1 resultado para Fourth Amendment violations remedy
em Digital Peer Publishing
Filtro por publicador
- Academic Research Repository at Institute of Developing Economies (2)
- AMS Tesi di Dottorato - Alm@DL - Università di Bologna (2)
- Aquatic Commons (7)
- ArchiMeD - Elektronische Publikationen der Universität Mainz - Alemanha (1)
- Archive of European Integration (318)
- Archivo Digital para la Docencia y la Investigación - Repositorio Institucional de la Universidad del País Vasco (2)
- Biblioteca Digital da Câmara dos Deputados (1)
- Biblioteca Digital da Produção Intelectual da Universidade de São Paulo (2)
- Biblioteca Digital da Produção Intelectual da Universidade de São Paulo (BDPI/USP) (3)
- Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações Eletrônicas da UERJ (1)
- Biodiversity Heritage Library, United States (1)
- BORIS: Bern Open Repository and Information System - Berna - Suiça (20)
- Boston University Digital Common (1)
- Brock University, Canada (10)
- Bucknell University Digital Commons - Pensilvania - USA (2)
- Cambridge University Engineering Department Publications Database (2)
- CentAUR: Central Archive University of Reading - UK (24)
- Center for Jewish History Digital Collections (3)
- Chinese Academy of Sciences Institutional Repositories Grid Portal (8)
- Cochin University of Science & Technology (CUSAT), India (3)
- Comissão Econômica para a América Latina e o Caribe (CEPAL) (105)
- Cornell: DigitalCommons@ILR (1)
- Dalarna University College Electronic Archive (1)
- DI-fusion - The institutional repository of Université Libre de Bruxelles (1)
- Digital Archives@Colby (1)
- Digital Commons @ DU | University of Denver Research (5)
- Digital Commons @ Winthrop University (3)
- Digital Peer Publishing (1)
- Digital Repository at Iowa State University (1)
- DigitalCommons@The Texas Medical Center (4)
- DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln (3)
- eResearch Archive - Queensland Department of Agriculture; Fisheries and Forestry (3)
- Greenwich Academic Literature Archive - UK (3)
- Harvard University (3)
- Helda - Digital Repository of University of Helsinki (3)
- Indian Institute of Science - Bangalore - Índia (9)
- Massachusetts Institute of Technology (1)
- Memoria Académica - FaHCE, UNLP - Argentina (3)
- Ministerio de Cultura, Spain (1)
- National Center for Biotechnology Information - NCBI (7)
- Plymouth Marine Science Electronic Archive (PlyMSEA) (4)
- Portal de Revistas Científicas Complutenses - Espanha (1)
- Publishing Network for Geoscientific & Environmental Data (6)
- QUB Research Portal - Research Directory and Institutional Repository for Queen's University Belfast (28)
- Queensland University of Technology - ePrints Archive (39)
- Repositório digital da Fundação Getúlio Vargas - FGV (1)
- Repositório Institucional UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista "Julio de Mesquita Filho" (28)
- SAPIENTIA - Universidade do Algarve - Portugal (1)
- School of Medicine, Washington University, United States (2)
- South Carolina State Documents Depository (2)
- Universidad Autónoma de Nuevo León, Mexico (2)
- Universidad del Rosario, Colombia (3)
- Universidad Politécnica de Madrid (4)
- Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte (UFRN) (1)
- Universitätsbibliothek Kassel, Universität Kassel, Germany (2)
- Université de Lausanne, Switzerland (1)
- Université de Montréal, Canada (5)
- University of Connecticut - USA (2)
- University of Michigan (263)
- WestminsterResearch - UK (1)
Resumo:
In Europe, roughly three regimes apply to the liability of Internet intermediaries for privacy violations conducted by users through their network. These are: the e-Commerce Directive, which, under certain conditions, excludes them from liability; the Data Protection Directive, which imposes a number of duties and responsibilities on providers processing personal data; and the freedom of expression, contained inter alia in the ECHR, which, under certain conditions, grants Internet providers several privileges and freedoms. Each doctrine has its own field of application, but they also have partial overlap. In practice, this creates legal inequality and uncertainty, especially with regard to providers that host online platforms and process User Generated Content.