340 Recht
Refine
Year of publication
- 2012 (110)
- 2020 (53)
- 2021 (43)
- 2018 (38)
- 2022 (37)
- 2016 (31)
- 2015 (30)
- 2017 (30)
- 2013 (27)
- 2019 (27)
- 2014 (21)
- 2003 (14)
- 2008 (12)
- 2002 (9)
- 2005 (9)
- 2004 (8)
- 2024 (8)
- 1993 (7)
- 2001 (7)
- 2010 (7)
- 2011 (7)
- 2023 (7)
- 1996 (6)
- 1999 (5)
- 2000 (5)
- 2009 (5)
- 1998 (4)
- 1990 (3)
- 1992 (3)
- 1997 (3)
- 2006 (3)
- 2007 (3)
- 1991 (2)
- 1994 (2)
- 1770 (1)
- 1908 (1)
- 1913 (1)
- 1927 (1)
- 1982 (1)
- 1985 (1)
- 1989 (1)
- 1995 (1)
Document Type
- Article (224)
- Working Paper (164)
- Conference Proceeding (104)
- Review (39)
- Part of a Book (15)
- Book (12)
- Doctoral Thesis (12)
- Report (10)
- Part of Periodical (9)
- Preprint (3)
Language
- English (594) (remove)
Has Fulltext
- yes (594) (remove)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (594)
Keywords
- global justice (16)
- Deutschland (14)
- European Union (11)
- climate change (11)
- human rights (11)
- Democracy (10)
- Internet (8)
- justice (8)
- Corporate Governance (7)
- Law (7)
Institute
- Rechtswissenschaft (368)
- Gesellschaftswissenschaften (131)
- Wirtschaftswissenschaften (62)
- Sustainable Architecture for Finance in Europe (SAFE) (57)
- House of Finance (HoF) (50)
- Foundation of Law and Finance (47)
- Center for Financial Studies (CFS) (44)
- Exzellenzcluster Die Herausbildung normativer Ordnungen (41)
- Institute for Law and Finance (ILF) (12)
- LOEWE-Schwerpunkt Außergerichtliche und gerichtliche Konfliktlösung (10)
The lack of a European Deposit Insurance Scheme (EDIS) – often referred to as the ‘third pillar’ of Banking Union – has been criticized since the inception of the EU Banking Union. The Crisis Management and Deposit Insurance (CMDI) framework needs to rely heavily on banks’ internal loss absorbing capacity and provides little flexibility in terms of industry resolution funding. This design has, among others, led to the rare application of the CMDI, particularly in the case of small and medium sized retail banks. This reluctance of resolution authorities weakens any positive impact the CMDI may have on market discipline and ultimately financial stability. After several national governments pushed back against the establishment of an EDIS, the Commission recently took a different approach and tried to reform the CMDI comprehensively, without seeking to erect a ‘third pillar’. The overarching rationale of the CMDI Proposal is to make resolution funding more flexible. To this end, the proposal seeks to facilitate contributions from (national) deposit guarantee schemes (DGS). At the same time, the CMDI Proposal tries to broaden the scope of resolution to include smaller and medium sized banks. This paper provides an assessment of the CMDI Proposal. It argues that the CMDI Proposal is a step in the right direction but cannot overcome fundamental deficiencies in the design of the Banking Union.
Regulating IP exclusion/inclusion on a global scale: the example of copyright vs. AI training
(2024)
This article builds upon the literature on inclusion/inclusivity in IP law by applying these concepts to the example of the scraping and mining of copyright-protected content for the purpose of training an artificial intelligence (AI) system or model. Which mode of operation dominates in this technological area: exclusion, inclusion or even inclusivity? The features of AI training appear to call for universal and sustainable “inclusivity” instead of a mere voluntary “inclusion” of AI provider bots by copyright holders. As the overview on the copyright status of AI training activities in different jurisdictions and emerging laws on AI safety (such as the EU AI Act) demonstrates, the global regulatory landscape is, however, much too fragmented and dynamic to immediately jump to an inclusive global AI regime. For the time being, legally secure global AI training requires the voluntary cooperation between AI providers and copyright holders, and innovative techno-legal reasoning is needed on how to effectuate this inclusion.
