论软件搭售救济模式的发展——从隐藏、删除到选择屏

占有市场支配地位的软件企业通过软件搭售的方式，将其支配地位延伸至邻近软件市场，在很多国家都是违反反垄断法的。对软件搭售的救济，美国要求微软隐藏搭售软件的图标；欧盟要求微软提供删除多媒体播放器源代码的视窗版本，但仍允许可提供捆绑播放器的视窗版本；韩国采取了类似于欧盟却又有自身特点的救济方式；为解决微软在视窗操作系统搭售IE浏览器的问题，欧盟2009年迫使微软承诺在视窗操作系统中设置选择屏，以便用户自由选择浏览器。欧盟2009年的这种救济是迄今为止解决软件搭售问题最为彻底的救济手段。     

欧盟微软案件裁决对我国的借鉴价值

欧盟具有成熟的反垄断法律体系和丰富的反垄断执法经验。对欧盟微软案件的裁决进行比较研究，地我国具有重要借鉴意义。欧盟委员会认定微软拒绝向竞争对手提供充分的兼容信息和将其多媒体播放器和视窗操作系统捆绑销售的行为违反了《欧洲经济共同体条约》第八十二条。阐述了欧盟委员会认定微软违反欧盟竞争法的事实理由和司法救济，并通过与美国、韩国微软案件中司法救济的比较，评述了欧盟委员会的救济措施的规制效果。最后得出结论，欧盟裁决对我国在软件产业适用《反垄断法》具有多处借鉴价值。     

大案速览

微软被欧盟开出5.61亿欧元罚单3月6日,欧盟对微软开出了一张高达5.61亿欧元的罚单。理由是,微软未能在其操作系统中向欧洲用户开放使用其他网络浏览器的选项,违反了此前与欧盟的和解协议。2009年,微软公司曾与欧盟达成和解协议,承诺在其操作系统中向欧洲用户提供微软公司IE浏览器之外的其他网络浏览器选择。但是在去年,微软公司表示他们     

从微软案看美国反垄断的法律依据

1998年 5月 ,美国司法部和十九个州联合对电脑软件王国微软公司提起反垄断诉讼 ,指控微软凭借其视窗软件操作系统优势 ,在九八视窗系统内置入“探索者”浏览器 ,从而扼杀了对手在以浏览器为主的互联网市场上的竞争机会。 1 999年 1 1月 5日 ,美国地方法官杰克逊对该案件作出初步裁定 :微软运用其垄断力量来阻碍市场竞争 ,在个人电脑操作系统市场已形成垄断。对此 ,微软公司主席盖茨表示 ,微软在个人电脑操作系统领域并不构成垄断 ,该公司始终是在法律许可的范围内确保产品处于领先地位 ,并决定将官司打到底。此后 ,微软和美国政府进行了四个…     

欧委会vs．微软反垄断案：一个败笔还是新里程碑

欧盟委员会(欧委会)于2004年3月就微软公司垄断一案作出决定,认定其违反欧盟法反垄断条款,包括拒绝向竞争厂商提供Windows操作系统和网络服务器之间的界面兼容信息,以及将MediaPlayer与Windows操作系统(下称Windows OS)捆绑销售。据此责令微软向竞争厂家公布特定界面兼容信息,同时推出包含和不包含Media Player的两款Windows OS供市场选择,并支付近5亿欧元的罚款。     

欧盟竞争法体系概述

随着微软遭欧洲委员会起诉一案以微软遭受重创而结束，反垄断法也渐渐显现出立法者所期待的威力。2004年12月22日．欧盟初审法院驳回了微软要求延迟执行一项欧盟处罚的请求。欧盟执行委员会于今年3月份判定微软滥用Windows操作系统的垄断地位．对其处以创纪录的497亿欧元罚款．并要求其改变操作系统的销售方式。一时间有关该案的讨论甚嚣尘上．反垄断立法的话题也再次进入国人的视野．据说反垄断法草案已加紧商讨出台以应付国内日渐严重的竞争扭曲现象。     

