Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (401)
- Working Paper (400)
- Review (260)
- Conference Proceeding (119)
- Part of Periodical (60)
- Part of a Book (58)
- Book (54)
- Doctoral Thesis (39)
- Contribution to a Periodical (38)
- Report (14)
Language
- German (1028)
- English (386)
- Italian (13)
- French (8)
- Multiple languages (8)
- Portuguese (5)
- Spanish (3)
- mis (1)
- Polish (1)
Has Fulltext
- yes (1453) (remove)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (1453)
Keywords
- Deutschland (72)
- Aktienrecht (17)
- Kapitalmarktrecht (16)
- Börsenrecht (12)
- Coronavirus (12)
- Corporate Governance (12)
- Börsenordnung (11)
- USA (11)
- Urheberrecht (11)
- Democracy (10)
Institute
- Rechtswissenschaft (1453) (remove)
Der europäische Arbeitnehmerbegriff ist aus der arbeitsrechtlichen Praxis inzwischen nicht mehr wegzudenken. Das Ausmaß des Einflusses des Europarechts auf das nationale Arbeitsrecht ist insbesondere seit den Entscheidungen des EuGH in den Rechtssachen Danosa (EuGH, 11.11.2010 - C-232/09) und Balkaya (EuGH, 9.7.2015 - C-229/14) zum Arbeitnehmerstatus des Geschäftsführers einer Kapitalgesellschaft erheblich. Dieser Beitrag beleuchtet die Auswirkungen dieser Rechtsprechung auf den nationalen Arbeitnehmerbegriff.
Hassrede und Katzenbilder : Wie können im globalen Netz nationale Gesetze respektiert werden?
(2017)
Der Zugang zum Internet ist die Voraussetzung, um online aktiv zu sein, zu kommunizieren oder einzukaufen. Zugang allein reicht aber nicht: Erst sogenannte Internet-Intermediäre (oder Internet-Inhalt-Vermittler) wie Google, Facebook oder Amazon ermöglichen es, das Internet zu nutzen, um über Social Media zu kommunizieren, auf Musik, Filme und Texte zuzugreifen oder überhaupt erst via Suchmaschine passende Online-Angebote ausfindig zu machen. Intermediäre verbinden Nutzer mit dem Internet, sie helfen bei der Datenverarbeitung, sie hosten und indexieren Inhalte, sie ermöglichen die Suche, sammeln Informationen, vermitteln Angebote Dritter und ermöglichen Käufe und Zahlungen...
The topic of global trade has become central to debates on global justice and on duties to the global poor, two important concerns of contemporary political theory. However, the leading approaches fail to directly address the participants in trade and provide them with normative guidance for making choices in non-ideal circumstances. This paper contributes an account of individuals’ responsibilities for global problems in general, an account of individuals’ responsibilities as market actors, and an explanation of how these responsibilities coexist. The argument is developed through an extended case study of a consumer’s choice between conventional and fair trade coffee. My argument is that the coffee consumer’s choice requires consideration of two distinct responsibilities. First, she has responsibilities to help meet foreigners’ claims for assistance. Second, she has moral responsibilities to ensure that trades, such as between herself and a coffee farmer, are fair rather than exploitative.
The venture capital industry holds relevance for entrepreneurs looking for money to finance an innovative project, investors seeking to make money by investing in entrepreneurial firms and governments trying to promote innovation and entrepreneurship. Venture capital investment could facilitate innovation and thus a better economy.
Venture capital has enabled the U.S. to support its entrepreneurial talent by turning ideas into world-famous products and services, building companies from mere business plans to mature and powerful organizations. Three of the five largest U.S. public companies by market capitalization – Apple, Google and Microsoft – received most of their early external funding from venture capital. Having its ups and downs, venture capital investment in the U.S. expanded from virtually zero in the mid-1970s to $8 billion in 1995 and $49.3 billion in 2014. Venture backed companies have been a prime driver of economic growth in the U.S.Across the pacific, venture capital investment in China has grown out of the transition from a centrally planned economy to a free market economy over the past three decades, becoming an important pillar supporting China’s innovation system. In 2015, a total of 2,824 venture capital investment deals provided an aggregate investment of $36.9 billion. Venture capital has long been a hot topic in China’s capital market, particularly since the government decided to boost “mass entrepreneurship and innovation” in 2014.
