The U.S. Has Failed To Make A Case
      The U.S. case relies primarily on the legal assertion that while Japan did not violate any specific WTO obligations, the Japanese government took measures that "nullified or impaired" tariff concessions that were negotiated in the Kennedy Round in 1967, the Tokyo Round in 1979, and the Uruguay Round in 1994.
      Under the requirements of the WTO, to prove that Japan "nullified or impaired" tariff concessions, the U.S. must demonstrate that there was some change in the competitive conditions in the markets for photographic film and paper, and that such a change (1) could not have been foreseen at the time of the relevant tariff concessions, (2) resulted from government measures, and (3) adversely modified the competitive position of imports.
      The U.S. case fails utterly to establish these required elements.
      The only legally relevant tariff concessions are those made in 1994 at the conclusion of the Uruguay Round; the earlier tariff concessions have all been superseded.   Since the U.S. does not even allege any government measures that took place after 1994, there could be no unforeseeable changes in policies that would even be capable of nullifying or impairing those tariff concessions.
      Even if earlier tariff concessions were taken into account, the U.S. case is still hopeless.
      Since 1979 -- the first tariff concessions on color film and paper -- there are not even any U.S. allegations of new "distribution countermeasures," and both the Large Scale Retail Store Law and Premiums Law have been liberalized significantly.   There has been no adverse change in competitive conditions, much less an unanticipated one.
      Even going back to 1967, when the tariff concessions were limited to black & white film and paper (which today account for only around 2 percent of the total Japanese film and paper markets), there were some alleged government measures that occurred between 1967 and 1979.   All of these, however, were outgrowths of previous policies, and should have been foreseen by the United States.   At any rate, even by U.S. standards competitive conditions today are more favorable for imports than in 1967, and so the U.S. has no basis for complaint.