论欧盟反倾销规则中反吸收制度的违法性

为保障反倾销措施实施的力度和有效性,欧盟的反倾销基本法中特别规定了反规避与反吸收制度,这两种制度均超出GATT1994第六条《反倾销协议》的范畴。纵观世贸组织161个成员国,仅美国与欧盟有反规避制度,反吸收制度更为欧盟所独有。从2004年以来,欧盟共发起了5起反吸收案件,其中4起针对中国并在两案中裁决存在吸收。由于受害面仅限中国,因此在WTO争端解决机制层面目前无人挑战其违法性,致使欧盟在运用上更加放任,迫使我们需全面梳理欧盟的     

IDC推出最新关于中国经济的研究报告

美国商业软件联盟（BSA）5月23日发布的一份最新全球PC软件盗版研究报告显示．2005年全球软件业因盗版的损失高达340亿美元。比2004年增加16亿美元。个人电脑（PC）中安装的套装软件的盗版率为35％，与2004年持平。     

开源软件的著作权保护问题研究

著作权专有权对软件的保护使得软件源代码处于闭源状态，很难参考借鉴他人软件，软件创新受阻，开源软件为了克服著作权保护的弊端应运而生，其本质上属于在开源许可证保障下的新型著作权许可模式。开源许可证为附解除条件的著作权许可合同。GPL许可证为不可撤销合同，著作权人选择了开源，就不得作出商业限制保留，亦不得撤销先前已经作出的许可证授权。在所有许可证种类中，GPL许可证最为严格，具有高传染性，对于在逻辑上与开源软件的源代码有关联且整体发布的衍生作品，只要有一部分受GPL开源许可证约束，则整个衍生作品都受GPL开源许可证约束而必须开源。用户若违反GPL开源许可证的约定，则其失去使用开源软件的条件，已获得的授权失效。著作权人可以选择违约救济或侵权救济，二者竞合，允许当事人择一救济方式维权。我国著作权法应重视对开源软件的规制，不断总结经验并完善相关制度，以促进我国软件产业稳步发展。     

合理无歧视许可要求的客观衡量标准探析——从解读欧盟委员会对微软的裁决出发

合理无歧视的许可要求由于缺乏客观的衡量标准，致使标准实施人的正当利益无法得到根本的保护，可能损害市场对相关标准实施的信心。欧盟委员会在针对微软滥用市场支配地位所作出的2004年的裁决、以及2005年末就微软履行2004年委员会裁决作出的报告中，就事实标准中知识产权许可需要符合的“合理无歧视许可”要求这一问题进行了分析，对这些规则进行法律解读，可以为确定合理无歧视许可的具体内容提供参考。     

EU Merger Remedies and Competition Concerns: An Empirical Assessment

The purpose of merger remedies is to relieve the potential competitive detriments as to preserve the efficiencies. The European Community (EC) Merger Remedies Notice requires remedies able to remove the identified competition concerns entirely and proportionately. The scope of each merger remedy package is confined by the competition concern in question. This study analyses, from an empirical point of view, the relationship between competition concerns and merger remedies. It reviews all remedies accepted in Phase II EU merger investigation and categorises them into seven sets according to their nature. Results of the empirical assessment present the frequencies of each remedy type accepted for resolving various competitions concerns and reveal that merger remedy design does vary for different competition concerns. Horizontal effects require divestiture remedies more. Other structural remedies, especially access commitment and supply commitment, have a good chance to be accepted in resolving vertical and conglomerate effects.     

Extradition on the Two Sides of the Atlantic: The U.S. Model as Blueprint for the European Arrest Warrant?

This article compares the EU’s enhanced extradition model, in the form of the European Arrest Warrant, with the more mature American interstate extradition mechanism. The US Constitution’s Extradition Clause mandates interstate extradition and, after a slow start-up, has led to a smooth and obligatory procedure. In the EU, the European Arrest Warrant, based on the principle of mutual recognition, has made a number of significant changes to traditional extradition and has simplified extradition between EU member states. Yet, it does not operate without problems and the first decade has revealed what the difficulties with extradition on the basis of mutual recognition are. The comparison with the US seeks to draw lessons from the US experience. The main finding is that in a number of areas the US example can direct the EU toward further improving its extradition scheme, while at the same time it is not realistic to expect that the EU will achieve a similar degree of harmony as in the US, required for an obligatory extradition scheme. The article argues that it is important to recognise these limits in order to make the European Arrest Warrant a success.     

