Authorization and Licensing

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anne Flanagan
Keyword(s):  
Due Process ◽  
Private Property ◽  
New Technologies ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Legal Certainty ◽  
Private Property Rights ◽  
Telecommunications Regulation ◽  
Legal Nature ◽  
Basic Level ◽  
Roll Out

Licensing is a key aspect of telecommunications regulation. At a basic level, a licence permits a telecommunications provider to offer specified equipment, networks, and/or services, and often conditions that permission on certain requirements. Licensing, however, can control market entry and, therefore, can be used to shape the market by limiting, or not, the number of players or the types of services. Licensing can create legal certainty for new entrants where the telecommunications regulatory or general legal framework is not comprehensive or otherwise adequate. Here, conditions and rights integrated into licences can substitute for such frameworks. Similarly, eg where private property rights might be uncertain, the licence can serve as a contract between governments and investors, a departure from the traditional legal nature of a licence. As a binding contract, it could guarantee exclusivity, ensure due process as well as impose performance obligations, eg market penetration or network roll-out requirements. Investors might otherwise be reluctant to commit the capital required to roll out new technologies and/or networks to improve and update services. Without performance obligations, countries might be unwilling to involve private parties in running the state-owned incumbent. Licensing can also foster competitive markets by imposing obligations on incumbents to level

Mining on Celestial Bodies: The Equitable Distribution of Benefits Doctrine and Distributive Justice

2019 ◽  
Vol 36 (1) ◽  
pp. 195-238
Author(s):  
Melanie K Saunders
Keyword(s):  
Private Property ◽  
The United States ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Economic Benefits ◽  
Equitable Distribution ◽  
Private Property Rights ◽  
Equitable Sharing ◽  
Celestial Bodies ◽  
Collective Benefit ◽  
Private Actors

Abstract The United States and Luxembourg have recently legislated to permit the acquisition of private property rights over celestial resources mined by private actors. Considering these developments, this note will consider an element of the Common Heritage of Mankind under international space law: the equitable sharing of benefits doctrine. It proposes a formulation of the doctrine that entails material and equitable distribution of economic benefits derived from space mining among all States, ensuring that space is utilised in a manner delivering a tangible collective benefit. It suggests that this doctrine presently lacks the preconditions to amount to an international legal principle erga omnes, and therefore considers how it may develop into a binding juridical standard through analysing an existing model of equitable sharing in an analogous context: the deep seabed. Accordingly, this note conceptualises an international legal framework that delivers an effective mechanism for the redistribution of wealth obtained from mining celestial resources, and that will enhance the compliance of States and private actors with principles of equitable sharing.

scholarly journals DATA NECROPOLITICS v2

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
ANTONIO PELE
Keyword(s):  
Physical Aggression ◽  
Private Property ◽  
New Technologies ◽  
Black Box ◽  
Digital Form ◽  
Social Death ◽  
Private Property Rights ◽  
Social Violence ◽  
Novel Technologies ◽  
Labour Exploitation

Algorithmic Governmentality’ (A. Rouvroy), ‘Expository society’ (B. Harcourt), ‘Black Box Society’ (F. Pasquale), ‘Surveillance Capitalism’ (S. Zuboff), ‘Techno-Feudalism’ (C. Durand), ‘Radical Anti-Humanism (E. Sadin), increasing literature has been highlighting how our societies and subjectivities are being modified and threatened by new technologies and Big Techs . While these debates are grasping how our social existence and future are being shaped by the development of novel technologies, guided by profit rentability and power struggles, I would like to suggest another critical layer. The current deployment of new technologies also relies on a novel circulation of violence. Borrowing the expression from Achille Mbembe I call this phenomenon Data Necropolitics, which is also the title of the book I am working on. Necropolitics is ‘the generalized instrumentalization of human existence and the material destruction of human bodies and populations.’ My intuition is that Data Necropolitics is at the intersection of these two phenomena. Data and new technologies are reifying human’s lives, through different procedures of ‘mortification of the self’ labour exploitation , and in some cases, and especially among vulnerable populations, they can foster violence and eventually death. Violence should not be understood as ‘mere’ physical aggression or violation of private property rights. It is also socio-economic and symbolic. When I refer to Data Necropolitics, I have in mind not only the physical elimination of given individuals, but also a predatory/digital form of governance that expose and produce social violence, vulnerability and eventually (social) death. It circulates below and set the foundations of our technological ‘welfare’.

