A Comparison of the Legal Protection of Databases in the United States and EU: Implications for Scientific Research

2010 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mitchell Smith
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Scientific Research ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
The United States

scholarly journals Perlindungan Konsumen atas Metode Penawaran Negative Option di Indonesia

2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 111
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Anastasia ◽  
Dwi Sekar Ningrum ◽  
William Marthianus ◽  
Willis Patrick Onggo
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Service Provider ◽  
Service Providers ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
The United States ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
Telecommunications Services ◽  
Financial Losses

Negative Option Method is a bidding method that requires confirmation from consumers in accepting or rejecting an offer. If the customer doesn’t provide confirmation, the business actor assumes that the consumer agrees and will be charged a fee for the offer given. The Negative Option method originating from the United States has actually developed in Indonesia, especially in the provision of telecommunications services. It is not uncommon for Telecommunications Service Providers in Indonesia to offer a particular feature that requires confirmation of rejection or cancellation from consumers via message, such as "unreg". If the consumer does not provide confirmation, the business actor will unilaterally assume that the Customer has accepted the offer, thus often resulting in the consumer experiencing financial losses due to the imposition of costs for goods and / or services without the consent of the consumer. This encourages the author to conduct legal research on consumer legal protection of the Negative Option bidding method using the normative juridical method. This legal research concludes that the Negative Option bidding method is contrary to the Minister of Communications Regulation Article 2 paragraph (3) and Article 4 paragraph (1) letter a which specifies that each Telecommunications Service Provider must obtain written and/or message approval from the Customer to activate a paid feature. If the Telecommunications Service Provider has not received approval from the Customer, then the paid feature must be stopped.

Lessons Learned from the Canada–China FIPA for the US–China BIT and beyond

2019 ◽  
pp. 116-141 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kyle Dylan Dickson-Smith
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
The United States ◽  
International Investment ◽  
Economic Benefits ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Investment Protection ◽  
The Us ◽  
Investment Agreements

Key lessons can be made from analysing a unique and recent BIT, the Canada–China Foreign Investment Protection Agreement (FIPA), in order better to predict and identify the opportunities and challenges for potential BIT counterparties of China (such as the United States, the European Union (EU), India, the Gulf Cooperation Council, and Columbia). The Canada–China FIPA and the anticipated US–China BIT (and EU–China BIT) collectively fall into a unique class of investment agreements, in that they represent a convergence of diverse ideologies of international investment norms/protections with two distinct (East/West) underlying domestic legal and economic systems. The purpose of this chapter is to appreciate and utilize the legal content of the Canada–China FIPA in order to isolate the opportunities and challenges for investment agreements currently under negotiation (focusing on the US–China BIT). This analysis is conducted from the perspective of China’s traditional BIT practice and political–economic goals, relative to that of its counterparty. This chapter briefly addresses the economic and broader diplomatic relationship between China and Canada, comparing that with the United States. It then analyses a broad selection of key substantive and procedural obligations of the Canada–China FIPA, addressing their impact, individually and cumulatively, to extract what lessons can be learned for the United States (US) and other negotiating parties. This analysis identifies the degree of investment liberalization and legal protection that Canada and China have achieved, and whether these standards are reciprocally applied. The analysis is not divorced from the relevant political economy and negotiating position between China and the counterparty and the perceived economic benefits of each party, as well as any diplomatic sensitive obstacles between the parties. While this chapter does not exhaustively analyse each substantive and procedural right, it provides enough of a comprehensive basis to reveal those challenges that remain for future bilateral negotiations with China.

scholarly journals Need for Legal Protection Against Weight Discrimination in the United States

Obesity ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 28 (10) ◽  
pp. 1784-1785
Author(s):  
Shreya Sabharwal ◽  
Karen J. Campoverde Reyes ◽  
Fatima Cody Stanford
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
The United States ◽  
Weight Discrimination

YURIDICAL ANALYSIS OF THEORY OF THEORY OF ETHICAL FACILITIES DUTIES LAW COMPETITION COMPETITION IN INDONESIA

2018 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 257
Author(s):  
Nandi Wardhana
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
The United States ◽  
European Countries ◽  
Comparative Approach ◽  
Conceptual Approach ◽  
Dominant Firm ◽  
Rule Of Reason ◽  
Sherman Act ◽  
Theory Of Theory

Indonesian competition law today requires a renewal of one of them concerning the doctrine of essential facilities duties. The doctrine essential facilities duties is a doctrine imposed on a dominant business actor who has access to essential facilities to provide access for competing business actors to use the facility. Regulation of essential facilities duties are needed to reduce dominance of a dominant firm in a particular market. This study uses a statutory approach, conceptual approach, and a comparative approach between the arrangements in the United States, Europe and Indonesia. The approach is expected to illustrate, harmonize problems arising, and provide better legal protection in the world of business competition. The doctrine essential facilities duties were first applied in the United States and then followed by European countries. The doctrine of essential facilities duties in the United States is based on the sherman act and uses theapproach rule of reason. The doctrine of essential facilities duties in European countries based on EC focuses on refusal to deal. The doctrine of essential facilities duties is explicitly implied in Law No. 5 of 1999. From this study it is concluded that the regulation on essential facilities duties in Law No. 5 of 1999 still can not provide a good legal protection for business competition in Indonesia.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document