美国商务部新规正式发布 「有条件」允许美企与华为合作制定 5G 标准

美国商务部新规正式发布 「有条件」允许美企与华为合作制定 5G 标准
2020 年 6 月 18 日，美国商务部工业和安全局（BIS） 在《联邦公报》上发布了新的临时最终规则，该规则对《出口管理条例》（EAR）（15 CFR 第 730-774 部分）进行了修正，「实体清单」中由华为组织指定与建立 5G 应用标准有关的技术将附加许可要求排除在外。BIS 表示，由于美国在标准组织中的参与和领导地位的重要性，它正在使用该规则修订实体清单。

规则指出，无论「实体清单」上的名单是否是标准制定的成员或参与成员，对「技术」是否适用于 EAR 的评估都是相同的。鉴于美国在标准组织中的参与和领导的重要性，以及考虑到华为参与标准组织所引起的持续关注，该规则修订了实体列表，以授权某些未经许可的技术发布。

具体而言，如果是出于以下目的而发布的技术，被发布为 EAR99 或仅出于反恐（AT）原因而在 Commerce Control List 中受控制的 EAR 技术，为有助于修订或开发标准，可能会发布给包括华为在内的未经许可的标准组织成员。

开放性：所使用的程序或过程向感兴趣的组织开放。这些组织在非歧视的基础上提供了有意义的机会参与标准制定。参与标准制定和制定标准的程序或过程是透明的。

平衡：标准制定过程应保持平衡。具体而言，应该有广泛的组织的参与，决不能以任何一个利益为主导。

正当程序：正当程序应包括成文的和可公开获得的政策和程序，适当的会议通知和标准制定，充足的时间来审查草稿并准备意见和反对意见，获得其他参与者的意见以及公平公正的解决程序观点冲突。

上诉过程：可以公正地处理程序性上诉的上诉过程。

共识：共识被定义为总的共识，但不一定是一致。在达成共识的过程中，将使用公正，公正，公开和透明的流程来考虑评论和异议。

该规则于 2020 年 6 月 18 日生效。在 2020 年 8 月 17 日或之前提交评论。

对于美国商务部的这份新规，此前就有业内人士和政府官员表示，此次规则改变不应被视为美国在限制华为问题上的决心有所减弱的迹象，指出华为令美国在标准制定方面处于劣势。由于美国公司不确定它们被允许分享哪些技术或信息，有些美国公司的工程师减少了参与度，从而给了华为更大的话语权。一位知情人士称，美国商务部作出上述修正旨在确保美国公司「全面参与」自愿标准制定机构，并对美国公司和国会议员的担忧作出回应。
On June 18, 2020, the Bureau of Industry and Security of the U.S. Department of Commerce (BIS) issued a new interim final rule in the Federal Register that amends the Export Management Regulations (EAR) (15 CFR Part 730-774), which excludes additional licensing requirements from technologies designated by Huawei organizations to establish 5G application standards. BIS says it is using the rule to revise the inventory of entities because of the importance of U.S. participation and leadership in standards organizations.

The rules state that the assessment of whether the “technology” applies to the EAR is the same regardless of whether the list on the Entity List is a member of the standard-setting or participating members. In view of the importance of U.S. involvement and leadership in standards organizations, and in view of the continuing concerns raised by Huawei’s participation in the standards organization, the rule revised the list of entities to authorize certain unauthorized technology releases.

Specifically, EAR technology that is published as EAR99 or controlled in Commerce Control List for anti-terrorism (AT) reasons may be released to unauthorized standards organization members, including Huawei, if the technology is released for the following purposes, or if it is controlled in Commerce Control List for anti-terrorism (AT) reasons alone.

Openness: The program or process used is open to interested organizations. These organizations provide a meaningful opportunity to participate in standard-setting on a non-discriminatory basis. The procedures or processes for participating in standard-setting and standard-setting are transparent.

Balance: The standard-setting process should be balanced. In particular, there should be a broad range of organizational participation and no one interest should be led.

Due process: Due process should include documented and publicly available policies and procedures, appropriate meeting notifications and standard-setting, sufficient time to review drafts and prepare comments and objections, to obtain input from other participants, and to resolve procedural conflicts of opinion fairly and impartially.

Appeal process: An appeal process in which appeals can be processed fairly.

Consensus: Consensus is defined as general consensus, but not necessarily consensus. In the process of reaching consensus, a fair, fair, open and transparent process will be used to consider comments and objections.

The rule came into effect on June 18, 2020. Submit a comment on or before August 17, 2020.

The new rules for the U.S. Commerce Department come after industry insiders and government officials said the rule change should not be seen as a sign of a weakening of U.S. resolve to limit Huawei, noting that Huawei puts the U.S. at a disadvantage in standard-setting. As U.S. companies aren’t sure what technology or information they’re allowed to share, some U.S. engineers have reduced their engagement, giving Huawei a bigger say. The U.S. Commerce Department made the changes to ensure that U.S. companies are “fully involved” with voluntary standard-setting agencies and to respond to concerns from U.S. companies and members of Congress, a person familiar with the matter said.