Put this in the category of "Methinks they doth protest too much." From Xinhua:

The World Trade Organization (WTO) decided on Tuesday to establish an expert panel to probe U.S. complaints that China was not doing enough to protect intellectual property rights (IPR), trade officials said.

The panel decision was automatically made at a meeting of the WTO's Dispute Settlement Body, following a second request by the United States. Washington's first request for such a panel was made last month but rejected by China

The United States initiated the case at the WTO in April, claiming that China's legal structure for IPR protection is unfairly deficient and inconsistent with WTO regulations. Consultations between the two sides failed to solve the dispute.

Since April, China has vigorously defended its position, regretting the U.S. insistence in setting up a WTO panel on the case.

For nearly 30 years and particularly since joining the WTO in 2001, China has spared no efforts to improve its IPR legislation, and now the legislation is in full accordance with WTO rules, the Chinese mission to the WTO said in a statement after Tuesday's meeting.

By initiating the case, the United States is actually trying to change the WTO legal structure on IPR protection, with an attempt to impose extra obligations on developing members, the statement said. in accordance with WTO rules.

The emphasis was added by me, 'cause it needed to be done. I am sympathetic to the Chinese side here, and I have consistently blogged (I hope) that the WTO IP case was not such a good move on the part of the U.S. I also think that the case is not going to be easy for the U.S., and I'm not sure what kind of enforcement would be possible even if they did win. On the other hand, and I wrote a fairly lengthy analysis on this, the U.S. does have reasonable grounds to assert that, in a couple of instances, China is indeed not in compliance with the TRIPs agreement.

China IP law is probably not in full compliance with TRIPs, and the U.S. is not trying to change WTO rules on China mid-stream. That does not make the WTO case a good one, and I think Beijing would be in a much better position to argue the case without resorting to this kind of rhetoric. Bring your best, most reasonable, argument and let the chips fall where they may.

For masochists who want the dirty details, go read my earlier posts on the WTO IP case: Part I, Part II, Part III, Part IV. If you want an academic approach (i.e. a real analysis), check out IP Dragon's thesis.