第5期；《中国反倾销反补贴保障措施信息择要》，2006年第9期
(6)《走出反倾销的十大认识误区》，《对外经贸财会》，2006年第11期

序号 图书馆 释义 美国卷 欧盟卷 其他国卷 案例2004 实务 释义(电子书) 美国卷(电子书)
1 安徽大学图书馆 9 9 4 9 6 0  
2 安徽工业大学图书馆 0 2 0 0 0 2  
3 安徽理工大学图书馆 0 5 5 0 0 0  
4 安徽省图书馆 2 2 2 0 0 0  
5 北京工业大学图书馆 3 3 3 3 0 0  
6 北方工业大学 0 0 0 2 0 0  
7 北方民族大学图书馆 0 5 0 0 5 5  
8 北京大学图书馆 3 2 3 2 3 3  
9 北京航空航天大学图书馆 1 2 1 1 4 3  
10 北京化工大学图书馆 7 7 0 5 0 0  
11 北京科技大学图书馆 3 5 5 5 3 3 有 有
12 北京理工大学图书馆 3 3 2 2 0 0  
13 北京联合大学应用文理学院图书馆 3 0 0 0 0 0  
14 北京林业大学图书馆 4 0 8 0 0 0  
15 北京师范大学图书馆 3 0 4 0 0 0  
16 北京师范大学珠海分校图书馆 3 6 0 0 3 0  
17 北京外国语大学图书馆 0 2 0 0 0 2  
18 北京邮电大学图书馆 4 0 4 4 4 0  
19 长安大学图书馆 3 3 5 3 5 10  
20 长春工程学院图书馆 0 0 0 10 0 0  
21 成都大学图书馆 3 0 0 0 0 0  
22 成都理工大学图书馆 3 5 0 2 1 2  
23 大连大学图书馆 5 5 0 5 0 4  
24 大连理工大学图书馆 3 3 0 3 0 3  
25 电子科技大学图书馆 0 0 0 5 3 3  
26 东北财经大学图书馆 4 4 5 5 5 3  
27 东北师范大学图书馆 3 2 2 0 0 0  
28 东华大学图书馆 1 0 0 5 0 3  
29 东南大学图书馆 3 2 3 3 3 4  
30 东莞数字图书馆 0 2 0 0 0 4  
31 对外经济贸易大学图书馆 5 8 5 6 3 8  
32 佛山科学技术学院图书馆 0 0 0 0 0 3  
33 福建省图书馆 2 2 0 0 2 2  
34 福建师范大学图书馆 6 1 1 3 0 0  
35 福州大学图书馆 3 3 4 5 3 3  
36 复旦大学图书馆 0 2 2 2 3 1  
37 广东海洋大学图书馆 12 8 12 12 1 1  
38 广东科技职业技术学院图书馆 6 6 0 0 6 0  
39 广东省立中山图书馆 4 0 0 4 0 4  
40 广东外语外贸大学图书馆 4 4 8 4 4 4  
41 广西大学图书馆 3 5 4 4 3 3  
42 广西壮族自治区图书馆 2 2 2 0 0 0  
43 广州图书馆 4 3 4 4 0 0  
44 国家图书馆 6 6 6 6 6 6  
45 哈尔滨工程大学图书馆 0 5 0 0 7 7  
46 哈尔滨工业大学图书馆 16 6 10 6 0 0  
47 哈尔滨理工大学图书馆 5 8 8 8 0 8  
48 哈尔滨市图书馆 2 2 0 0 0 0  
49 海南大学图书馆 4 0 7 3 0 0  
50 海南师范大学图书馆 4 0 2 2 5 5  
51 杭州电子科技大学图书馆 4 4 0 4 5 6  
52 杭州师范学院图书馆 3 3 3 0 4 3  
53 杭州图书馆 3 0 0 1 3 3  
54 合肥工业大学图书馆 20 10 10 10 10 0  
55 河北工业大学图书馆 8 6 3 3 0 0  
56 河北经贸大学图书馆 0 3 0 3 0 0  
57 河南大学弹图书馆 5 5 0 0 0 0  
58 河南工业大学图书馆 3 3 0 4 5 0  
59 黑龙江八一农垦大学图书馆 5 5 0 5 0 5  
60 湖北大学图书馆 5 0 5 0 0 0  
61 湖北工业大学图书馆 2 1 0 0 1 5  
62 湖北省图书馆 0 2 0 0 0 0  
63 湖南大学图书馆 4 10 5 4 0 0  
64 湖南理工学院图书馆 3 3 3 3 3 4  
65 湖南师范大学图书馆 0 4 0 0 3 3  
66 湖南图书馆 0 0 0 2 0 2  
67 湖州师范学院图书馆 0 2 0 0 0 0  
68 华东理工大学图书馆 0 1 1 0 0 0  
69 华东师范大学图书馆 5 3 3 3 4 4  
70 华南理工大学图书馆 11 12 12 0 0 0  
71 华南农业大学图书馆 4 4 4 4 4 0  
72 华南热带农业大学图书馆 6 3 3 3 0 0  
73 华南师范大学图书馆 6 5 6 6 0 5  
75 华中师范大学图书馆 0 0 0 4 0 0  
76 吉林大学图书馆 0 2 2 1 0 0  
77 吉林省图书馆 2 2 2 0 2 0  
78 集美大学图书馆 4 4 4 4 8 0  
79 暨南大学深圳旅游学院图书馆 0 0 4 0 0 0  
80 暨南大学图书馆 4 4 3 3 3 3  
81 暨南大学珠海学院图书馆 0 0 2 0 0 0  
82 江汉大学图书馆 0 0 0 1 1 1  
83 江苏大学图书馆 0 3 2 3 2 2  
84 江苏教育学院图书馆 0 0 0 1 0 0  
85 江苏科技大学图书馆 0 2 2 2 3 2  
86 江西省图书馆 0 0 0 2 2 0  
87 江阴职业技术学院图书馆 0 0 0 2 3 0  
88 金陵科技学院图书馆 0 0 0 0 0 0  
89 金陵图书馆 2 2 3 2 2 2  
90 九州学院图书馆 0 1 0 0 0 0  
91 莱阳农学院图书馆 0 0 0 5 0 0  
92 辽宁大学图书馆 0 3 0 0 2 0  
93 辽宁科技大学图书馆 3 3 6 0 0 0  
94 辽宁省图书馆 2 2 3 2 2 2  
95 内蒙古大学图书馆 0 0 0 3 0 0  
96 南昌大学图书馆 7 0 0 9 0 0  
97 南京财经大学图书馆 5 5 5 0 4 0 有 有
98 南京大学图书馆 4 5 5 4 6 7  
99 南京工业大学图书馆 5 5 5 3 3 3 有 有
100 南京理工大学图书馆 0 4 4 0 0 0  
101 南京林业大学图书馆 6 6 6 6 1 1  
