scholarly journals STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES OF THE EU INFOSOC DIRECTIVE WITH AN EMPHASIS ON THE PROVISIONS OF COPYRIGHT EXCEPTIONS AND LIMITATIONS

2018 ◽  
Vol 28 (6) ◽  
pp. 2167-2170
Author(s):  
Ivona Sekulovska

Directive 2001/29/EC on the harmonization of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society also known as the InfoSoc Directive, entered into force on 22 June 2001.625 In the language of the European Union “information society” means the internet. In order to respond to the new forms of exploitation of the copyright works, the law on copyright and related right needed to be adapted. These economic challenges require a new and flexible Community legal framework, so that the information society could be maintained and developed. However, the objectives of the Copyright Directive resulted in providing measures that concern both the analog and the digital environment, and is further questioned whether the objective of harmonizing the copyright laws has been met. So in this paper the strengths and the weaknesses of certain provisions of the Directive will be briefly summarized.

Author(s):  
Graham Butler

Not long after the establishment of supranational institutions in the aftermath of the Second World War, the early incarnations of the European Union (EU) began conducting diplomacy. Today, EU Delegations (EUDs) exist throughout the world, operating similar to full-scale diplomatic missions. The Treaty of Lisbon established the legal underpinnings for the European External Action Service (EEAS) as the diplomatic arm of the EU. Yet within the international legal framework, EUDs remain second-class to the missions of nation States. The EU thus has to use alternative legal means to form diplomatic missions. This chapter explores the legal framework of EU diplomatic relations, but also asks whether traditional missions to which the VCDR regime applies, can still be said to serve the needs of diplomacy in the twenty-first century, when States are no longer the ultimate holders of sovereignty, or the only actors in international relations.


This book provides the first comprehensive analysis of the withdrawal agreement concluded between the United Kingdom and the European Union to create the legal framework for Brexit. Building on a prior volume, it overviews the process of Brexit negotiations that took place between the UK and the EU from 2017 to 2019. It also examines the key provisions of the Brexit deal, including the protection of citizens’ rights, the Irish border, and the financial settlement. Moreover, the book assesses the governance provisions on transition, decision-making and adjudication, and the prospects for future EU–UK trade relations. Finally, it reflects on the longer-term challenges that the implementation of the 2016 Brexit referendum poses for the UK territorial system, for British–Irish relations, as well as for the future of the EU beyond Brexit.


2021 ◽  
pp. 1-24
Author(s):  
Vincent DELHOMME

Amidst a growing interest from European Union (EU) Member States, the European Commission recently announced that it would put forward a legislative proposal for the adoption of a harmonised and mandatory front-of-pack nutrition labelling scheme at the EU level. The present contribution discusses the implications of such an adoption, taking a behavioural, legal and policy angle. It introduces first the concept of front-of-pack nutrition labelling and the existing evidence regarding its effects on consumer behaviour and dietary habits. It then presents the legal framework currently applicable to (front-of-pack) nutrition labelling in the EU and discusses some of the main political and practical aspects involved with the development of a common EU front-of-pack label.


2014 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 55 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher Kuner

The European Union (EU) has supported the growing calls for the creation of an international legal framework to safeguard data protection rights. At the same time, it has worked to spread its data protection law to other regions, and recent judgments of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) have reaffirmed the autonomous nature of EU law and the primacy of EU fundamental rights law. The tension between initiatives to create a global data protection framework and the assertion of EU data protection law raises questions about how the EU can best promote data protection on a global level, and about the EU’s responsibilities to third countries that have adopted its system of data protection.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
James Gallagher

<p>The European Union (EU) has undergone constant political and economic integration since its inception in 1952. It has developed from a community in the aftermath of World War Two, into a Union of diverse states with its own political and legal system. It is the best example of international integration and co-operation in the world.  A number of treaties represent the primary law of the EU. The treaties represent the EU’s commitment to promote human rights, freedom, democracy, equality, and the rule of law. The Treaty of Lisbon¹ was introduced and adopted by the Member States to increase participatory democracy within the EU. Originally called the Reform Treaty, it amended the existing EU and EC treaties, providing the EU with the legal framework to meet the future challenges and to respond to the increasing demands of the citizens’ for a more transparent and open institution.  The European Parliament is the only directly elected institution of the EU, and traditionally had the least amount of power of the EU institutions. The Lisbon Treaty attempted to address the so-called democratic deficit through a range of institutional reforms that recognised the importance of European citizen involvement in the EU. Citizen involvement in the EU has also been increased through the implementation of the European Citizens’ Initiative (ECI). The ECI represents a further step towards the EU becoming a true participatory democracy.  This purpose of this paper is to critically assess the democratic involvement of European citizens in the operation of the EU, and how the constitutional foundation of the EU provides for this involvement. The paper will seek to answer to what extent European Citizens’ have the ability to affect real and meaningful change upon the EU, a power that currently sits with the governments of Member States.  Democracy is often associated with the power of the citizens to affect change in the institutions that govern them. The theory of constituent power goes one step further and argues that it gives citizens the ability to alter not only the governing institutions, but the also the power that those institutions exercise. This begins with an introduction of the main institutions of the EU, before moving to discuss the theory of constituent power, before assessing what factors would be necessary for constitutent power to be successful in the EU.  ¹ Official Journal of the European Union 2007 No C 306/1 (herein after referred to as the Treaty of Lisbon). Adopted 2008, entered into force 1 December 2009.</p>