LAND PLOT AS AN OBJECT OF PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vyacheslav Vovk
Keyword(s):  
Property Rights ◽  
Land Management ◽  
Land Reform ◽  
Essential Role ◽  
Private Property ◽  
Rich Country ◽  
Private Property Rights ◽  
Land Plot ◽  
Government Supervision

Russia is a resource-rich country, and great changes are being made today in order that land and its resources are used for the benefit of any citizen of our state. Under the circumstances government supervision (control) over the optimal use of territories gets the essential role. The rights that are contained in land reform give owners, landowners, land users, and employers extensive powers concerning independent land management.

Konsep Distribusi Pendapatan Dalam Islam

2016 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 85-97
Author(s):  
Moh. Ah. Subhan ZA
Keyword(s):  
Property Rights ◽  
Social Life ◽  
Private Property ◽  
Wealth Distribution ◽  
The State ◽  
Private Property Rights ◽  
Job Opportunities ◽  
The Rich ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Distribution Of Income

The main problem of social life in the community is about how to make the allocation and distribution of income well. Inequality and poverty basically arise not because of the difference of anyone’s strength and weakness in getting livelihood, but because of inappropriate distribution mechanism. With the result that wealth treasure just turns on the rich wealthy, which is in turn, results in the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.Therefore, a discussion on distribution becomes main focus of theory of Islamic economics. Moreover, the discussion of the distribution is not only related to economic issues, but also social and political aspects. On the other side, the economic vision of Islam gives priority to the guarantee of the fulfillment of a better life. Islam emphasizes distributive justice and encloses, in its system, a program for the redistribution of wealth and prosperity, so that each individual is guaranteed with a respectable and friendly standard of living. Islam recognizes private property rights, but the private property rights must be properly distributed. The personal property is used for self and family livelihood, for investment of the working capital, so that it can provide job opportunities for others, for help of the others through zakat, infaq, and shodaqoh. In this way, the wealth not only rotates on the rich, bringing on gap in social life.The problem of wealth distribution is closely related to the welfare of society. Therefore, the state has a duty to regulate the distribution of income in order that the distribution can be fair and reaches appropriate target. The state could at least attempt it by optimizing the role of BAZ (Badan Amil Zakat) and LAZ (Lembaga Amil Zakat) which has all this time been slack. If BAZ and LAZ can be optimized, author believes that inequality and poverty over time will vanish. This is because the majority of Indonesia's population is Muslim.

Der Spielraum bei der Vermarktung von Waldleistungen ist eingeschränkt (Essay) | The scope for the commercialization of forest services is limited (essay)

2009 ◽  
Vol 160 (8) ◽  
pp. 228-231
Author(s):  
Hansruedi Walther
Keyword(s):  
Private Property ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Third Parties ◽  
Wood Products ◽  
Forest Owner ◽  
Free Access ◽  
School Class ◽  
Market Niche ◽  
The Right ◽  
Exclusive Right

A forest owner can only commercialize non-wood products and services within a tightly restricted market niche. On account of free access being permitted to the forest it is impossible to deny to third parties the consumption of many non-wood products and services: everybody has the right to be in the forest for recreation. As a result many non-wood services cannot be commercialized by the forest owner, or not exclusively. What would seem unthinkable elsewhere on private property seems to be taken for granted in the forest: third parties may take products from the forest and even sell them without being the forest owners. For certain nonwood services or products, such as the installation of rope parks or for burial in the forest, the organizer must conclude an agreement with the forest owner or draw up a contract for servitude or benefit. In addition, for these activities a permit from the Forestry Department is necessary. On the other hand, for an itinerant school class or for the production of forest honey neither a binding regulation with the forest owner nor a permit from the Forestry service is necessary, provided that no constructions are erected in the forest. The only exclusive right which remains to the forest owner, besides the sale of his property, is the exploitation of his trees within the legal framework.

Libertarianisms

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Halliday
Keyword(s):  
Property Rights ◽  
Private Property ◽  
Private Property Rights ◽  
Classical Liberal ◽  
Inherited Wealth ◽  
Left And Right ◽  
The Common

This chapter considers various arguments both for and against taxing inherited wealth, each of these being associated with some or other type of libertarian outlook. Libertarianism in the Lockean guises (‘left’ and ‘right’ varieties) is distinguished from its classical liberal alternative, which downplays the Lockean emphasis on private property rights in favour of a more defeasible case for small government and low taxation. These different perspectives generate a variety of quite different arguments about inheritance, some more persuasive than others. Some attention is paid to the common claim that inheritance taxes ‘punish’ virtue and generosity. It is then argued that a Rignano scheme may be particularly attractive in light of certain left-libertarian commitments and as a way of accommodating a classical liberal concern about perpetual savings.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document