102 南京农业大学图书馆 0 0 0 2 4 6  
103 南京森林公安高等专科学校 0 0 0 0 0 3  
104 南京师范大学图书馆 2 4 0 0 0 2  
105 南京晓庄学院图书馆 0 0 0 0 0 4  
106 南开大学图书馆 0 2 2 2 3 3  
107 南通大学图书馆 0 3 0 0 1 6  
108 宁波大学园区图书馆 1 0 1 1 1 1  
109 清华大学图书馆 5 6 4 6 2 3  
110 沙洲职业工学院图书馆 0 0 0 0 0 3  
111 山东财经学院图书馆 4 5 5 4 5 4  
112 山东大学图书馆 3 3 3 3 3 3  
113 山东大学威海分校图书馆 0 3 5 3 3 3  
114 山东经济学院图书馆 0 1 0 0 1 0  
115 山东科技大学图书馆 3 3 3 3 4 0  
116 山东理工大学图书馆 5 5 5 5 4 5  
117 山东农业大学图书馆 5 0 0 0 0 0  
118 山东省社会科学院图书馆 2 0 0 0 0 0  
119 山东省图书馆 3 3 3 3 3 3  
120 山东师范大学图书馆 4 3 3 3 0 3 有 有
121 山东轻工业学院图书馆 0 3 3 3 3 3  
122 山西财经大学图书馆－南馆 6 4 3 3 0 0 有 有
123 山西大学图书馆 0 1 1 1 3 0  
124 山西省图书馆 0 0 0 0 2 0  
125 陕西省图书馆 3 3 3 3 2 3  
126 陕西师范大学图书馆 3 3 0 0 0 0  
127 上海WTO事务咨询中心 1 0 0 0 0 0  
128 上海财经大学图书馆 5 5 4 4 1 1  
129 上海大学图书馆 3 3 3 3 0 3  
130 上海对外贸易学院图书馆 6 21 2 6 9 11 有 有
131 上海交通大学图书馆 3 2 2 2 0 0  
132 上海师范大学图书馆 0 3 1 0 1 0  
133 上海图书馆 3 3 5 5 20 8  
134 上海外国语大学图书馆 7 7 0 0 0 0  
135 绍兴文理学院图书馆 0 1 5 0 0 0  
136 深圳大学城图书馆 4 5 2 2 3 3 有 有
137 深圳大学图书馆 8 8 12 8 0 9  
138 深圳图书馆 2 2 0 2 0 0  
139 沈阳工业大学图书馆 0 7 0 0 0 0 有 
140 石河子大学图书馆 0 0 0 5 5 0  
141 首都经济贸易大学图书馆 5 0 0 0 6 6  
142 首都师范大学图书馆 0 0 2 2 2 2  
143 首都图书馆 2 2 2 2 2 2  
144 首都图书馆(含区图书馆) 4 2 2 2 2 4  
145 顺德职业技术学院图书馆 0 4 4 0 0 5  
146 四川大学图书馆 3 0 0 0 3 3  
147 四川理工学院图书馆 0 0 0 0 0 4  
148 四川师范大学图书馆－狮子山、东校区 0 0 7 0 0 2  
149 四川师范大学图书馆－院系 0 2 0 2 0 0  
150 苏州大学图书馆 5 2 2 2 3 5  
151 苏州图书馆 0 2 0 0 0 2 有 有
152 塔里木大学图书馆 5 5 0 0 0 0  
153 天津大学图书馆 3 3 0 0 0 3  
154 天津科技大学图书馆 4 4 4 4 0 0  
155 天津市图书馆 3 3 0 2 3 2  
156 同济大学图书馆 0 4 4 4 5 0  
157 温州大学图书馆 0 5 3 0 0 2  
158 无锡商业职业技术学院图书馆 0 0 0 0 3 2  
159 吴江市图书馆 0 0 0 0 2 0  
160 武汉大学图书馆 5 5 0 0 5 8  
161 武汉科技大学图书馆 0 8 8 7 0 0  
162 武汉理工大学图书馆 6 4 4 2 4 3  
163 西安电子科技大学图书馆 4 4 0 0 0 0  
164 西安工业大学图书馆 0 0 0 6 0 0  
165 西安交通大学图书馆 3 0 3 0 0 5  
166 西北工业大学图书馆 2 3 1 2 0 1  
167 西华师范大学图书馆 0 0 0 1 0 0  
168 西南财经大学图书馆 0 0 5 0 5 0  
169 西交通大学图书馆 0 0 0 7 0 0  
170 西南科技大学图书馆 2 0 0 5 5 9  
171 西南民族大学图书馆 2 3 2 1 2 2  
172 厦门大学图书馆 6 7 4 0 6 3  
173 厦门图书馆 2 2 2 0 0 2  
174 湘潭大学图书馆 0 2 2 2 4 4  
175 新疆大学图书馆 0 0 2 0 0 0  
176 新疆农业大学图书馆 0 0 0 2 2 3  
177 徐州工程学院图书馆 3 3 0 3 0 3  
178 扬州大学图书馆 0 0 0 0 0 3  
179 浙江大学图书馆 0 3 3 3 0 0  
180 浙江工商大学图书馆 8 8 10 8 8 5  
181 浙江工业大学图书馆 0 3 3 3 3 3  
182 浙江林学院图书馆 0 4 0 4 0 0  
183 浙江图书馆 3 3 3 3 2 2  
184 郑州大学图书馆 8 8 0 0 5 8  
185 郑州工程学院图书馆 3 3 0 4 5 0  
186 中北大学图书馆 3 0 0 0 0 0  
187 中国地质大学图书馆 3 3 3 3 3 0  
188 中国科学技术大学图书馆 4 2 0 0 0 0 有 有
189 中国矿业大学图书馆 0 0 4 0 0 0  
190 中国人民大学图书馆 3 4 4 3 0 3  
191 中国石油大学青岛校区图书馆 0 0 0 0 10 0  
192 中国石油大学图书馆 0 0 0 0 10 0  
193 中国药科大学图书馆 2 3 3 3 0 0  
194 中国政法大学图书馆 0 4 4 4 4 4  
195 中南民族大学图书馆 5 5 5 5 5 5  
196 中山大学图书馆 4 2 2 2 0 0 有 有
197 中央财经大学图书馆 5 4 0 5 5 3  
198 重庆大学图书馆 3 3 0 0 0 0  
199 重庆师范大学图书馆 0 0 0 0 5 5  
200 重庆图书馆 2 2 2 0 2 2  
 合计 521 557 436 445 393 399  

