scholarly journals The importance of regulatory data protection or exclusive use and other forms of intellectual property rights in the crop protection industry

2016 ◽  
Vol 72 (9) ◽  
pp. 1631-1637 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael J Carroll
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Data Protection ◽  
Crop Protection ◽  
Regulatory Data

scholarly journals Report from the DCC Workshop: Legal Environment of Digital Curation

2008 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 133-142 ◽  
Author(s):  
Angus Whyte
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Data Protection ◽  
Freedom Of Information ◽  
Legal Environment ◽  
Legal Professionals ◽  
Digital Curation ◽  
Law And Technology

This is a report from the Legal Environment of Digital Curation workshop held at Glasgow University on November 23, 2007. The event provided an overview of legal considerations for non-legal professionals who work with data, focusing especially on intellectual property rights and licensing, data protection, freedom of information and privacy, and data as evidence. The workshop was organised in conjunction with the SCRIPT-ed journal of law and technology, and supported by JISC, the AHRC and Edinburgh University.

scholarly journals Against the dehumanisation of decision-making. Algorithmic decisions at the crossroads of intellectual property, data protection, and freedom of information

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Guido Noto La Diega
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Data Protection ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Freedom Of Information ◽  
Property Data ◽  
The Eu

This work presents ten arguments against algorithmic decision-making. These re-volve around the concepts of ubiquitous discretionary interpretation, holistic intu-ition, algorithmic bias, the three black boxes, psychology of conformity, power of sanctions, civilising force of hypocrisy, pluralism, empathy, and technocracy. Nowadays algorithms can decide if one can get a loan, is allowed to cross a bor-der, or must go to prison. Artificial intelligence techniques (natural language pro-cessing and machine learning in the first place) enable private and public deci-sion-makers to analyse big data in order to build profiles, which are used to make decisions in an automated way. The lack of transparency of the algorithmic deci-sion-making process does not stem merely from the characteristics of the relevant techniques used, which can make it impossible to access the rationale of the deci-sion. It depends also on the abuse of and overlap between intellectual property rights (the “legal black box”). In the US, nearly half a million patented inventions concern algorithms; more than 67% of the algorithm-related patents were issued over the last ten years and the trend is increasing. To counter the increased mo-nopolisation of algorithms by means of intellectual property rights (with trade se-crets leading the way), this paper presents three legal routes that enable citizens to ‘open’ the algorithms. First, copyright and patent exceptions, as well as trade se-crets are discussed. Second, the EU General Data Protection Regulation is critical-ly assessed. In principle, data controllers are not allowed to use algorithms to take decisions that have legal effects on the data subject’s life or similarly significantly affect them. However, when they are allowed to do so, the data subject still has the right to obtain human intervention, to express their point of view, as well as to contest the decision. Additionally, the data controller shall provide meaningful in-formation about the logic involved in the algorithmic decision. Third, this paper critically analyses the first known case of a court using the access right under the freedom of information regime to grant an injunction to release the source code of the computer program that implements an algorithm. Only an integrated ap-proach – which takes into account intellectual property, data protection, and free-dom of information – may provide the citizen affected by an algorithmic decision of an effective remedy as required by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU and the European Convention on Human Rights.

PERLINDUNGAN HUKUM TERHADAP KARYA SENI BATIK YANG BELUM TERDAFTAR MENURUT UNDANG-UNDANG NOMOR 28 TAHUN 2014 TENTANG HAK CIPTA

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Inggrit Fernandes
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Cultural Heritage ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Rapid Growth ◽  
Economic Value ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Property Law ◽  
Market Demand ◽  
Work Of Art

Batik artwork is one of the treasures of the nation's cultural heritage. Batik artwork is currently experiencing rapid growth. The amount of interest and market demand for this art resulted batik artwork became one of the commodities in the country and abroad. Thus, if the batik artwork is not protected then the future can be assured of a new conflict arises in the realm of intellectual property law. Act No. 28 of 2014 on Copyright has accommodated artwork batik as one of the creations that are protected by law. So that this work of art than as a cultural heritage also have economic value for its creator. Then how the legal protection of the batik artwork yaang not registered? Does this also can be protected? While in the registration of intellectual property rights is a necessity so that it has the force of law to the work produced

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document