Anticipating the future use of safeguards by the EU and the US on China��s textiles & clothing exports

Textiles and clothing (T&C) trade after lapse of quotas in 2005 has revealed China’s overwhelming comparative advantage in the manufacture and export of T&C products. China’s advantage in this sector attracted the use of trade remedies by WTO members under WTO laws, often in a manner contrary to WTO norms. China has also been subjected to origin-specific safeguard regimes. The EU and the US have been leading users of safeguards against China’s T&C exports. The use of safeguards by the EU and the US raises a number of questions that impact on the future use of trade remedies by other countries. The use of safeguards also poses challenges for the multilateral trading system. This paper analyses the use of safeguards against China’s T&C exports with a view to anticipating the future use of safeguards in the quota-free trading environment for T&C.     

Analysing the application of Brussels I in regulating e-commerce jurisdiction in the European Union – Success,deficiencies and proposed changes

This article analyses the regulatory framework of e-commerce jurisdiction in the European Union (EU). Firstly, it discusses and analyses the current regime under the Brussels Regulation, highlighting its success in consumer protection and the deficiencies for e-commerce jurisdiction, which need to be addressed. Secondly, the article compares the EU regime with that of the United States (US). It is argued that the US courts follow uncertain and distinct approaches compared to the clear rules of the Brussels Regulation. Their present approach of minimum contacts analysis as followed in the Yahoo! case poses problems for a transnational EU litigant in similar cases. Thirdly, the article examines the recent proposals adopted by the European Commission to remedy the deficiencies in the Regulation. The most important change proposed is the inclusion of third-state defendants within its ambit. It is argued that the changes to be adopted by the European Parliament are insufficient, and the author therefore provides recommendations. Lastly, the article highlights the inability of the proposed changes to address the deficiencies identified by the discussion.     

Market structures,political surroundings,and merger remedies: an empirical investigation of the EC’s decisions

This paper aims to build and empirically evaluate a discrete choice model of merger remedies as a basis for policy analysis. The database consists of 229 merger cases accepted in Phase I or Phase II of the European merger process between 1990 and 2005. We focus on the following question: Which merging firms’ characteristics lead the European Commission to decide whether to require conditional acceptance? Although a lot of empirical studies have been carried out these last years, ours is distinguished by at least two original features. First, we explore determinant factors of the Commission’s decisions with a neural network model differentiating cases accepted with or without remedies (either structural or behavioral). Secondly, we implement three multinomial logit models. We find that variables related to high market power lead more frequently to a remedy outcome, no matter the phase. Innovative industries such as energy, transportation and communications positively affect the probability of a behavioral remedy. Lastly, former Competition Commissioner Mario Monti’s policy appears to be pro-remedy, i.e. seeking concessions from merging parties.     

An American Looks at the European Union

Abstract: Anyone who has followed the evolution of six European nations from a simple Coal and Steel Community to the current twenty‐five Member State European Union (EU), has witnessed a truly remarkable passage. Nonetheless, the EU remains a decidedly jerrybuilt affair. Through numerous enlargements, increased competences, changes in structure and operation, the Union has been bedevilled by the fact that it is neither a simple international treaty with 25 signatories, nor a truly federal union. Rather, the EU has operated, sometimes effectively, often shakily, between these two extremes; exhibiting a sort of ‘fear of federalism’. From a US perspective, this article looks at the present state of the European Union and asks why it has met its potential in some ways, but has fallen so far short in others. Obviously, the tension between the Member States and the Community institutions is one reason. The article asks why do the states compete so much with one another, when their true competition is often with non‐European entities? Why does the European Council never seem to act in a timely manner? Why do euro‐citizens have so poor of an appreciation of what the Community does for them? Why does the Common Agricultural Policy, which contributes such a small amount to European gross domestic product, so dominate the EU budget and agenda? Can the euro, clearly the world's second currency after the US dollar, ever win over its doubters and harmonise European financial service markets? Does enlargement improve or threaten the future of the Community? And can its Common Foreign and Security Policy ever be successful if it is forced to compete with parallel politics in the Member States? All of these questions are addressed in this article with the hope that, through an external critique, the EU will live up to its potential both at home and abroad.     

