Ireland deputy data protection Commissioner to take up Apple job

Irishtimes.com, here.

The Patent-Antitrust Interface: Are There Any No-No’s Today?

Venable.com, here

New Year Will See More Policing of Patent Conduct By US and EU Competition Agencies

Skadden.com, here

Ed O'Bannon vs. the NCAA: The antitrust lawsuit explained

Sbnation.com, here

PRIVATE ACTIONS IN COMPETITION LAW: A consultation on options for reform - government response

UK Government, here

OFT chief calls for more competitive banking sector

Telegraph.co.uk, here

EU Commission sends Statement of Objections to J&J and Novartis on delayed entry of generic pain-killer

Press Release, here.

Recommendations Resulting from the Mediation on Private Copying And Reprography Levies

A. Vitorino, here

What's wrong with data protection?

A Greens/EFA hearing, January 31, 2013, here (archived video available here).
Stallman:  neither using most of the available Internet services, nor possessing a mobile phone...too dangerous, he says. 

Open Access versus Traditional Journal Pricing: Using a Simple “Platform Market” Model to Understand Which Will Win (and Which Should)


M. McCabe, C. Snyder A. Fagin, here.

Digital music rights - Baby got backlash

TheEconomist.com, here

SAS Institute/World Programming: UK Ruling After The Reference

[2013] EWHC 69 (Ch), Justice Arnold, here.
You can read my brief paper here for some background information.

U.S. firms, officials resisting Europe’s push for stronger digital privacy rules

WashingtonPost.com, here.

Cloud computing, cookies y protección de datos

Seminario APEP-Derechotics, Audios aquì

Bundesgerichtshof erkennt Schadensersatz für den Ausfall eines Internetanschlusses

Bundesgerichtshof III ZR 98/12, Pressemitteilung hier.
Aus der Pressemitteilung: 
"...Nach der Rechtsprechung des Bundesgerichtshofs muss der Ersatz für den Ausfall der Nutzungsmöglichkeit eines Wirtschaftsguts grundsätzlich Fällen vorbehalten bleiben, in denen sich die Funktionsstörung typischerweise als solche auf die materiale Grundlage der Lebenshaltung signifikant auswirkt"...."Demgegenüber hat der Senat dem Kläger dem Grunde nach Schadensersatz für den Fortfall der Möglichkeit zuerkannt, seinen Internetzugang für weitere Zwecke als für den Telefon- und Telefaxverkehr zu nutzen. Die Nutzbarkeit des Internets ist ein Wirtschaftsgut, dessen ständige Verfügbarkeit seit längerer Zeit auch im privaten Bereich für die eigenwirtschaftliche Lebenshaltung typischerweise von zentraler Bedeutung ist. Das Internet stellt weltweit umfassende Informationen in Form von Text-, Bild-, Video- und Audiodateien zur Verfügung. Dabei werden thematisch nahezu alle Bereiche abgedeckt und verschiedenste qualitative Ansprüche befriedigt. So sind etwa Dateien mit leichter Unterhaltung ebenso abrufbar wie Informationen zu Alltagsfragen bis hin zu hochwissenschaftlichen Themen. Dabei ersetzt das Internet wegen der leichten Verfügbarkeit der Informationen immer mehr andere Medien, wie zum Beispiel Lexika, Zeitschriften oder Fernsehen. Darüber hinaus ermöglicht es den weltweiten Austausch zwischen seinen Nutzern, etwa über E-Mails, Foren, Blogs und soziale Netzwerke. Zudem wird es zunehmend zur Anbahnung und zum Abschluss von Verträgen, zur Abwicklung von Rechtsgeschäften und zur Erfüllung öffentlich-rechtlicher Pflichten genutzt. Der überwiegende Teil der Einwohner Deutschlands bedient sich täglich des Internets. Damit hat es sich zu einem die Lebensgestaltung eines Großteils der Bevölkerung entscheidend mitprägenden Medium entwickelt, dessen Ausfall sich signifikant im Alltag bemerkbar macht."
Volltext hier

Antitrust's Democracy Deficit

H. First, S. Weber Waller, here

Fair Use 2.0: The Rebirth of Fair Dealing in Canada

A. Katz, here

Vie privée : Les entreprises US gagnent en commission "consommateurs" au Parlement européen

Laquadrature.net, ici.
Avis de la Commission Marché intérieur et protection des consommateurs ici.

