Incentivising Innovation? The competition law approach to the new challenge clauses in the competition rules for technology licensing agreements of the EU

Tutkielman aiheena on EU:n kilpailuoikeudellinen lähestymistapa challenge-lausekkeisiin teknologinsiirtosopimuksia koskevassa ryhmäpoikkeusasetuksessa. Teknologian lisensoinnin katsotaan olevan tärkeä väline teknologian kehityksen levittämisessä ja innovaation edistämisessä. Joissakin tapauksissa lisenssisopimus voi sisältää kilpailua rajoittavia lausekkeita, joiden voidaan kuitenkin nähdä hyödyttävän kilpailua kokonaisuutta arvostellen. Tällaisia lausekkeita ovat niin sanotut ”no-challenge” – lauseke, eli sopimusehto, jonka nojalla lisenssinsaaja sitoutuu olemaan haastamatta lisensoidun immateriaalioikeuden pätevyyttä ja ”termination-on-challenge” – lauseke, joka antaa lisensoijalle haastettaessa oikeuden päättää lisenssisopimus. Tutkielmassa perehdytään challenge -lausekkeiden hyväksyttävyyden arviointiin Euroopan unionin kilpailuoikeuden näkökulmasta uuden 1.5.2014 voimaan tulleen ryhmäpoikkeusasetuksen valossa. Muissa kuin yksinoikeuksia luovissa teknologiansiirtosopimuksissa olevat termination-on-challenge – lausekkeita tulee uusimmassa ryhmäpoikkeusetuksessa aina perustua yritysten itse suorittamaan tapauskohtaiseen arviointiin. No-challenge – lausekkeet ovat jatkossakin aiemman käytännön mukaisesti ryhmäpoikkeuksen soveltamisalan ulkopuolella. Komission on perustellut challenge - lausekkeiden jättämistä asetuksen ulkopuolelle julkisella intressillä, joka on päästä eroon mitättömistä immateriaalioikeuksista. Komission on katsonut, että challenge – lausekkeiden kilpailua rajoittava ominaisuus on mitättömien immateriaalioikeuksien esiintyminen markkinoilla, mikä osaltaan vääristää kilpailua ja hidastaa toimijoiden markkinoille pääsyä. Toisaalta lausekkeiden voidaan sanoa edistävän kilpailua, sillä ne usein tarjoavat immateriaalioikeuden haltijalle riittävän oikeussuojan ja kannustimen lisensoida teknologia, mikä lisää kilpailua, keksijöiden kannustimia panostaa innovaatioihin sekä vähentää transaktiokustannuksia. Tutkielman keskeinen tulos on ennen kaikkea challenge-lausekkeiden kilpailuvaikutusten tunnistamisessa ja komission perusteluiden kriittisessä arvioinnissa. Komission linjauksen perustelut eivät saa riittävää tukea ottaen huomioon vaikutustenarvioinnin, EU:n tuomioistuinkäytännön sekä taloustieteellisen lähestymistavan. Tutkielman tulosten pohjalta ja tukeutuen eri oikeuslähteisiin, taloustieteellisiin argumentteihin ja oikeusvertailevaan tutkimukseen, on mahdollista tehdä johtopäätöksiä niistä seikoista ja argumenteista, joilla on merkitystä uuden politiikkalinjauksen kilpailuvaikutuksiin.

Corruption, income, and rule of law: empirical evidence from developing and developed economies

This article presents an empirical analysis based on cross-country data concerned with two points regarding corruption: (i) its effects on income; and (ii) how to mitigate corruption. The findings can be highlighted in two points. Firstly the idea that corruption is intrinsically connected with income is confirmed. Secondly, the traditional argument that an increase in rule of law represents a good strategy in the fight against corruption is valid for developing countries. Furthermore, this study reveals that the search for increasing the human development index represents a rule of thumb for high levels of income and to control corruption.

In Search for the European solidarity: The rule of law within the European Union in the framework of constitutional pluralism

The dissertation examines the rule of law within the European Union in the theoretical framework of constitutional pluralism. The leading lines of constitutional pluralism are examined with relation to the traditional and prevailing, monistic and hierarchical conceptions on how to perceive legal orders in Europe. The theoretical part offers also historical perspective by highlighting some of the turning points for the Union constitutional legal order in the framework of European integration. The concept of rule of law is examined in legal terms and its meaning to the Union constitutional constellation as a constitutional principle and a common value is observed. The realization of the rule of law at supranational and national level is explored with a view to discover that recent developments in some of the Member States give rise to concern about the viability of the rule of law within the European Union. It is recognized that the inobservance of the rule of law at national level causes a threat to the supranational constitutional legal order. The relationship between the supranational and national legal orders is significant in this respect and therefore particularly the interaction between the Court of Justice of the European Union (hereinafter the ECJ) and the Member States’ (constitutional/supreme) courts takes focus. It is observed that functioning dialogue between the supranational and national courts based on mutual respect and judicial deference is an important prerequisite for the realization of the rule of law within Europe. In order to afford a concrete example, a recent case C-62/14 Gauweiler v Deutscher Bundestag is introduced and analysed in relation to the notorious relationship between the Federal Constitutional Court of Germany and the ECJ. The implications of the ECJ’s decision in Gauweiler v Deutscher Bundestag is assessed with reference to some of the pressing issues of constitutionalism within Europe and some institutional aspects are also brought forward. Lastly, the feasibility of constitutional pluralism as a theoretical setting is measured against the legal reality of today’s Europe and its many constitutions. The hierarchical idea of one ultimate source of power, stemming from the traditional approaches to legal systems, is then assessed with relation to the requirement of the realization of the rule of law within the European Union from the supranational and national point of view.