欧盟区域刑事合作进程中的制度缺陷与对策——从《马斯特里赫特条约》到《里斯本条约》

从《马斯特里赫特条约》到《里斯本条约》,随着一体化进程的不断发展,欧盟逐步加强了对内部区域刑事合作的影响。但是,这种变化的＂代价＂则分别体现为：成员国全体一致的决策机制、＂框架决定＂立法中的＂民主赤字＂,以及成员国利用＂紧急刹车＂条款以规避关乎其切身利益的敏感立法的适用等。本文重点探讨这些制度缺陷,进而评析欧盟在相关问题上的对策。     

韩国医疗纠纷调解立法及对我国的启示

为有效化解医疗纠纷、救济医疗损害从而为医务人员创造一个安宁的诊疗环境,韩国出台了《关于医疗事故损害救济及医疗纠纷调解等的法律》。依据该法律之规定,韩国设立了医疗纠纷调解仲裁院,在调解仲裁院下设医疗纠纷调解委员会和医疗事故鉴定团,实施新的医疗纠纷调解仲裁制度。该法律还规定了医疗损害赔偿互助制度、医疗损害无过失补偿制度及代偿制度等。     

Protecting digital identity in the cloud: Regulating cross border data disclosure

Widespread use of cloud computing and other off-shore hosting and processing arrangements make regulation of cross border data one of the most significant issues for regulators around the world. Cloud computing has made data storage and access cost effective but it has changed the nature of cross border data. Now data does not have to be stored or processed in another country or transferred across a national border in the traditional sense, to be what we consider to be cross border data. Nevertheless, the notion of physical borders and transfers still pervades thinking on this subject. The European Commission (“EC”) is proposing a new global standard for data transfer to ensure a level of protection for data transferred out of the EU similar to that within the EU. This paper examines the two major international schemes regulating cross-border data, the EU approach and the US approach, and the new EC and US proposals for a global standard. These approaches which are all based on data transfer are contrasted with the new Australian approach which regulates disclosure. The relative merits of the EU, US and Australian approaches are examined in the context of digital identity, rather than just data privacy which is the usual focus, because of the growing significance of digital identity, especially to an individual's ability to be recognized and to transact. The set of information required for transactions which invariably consists of full name, date of birth, gender and a piece of what is referred to as identifying information, has specific functions which transform it from mere information. As is explained in this article, as a set, it literally enables the system to transact. For this reason, it is the most important, and most vulnerable, part of digital identity. Yet while it is deserving of most protection, its significance has been largely under-appreciated. This article considers the issues posed by cross border data regulation in the context of cloud computing, with a focus on transaction identity and the other personal information which make up an individual's digital identity. The author argues that the growing commercial and legal importance of digital identity and its inherent vulnerabilities mandate the need for its more effective protection which is provided by regulation of disclosure, not just transfer.     

CLOUD act agreements from an EU perspective

For many years, transatlantic cooperation between the EU and the US in the area of personal data exchange has been a subject of special interest on the part of lawmakers, courts – including supranational ones – NGOs and the public. When implementing recent reform of data protection law, the European Union decided to further strengthen guarantees of the protection of privacy in cyberspace. At the same time, however, it faced the practical problem of how to ensure compliance with these principles in relation to third countries. The approach proposed in the GDPR, which is based on a newly-defined territorial scope of application, clearly indicates an attempt to apply EU rules extraterritorially in relation to data processors in third countries.Irrespective of EU activity, the United States has also introduced its own regulations addressing the same problem. An example is the federal law adopted in 2018, specifying how to execute national court orders for the transfer of electronic data. The CLOUD Act was established in response to legal doubts raised in the Microsoft v United States case regarding the transfer of electronic data stored in the cloud by US obliged entities to law enforcement authorities, as well as in cases where this data is physically located in another country and its transfer could result in violating the legal norms of a foreign jurisdiction. The CLOUD Act also facilitates bilateral international agreements that enable the cross-border transfer of e-evidence for the purposes of ongoing criminal proceedings. Both the content of the new regulations and the model proposed by the US legislature for future agreements concluded on the basis of the CLOUD Act can be seen as an alternative to regulations arising from EU law.The purpose of this paper is to analyse the CLOUD Act and CLOUD Act Agreements from the perspective of EU law and, in particular, attempt to answer the question as to whether this new legal mechanism brings the EU and the USA closer to finding common ground with regard to a coherent model of exchange and protection of personal data.