Quo vadis information society? Notification of draft rules on e-services in the EU

From its inception the European legislator has adopted a mixed approach to the regulation of a novel and complex phenomenon of the Internet based commerce. The idea of harmonisation or approximation of laws has been accompanied by a parallel process of monitoring of draft laws pertaining to e-commerce, known as the notification procedure under 98/34/EC directive related to information society services. The aim of this paper is to analyse the notification principle in the light of the Notification Directive as well as the practice of states as evidenced by data gathered in a database of submitted drafts.     

Anonymisation of personal data – A missed opportunity for the European Commission

As early as the 1970's, privacy studies recognised that ‘anonymisation’ needed to be approached with caution. This caution has since been vindicated by the increasing sophistication of techniques for reidentification. Yet the courts in the UK have so far only hesitatingly grappled with the issues involved, while European courts have produced no guidance.     

Article 53(b) EPC: A Challenge to the Novartis Theory of European Patent History

The authoritative ( Novartis/transgenic plant systems ) interpretation of the Article 53(b) EPC exclusion from European patentability of plant and animal varieties, and essentially biological processes for the creation of plants and animals, is considered, and its significance for the trend of EPO jurisprudence and legitimacy of the EC Biotechnology Patenting Directive noted. The Enlarged Board of Appeal's justification for that interpretation in Novartis with reference to the exclusion's legislative history is challenged, and an alternative theory of that history proposed, based on a thorough analysis of the unpublished travaux préparatoires for the Strasbourg and European Patent Conventions. In addition to elucidating the framers' (actual and presumed) intent with respect to the Article 53(b) exclusion, that analysis offers an insight into post-war legal unification methodology and its continued impact on one of the most contentious and technical areas of intellectual property law.     

Premature or stillborn? – The recent challenge to the Digital Economy Act

The High Court has recently delivered judgment on the judicial review of the Digital Economy Act 2010 (DEA) and the draft Costs Order¹ on application by BT and Talktalk.² Mr Justice Kenneth Parker rejected the application on all but one ground (one aspect of the cost sharing arrangement). See: The Queen on the Application of British Telecommunications Plc, Talktalk Telecom Group Plc v The Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills [2011] EWHC 1021 (Admin), Judgment of 20. April 2011.     

英美国家犯罪DNA数据库建设及应用

DNA技术在刑事侦查、打击犯罪和法庭审判中发挥着重要作用.近几年来,欧美等一些发达国家相继建成了以PCR-STR分型技术为基础的罪犯DNA数据库,并且也已制定了相关的法律法规以规范数据库的整个运作过程.西方发达国家的实际应用情况充分证明了国家犯罪DNA数据库已经成为司法物证信息系统的核心组成部分.英国是世界上DNA建库最早的国家,美国CODIS系统是世界上犯罪DNA数据库建设与应用最成功的,目前CODIS系统已被世界上十余个国家所引用.     

'Dedicating' Copyright to the Public Domain

This article explores whether authors can dedicate their copyright to the public domain. Such dedications are becoming increasingly relevant as authors now see the expansion of the public domain as value in itself. This is facilitated by organisations providing pro forma documents for dedicating works to the public domain. However, there has been no real consideration of what, if any, legal effect a dedication to the public might have. This article suggests that such dedications are no more than copyright licences which, in English and US law at least, can be revoked at will. This means that users of such works must rely on estoppel alone to enforce any dedication to the public domain.     

关于马克思主义经济学指导地位的几个问题——兼与刘国光教授商榷

在现实中,马克思主义经济学在教学和研究中脱离了实际,在很多地方不仅不能说明现实,甚至和现实相矛盾。现在的当务之急是,破除教条主义的束缚,把马克思主义经济学普遍原理和我国社会主义市场经济现实相结合,进行理论创新,对现实经济关系做出新的理论概括,科学地说明现实,这样就能使马克思主义经济学重新占据指导地位。     

The new German Data Protection Act and its compatibility with the European Data Protection Directive

A substitution of the right to maintain mailing lists for marketing purposes (the so-called list privilege) by a strict opt-in requirement as proposed by the German Government for the amendment of the German Data Protection Act does not conform with European law. Making the use of relatively innocuous data like name and address for marketing purposes subject to the data subject's declaration of consent infringes upon the requirements of the European Data Protection Directive. The Directive allows for the use of personal data either on the basis of a data subject's declaration of consent or after a balancing of legally protected interests. Reducing this two-track model to a one-track model (based on the data subject's declaration of consent only) does not do justice to the idea of balancing of interests or free movement of goods and services which are a mandatory part of European law. The draft bill interferes drastically with the free movement of goods and services. A tightening of the opt-in requirements would be a severe burden for the German economy because it is impossible for businesses to distribute their goods and services without the help of marketing measures. The economic cycle would be hit at its weakest point, i.e. the link between businesses and consumers which is gaining more and more importance especially with a view to cross-border competition.     

Data retention in the UK: Pragmatic and proportionate,or a step too far?

On 6 April 2009 new legislation came into force, for the first time putting Internet service providers' duty to retain significant amounts of data (relating to customers' email and Internet usage) on a compulsory, as opposed to a voluntary footing. It is a topic which has provoked intense protest from the privacy lobby and fuelled months of “Big Brother” headlines in the press. For the industry it raises operational challenges – how to facilitate storage and retrieval of colossal amounts of data. In this article we consider the policy background to the regime, the detail of the UK implementation and the practical implications for communications service providers. We weigh up the privacy and human rights concerns against the business case put forward by the Government. We also examine the Government's proposals – announced at the end of April – to significantly extend and “future proof” this regime in the form of its Intercept Modernisation Programme.     

The European Commission's Opinions under Article 6(4) of the Habitats Directive

The contribution examines the Opinions which the European Commissionhas issued so far under Article 6(4) of Directive 92/43 (HabitatsDirective). It examines Member States' reasoning for justifyingthe application of Article 6(4) of the Habitats Directive inthe light of the European Court of Justice rulings, and comesto the conclusion that probably not one of the cases submittedwould have been accepted by the Court.