Regulators worldwide have been implementing different privacy laws. They vary in their impact on the value for advertisers, publishers and users, but not much is known about these differences. This article focuses on three important privacy laws (i.e., General Data Protection Regulation [GDPR], California Consumer Privacy Act [CCPA] and Personal Information Protection Law [PIPL]) and compares their impact on the value for the three primary actors of the online advertising market, namely, advertisers, publishers and users. This article first compares these three privacy laws by developing a legal strictness score. It then uses the existing literature to derive the effects of the legal strictness of each privacy law on each actor’s value. Finally, it quantifies the three privacy laws’ impact on each actor’s value. The results show that GDPR and PIPL are similar and stricter than CCPA. Stricter privacy laws bring larger negative changes to the value for actors. As a result, both GDPR and PIPL decrease the actors’ value more substantially than CCPA. These value declines are the largest for publishers and are rather similar for users and advertisers. Scholars and practitioners can use our findings to explore ways to create value for multiple actors under various privacy laws.
The EU Commission proposed a regulation on artificial intelligence (AI) on 21 April 2021, which categorizes the use of AI in “social credit” as a prohibited application. This paper examines the definition and structure of the Social Credit System in China, which comprises various systems operating at different levels and sectors. The analysis focuses on two main subsystems: the database and one-stop inquiry platform for financial credit records, and the social governance tool designed to facilitate legal and political compliance. The development of the commercial customer credit reference is also explored. This paper further discusses the impacts and concerns associated with the implementation of the Chinese social credit system to raise awareness. The objective is to offer insights from the existing system and contribute to the ongoing discussion on regulating AI applications in social credit within the EU.
The Russian invasion of Ukraine illustrates the increasingly judicialized nature of international relations and geopolitics. By viewing aspects of the invasion as illegal – in particular through the identification of war crimes and crimes against humanity – the international response draws attention to the political geographies of international criminal investigation. Human rights groups, academics, journalists, and open-source forensic investigations have joined forces to collect, evaluate and analyze the violent nature of war crimes. While similar shifts in evidence gathering have been observed in the case of the Bosnia-Herzegovina war and the Assad regime's violence against Syrian citizens, the use of evidence-gathering technologies and evidence-securing institutions in the case of Ukraine is distinctive. In this scholarly intervention we seek to illustrate the intimate geopolitics of evidence gathering by zooming in on two different elements that shape evidential procedures in Ukraine: i) the blurring of civilian/military boundaries; and ii) the challenges of access. By evaluating what is new and what is similar to previous war sites, we suggest that these two areas reflect a geopolitics of evidence gathering, highlighting its global-local intimacies. Both these areas are well positioned to foster new research on the (geo)legal nature of war crimes in political geography and beyond.
Virtual currencies have gained popularity as part of the digital transformation of the financial system. In particular stablecoins are becoming increasingly popular with consumers. The tokens, which are pegged to a value and - according to their name - promise price stability, pose significant risks from which consumers need to be protected. This article focuses first on consumerspecific risks (B.) and German consumer protection law and in particular on the applicability of a right of withdrawal from the acquisition of stablecoins (C.). Subsequently, the EU legislator’s effort to minimize price stability as well as transparency and exchangeability risks, the Markets in Crypto-assets Regulation (2023/1114), is examined in terms of its consumer protection instruments (D.).
The Russian invasion of Ukraine illustrates the increasingly judicialized nature of international relations and geopolitics. By viewing aspects of the invasion as illegal – in particular through the identification of war crimes and crimes against humanity – the international response draws attention to the political geographies of international criminal investigation. Human rights groups, academics, journalists, and open-source forensic investigations have joined forces to collect, evaluate and analyze the violent nature of war crimes. While similar shifts in evidence gathering have been observed in the case of the Bosnia-Herzegovina war and the Assad regime's violence against Syrian citizens, the use of evidence-gathering technologies and evidence-securing institutions in the case of Ukraine is distinctive. In this scholarly intervention we seek to illustrate the intimate geopolitics of evidence gathering by zooming in on two different elements that shape evidential procedures in Ukraine: i) the blurring of civilian/military boundaries; and ii) the challenges of access. By evaluating what is new and what is similar to previous war sites, we suggest that these two areas reflect a geopolitics of evidence gathering, highlighting its global-local intimacies. Both these areas are well positioned to foster new research on the (geo)legal nature of war crimes in political geography and beyond.
