As goods and services powered by AI continue to proliferate, scholarly opinion seems to consider that current WTO law is insufficient to regulate trade in AI-powered products. The following reasons can help explain this perceived insufficiency of the WTO law: (a) AI-powered products are difficult to categorise within the perceived goods/services dichotomy under WTO law, thus causing uncertainties as to the applicable legal regime; and (b) the WTO law has yet to respond to the need for national governments to strike a balance between trade and controversial trade practices regarding AI-powered products. This paper argues that while current WTO law is far from perfect, it does partly regulate trade in AI-powered products. The following observations substantiate the partial regulation of trade in AI-powered products by the WTO law: (a) AI-powered products cannot escape existing WTO disciplines on trade in goods and trade in services, by virtue of either the involvement of AI or the perceived goods/services dichotomy; and (b) efforts to balance trade/non-trade interests associated with trade in AI-powered products are allowed under the GATT/GATS’ ‘public morals’ and security exceptions.

The current scale of the import trade of the US with China is significant and has the potential to be more in near future. However, patent-based disputes, especially in terms of Section 337 investigation, have also been increased in recent years. In the context of parallel development of national innovation strategies of China’s “Made in China 2025 Plan” and the American “Advanced Manufacturing Partnership,” along with the latest expanded “Information Technology Agreement” in the WTO trading system, the implications for optimally resolving patent-based disputes in the US import trade with China is highly significant for two countries. These disputes may even impact the world trade, since bilateral trade between China and the US accounts for a considerable proportion. Thus, both China and the US should take precautions and appropriate measures to guard against such potential frictions in order to attain mutually beneficial outcomes in resolving such disputes.