注：各图书出版时间         
1 WTO《反倾销协定》释义，2005年2月        
2 世界贸易组织反倾销争端案例(1995～2003，美国卷)，2005年2月        
3 世界贸易组织反倾销争端案例(1995～2003，欧盟卷)，2005年4月        
4 世界贸易组织反倾销争端案例(1995～2003，其他国卷)，2005美国3月        
5 世界贸易组织反倾销争端案例2004，2006年1月        
6 美国反倾销实务，2006年1月        

另： 2005 年全国共有普通高等学校和成人高等学校2273 所。这里只统计了不到十分之一高校图书馆的收藏情况。高校图书馆仅仅是此类图书购买对象中的一个。面向其他群体的销售状况，一般情况下无法统计。        

71 FR 63230, October 30, 2006
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
19 CFR Part 358

Docket No. 060602144-6270-02
RIN 0625-AA71
 
Procedures for Importation of Supplies for Use in Emergency Relief Work

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (``the Department'') hereby
establishes procedures for importation of supplies for use in emergency
relief work free of antidumping and countervailing duties, as
authorized under section 318(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended
(``the Act'') (19 U.S.C. 1318(a)). Such supplies would be for use in
emergency relief work related to an emergency declared by the
President.

DATES: This rule is effective November 29, 2006.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stacy J. Ettinger, Office of the Chief
Counsel for Import Administration, room 3622, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC, 20230;
telephone: 202-482-4618.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Section 318(a) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1318(a)) gives the Secretary
of the Treasury authority, on a temporary basis, to respond immediately
where the President declares the existence of an emergency.
Specifically, the Secretary may ``permit ... the importation free of
duty of ... supplies for use in emergency relief work.'' This
authority, insofar as it encompasses antidumping and countervailing
duties, was delegated to the Secretary of Commerce in 1979, pursuant to
Reorg. Plan No. 3 of 1979.\1\ Consistent with the Reorg. Plan, we have
promulgated this rule in consultation with the Department of Treasury
and the Department of Homeland Security. The rule establishes
procedures for importation of supplies for use in emergency relief work
free of antidumping and countervailing duties, as authorized under
section 318(a) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ All functions of the Secretary of Treasury under this
provision, with respect to the antidumping and countervailing duty
functions, were transferred to Commerce pursuant to Reorg. Plan No.
3 of 1979, to be exercised in consultation with the Secretary of the
Treasury. Reorg. Plan No. 3 is set out as notes under 19 U.S.C.A.
2171. Authority under section 318 of the Act was transferred to
Commerce under section 5(a)(1)(E) of the Reorg. Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Discssion of Comments

    On June 22, 2006, the Department published a proposed rule and
request for public comment concerning procedures for importation of
supplies for use in emergency relief work free of antidumping and
countervailing duties, as authorized under section 318(a) of the Act
(71 FR 35846, June 22, 2006). In finalizing these procedures, the
Department carefully considered each of the comments it received. The
following is an explanation of the provisions of the rule, as well as a
summary of the comments received and the Department's responses to
those comments.

