Friday, October 03, 2014
Thursday, October 02, 2014
The Devil is in the Retail
A. Italiener, here.
{Of course, with less concentration on both the supplier and retailer sides of the market we could've had, possibly, higher levels of innovation and better choice for consumers. How do you measure that?}
{Of course, with less concentration on both the supplier and retailer sides of the market we could've had, possibly, higher levels of innovation and better choice for consumers. How do you measure that?}
WIPO General Assembly Fails to Draw any Conclusions on Exceptions and Limitations
IFLA.org, here.
(For transparency's sake: this blog's author was part of the team representing IFLA at WIPO GA).
(For transparency's sake: this blog's author was part of the team representing IFLA at WIPO GA).
Tuesday, September 30, 2014
Sunday, September 28, 2014
Saturday, September 27, 2014
Friday, September 26, 2014
Thursday, September 25, 2014
M. et Mme X et M. Y / Google France
Tribunal de grande instance de Paris, Ordonnance de référé du 16 septembre 2014, ici.
Wednesday, September 24, 2014
Tuesday, September 23, 2014
Translation and intellectual property rights
Bird&Bird for the European Commission (DG Translation), here.
Monday, September 22, 2014
Harper Competition Review Draft Report
Here.
A few selected topics:
Taxi industry and disruptive innovation
P.30: "States and Territories should remove regulations that restrict competition in the taxi industry, including from services that compete with taxis, except where it would not be in the public interest.
If restrictions on numbers of taxi licences are to be retained, the number to be issued should be determined by independent regulators focused on the interests of consumers."
P. 139: "Mobile technologies are emerging that compete with traditional taxi booking services and support the emergence of innovative passenger transport services. Any regulation of such services should be consumer-focused and not inhibit innovation or protect existing business models."
IP and competition policy
P.31: "The Panel recommends that an overarching review of intellectual property be undertaken by an independent body, such as the Productivity Commission. The review should focus on competition policy issues in intellectual property arising from new developments in technology and markets.
The review should also assess the principles and processes followed by the Australian Government when establishing negotiating mandates to incorporate intellectual property provisions in international trade agreements.
Trade negotiations should be informed by an independent and transparent analysis of the costs and benefits to Australia of any proposed IP provisions. Such an analysis should be undertaken and published before negotiations are concluded."
{P. 80-87 are already on my students' mandatory reading list.}
RPM and Retail MFN
P. 46 f.: "The Panel considers that there is not a sufficient case at this time for changing the prohibition of RPM from a per se prohibition to a competition based test. It would be appropriate, though, to allow business to seek exemption from the prohibition more easily. This could be achieved through allowing RPM to be assessed through the notification process, which is quicker and less expensive for businesses than authorisation. This change would also have the advantage of allowing the ACCC to assess RPM trading strategies more frequently, and thereby provide better evidence as to the competitive effects of RPM in Australia."
P. 234 f.: "Historically, RPM has been considered in the context of ‘bricks and mortar’ retailers. RPM is now emerging as an issue for new models of digital-based retailing. eBay states, based on annual surveys of its sellers, that around a quarter of sellers are instructed by their suppliers to sell at recommended retail prices (...)
RPM in digital markets also recently received significant international legal attention when Apple was found to have breached EU and US competition laws
by fixing the prices of e-books in collaboration with five publishers."
Big Data, Personal Data Protection and Competition Policy
P.129: "Markets work best when consumers are engaged, empowering them to make informed decisions. There is capacity to enhance Australian consumers’access to data on their own usage of utility services in a usable format to assist consumers to make better informed decisions.
A few selected topics:
Taxi industry and disruptive innovation
P.30: "States and Territories should remove regulations that restrict competition in the taxi industry, including from services that compete with taxis, except where it would not be in the public interest.
If restrictions on numbers of taxi licences are to be retained, the number to be issued should be determined by independent regulators focused on the interests of consumers."
P. 139: "Mobile technologies are emerging that compete with traditional taxi booking services and support the emergence of innovative passenger transport services. Any regulation of such services should be consumer-focused and not inhibit innovation or protect existing business models."
IP and competition policyP.31: "The Panel recommends that an overarching review of intellectual property be undertaken by an independent body, such as the Productivity Commission. The review should focus on competition policy issues in intellectual property arising from new developments in technology and markets.
The review should also assess the principles and processes followed by the Australian Government when establishing negotiating mandates to incorporate intellectual property provisions in international trade agreements.
Trade negotiations should be informed by an independent and transparent analysis of the costs and benefits to Australia of any proposed IP provisions. Such an analysis should be undertaken and published before negotiations are concluded."
