Browse by title

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 585 items :

  • Information and Media Law x
Clear All
This content is available to you

Edited by Alistair S. Duff

You do not have access to this content

Edited by Alistair S. Duff

This comprehensive and innovative Research Handbook tackles the pressing issues confronting us at the dawn of the global network society, including freedom of speech, government transparency and the digital divide. Engaging with controversial problems of public policy including freedom of expression, copyright and information inequality, the Research Handbook on Information Policy offers a well-rounded exploration of the history and future of this vital field.
This content is available to you

Marc Barennes, Tessel Bossen, Hans Bousie and Sarah Subrémon

Several legal topics regarding cartel damages litigation have drawn special attention over the last few years, including the passing-on defence. ‘Passing-on’ in competition cases is where overcharges caused by a cartel, which affect the customers of the cartelists (direct purchasers), are passed-on by these purchasers to buyers further down the supply chain (indirect purchasers). Cartel members regularly invoke this defence as a (partial) shield against a claim for damages. The EU Damages Directive contains two important presumptions in connection to passed-on damages. This article undertakes a comparative analysis of how the courts in the Netherlands, France and England and Wales apply these presumptions in practice in their case law.

You do not have access to this content

Gönenç Gürkaynak, Kansu Aydoğan Yeşilaltay and Zeynep Ayata Aydoğan

This article examines the recent proposals and reports on the regulation of digital mergers in the European Union, United Kingdom, United States and other jurisdictions, with a particular focus on the proposals for presumptions against mergers. It argues that any intervention in digital mergers needs to calibrate a balance between preventing excessive levels of market concentration and promoting innovation and that any departure from existing laws should be justified. Against this background, this article concludes that the recent arguments for lowering the threshold for blocking digital mergers undermines the risk of chilling innovation and losing significant efficiencies, and does not rely on concrete evidence and sound economic theories.

You do not have access to this content

Christopher Vajda

Following the expiry on 31 December 2020 of the ‘transition period’ under the UK/EU Withdrawal Agreement, the relationship between UK and EU law had changed. Whilst much EU legislation at that date will continue to apply in UK law as ‘retained EU law’ and judgments of the EU courts handed down before that date will remain binding on UK courts as ‘retained EU case law’, the Court of Appeal and Supreme Court can depart from that case law. Whilst EU court judgments handed down after that date are not binding on UK courts, they may be taken into account. This article considers both the status of EU retained case law and when the Supreme Court and Court of Appeal may depart from it, and the future of EU law that is not ‘retained EU case law’ and how judgments of the European Courts and national courts of its Member States may influence UK judges in the future.

You do not have access to this content

Andrew Mell and Gareth Shier

Around the world, competition agencies and academics alike have raised concerns that the existing suite of policy tools and economic theory fail to capture all of the harms that can arise in digital markets. At the same time, other academics and practitioners consider that competition policy and industrial organization is unable to account for many of the benefits that online platforms and digital ecosystems can bring.

As a range of new interventions – ranging from strengthened ex-post enforcement tools to new ex-ante regulations – are being proposed, we ask which view is right? Are the business practices observed in digital markets and targeted by these reforms so obviously harmful that they are deserving of a return to form-based prohibitions in place of effects-based analysis? Or does this represent an unhelpful regression, based on a misunderstanding of how these new types of markets function?

This content is available to you

Edited by Sharon K. Sandeen, Christoph Rademacher and Ansgar Ohly

You do not have access to this content

Edited by Sharon K. Sandeen, Christoph Rademacher and Ansgar Ohly

This fresh and insightful Research Handbook delivers global perspectives on information law and governance, delving into principles of information law in the areas of trade secrecy, privacy, data protection and cybersecurity.
This content is available to you

Pier Luigi Parcu and Elda Brogi

Defining EU media law, and the broader concept of EU media policy, is more challenging today than in the past, and inevitably includes dealing with the construction and interpretation of the regulation of digital services, also in a de iure condendo perspective. It must be stressed, that the field of digital services regulation not only affects an increasingly decisive economic sector, but goes beyond mere market issues, investing the social and political significance of media and “non-media” platforms. In fact, the media ecosystem has faced an obvious metamorphosis and a deep disruption over the last three decades. The extraordinary evolution of audiovisual and communication services has probably precipitated the conditions for wider EU intervention and jurisdiction in a field where national member states, taken in isolation, risk being overwhelmed.