Section 358.101

    Section 358.101 sets forth the scope of Part 358, procedures for
importation of supplies for use in emergency relief work free of
antidumping and countervailing duties, as authorized under section
318(a) of the Act.
    Several commenters expressed support for the establishment of
procedures for importation of supplies for use in emergency relief work
free of antidumping and countervailing duties. The commenters argued
that the temporary suspension of antidumping and countervailing duties
during an emergency could provide needed relief after natural disasters
and would have a positive impact on emergency relief and reconstruction
efforts by reducing costs and ensuring availability of building and
other emergency relief supplies. Other commenters argued that there is
no need for such a rule or that there have been no circumstances where
antidumping or countervailing duties have been shown to affect or delay
the importation of emergency supplies. One commenter argued that the
rule would exacerbate the previously demonstrated injury to the
domestic industry by permitting an additional influx of unfairly traded
goods.
    The Department is committed to strong enforcement of U.S. trade
laws and will do everything within the parameters prescribed by
Congress to ensure that domestic industries obtain effective relief
from dumped and subsidized imports. Congress also, however, has
authorized the Secretary to permit the importation of supplies for use
in relief work free of antidumping and countervailing duties during a
declared emergency. This rule establishes the procedures for
importation of such supplies as authorized by Congress and is intended
to facilitate access to needed resources in the event of a natural
disaster or other emergency. Any waiver of antidumping and
countervailing duties would be both temporary and limited to supplies
for use in emergency relief work related to the emergency declared by
the President. The Department does not believe that such temporary
limited waivers will exacerbate injury to the domestic industry.
Nevertheless, we recognize that we have no experience with the new
waiver mechanism and that it is possible that the application of the
waiver mechanism could have unintended consequences with regard to the
protection afforded to U.S. industries found to be injured by dumped
and/or subsidized imports. Therefore, we have added section 358.104,
which provides that the

[[Page 63231]]

Secretary will review and issue a report on the first five years of the
operation of the waiver mechanism. The report will consider the impact
of the application of the waiver mechanism on U.S. parties injured by
dumped and/or subsidized imports.
    Several commenters argued that the Department has no legal
authority to promulgate a rule allowing for temporary waiver of
antidumping and countervailing duties because Title VII of the Act does
not provide such authority and/or the waiver authority under section
318(a) of the Act does not explicitly reference or encompass
antidumping or countervailing duties. We do not agree with the
commenters' assertions. The Department's authority to promulgate this
rule arises under section 318(a) of the Act. Specifically, section
318(a) gives the Secretary of the Treasury authority, on a temporary
basis, to respond immediately where the President declares the
existence of an emergency. Under these circumstances, the Secretary may
permit the importation free of duty of supplies for use in emergency
relief work. Insofar as it encompasses antidumping and countervailing
duties, this authority was explicitly delegated to the Secretary of
Commerce in 1979, pursuant to section 5(a)(1)(E) of Reorg. Plan No. 3
of 1979. Regardless of whether Title VII of the Act permits temporary
waiver of antidumping and countervailing duties, such waiver authority
is specifically and explicitly contemplated under section 318(a) of the
Act.
    One commenter argued that, based on certain language in Reorg. Plan
No. 3, any rule regarding the application of section 318 of the Act
must be ``jointly promulgated'' between the Department and the
Department of Homeland Security (``DHS''). The Department disagrees
with the commenter's interpretation of Reorg. Plan No. 3. Nothing in
section 318(a) or in Reorg. Plan No. 3 requires that this rule be
``jointly promulgated'' with DHS or any other agency. Rather, section
5(a)(1)(E) of the Reorg. Plan provides that all functions of the
Secretary of Treasury under section 318(a) of the Act\2\ with respect
to antidumping and countervailing duties, were transferred to the
Secretary of Commerce ``to be exercised in consultation with the
Secretary of the Treasury.'' In the course of promulgating this rule,
the Department has, in fact, consulted with Treasury, as well as with
the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection (``CBP'') and DHS. These
interagency consultations satisfy the requirements of Reorg. Plan No.
3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ In 2002, Pub.L. 107-210, section 342(1), designated the
former text of section 318 of the Act as subsection (a) of section
318 of the Act. Section 342(2) of Pub.L. 107-210 added new
subsection (b) to section 318 of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    One commenter suggested that there was no need for the rule because
there are other emergency powers already available to the President and
the federal government. The commenter is correct that there are other
emergency powers available to the President and other federal agencies.
For example, in addition to the authorities delegated to the Secretary
of Commerce pursuant to Reorg. Plan No. 3, section 318 of the Act
contains provisions that provide relief from duties other than
countervailing and antidumping duties and also from other measures
affecting importations. Section 322 of the Act also provides for other
emergency relief authority with regard to importations. We note that
this rule (Part 358) is in no way intended to limit the emergency
relief available through other provisions of the Act, or limit the
authority of the Secretary of the Treasury, or those to whom that
authority has been delegated, to grant emergency relief of duties or
take any other measure necessary to respond to a emergency or other
threat pursuant to sections 318, 322, or any other provisions of the
Act. However, the fact that there are other available emergency powers
does not vitiate the need for this rule. The Department has determined
to promulgate this rule in order to prescribe the process by which the
Department will exercise its authority under section 318(a) of the Act.
    One commenter argued that the rule does not go far enogh and that
U.S. law should be amended to establish a ``no or short supply''
exception to the application of antidumping and countervailing duties
in the form of either a public-interest test or a lesser-duty rule.
Another commenter expressed concern that the rule could lead to an
unnecessary short-supply provision and create a loophole benefitting
its Brazilian orange juice competitors. One commenter proposed that the
Department clarify that the rule does not apply to Mexican cement.
    This rule serves the limited function of establishing procedures
for importation of supplies for use in emergency relief work free of
antidumping and countervailing duties, in the context of and related to
an emergency declared by the President. The rule does not limit the
definition of supplies for use in emergency relief work to products for
which there is insufficient U.S. production. In other words, the rule
is not a so-called ``short-supply'' provision. The rule also does not
exempt specific products (such as orange juice or cement) from
consideration as supplies for use in emergency relief work for the
reason that what supplies might be needed for use in emergency relief
work will depend on the circumstances of a specific declared emergency
and the particular needs of persons affected by that emergency.