The Åland Islands archipelago enjoys a special international status sui generis, which essentially encompasses demilitarisation, neutralisation, and autonomy. This status is guaranteed under international law by the agreements of 1921, 1940, and 1947, which are still in force. Furthermore, there are convincing reasons to assume that the Åland Islands regime has grown into European customary law. By virtue of her international (treaty) obligations, Finland cannot unilaterally change this status under the present conditions, irrespective of domestic (constitutional) decisions. While integration into NATO’s collective defence system and the EU’s Common Security and Defence Policy structures is compatible with the special status of the Åland Islands, care must be taken by Finland and her partners to ensure that the obligations arising from these developments are fulfilled in accordance with the demilitarised and neutralised status of the archipelago. This includes that the use by Finnish troops for preventive defence, beyond the exceptions laid down in the 1921 Åland Agreement, is only permitted in the case (of threat) of an immediate and clearly identifiable attack.
The autonomous character of the Åland Islands was established under a League of Nations dispute settlement and implemented, inter alia, in Finnish legislation. Its essence even grew into customary law. The arrangements of 1921, however, do not constitute a bilateral treaty between Finland and Sweden. The UN assumes that the international mechanism to protect Åland’s autonomy did not become obsolete with the demise of the League of Nations, but was only “suspended until such time as an express decision has been taken by the United Nations to put it back into force”. A corresponding proposal could be submitted, in any case, both by Finland and/or Sweden or possibly even by any other UN member state, for discussion in the Sixth Committee. However, the final decision to re-activate this special mechanism would have to be adopted by the UN General Assembly.
EU Law applies to the Åland Islands in principle; however, Finland’s Accession Treaty to the EU to which Protocol No. 2 on the Åland Islands was annexed, established a number of specific rules which are still in force today. This, most notably, results in the limited application of value added tax and excise duties in the Åland Islands. Therefore, the rules on customs procedures apply with respect to the movement of goods to and from the Åland Islands. In addition, other provisions of Union law, in particular those relating to fundamental freedoms and European state aid law, may be relevant in view of the special fiscal status of the Åland Islands. However, assessing individual cases would require further information and in-depth studies. Irrespective of the requirements set out in the said Protocol, the EU is obliged to respect the national identity of Member States pursuant to Article 4 para. 2 TEU; this obligation includes respect for the special status of the Åland Islands under both international and Finnish constitutional law.
Corporate governance is the set of rules, be they legal or self-regulatory, practices and processes pursuant to which an insurance undertaking is administrated. Good corporate governance is not only key to establishing oneself and succeeding in a competitive environment but also to safeguarding the interests of all stakeholders in an insurance undertaking. It is insofar not surprising that mandatory requirements on the administration of insurance undertakings have become rather prolific in recent years, in an attempt by regulators to protect especially policyholders against perceived risks hailing from improperly governed insurance undertakings. In Germany this has been regarded by many undertakings as an overly paternalistic approach of the legislator, especially considering that the German insurance sector has experienced for decades if not centuries a remarkably low number of insolvencies and that German insurers were neither the trigger nor the (especially) endangered actors in the financial crisis commencing in 2007. Notwithstanding the true core of this criticism, that the insurance industry was taken to a certain degree hostage by the shortcomings within the banking sector, the reform of German Insurance Supervisory Law via implementation of the Solvency II-System has brought many advances in the sense of better governance of insurance undertakings and has also brought to light many deficiencies that the administration of some insurance undertakings may have suffered from in the past, which are now more properly addressed.