{P. 80-87 are already on my students' mandatory reading list.}
RPM and Retail MFN
P. 46 f.: "The Panel considers that there is not a sufficient case at this time for changing the prohibition of RPM from a per se prohibition to a competition based test. It would be appropriate, though, to allow business to seek exemption from the prohibition more easily. This could be achieved through allowing RPM to be assessed through the notification process, which is quicker and less expensive for businesses than authorisation. This change would also have the advantage of allowing the ACCC to assess RPM trading strategies more frequently, and thereby provide better evidence as to the competitive effects of RPM in Australia."
P. 234 f.: "Historically, RPM has been considered in the context of ‘bricks and mortar’ retailers. RPM is now emerging as an issue for new models of digital-based retailing. eBay states, based on annual surveys of its sellers, that around a quarter of sellers are instructed by their suppliers to sell at recommended retail prices (...)
RPM in digital markets also recently received significant international legal attention when Apple was found to have breached EU and US competition laws
by fixing the prices of e-books in collaboration with five publishers."
Big Data, Personal Data Protection and Competition Policy
P.129: "Markets work best when consumers are engaged, empowering them to make informed decisions. There is capacity to enhance Australian consumers’access to data on their own usage of utility services in a usable format to assist consumers to make better informed decisions.
e
-
books
in collaboration with fivepublishers."
Friday, September 19, 2014
Thursday, September 18, 2014
Le secteur des autoroutes après la privatisation des sociétés concessionnaires
Autorité de la concurrence, ici.
The Internet: Just Another Distribution Channel? EU and U.S. Competition Policy Approaches to E- Commerce
J. Wahl, S. Troost and C. Buts, here.
NewsCorp: Google is a 'platform for piracy'
BBC, here. Letter here.
"Google is commodifying the audience of specialist publishers and limiting their ability to generate advertising revenue. Data aggregators attempt to sell audiences at a steep discount to the original source, for example, access to 75 per cent of The Wall Street Journal demographic at 25 per cent of the price, thus undermining the business model of the content creator. This process is at a relatively early stage and needs constant monitoring to ensure that abuses are halted and that there is a fair return for newspapers, publishers and other investors in original content."
"Google is commodifying the audience of specialist publishers and limiting their ability to generate advertising revenue. Data aggregators attempt to sell audiences at a steep discount to the original source, for example, access to 75 per cent of The Wall Street Journal demographic at 25 per cent of the price, thus undermining the business model of the content creator. This process is at a relatively early stage and needs constant monitoring to ensure that abuses are halted and that there is a fair return for newspapers, publishers and other investors in original content."
Wednesday, September 17, 2014
10 Comments on the ECJ’s Judgment in Case C-67/13 P, Groupement des Cartes Bancaire
ChillingCompetition, here.
Tuesday, September 16, 2014
Groupement des Cartes Bancaires and the resilience of the case law on restrictions by object
Chillingcompetition.com, here.
Monday, September 15, 2014
Authors United Sends Open Letter to Amazon Board, Filled With Bad Arguments and Factual Errors
The-digital-reader.com, here.
Friday, September 12, 2014
Wednesday, September 10, 2014
Tuesday, September 09, 2014
Monday, September 08, 2014
Sunday, September 07, 2014
Saturday, September 06, 2014
Friday, September 05, 2014
L’Autorité de la concurrence s’inquiète de l’intégration verticale des géants du Web
Larevuedudigital.com, ici.
«...dans le cas de l’enquête sur Booking.com et Expedia qui imposent aux hôteliers de ne pas vendre moins cher que sur leurs plateformes, nous nous associons aux autres autorités, car c’est un frein à la concurrence»
«...dans le cas de l’enquête sur Booking.com et Expedia qui imposent aux hôteliers de ne pas vendre moins cher que sur leurs plateformes, nous nous associons aux autres autorités, car c’est un frein à la concurrence»
Thursday, September 04, 2014
Wednesday, September 03, 2014
Engineering a Market for Personal Data: The Hub-of-all-Things (HAT)
RCUK Digital Economy HAT Project, here.
Tuesday, September 02, 2014
Auditing Algorithms: Research Methods for Detecting Discrimination on Internet Platforms
C. Sandvig, K. Hamilton, K. Karahalios, C. Langbort, here.
Value of a Platform to a Seller: Case of American Airlines and Online Travel Agencies
V. Bilotkach, N. Rupp, V. Pai, here.
Saturday, August 30, 2014
Friday, August 29, 2014
Thursday, August 28, 2014
Wednesday, August 27, 2014
Tuesday, August 26, 2014
Monday, August 25, 2014
Saturday, August 23, 2014
Friday, August 22, 2014
Thursday, August 21, 2014
Google processes 1 million removal requests per day for alleged copyright infringement
Futureofcopyright.com, here.
Müssen Google und Facebook gezähmt werden?
FAZ, hier.
