Dominating search: Google before the law

For many, particularly in the Anglophone world and Western Europe, it may be obvious that Google has a monopoly over online search and advertising and that this is an undesirable state of affairs, due to Google's ability to mediate information flows online. The baffling question may be why governments and regulators are doing little to nothing about this situation, given the increasingly pivotal importance of the internet and free flowing communications in our lives. However, the law concerning monopolies, namely antitrust or competition law, works in what may be seen as a less intuitive way by the general public. Monopolies themselves are not illegal. Conduct that is unlawful, i.e. abuses of that market power, is defined by a complex set of rules and revolves principally around economic harm suffered due to anticompetitive behavior. However the effect of information monopolies over search, such as Google’s, is more than just economic, yet competition law does not address this. Furthermore, Google’s collection and analysis of user data and its portfolio of related services make it difficult for others to compete. Such a situation may also explain why Google’s established search rivals, Bing and Yahoo, have not managed to provide services that are as effective or popular as Google’s own (on this issue see also the texts by Dirk Lewandowski and Astrid Mager in this reader). Users, however, are not entirely powerless. Google's business model rests, at least partially, on them – especially the data collected about them. If they stop using Google, then Google is nothing.

[Addresses before the Law Association of Philadelphia]

Includes bibliographical references

A report from the National Hispanic Conference on Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice, July 28-30, 1980, Washington, D.C.

Item 968-H-1

A Call for action : the Illinois State Justice Commission final report, June 1996.

Report consists of (1) a description of issues identified by the Commission as important to future efforts to improve the quality of justice in Illinois, (2) a review and compilation of previous studies of the Illinois justice system, (3) highlights of national, state and local findings and (4) a guide for future action in Illinois.

Unorthodoxy in legislation: The Hungarian experience

This paper deals with legal unorthodoxy. The main idea is to study the so-called unorthodox taxes Hungary has adopted in recent years. The study of unorthodox taxes will be preceded by a more general discussion of how law is made under unorthodoxy, and what are the special features of unorthodox legal policy. Unorthodoxy challenges equality before the law and is critical towards mass democracies. It also raises doubts on the operability of the rule of law, relying on personal skills, or loyalty, rather than on impersonal mechanisms arising from checks and balances as developed by the division of political power. Besides, for lack of legal suppositions, legislation suffers from casuistry and regulatory capture.

Unorthodoxy in legislation: The Hungarian experience

This paper deals with legal unorthodoxy. The main idea is to study the so-called unorthodox taxes Hungary has adopted in recent years. The study of unorthodox taxes will be preceded by a more general discussion of how law is made under unorthodoxy, and what are the special features of unorthodox legal policy. Unorthodoxy challenges equality before the law and is critical towards mass democracies. It also raises doubts on the operability of the rule of law, relying on personal skills, or loyalty, rather than on impersonal mechanisms arising from checks and balances as developed by the division of political power. Besides, for lack of legal suppositions, legislation suffers from casuistry and regulatory capture.

Contrato social entre mujeres y hombres (Tema Central)

En esta intervención se pretende reflexionar acerca de una propuesta que ha ido ganando aceptación en los últimos tiempos: nos referimos al contrato social mujeres y hombres. Así, evocando el contrato social formulado por Rousseau como fundamento para la construcción del Estado, se pretende una nueva reedición del mismo. Un contrato que, se dice, se ha de celebrar entre los dos géneros, y mediante el cual deben fijarse las condiciones para una nueva convivencia social en la que participen por igual los ciudadanos y las ciudadanas.

Perspectives.

Title from cover.

Uguaglianza e differenza di genere nella riforma del diritto di famiglia: una lettura luhmanniana

La igualdad ante la ley es uno de los derechos fundamentales de las Constituciones modernas. Sin embargo, hay algo más. De hecho podría decirse que los modernos sistemas jurídicos se han ido formando alrededor de la idea de igualdad. El valor de la igualdad parece expresar una manera común de entender las relaciones humanas, especialmente en el caso de la igualdad de género, expresamente mencionado por el artículo de las Constituciones democráticas modernas que se refiere al principio de igualdad ante la ley. El presente estudio trata esa forma específica de igualdad que se caracteriza por la paradoja de querer tratar como igual lo que es diferente, o sea, de hacer distinciones sin discriminar. Con este fin nos referimos al enfoque jurídico y al enfoque político del tema como se encuentran en la reforma del derecho de familia. No es un problema de una específica legislación nacional, sino más bien una versión específica de un problema de nivel general. Se trata de la imposibilidad de construir como indistinguible lo que es diferente. El intento político de reformar el derecho de familia para implementar el principio constitucional de igualdad no consigue resolver el problema. Éste vuelve a aparecer por la imposibilidad que el derecho funcione sin crear diferencias. Al mismo tiempo, surgen problemas nuevos relacionado con formas nuevas de organizar la vida familiar.

The Racial Equality Directive – from law to practice. IES Policy Brief Issue 2013/07/September 2013

The transposition of the Racial Equality Directive (2000/43/EC) has immensely enhanced legal protection against discrimination on the grounds of racial and ethnic origin throughout the EU. More than 10 years after its adoption, the main challenge identified in many Member States is the enforcement of anti-discrimination laws in practice, in particular with regard to access to justice. Ultimately it is up to the domestic courts to ensure effective implementation of anti-discrimination law. Polls regularly show that the discrepancy between the levels of discrimination experienced and discrimination reported by victims must be seriously addressed. Awareness is low not only among the public but also among the members of the legal professions, leading to under-reporting of discrimination cases. In addition, data that reflect the ethnic or racial composition of the population are scarce which makes it difficult to prove discrimination before the competent authorities. Moreover, certain procedural difficulties that affect access to justice and effective enforcement also stem from the short limitation periods foreseen in legislation, lengthy procedures, evidence, high costs and failures in the provision of legal aid, ineffective sanctions, as well as barriers in the form of language and issues relating to legal standing or legitimate interest. The law remains complex and remedies often inadequate.

Interpretation of Section 17 Employment Protection Act in the light of ECJ case law and under consideration of the cases pending before the Federal Labour Court

This article analyses the relevance of the ECJ ruling in Junk for German labour law.

Competition law proceedings before the European Commission and the right to a fair trial: no need for reform? Research Papers in Law, 5/2008

From the Introduction. This paper will thus show that, given the rapid "criminalisation" of competition law proceedings, sanctions should in principle be imposed at first instance I. Sanctions imposed by the Commission in competition proceedings are "criminal charges" within the meaning of Article 6 ECHR by an independent and impartial tribunal fulfilling all the conditions of Article 6 ECHR (part I). Or at the very least, these sanctions should be subject to full jurisdictional review by an independent and impartial tribunal in order to comply with Article 6 ECHR and to cure the defects of the administrative procedure (part II). It is doubtful however whether such a full jurisdictional review, as it is understood by the ECtHR, is available at Community-level in antitrust cases.