Section 358.102

    Section 358.102 sets forth the definition of terms that are used in
Part 358. With respect to the definition of ``supplies for use in
emergency relief work,'' some commenters proposed that emergency relief
work be broadly defined and that the rule clarify that eligible
supplies include, for example, supplies for repairs or reconstruction
work made necessary by the emergency. Other commenters argued that the
definition of ``supplies for use in emergency relief work'' is broader
than the definition authorized by Congress. These commenters argued
that section 318(a) of the Act limits supplies for use in emergency
relief work to humanitarian goods provided on a short-term basis,
specifically food, clothing, and medical and surgical supplies. The
commenters proposed that the rule be redrafted to reflect this limited
definition.
    The Department's proposed definition of ``supplies for use in
emergency relief work'' was intended to reflect the statutory authority
to permit the duty-free importation of supplies for use in emergency
relief work. However, some commenters found the proposed definition too
limited, while others found the proposed definition too broad. Given
the mixed reaction to the proposed definition, the Department has
modified the definition of ``supplies for use in emergency relief
work.'' The definition will now track the language of section 318(a) of
the Act. The Department does not agree with commenters' assertions that
the statute ``limits'' supplies for use in emergency relief work to
humanitarian goods provided on a short-term basis such as food,
clothing, medical and surgical supplies. The statute also permits duty
waiver for ``other supplies for use in emergency relief work.'' As a
general proposition, identification of needed supplies will be
dependent on the circumstances of an actual declared emergency. While
clothing and medical supplies might be needed for emergency relief work
in certain circumstances, there may be other circumstances where
supplies related to repair or reconstruction work are equally or more
needed.

[[Page 63232]]