Georgia State and Fair Use: Copyright on Appeal

K. Crews, here

Google and the FTC: the implications

Econsultancy.com, here

The Sky Is Rising 2 - Regional Study: Germany, France, UK, Italy, Russia, Spain

Techdirt.com, here.

The European Commission vs. Gazprom: An Issue of Fair Competition or a Foreign Policy Quarrel?

N. Sartori, here

Elargissement du domaine de l'exception pédagogique envisagé en France

Actualitte.com, ici

MPI on the Proposal for a Collective Management of Copyright and Related Rights

Here

Leistungsschutzrecht – nein danke!

J. Haucap, hier

Albrecht Draft Report on the Right to Data Portability: Blurring the Legal Contours?

A much debated element of the EU Personal Data Protection reform package is the proposal to introduce a right to data portability, as put forth in Article 18 of the draft Regulation.

Art. 8(2) of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights states that” everyone has the right of access to data which has been collected concerning him or her, and the right to have it rectified.” Pursuant to Article 12 of the currently applicable Data Protection Directive, individuals already have the right to access their personal data, and in particular to obtain from the data controller communication “in an intelligible form of the data undergoing processing,” but the form of the communication is not specified, and the way in which that right can be exercised varies considerably from country to country within the EU, and access has become particularly challenging especially in connection with the online environment.

Pursuant to the proposed Art.18 of the Regulation, data subjects could, first, obtain a copy of their personal data “processed by electronic means and in a structured and commonly used format.” The copy itself must be “an electronic and structured format which is commonly used and allows for further use by the data subject.” Further, individuals would be granted the explicit right to transfer “personal data and any other information provided by the data subject and retained by an automated processing system” into another automated processing system “where the data subject has provided the personal data and the processing is based on consent or on a contract.” The transfer should be “without hindrance by the controller”, and data should be “in an electronic format which is commonly used.”Article 18(3) gives the Commission the power to specify the electronic format and the "technical standards, modalities and procedures for the transmission of personal data.”

Art. 18 should be read against the background of Article 15 of the draft Regulation, that provides for the “general” right of access for the data subject. Article 15 states that the data subject has the right to obtain from the controller communication of the personal data undergoing processing, but the main difference is that Article 18 specifically deals with the condition for reuse of the data, by the data subject herself and/or by another automated processing system.

As seen above, Art. 18(2) introduces the right to export personal data and other information provided by data subject to another service “without hindrance” by the controller. It is not clear, however, if this would involve an affirmative obligation on the controller to transfer data directly to another service, i.e. to provide for some degree of interoperability between electronic processing systems. The data that the individual has the right to trasfer should be in electronic form. As mentioned before, the Regulation would give the Commission the power to specify the electronic format and the further technical requirements for allowing the transmission of personal data.

The contours of the data portability right as foreseen by Article 18 of the draft Regulation are not totally clear, though, in particular because most of the critical “technicalities” (i.e. electronic format and the technical standards, modalities and procedures for the transmission of personal data) are left to later clarifications by the Commission. In this highly sensitive area, however, negative implications on innovation processes should be carefully avoided by abstaining from imposing microregulation on technological solutions to ensure data portability. Moreover, in the rather remote event that the language of Article 18 remains largely unaffected by the various negotiation phases the reform package is currently going through, the effectiveness of the new right will critically depend on the interpretation of rather vague legal concepts like “without hindrance.”

Even more uncertainty could be the result of the negotiations surrounding the reform package, though. A good example of this is the amendment proposal put forth by the rapporteur for the European Parliament's Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Committee (“Albrecht Draft Report"). According to the proposal, Article 18 should be merged with Article 15. The Albrecht draft, however, blurrs the legal contours of the right to export personal data and other information to another service even further, in so far as it foresees that the right should be exercised “where technically feasible and appropriate”. The critical change in the text would appear to be at least partially in line with the amendments suggested by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and already contained in the Draft Opinion of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy for the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs.

Verordnung zur Markttransparenzstelle fertig

Brennstoffspiegel.de, hier

Algorithms and competition

M. Vestager, here . Large friendly letters? "It's true that the idea of automated systems getting together and reaching a...