"betont das Bundeskartellamt in einem internen Bericht, der dieser Zeitung vorliegt". Gerne der breiteren Öffentlichkeit bekannt machen!
"betont das Bundeskartellamt in einem internen Bericht, der dieser Zeitung vorliegt". Gerne der breiteren Öffentlichkeit bekannt machen!
Digitale Agenda: Bundesregierung legt Pflichtenheft für die digitale Gesellschaft vor
Heise.de, hier. Agenda hier.
"Spezifisch" zum Urheberrecht:
S. 15:
rechtliche Rahmenbedingungen anpassen"; Haftungsprivileg bändigen; kollektive Rechtewahrnehmung stärken; an der Überprüfung des europäischen Urheberrechts aktiv
mitwirken.
S. 27:
"Um die Potenziale für Wissenschaft, Forschung und Bildung
voll zu nutzen, werden wir die urheberrechtlich
zulässige Nutzung von geschützten Inhalten zu diesen
Zwecken verbessern. Insbesondere soll eine Bildungs- und
Wissenschaftsschranke eingeführt werden".
S. 29:
"Wir stellen – soweit urheberrechtlich zulässig – digitalisierte
Kulturgüter und deren Metadaten offen und
möglichst unentgeltlich zur Verfügung."
Zum Kartellrecht:
S. 15:
"Wir werden sicherstellen, dass Innovationen und Wettbewerb
nicht durch missbräuchliches Verhalten marktbeherrschender
Internetkonzerne behindert werden. Wir
setzen uns für eine strikte Anwendung nationaler und
europäischer kartellrechtlicher Vorschriften ein und prüfen,
inwieweit diese unter den sich dynamisch entwickelnden
technologischen und wirtschaftlichen Bedingungen
der globalen Datenökonomie fortzuentwickeln sind. Insbesondere
prüfen wir, wie die Nichtdiskriminierung von
Wettbewerbern durch marktbeherrschende Plattformbetreiber
und ein diskriminierungsfreier, neutraler Zugang
zu Distributionswegen und Inhalten sichergestellt werden
können. Internetspezifische Kartellrechtsfragen werden
durch Fachgutachten aufgearbeitet."
"Spezifisch" zum Urheberrecht:
S. 15:
rechtliche Rahmenbedingungen anpassen"; Haftungsprivileg bändigen; kollektive Rechtewahrnehmung stärken; an der Überprüfung des europäischen Urheberrechts aktiv
mitwirken.
S. 27:
"Um die Potenziale für Wissenschaft, Forschung und Bildung
voll zu nutzen, werden wir die urheberrechtlich
zulässige Nutzung von geschützten Inhalten zu diesen
Zwecken verbessern. Insbesondere soll eine Bildungs- und
Wissenschaftsschranke eingeführt werden".
S. 29:
"Wir stellen – soweit urheberrechtlich zulässig – digitalisierte
Kulturgüter und deren Metadaten offen und
möglichst unentgeltlich zur Verfügung."
Zum Kartellrecht:
S. 15:
"Wir werden sicherstellen, dass Innovationen und Wettbewerb
nicht durch missbräuchliches Verhalten marktbeherrschender
Internetkonzerne behindert werden. Wir
setzen uns für eine strikte Anwendung nationaler und
europäischer kartellrechtlicher Vorschriften ein und prüfen,
inwieweit diese unter den sich dynamisch entwickelnden
technologischen und wirtschaftlichen Bedingungen
der globalen Datenökonomie fortzuentwickeln sind. Insbesondere
prüfen wir, wie die Nichtdiskriminierung von
Wettbewerbern durch marktbeherrschende Plattformbetreiber
und ein diskriminierungsfreier, neutraler Zugang
zu Distributionswegen und Inhalten sichergestellt werden
können. Internetspezifische Kartellrechtsfragen werden
durch Fachgutachten aufgearbeitet."
Wednesday, August 20, 2014
Tuesday, August 19, 2014
Octane Fitness May Require a Summary Judgment Motion for an Exceptional Case Findings
Retailpatentlitigation.com, here.
At the Edge of the License: Where the ODbL Ends and the Community Guidelines Begin
Blog.openstreemap.org, here.
Monday, August 18, 2014
Sunday, August 17, 2014
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
-
Don't look for it in Rome... Nearly two months on, the Commission’s DMA non-compliance decision against Meta was finally published... -
And two seconds later she did block me 😇- nothing personal, ofc. Just belonging myself to one of those DMA groupies as annoying as mosqu... -
P. Samuelson, here.
-
D. Baldacci, here.
-
Orf.at, hier (Max Schrems ab 9:34).
-
Podcast, here.
-
T. Höppner, here.
-
Not the usual Competition Commissioner's statement. Whole-of-Commission Approach? EC, here . [Dutch company buying an US company, mind...