Section 358.103

    Section 358.103 sets forth the procedures for importation of
supplies for use in emergency relief work free of antidumping and
countervailing duties.
    Where the President, acting under section 318 of the Act,
authorizes the Secretary to permit the importation of supplies for use
in emergency relief work, the Secretary will consider a request for
importation free of antidumping and countervailing duties under the
conditions set forth in paragraph (a). Paragraph (a)(1) requires that a
request be in writing, identifies persons that may submit a request,
indicates the number of copies required for filing, and states that a
request must be filed with the Department's Central Records Unit.
Paragraph (a)(2) identifies the information required to be provided in
a request.
    Two commenters proposed that the rule set time limits for
submission of waiver requests, e.g., within 60 days after the date of
declaration of the emergency and for the entry of merchandise, e.g.,
within 60 days after the date the waiver request is granted. The
Department has not adopted a time limit for submission of waiver
requests as suggested by the commenters. After declaring an emergency,
and acting under section 318 of the Act, the President can authorize
the Secretary to permit importation of supplies for use in emergency
relief work free of antidumping and countervailing duties. Opportunity
to request, and the Secretary's determination to permit such
importations are appropriate throughout the continuance of the declared
emergency. A 60-day time limit on requests for importation of emergency
relief supplies would frustrate the utility of the waiver mechanism by
not allowing for differing circumstances or the duration of an actual
emergency.
    The Department does, however, see merit in setting a deadline for
entry of relief supplies once the Secretary has made a determination to
permit such entry. A limited entry period is consistent with the entry-
specific nature of a determination by the Secretary to waive duties, as
well as the temporary duration of a declared emergency. Therefore, with
one modification, the Department has adopted the 60-day time frame
proposed by the commenters. Specifically, we have modified the proposal
to allow a flexible approach to specific situations in which entry of
duty-waiver merchandise will not occur within the 60-day time frame.
This might occur, for example, where three shipments of duty-waiver
merchandise are scheduled to enter the United States over a three month
period, i.e., one shipment per month. This flexible approach is
reflected in our use of the word ``normally'' in new paragraph (c) of
section 358.103, which provides that duty-waiver merchandise must enter
the United States normally within 60 days after the date on which the
Secretary notifies the person who submitted the request or the
merchandise will be subject to antidumping and/or countervailing
duties, as applicable.
    One commenter proposed that, given the changing needs and
conditions during an emergency, the Department should include some
flexibility in the information requirements set forth in paragraph
(a)(2). The commenter also suggested that the Department should ensure
that the paperwork required not frustrate the utility of this mechanism
at a time of dire need. The Department acknowledges that changing needs
and conditions during an emergency might affect a requester's ability
to provide all the information required for a waiver request at the
time the request is submitted. However, the Department will need to
have sufficient information to make a decision on a waiver request. The
Department does not consider that the information requirements set
forth in paragraph (a)(2) are particularly onerous, but welcomes any
comments on reporting burdens associated with the information required
for a waiver request.
    Other commenters proposed additional information requirments such
as specification of the intended emergency use, identification of the
U.S. customer, identification of the emergency relief-related project,
and/or designation of the geographical limits for use of the
merchandise. Two commenters argued that price, included in the list of
required information, is not an appropriate element of any analysis of
potential waiver because any price effects resulting from the emergency
would similarly affect both fairly and unfairly traded goods. One
commenter suggested that required information include a demonstration
that the merchandise for which duty-free importation is requested be in
short supply.
    As discussed above, this rule is not a short supply provision, and
duty waiver on emergency relief supplies is not dependent on whether
there is insufficient U.S. production. For this reason, the Department
has not adopted the suggestion that information required under
paragraph (a)(2) include a demonstration that there is insufficient
U.S. production of the merchandise for which duty-free importation is
requested. The Department has adopted, however, the essence of certain
other suggestions regarding required information. In particular, the
Department believes that identification of the person for whose account
the merchandise will be brought into the United States, as well as
designation of the geographical location at which the merchandise will
be used, are useful pieces of information. We have modified paragraph
(a)(2) to reflect these additions. Paragraph (a)(2) already provides
for identification of the use to be made of the merchandise and, for
this reason, we have not adopted the suggestion to include
identification of the emergency relief-related project. Moreover, the
term ``emergency relief-related project'' proposed by the commenter
implies a formal, government-sponsored or -countenanced emergency
relief project, which is not a limitation prescribed in this rule or in
the statute. We also have not adopted the suggestion that price be
excluded from the list of required information. The commenters assume
that analysis of price effects is a factor in waiver requests. No such
assumption is warranted. Price information may be relevant in
subsequent administrative or new shipper reviews, for example, for
purposes of both checking the completeness of respondents' reporting
and providing an indication as to whether the merchandise was donated
or sold.
    Paragraph (b) provides that, if the Secretary determines to permit
importation of particular merchandise free of antidumping and
countervailing duties, the Secretary will notify the person who
submitted the request and instruct CBP to allow entry of the
merchandise without regard to antidumping and countervailing duties.
    One commenter proposed that the Secretary allow importation of
merchandise free of antidumping and countervailing duties only where
necessary to meet an important need in emergency relief efforts, to
address short-term immediate humanitarian needs, where short-term need
cannot adequately be met through fairly traded merchandise, and in
circumstances not likely to have any significant impact on the
effectiveness of existing antidumping and countervailing duty orders or
result in injury to a domestic industry. Another commenter proposed
that importation of merchandise free of antidumping and countervailing
duties should only be allowed where fairly traded merchandise cannot
meet the short-term need. Other commenters

[[Page 63233]]

