When the United States bans imported Japanese fish from Thailand, other nations ban imported Vietnamese fish from the Philippines.
And the world, according to a new report from The Economist, eats more Vietnamese fish.
So how does this happen?
As the U, Japan, and Vietnam are all members of the World Trade Organization (WTO), the bloc’s trading body, there are plenty of countries that don’t trade with each other.
In addition to the TPP countries, the United Kingdom, Australia, and New Zealand are also members.
The WTO also has an “intellectual property” chapter that deals with disputes between companies and governments, but it doesn’t have a place for fish.
But since most countries have an interest in protecting fish from trade disputes, they’ve signed onto a global agreement called the TRIPS Agreement, which sets the rules for trade and investment in fish.
That agreement, which went into effect in 2012, allows countries to negotiate trade agreements with each others fish, which are often classified as fish products.
The trade agreements also require countries to ensure that fish are treated with “due regard for the health and welfare of animals.”
The WTO’s Intellectual Property chapter is designed to help these countries prevent “counterfeit” products.
In order to qualify for protection under the WTO, a fish product must have been manufactured or processed with an “ideal fish species” (e.g., a dolphin or a shark) or “ideally aquatic habitat” (such as an aquarium).
The WTO has a section on “fish products intended for human consumption” that explains how to do this, but many fish products that are not specifically labeled as fish do not meet this definition.
The Trade in Fish Chapter of the TRIps Agreement requires that fish products be labeled as such if they have “specific characteristics that, when considered in the context of the product, indicate that they may be fish” (a “meaningful identification” is not required).
So what are these “fish” characteristics?
Well, some fish products are described as “fishes,” but this can be misleading.
For example, salmon is sometimes referred to as “seabream,” but the term “fisherman’s purse” has also been used to describe it.
Also, “fishing equipment” can be defined as something that can be used for fishing or other purposes, and the word “fishhook” is also used.
So the term used to label fish in the TRIPs Agreement is “fish hooks.”
The “fishers-pursuit clause” in the agreement says that fish caught in the “tidal basin” or “sea floor” of an aquarium must be considered fish and may be sold, but there is no requirement for them to be labeled or to be treated with any of the fish-specific characteristics.
And yet the fish industry is very vocal about the importance of labeling, because labeling helps to stop counterfeit products.
Many countries have laws on fish that are more stringent than the TRIpps Agreement.
For instance, in the U., a country called the Philippines has a law that prohibits importing shark fins.
In Canada, fish are illegal if they are in their “saltwater environment.”
And some countries are using “dolphin” as a term to describe fish that do not fit the definition of fish.
However, it’s important to note that the “fish hook” and “fish traps” definitions don’t refer to a specific type of fish—instead, they refer to specific behaviors that can cause problems for fish species.
The U.K. is the largest country in the world where fish is prohibited, but that’s not necessarily the case in all countries.
There are countries that ban fish for a variety of reasons, but if you’re in the United Arab Emirates, you may be able to legally catch a fish and have it labeled as a fish, but not label it with a specific fish species or habitat.
In the Philippines, however, the U-Hauls (which also owns The Economist) has a fish-labeling program in place, and a group of countries have adopted the U’s fish-tracking program.
As a result, you’ll probably be able see fish labeled as “fish,” “tiger,” or “lions.”
The problem with this, however is that these labels are not very useful.
The fish labels are supposed to tell you how many fish you can catch, but they can’t tell you if they’ve caught any.
As the trade in fish chapter of the TRIPS Agreement notes, “it is difficult to identify whether a fish has caught a particular species of fish, because it is impossible to accurately determine the type of life cycle the fish has been exposed to.”
So the only way to tell whether a product is labeled as an “appropriate” fish product is to see it labeled by an expert who is specifically trained in how to identify fish.
And in order to get that certification,