2020 ◽  
Vol 45 (4) ◽  
pp. 472-486
Author(s):  
Elizaveta Samoilova

Abstract With all eyes on the recent global COVID-19 pandemic, another pandemic has been growing in the shadows: violence against women. The Council of Europe’s Istanbul Convention creates a legal framework in order to protect women against all forms of violence. Its ratification process, however, has faced considerable challenges, particularly in the Central and Eastern European Member States. This article discusses the basic elements of the Istanbul Convention, reflects on the ratification process in the EU and its Member States, and sets out the main legal issues raised in the European Parliament’s request for an opinion (A-1/19 of 22 November 2019) to the Court of Justice of the European Union. Special focus is put on the choice of the correct EU legal basis and the practices of ‘splitting’ and ‘common accord’. This article argues that the European Parliament’s request for an opinion provides the perfect opportunity for the Court of Justice of the European Union to further clarify the law and the practice of concluding mixed agreements by the EU and its Member States.


2009 ◽  
pp. 142-150
Author(s):  
Ned Kock ◽  
Pedro Antunes

Government funding of e-collaboration research in both the US and EU seems to be growing. In the EU, a key initiative to promote governmental investment in e-collabo-ration research is the Collaboration@Work initiative. This initiative is one of the EU’s Information Society Technologies Directorate General’s main priorities. In the US, government investment in e-collaboration research is channeled through several gov-ernment branches and organizations, notably the National Science Foundation. There are key differences in the approaches used for government funding of e-collaboration research in the EU and US. Some of these differences are discussed here, as well as related implications.


2018 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 300-307
Author(s):  
George Pavlidis

In order to enhance the existing legal framework on asset recovery, the European Union (EU) will have to apply a ‘no safe haven’ policy to the proceeds of corruption and use all appropriate legal tools. We argue that a new EU instrument on asset recovery, modelled after the Swiss Law on Asset Recovery, would be a valuable addition to the EU’s legal arsenal against corruption, in compliance with its commitments under the United Nations Convention against Corruption. Such an EU instrument will deal specifically with the EU’s power to block the assets of foreign politically exposed persons (PEPs) and eventually facilitate restitution of these assets. Following the model of the Swiss law, a reversal of the burden of proof as to the origin of PEPs’ assets could be introduced in the new EU instrument. Judicial review should be wide enough to ensure fairness to the affected PEPs, balancing the new powers of the Council of the EU.


2017 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 63-78
Author(s):  
Agnieszka Tylec ◽  
Zuzanna Ostraszewska

The aim of the article is to present the innovation level of Poland versus the results of the European Union based on the Summary Innovation Index (SII). For its implementation, the decomposition of the SII was performed first, followed by the presentation and analysis of the data taken into account in determining the level of innovation of particular countries and in the EU. In the article one used the method of analysis, including the literature of the subject, reports on innovation published in the Internet, the descriptive method and the method of graphical presentation of data.


2014 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 79-99
Author(s):  
Enkelejda Turkeshi

Illegal waste management activities violate specific rules that aim at preventing or reducing the negative effects they may have on the environment and human health. For the purpose of providing a more effective protection of the environment, in many countries and since 2008 even at the European Union (EU) level, besides the relevant administrative offences, it is also provided for a specific criminal offence against environment concerning serious infringements of the waste management legislation. This paper examines the current legal framework in Albania concerning waste-related criminal offences, against the minimum standard set forth by the EU in the Directive 2008/99/EC on the protection of environment through criminal law. While the adoption of the new framework law on Integrated Waste Management in 2011 as part of Albania’s efforts in aligning its legislation to that of the EU, has been a positive step towards more stringent rules concerning waste management, thus helping in tackling the serious and constantly evolving problems that the country has been facing in this field for years, the paper suggests that certain amendments to the Criminal Code are also necessary, as the minimum standard of the EU requires that criminal law applies at least in the case of particularly serious infringements of the new waste management legislation. These amendments would increase the protection of the environment and further the alignment of the Albanian legislation with that of the EU, while the country is seeking to fulfill obligations for EU membership.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document