In the U.S., most venture capital firms are organized as limited partnerships, with the venture capitalists being general partners and the investors limited partners. Studies have shown that investors choose to invest through venture funds as an intermediary rather than placing their investments directly with the entrepreneurs; because of the high risk nature of the entrepreneur’s business, it is hard for them to get bank loans or direct equity investments. Conflicts may also arise, however, between the venture capitalists acting as agents and the investors as principals.5 This agency problem maybe particularly severe, since venture capital provides money for businesses with high potential and high risk, although the limited partnership has certain merits and is still most commonly chosen as the business form for venture capital funds.6 At the same time, the fact that general partners have total control of the partnership business necessitates that the agency problem is addressed by legal rules, contracts and other mechanisms.
Meanwhile, despite the rapid growth of venture capital investments in China, little attention has been paid to the organizational form of venture capital funds. In contrast to the U.S., most Chinese venture funds have been structured as corporations. One may argue that it was due to legislative reasons: that the limited partnership was not recognized by Chinese law when venture capital first appeared in China. However, after adopted a chapter was adopted in the Partnership Enterprise Law (PEL) governing limited partnerships in 2007, most of the venture funds abided by their choice, while those opting for the limited partnership have encountered difficulties: the limited partners are having trouble trusting the general partners with their money and are therefore interfering with the operation of the partnership business, which may lead to dissolution of the partnership.
This thesis applies transaction cost theory to explain the benefits and costs of choosing the limited partnership as a business form in the special context of venture capital investments, showing that the potential agency conflict between the general partners and the limited partners have been mitigated by legal and other mechanismsin the United States, and that the U.S. investors could therefore exploit the merit of the limited partnership form in venture capital financing. In China, investors have different answers to the agency problem. Similarly to the situation in the U.S., Chinese partners also employ contract terms to deal with agency problems, and the legislators enact laws that aim at regulating the limited partnership form; some legislation was even transplanted from the U.S., such as that part of the PEL which governs limited partnerships. It seems, then, that similar mechanisms that deal with agency problems also exist in China. However, given the unique history of the development of China’s innovation system and venture capital market, the effectiveness of these constraints is questionable. Chinese venture capital investors have therefore characteristically behaved differently to U.S. investors. Rather than relying on these questionable mechanisms, Chinese investors as well as the Chinese government have developed different approaches to addressing these agency problems.
Das zwischenstaatliche Gewaltverbot steht im Zentrum der völkerrechtlichen Aufmerksamkeit. Auf bewaffnete Konflikte auf dem afrikanischen Kontinent trifft dies nur begrenzt zu. An dieses Defizit knüpft die Autorin ab der Zeitwende 1989/90 an. Dabei überschreitet sie die traditionellen Grenzen des Gewaltverbots und analysiert, inwieweit dies, v. a. durch die Fortentwicklung der Menschenrechtslehre, eine inhaltliche Änderungen erfahren hat, die auch die militärische Anwendung von Gewalt im Innern eines Staates ächtet (ius contra bellum internum). Ein weiterer Schwerpunkt sind Interventionen durch Regionalorganisation. Hierbei wird untersucht, ob multilaterale Interventionen schon dann gewohnheitsrechtliche Akzeptanz erfahren, wenn sie entweder formell oder materiell rechtmäßig sind. Zumindest solche, die durch den UN-Sicherheitsrat autorisiert sind, können diese sog. Baugenehmigungsthese für sich in Anspruch nehmen. Doch auch ohne UN-Mandat vermögen humanitäre Interventionen regionaler Organisationen in engen Grenzen völkerrechtmäßig sein.
The mainstream law and economics approach has dominated positive analysis and normative design of economic regulations. This approach represents a form of applied neoclassical and new institutional economics. Neoclassical and/or new institutional economic theories, models, and analytical concepts are applied automatically to economic regulatory problems.
This automatic application of neoclassical economics to economic regulatory problems loses sight of the valid insights of non-neoclassical schools of economic thought and theories, which may illuminate important aspects of the regulatory problems. This thesis, therefore, advocates an integrated law and economics approach to economic regulations. This approach identifies the relevant insights of neoclassical and non-neoclassical schools of thought and theories and refines them through a process of cross-criticism. In this process, the insights of each school of thought are subjected to the critiques of other schools of thought. The resulting refined insights, which are more likely to be valid, are then integrated consistently through various techniques of integration.