proposed that the rule only allow for waiver of antidumping and
countervailing duties on merchandise considered necessary for relief by
the Federal Emergency Management Agency (``FEMA''). One commenter also
suggested that the Department require that supplies for use in
emergency relief work be donated, not sold.
    We have not adopted these suggestions. This rule establishes the
procedures for importation of supplies for use in relief work free of
antidumping and countervailing duties during a declared emergency as
authorized by Congress and is intended to facilitate access to needed
resources in the event of a natural disaster or other emergency. What
supplies might be needed for use in emergency relief work will depend
on the circumstances of a specific declared emergency and the
particular needs of persons affected by that emergency. While a FEMA
list of needed emergency supplies, if created, could be instructive,
the Department believes that it is appropriate for the Secretary to
have maximum flexibility to review waiver requests in the context of a
specific emergency and to make waiver determinations on an emergency-
by-emergency basis. As discussed above, the Department does not believe
that temporary limited waiver of antidumping and countervailing duties
will exacerbate injury to the domestic industry. However, as set forth
in new section 358.104, the Department will review the operation and
impact of the waiver mechanism after five years. The Department also
finds no reason to limit the definition of emergency relief supplies to
only donated merchandise, as one commenter suggested, although the
Secretary will consider whether the merchandise was donated or sold
since that information is required to be included in a waiver request.
    Certain commenters suggested that there should be specific and/or
short time limits on temporary waivers of antidumping and
countervailing duties to prevent inappropriate long-term use of such
waivers. Other commenters suggested that a waiver specify the allowable
geographic limits for use of the imported merchandise.
    The Department agrees with these suggestions. To alleviate concerns
about inappropriate long-term use of waivers, we have modified
paragraph (b) to indicate that waiver of antidumping and countervailing
duties on imports of merchandise for use in emergency relief work will
be specific and limited to the merchandise explicitly identified in the
waiver request. Pursuant to paragraph (a)(2), a waiver request must
identify, inter alia, the quantity of the merchandise to be imported,
the proposed date of entry, the destination of the merchandise, and the
use to be made of the merchandise at the designated destination. In
addition, as discussed above, we have added paragraph (c) to require
that waiver merchandise enter the United States normally within 60 days
after the date on which the Secretary grants a waiver request or such
merchandise will be subject to antidumping and/or countervailing
duties, as applicable.
    Certain commenters proposed that the Department provide notice to,
and an opportunity for, interested parties to comment on requests
before the Secretary makes a determination to permit importation of
particular merchandise for use in emergency relief work.
    We have not adopted this proposal. The speed with which the
Secretary may need to address requests for importation of emergency
relief supplies will be dependent on the circumstances of an actual
declared emergency. In certain situations, the Secretary may need to
respond immediately and an opportunity for notice and comment could
have a detrimental impact on persons in need of emergency relief
supplies. The Department's regulations (19 CFR 351.104) already provide
that the official record of each antidumping and countervailing duty
proceeding will include material presented to the Secretary during the course of a proceeding, as well as determinations made by the
Secretary, that pertain to the proceeding. As a result, requests for
importation of emergency relief supplies and the Secretary's
determination to permit importation, if any, will be included on the
record of the relevant proceeding(s). In addition, we have added
language to paragraph (b) stating that notification of a determination
by the Secretary will be posted on our website.
    Two commenters proposed that the Department be required to inform
Congress about any application of the rule. The Department agrees that
it is appropriate to inform Congress that it is establishing procedures
for importation of supplies for use in emergency relief work free of
antidumping and countervailing duties, as authorized by section 318(a)
of the Act, and it will provide notice of this rulemaking upon
publication. No changes to the rule are necessary.
    Paragraph (d) indicates possible penalties where merchandise
entered for use in emergency relief work is used in the United States
for some other purpose. The merchandise may be subject to seizure or
other penalty, including under section 592 of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1592).
This paragraph had been numbered as paragraph (c) in the proposed rule.
    One commenter proposed that, given the confused and unpredictable
circumstances of a declared emergency, there should be a good-faith
exception when merchandise is diverted away from the purpose identified
in the initial request. The commenter suggested that financial
penalties be limited to instances of bad-faith misuse of the duty-
waiver mechanism. Other commenters proposed that there be stronger
safeguards and/or oversight to ensure proper use of emergency supplies
and/or to check on appropriate use after the fact. Several commenters
suggested that importers should be required to file entry-specific
certifications that the merchandise is for emergency relief. Some
commenters proposed that the importer be subject to penalties for
improper use of goods. Other commenters argued that the proposed rule
does not include sufficient safeguards to prevent abuse by importers.
    The Department agrees with commenters that there is a need to
ensure appropriate use of the duty-waiver mechanism and imported
emergency relief supplies. For this reason, as set forth in paragraph
(a)(2), a request for duty waiver must include, inter alia, a detailed
description of the merchandise, state the quantity to be imported,
identify a proposed date of entry, and indicate the destination of the
merchandise. In response to comments, we also have added the
requirements that the request identify the person for whose account the
merchandise will be brought into the United States and the use to be
made of the merchandise at the designated destination. As discussed
above, the Secretary's determination to grant a duty-waiver request
will be specific to the described merchandise and stated entry date,
use, and destination. The Secretary's determination also will be made
available in the public record of the relevant proceeding(s) and
notification of the determination will appear on the Department's
website. Any party with specific concerns about improper use of
particular imports of emergency relief supplies should contact the
Department about those specific concerns. Based on receipt of such
comments and on its own authority, the Department may consider the need
for penalties or other action if specific instances of misuse arise.
Paragraph (d) provides maximum flexibility in this regard because it
does

[[Page 63234]]

not limit the range of possible penalties for improper use.
    The proposed rule clarified that merchandise entered for use in
emergency relief work is subject to Department reporting requirements
in antidumping and countervailing duty administrative reviews, but that
such merchandise will be excluded from the calculation of assessment
and cash deposit rates. In the final rule, these two provisions are set
forth in paragraphs (e) and (f)(1), respectively. In addition, in
paragraph (e) we have added a reference to new shipper reviews to
clarify that duty-waiver merchandise also is subject to Department
reporting requirements in new shipper reviews.
    One commenter argued that subjecting merchandise entered for use in
emergency relief work to Department reporting requirements in
antidumping and countervailing duty reviews creates a burden of
unnecessary reporting and recordkeeping in an emergency situation. The
Department disagrees with the commenter's assertion. We expect that the
data with respect to merchandise entered for use in emergency relief
work already would be recorded in a producer's books as a matter of
normal recordkeeping. With respect to duty-waiver merchandise,
respondents would need to report only the data necessary to allow the
Department to identify and account for the emergency relief
transactions. In addition, the time period of the emergency and the
period during which the relevant review (i.e., the review related to
the period during which the duty-waiver merchandise was sold or donated
in the United States) is conducted are not likely to be
contemporaneous. Finally, the foreign producer responding to the
Department's questionnaire in an administrative or new shipper review,
and that producer's bookkeeping activities, are unlikely to have been
directly affected by an emergency within the United States.
    Certain commenters suggested that the rule clarify that duty-waiver
merchandise does not count towards ``commercial quantities''
requirements in certain types of antidumping and countervailing duty
proceedings. The commenter also suggested that the rule clarify the
effect on suspension agreements and the effect on yearly quotas. We
agree that we should clarify the treatment of merchandise entered for
use in emergency relief work in certain other types of antidumping and
countervailing duty proceedings and circumstances. Therefore, we have
added paragraph (f) to section 351.103 to provide such clarification.
    Paragraph (f)(1) clarifies that merchandise entered for use in
emergency relief work will be excluded from the calculation of
assessment and cash deposit rates in an administrative or new shipper
review. Previously, this clarification was reflected in paragraph (d)
of the proposed rule, although paragraph (f)(1) is modified to add a
reference to new shipper reviews and a cross reference to the
applicable statutory provision governing administrative and new shipper
reviews. The remaining substance of paragraph (d) of the proposed rule
is now reflected in paragraph (e) of the final rule, which provides
that merchandise entered for use in emergency relief work is subject to
Department reporting requirements in antidumping and countervailing
duty administrative and new shipper reviews.
    Paragraph (f)(2) is new and clarifies that merchandise entered for
use in emergency relief work will not count for purposes of any of the
``commercial quantities'' requirements set forth in 19 CFR 351.222.
Paragraph (f)(3) also is new and clarifies that such merchandise also
will not count for purposes of the quantity allowed by, or revised
price requirements established pursuant to, a suspension agreement
under section 704 or section 734 of the Act.