Parental and Successor Liability in EU Competition Law Infringements

Under EU competition law, parent companies may be held jointly and severally liable for the competition law infringements committed by their subsidiaries. The possibility of holding parent companies liable demonstrates a significant exception from the idea of separate legal entities. However, it is not the only deviation developed under EU competition law. In cases, where the legal entity responsible for the anti-competitive conduct has changed its form, liability can be attributed to the new operator, in particular, to its successor. The principles of legal certainty and legitimate expectations are issues that surround the doctrines of parental and successor liability. The aim of this thesis is to present a comprehensive comparative analysis of the parental and successor liability doctrines and to clarify the conditions under which it is possible to attribute liability for the infringements of EU competition law. The main purpose is therefore to demonstrate the problems related to the allocation of liability and to discuss whether these liability principles, established to assure the effective enforcement of the EU competition rules, are good solutions. The research methods used in this thesis are the legal dogmatic approach and the comparative law approach. The former enables the possibility of using the case law and legislation as a framework in which the difficulties concerning the application of parental and successor liability can be discussed while the latter ensures the comparison of the characteristics and judgments. The doctrines of parental and successor liability are both well established, but the application practice has caused several difficulties. These problems derive from, inter alia, the broadness and disjointed developed of the doctrines. There has been much recent case law dealing with these issues and having the potential to open up a considerable risk and to allocate strict liability for parent and successor companies.

Legal education in crisis: healing and humanizing Canadian law schools /

Western law schools are suffering from an identity and moral crisis. Many of the legal profession's problems can be traced to the law school environment, where students are taught to reason and practice in ways that are often at odds with their own personalities and values and even with generally accepted psychologically healthy practices. The idealism, ethic of care, and personal moral compasses of many students become eroded and even lost in the present legal education system. Formalism, rationalism, elitism, and big business values have become paramount. In such a moment of historical crisis, there exists the opportunity to create a new legal education story. This paper is a conceptual study of both my own Canadian legal education and the general legal education experience. It examines core problems and critiques of the existing Western legal education organizational and pedagogical paradigm to which Canadian law schools adhere. New approaches with the potential to enrich, humanize, and heal the Canadian law school experience are explored. Ultimately, the paper proposes a legal education system that is more interdisciplinary, theoretically and practically integrated, emotionally intelligent, technologically connected, morally accountable, spiritual, and humane. Specific pedagogical and curricular strategies are suggested, and recommendations for the future are offered. The dehumanizing aspects of the law school experience in Canada have rarely been studied. It is hoped that this thesis will fill a gap in the research and provide some insight into an issue that is of both academic and public importance, since the well-being of law students and lawyers affects the interests of their clients, the general public, and the integrity and future of the entire legal system.

The law of the sea: the United States, Canada and the deep seabed

The Falkland Islands War of 1982 was fought over competing claims to sovereignty over a group of islands off the east coast of South America. The dispute was between Argentina and the United Kingdom. Argentina claims the islands under rights to Spanish succession, the fact that they lie off the Argentine coast line and that in 1833 Great Britain took the islands illegally and by force. The United Kingdom claims the islands primarily through prescription--the fact that they have governed the islands in a peaceful, continuous and public manner since 1833. The British also hold that the population living on the islands, roughly eighteen hundred British descendants, should be able to decide their own future. The United Kingdom also lays claim to the islands through rights of discovery and settlement, although this claim has always been challenged by Spain who until 1811 governed the islands. Both claims have legal support, and the final decision if there will ever be one is difficult to predict. Sadly today the ultimate test of sovereignty does not come through international law but remains in the idea that "He is sovereign who can defend his sovereignty." The years preceding the Argentine invasion of 1982 witnessed many diplomatic exchanges between The United Kingdom and Argentina over the future of the islands. During this time the British sent signals to Argentina that ii implied a decline in British resolve to hold the islands and demonstrated that military action did more to further the talks along than did actual negotiations. The Argentine military junta read these signals and decided that they could take the islands in a quick military invasion and that the United Kingdom would consider the act as a fait accompli and would not protest the invasion. The British in response to this claimed that they never signaled to Argentina that a military solution was acceptable to them and launched a Royal Navy task force to liberate the islands. Both governments responded to an international crisis with means that were designed both to resolve the international crisis and increase the domestic popularity of the government. British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher was facing an all-time low in popularity for post-War Prime Ministers while Argentine President General Galtieri needed to gain mass popular support so he could remain a viable President after he was scheduled to lose command of the army and a seat on the military junta that ran the country. The military war for the Falklands is indicative of the nature of modern warfare between Third World countries. It shows that the gap in military capabilities between Third and First World countries is narrowing significantly. Modern warfare between a First and Third World country is no longer a 'walk over' for the First World country.

Letter from the Secretary of War, transmitting a return of the arms and military stores furnished to the respective states, under the provisions of the law of one thousand eight hundred and twelve.

At head of title: [107].

Grant Chapman, University of Southern California Law School graduation, 1925

Grant Chapman, University of Southern California Law School graduation, 1925.

Fitness to stand trial : how discourses of rationality, reasonableness and culpability inform the law and psychiatry to create standards of normal

The objective of this thesis is to demonstrate the importance of the concepts of rationality, reasonableness, culpability and autonomy that inform and support our conception of both the person and the punishable subject. A critical discourse analysis tracing these concepts through both the law and psychological tools used to evaluate the fitness of a person reveals that these concepts and their implied values are inconsistently applied to the mentally disordered who come into conflict with the law. I argue that the result of this inconsistency compromises a person's autonomy which is a contradiction to this concept as a foundational principle of the law. Ultimately, this thesis does not provide a solution to be employed in policy making, but its analysis leaves open possibilities for further exploration into the ways legal and social justice can be reconciled.