Factoring Cultural Element into Deciding the ‘Likeness’ of Cultural Products: A Perspective From the New Haven School
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AbstractThe ‘likeness’ of imported and domestic products serves as a prerequisite for national treatment under the WTO famework. This article tries to employ the jurisprudence of the New Haven School to examine both the GATT/WTO legislative framework on ‘like products’ and relevant judicial practice in ‘Canada-Periodicals’ and ‘China-Publications and Audiovisual Products’ with respect to GATT Art III (national treatment on internal taxation and domestic regulation). After pinpointing the ignorance of cultural values and associated problems, this article focuses on how to factor cultural elements into deciding the ‘likeness’ of cultural products. Specifically, one way suggested is to analyse the role that cultural elements may play in “consumers’ taste and conception”, one of the four traditional criteria in establishing the ‘likeness’. Another is to revisit the ‘aim and effect’ test so that a certain degree of discretion can be left for WTO adjudicators to consider the legitimate cultural policy objectives behind the Members’ regulatory measures. It is the author’s plea that given the widely recognized duality of cultural products, it becomes necessary to reconcile free trade and cultural diversity in the era of economic globalization. Factoring cultural elements into deciding the ‘likeness’ of cultural products acts as a crucial step towards this goal. Additional informationNotes on contributorsShi Jingxia* Professor of Law, China University of International Business & Economics (UIBE), School of Law. JSD (Yale), PhD in Law (Wuhan). The author would like to thank Professor W Michael Reisman at Yale Law School for inspiring this research and Professor Wang Guiguo at the City University of Hong Kong for his insightful comments. Any errors remain the author’s own.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it