Classification

E.O. 12866

    This rule has een determined to be not significant under E.O.
12866.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person is required
to respond to nor shall a person be subject to a penalty for a failure
to comply with a collection of information subject to the requirements
of the Paperwork Reduction Act unless that collection of information
displays a currently valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
control number. This rule involves collection-of-information
requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. Chapter
35. The information collection requirements in 19 CFR Part 358 are
approved by OMB and assigned OMB control number 0625-0256. The public
reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated at 10
total burden hours. This time is an estimate of the time required to
complete a waiver request, review instructions, search existing data
sources, gather and maintain the data needed, and complete and review
the collection of information.

E.O. 12612

    This rule does not contain federalism implications warranting the
preparation of a Federalism Assessment.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Chief Counsel for Regulation at the Department certified to the
Chief Counsel for Advocacy, Small Business Administration that this
rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. The factual basis of this certification was
published in the proposed rule and is not repeated here. No comments
were received on the economic impact of this rule. As a result, no
Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis was prepared.

List of Subjects in 19 CFR Part 358

    Administrative practice and procedure, Antidumping duties, Business
and industry, Countervailing duties, Emergency powers, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: October 20, 2006.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Department of Commerce
adds 19 CFR Part 358 as follows:

PART 358--SUPPLIES FOR USE IN EMERGENCY RELIEF WORK

Sec.
358.101 Scope.
358.102 Definitions.
358.103 Importation of supplies.
358.104 Report.

    Authority: 19 U.S.C. 1318(a).

Sec.  358.101  Scope.

    This part sets forth the procedures for importation of supplies for
use in emergency relief work free of antidumping and countervailing
duties, as authorized under section 318(a) of the Act.

Sec.  358.102  Definitions.

    For purposes of this part:
    Act means the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended.
    CBP means the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection of the United
States Department of Homeland Security.
    Department means the United States Department of Commerce.
    Order means an order issued by the Secretary under section 303,
section 706, or section 736 of the Act.
    Secretary means the Secretary of Commerce or a designee.
    Supplies for use in emergency relief work means food, clothing, and
medical, surgical, and other supplies for use in emergency relief work.

[[Page 63235]]

Sec.  358.103  Importation of supplies.

    (a) Where the President, acting under section 318 of the Act,
authorizes the Secretary to permit the importation of supplies for use
in emergency relief work free of antidumping and countervailing duties,
the Secretary shall consider requests for such importation under the
following conditions:
    (1) Before importation, a written request shall be submitted to the
Secretary by the person in charge of sending the subject merchandise
from the foreign country or by the person for whose account it will be
brought into the United States. Three copies of the request should be
submitted to the Secretary of Commerce, Attention: Import
Administration, Central Records Unit, Room 1870, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230.
    (2) The request shall state the Department antidumping and/or
countervailing duty order case number, the producer of the merchandise,
a detailed description of the merchandise, the current HTS number, the
price in the United States, the quantity, the proposed date of entry,
the proposed port of entry, the mode of transport, the person for whose
account the merchandise will be brought into the United States, the
destination, the use to be made of the merchandise at the designated
destination, and any other information the person would like the
Secretary to consider.
    (b) If the Secretary determines to permit duty-free importation of
particular merchandise for use in emergency relief work, the Secretary
will notify the person who submitted the request, instruct CBP to allow
entry of the merchandise identified in the request submitted under
paragraph (a) without regard to antidumping and countervailing duties,
and post notification of the determination on the Department's website.
    (c) Any subject merchandise entered under paragraph (b) of this
section must enter the United States normally within 60 days after the
date on which the Secretary notifies the person who submitted the
request or the merchandise will be subject to antidumping and/or
countervailing duties, as applicable.
    (d) Any subject merchandise entered under paragraph (b) of this
section which is used in the United States other than for a purpose
contemplated for it by section 318(a) of the Act may be subject to
seizure or other penalty, including under section 592 of the Act.
    (e) Any subject merchandise entered under paragraph (b) of this
section is subject to the Department's reporting requirements in its
conduct of an antidumping and/or countervailing duty administrative or
new shipper review, as applicable.
    (f) Any subject merchandise entered under paragraph (b) of this
section will be excluded from:
    (1) The calculation of assessment and cash deposit rates in an
administrative or new shipper review under section 751(a) of the Act;
    (2) ``Commercial quantities'' under 19 CFR 351.222; and
    (3) The quantity allowed by, or revised price requirements
established pursuant to, a suspension agreement under section 704 or
section 734 of the Act, as applicable.

Sec.  358.104  Report.

    The Secretary will review and issue a report on the first five
years of the operation of Part 358. The report will consider the impact
of determinations to permit importation of particular merchandise for
use in emergency relief work under this Part, on U.S. parties injured
by dumped and/or subsidized imports.

[FR Doc. E6-18193 Filed 10-27-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S