Not only does neoclassical (micro and macro) law and economics overlook the valid insights of non-neoclassical schools of thought, it is also highly reductionist. It ignores the interdependencies of legal institutions, highlighted mainly by the comparative capitalism literature, and the structural interlinkages among socio-economic actors, highlighted by economic sociology and complexity economics. Rather, it takes rational individuals and their interactions subject to the constraint of isolated institution(s) as its unit of analysis. In place of this reductionist perspective, the thesis argues for a systemic approach to economic regulations. This systemic perspective replaces the reductionist unit of neoclassical regulatory analysis with a systemic unit of analysis that consists of the least non-decomposable actors’ network and its associated least non-decomposable institutional network. Then, the thesis develops an operationalized and replicable systemic framework for systemic analysis and design of institutional networks.
Both the systemic and integrated approaches are theoretically consistent and complementary. The systemic approach is in essence a way of thinking that requires a broad and rich informational basis that can be secured by using the integrated approach. Due to their complementarity, they give rise to what I call “the integrated and systemic law and economics approach.” The thesis operationalizes this approach by setting out well-defined replicable steps and applying them to concrete regulatory problems, namely, the choice of a corporate governance model for developing countries and the development of a normative theory of economic regulations. These concrete applications demonstrate the critical bite of the integrated and systemic approach, which reveals significant shortcomings of mainstream law and economics’ answers to these regulatory questions. They also show the constructive potential of the integrated and systemic approach in overcoming the critiques advanced to the neoclassical regulatory conclusions.
The operationalized integrated and systemic approach is both a law and economics as well as a law and development approach. It does not only provide an alternative to mainstream law and economics analysis and design of economic regulations. It also fills a significant analytical lacuna in the law and development literature that lacks an analytical framework for analysis and design of context-specific legal institutions that can promote economic development in developing economies.
Der urheberrechtlich konnotierte Begriff des Plagiats zählt zu den anerkannten Grundtatbeständen wissenschaftlichen Fehlverhaltens. Der Beitrag zeigt indes, dass das Urheberrecht und das Wissenschaftsrecht keine konzentrischen Kreise bilden, sondern unterschiedliche Zwecke mit je anderen Regelungskonzepten verfolgen. Die Übernahme urheberrechtlicher Argumentationsmuster in die Wissenschaftsethik und das Wissenschaftsrecht erschwert die Herausbildung spezifisch wissenschaftsbezogener Kriterien zur Beurteilung wissenschaftlichen Fehlverhaltens. Als Alternative entwickelt der Beitrag ein Konzept wissenschaftlicher Redlichkeit, das sich am Recht gegen unlauteren Wettbewerb orientiert. Dazu werden weitreichende teleologische und strukturelle Gemeinsamkeiten des Lauterkeitsrechts und der Regeln zu wissenschaftlichem Fehlverhalten aufgedeckt. Insbesondere verfolgen beide Materien eine funktionale Teleologie. Das Lauterkeitsrecht gewährleistet die Funktionsbedingungen des wirtschaftlichen Wettbewerbs, das Verbot wissenschaftlichen Fehlverhaltens sichert die Funktionsbedingungen und damit zugleich den Zielerreichungsgrad des offenen Wissenschaftsprozesses und des Wettbewerbs um wissenschaftliche Reputation.
This paper reexamines the current legal landscape regarding the protection of trade marks and other industrial property rights in signs on the Internet. It is based on a comparative analysis of EU and national laws, in particular, German, U.S., and U.K. law. It starts with a short restatement of the principles governing trade mark conflicts that occur within a particular jurisdiction (part 2) and proceeds to the regulation of transnational disputes (part 3). This juxtaposition yields two basic approaches. Whereas trade mark conflicts within closed legal systems are generally adjudicated according to a binary either/or logic, transnational disputes are and should indeed be solved in a way that leads to a fair coexistence of conflicting trade mark laws and rights under multiple laws. This paper explains how geolocation technologies can alleviate the implementation of the principle of fair coexistence in concrete cases.