30/09/2016

Towards a more global Internet – The end of total American control on domain names

icann_logo Since the creation of the internet, and its global development in the ’90s, the world wide web remains, in part, under control of the U.S. Commerce Department.

The Californian non-profit company ICANN[1] (Internet Corporation for Assigned names and Numbers) is responsible for the administration of IP addresses worldwide, as well as the global responsibility for top level domains (TLDs), and it is controled by the US National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), an agency of the U.S. Commerce Department.

12/09/2016

Data protection: The Rise of the Privacy Shield

data-protection On July 12th 2016, the European Commission adopted the substitute for the Safe Harbor, the data protection agreement previously signed between the Commission and the United States Department of Commerce in 2010. This new agreement is referred to as the “Privacy Shield”.

As a reminder of the present state, the European Union Court of Justice “Schrems” decision on October 6th 2015 has invalidated the Safe Harbor agreement, stating that such agreement did not provide enough data protection for European citizens. The Safe Harbor was supposed to provide a legal framework on data transfer from European Union to the United States.

The new Privacy Shield is meant to be the substitute of the Safe Harbor. It is the result of negotiations between the European Commission and the American authorities since 2014. Read more

03/08/2016

LUMP SUM OR ACTUAL PREJUDICE COMPENSATION? BOTH, SAYS THE COURT

An important goal when acting against infringements of rights is to receive compensation for your loss. But what kind of compensation does the law offer you? Directive 2004/48 of 29 April 2004 on the enforcement of intellectual property rights created two sets of compensation rules in article 13(1):

either the national authorities choose a compensation scheme that takes into account the negative economic consequences which you have suffered as well as the unfair profits made by the infringer and the moral prejudice[1] caused to you (article 13 (1)(a));
or the national authorities choose to set up a lump sum on the basis of elements such as, at least, the amount of royalties you could have been paid by the infringer in order for him to use your intellectual property right lawfully in the first place (in appropriate cases only, such as the impossibility to determine the true amount of the prejudice) (article 13(1) (b)).

Is it possible to ask for moral prejudice compensation to be added to the lump sum? This question has now been answered by the European Court of Justice [2].

14/07/2016

Open, Alibaba… But not to Counterfeiting

There has already been controversy surrounding the operations of Chinese e-commerce company Alibaba Group Holdings.
Taobao, a platform under the Alibaba portfolio, has been accused of allowing vast amounts of counterfeit goods to be knowingly sold by users of the website. These allegations did not rise to a threatening level until the Chinese Government itself published a white paper last January in which it called out the practices of Alibaba for their failure to address the clear issues of counterfeit goods passing through their domains.[1]

11/07/2016

The New Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC) Arbitration Rules in 2016: A Comparative view

blog foto Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC)’s new Arbitration Rules from 1 August 2016 onwards

Singapore, just like the Netherlands, is one of the most attractive arbitration forums in the world. SIAC continuously improves the arbitration rules to provide parties with the most efficient ways to solve disputes. There are several changes to the Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC) Arbitration Rules. There are two points worth noting.

30/06/2016

GOODBYE OLD FRIEND…

Brexit and the consequences for intellectual property rights

On June 24^th, 2016, the United Kingdom referendum result came: Brexit over Remain. Though the economic and political effects of this exit of the European Union are yet to be determined, we are currently able to discern some of the most foreseeable consequences for intellectual property rights.

11/05/2016

Doing Business in the Digital Market: Balance between Data Protection and Competition Law

alibaba-e-day Companies within the internal market can build their market power by abstracting value from its client’s personal information. When entering into an unfamiliar market, a company should always bear in mind the balance between the levels of protection that it should provide to its consumers and the degree of competitiveness that it holds from controlling and processing big data in order to avoid risks and receive gains in the long run.

The first step of data analysis is to acquire data. Issuing loyalty cards is a frequently used method to acquire customer information. On the internet, companies can also set cookies[1] to collect customer data.

10/05/2016

China’s One Belt One Road Initiative on tax and customs

China One Road One Belt In September and October 2013, the Chinese President Xi Jinping had brought up two strategic initiatives which are jointly known as the “One Belt One Road” Initiative[1] (OBOR), respectively the New Silk Road Economic Road (SREB) and the 21^st Century Maritime Silk Road (MSR). These two projects are considered a re-establishment of the historical trade route between China and Europe across the Middle East. This is a trade and investment oriented Initiative aiming at integrity and connectivity in Eurasia.

In respect with tax and taxation, the State Administration of Taxation (SAT) announced a package of ten measures in April 2015 for serving the implementation of the OBOR Initiative[2]. This package is also known as the “policy paper on implementing the OBOR Initiative” through enhancing taxation services and management[3]. Thorough execution and interpretation of taxation agreements are on the top of this agenda. Eliminating mismatches between regional law enforcement and tax disputes are priorities as well.

09/05/2016

When data protection mingles with competition law and the right to data portability

According to Margrethe Verstager, European Commissioner for Competition, “we as consumers have a new currency that we can use […] – our data”[1] which most of the time consumers do not realize they posses and this is what the Digital Single Market Strategy addresses. The Digital Single Market Strategy aims at creating easy access and exercise of online activities under fair competition conditions and a high level of consumer and personal data protection for individuals and businesses[2].

One of the initiatives for the Digital Single Market Strategy is the General Data Protection Regulation including a right to data portability.[3] This individual right in the new General Data Protection Regulation enables individuals to obtain their data that is being processed in an inter-operable format so as to transfer it to another social network or search engine.[4] In this way two birds are killed with one stone: (a) citizens remain in control of their data and, (b) it contributes to preventing anti competitive behavior in some particular cases.

14/04/2016

Chinese investments fund based in London will trigger EU AIFM Directive

China law investment France avocat A 500 million pounds investment into a London-based fund had been announced by the Chinese company Cocoon Networks at a Beijing-London Tech Venture Forum held on the 19^th of January 2016. Two big private equity companies were behind this, namely China Equity Group and Hanxin Capital. This fund is to be expected in place in the next three to seven years with a clear intention on attracting, developing and expanding new tech and innovation startups into China.[1]