Suchergebnisse

I will talk a bit about the politics of international intellectual property, and specifically about ISDS—Investor State Dispute Settlement. International intellectual property law, especially over the last twenty years or so, has been an incredibly contested field. The last big treaty in this area—the AntiCounterfeiting Trade Agreement —was met on its release by the mobilization of roughly 300,000 people across Europe marching in the streets. People were marching to oppose the substance of the agreement. They believed that its measures combatting piracy were invading personal rights and the liberties of Internet users. And they opposed the treaty's process. People marched against the treaty's highly secretive process. They demanded that rules with such general applications should be subject to more democratic processes. There is struggle not just on the streets, but between industry groups. Steve mentioned the potential differences of perspectives between the tech community on one side—the Googles, Yahoos, Facebooks of the world—and the content producers on the other—the movie and music industries. Copyright is subject to intense political debate, and those debates are what I call "nested."

There are three specific purposes of this book. First, this volume aims to summarise studies on construction dispute. Second, apart from the theoretical constructs, where appropriate empirical tests are also included. This approach serves to go beyond the commonly used anecdotal approach for the subject matters. Third, it is the sincere hope of the authors that this book will help shaping research agenda of construction dispute. The studies are mostly framed from a management perspective drawing on methods and concepts in contract law, economics, psychology and management science. The studies presented in this book collectively demonstrate holistic approach in dispute management. Each chapter can be read as a study on its own. Practitioners will find the book a handy reference in dispute management and resolution. Students would find the book useful in explaining in details the causes of dispute, the processes to resolve them. The research design and empirical approaches are particularly useful to students in construction management, architectural, surveying and civil engineering programs. --

Undergirding really all the discussion that we've been having today is a fundamental truth that hasn't actually been articulated. I wanted to just give that voice as I begin my remarks, and that is: foreign piracy of copyrighted works is widespread, pervasive, and persistent. It's been going on for decades. You can go back and read the Special 301 reports that Probir and his predecessors, including Stan, have overseen and published, going back to the 1980s. And there is massive theft. The mode and methodology has changed over the years, but there's a real problem out there. For a period of time, we were able to address that through norm setting, the WIPO, but the problem there is there was no real enforcement mechanism. It has this International Court of Justice adjudication, but there were really no teeth to that. So it was really left to a matter of bilateral political pressure, and even the trade sanctions. And back in that age, that era, the United States did impose trade sanctions on occasion, bilaterally, unilaterally. With the adoption of the TRIPS agreement as part of the WTO, we have both a more modern and extensive set of standards, including enforcement standards, which generally didn't exist in WIPO documents. And we have a dispute resolution process that allowed a neutral third party adjudication of disputes, which were beneficial. Unfortunately, as was pointed out earlier, the TRIPS standards are now about a quarter century old. And as we're undergoing continual innovation and development in marketplace practices, as well as piracy practices, it's a fundamental necessity of global standards to keep pace. The reality is that the member states at WTO, and WIPO these days, are not willing to do that. Indeed, even a discussion of existing enforcement standards in a non-norm setting granulite TRIPS council is met with howls of protest.5 So it should be no surprise that countries whose industries are highly valued—like the United States—have sought other means to introduce modern norms.6 And that's what we see. Thus, you have more regional and bilateral agreements. We can debate whether that's good, bad or indifferent. But that's why it's happened.

This book proposes a principled approach to the regulation of dispute resolution. It covers dispute resolution mechanisms in all their varieties, including negotiation, mediation, conciliation, expert opinion, mini-trial, ombudsman procedure, arbitration and court adjudication. The authors present a transnational Guide for Regulating Dispute Resolution (GRDR). The regulatory principles contained in this Guide are based on a functional taxonomy of dispute resolution mechanisms, an open normative framework and a modular structures of regulatory topics. The Guide for Regulating Dispute Resolution is formulated and commented upon in a concise manner to assist legislators, policy-makers, professional associations, practitioners and academics in thinking about which solutions best suit local and regional circumstances

The following article is taken as an excerpt from the proceedings of the annual Acquisition Research Program. This annual event showcases the research projects funded through the Acquisition Research Program at the Graduate School of Business and Public Policy at the Naval Postgraduate School. Featuring keynote speakers, plenary panels, multiple panel sessions, a student research poster show and social events, the Annual Acquisition Research Symposium offers a candid environment where high-ranking Department of Defense (DoD) officials, industry officials, accomplished faculty and military students are encouraged to collaborate on finding applicable solutions to the challenges facing acquisition policies and processes within the DoD today. By jointly and publicly questioning the norms of industry and academia, the resulting research benefits from myriad perspectives and collaborations which can identify better solutions and practices in acquisition, contract, financial, logistics and program management. For further information regarding the Acquisition Research Program, electronic copies of additional research, or to learn more about becoming a sponsor, please visit our program website at: www.acquisitionresearch.org. For further information on or to register for the next Acquisition Research Symposium during the third week of May, please visit our conference website at: www.researchsymposium.org.;The use of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) in government disputes is mandated by the Administrative Dispute Resolution Act of 1990. The use of ADR to resolve disputes typically provides a quick and inexpensive resolution when compared to litigation. The Air Force has a very strong ADR program to resolve acquisition and workplace disputes; however, the varied conditions and situations of environmental issues have prevented the Air Force from achieving similar success in this area. This research analyzes the experiences of twenty-six Environmental Conflict Resolution practitioners who have resolved environmental disputes using ADR techniques. Content analysis and pattern matching were used to provide insight into the current use of ADR techniques in military environmental disputes. The insight gained from this research provides the Air Force with information to better understand the current practices in environmental ADR and also provides areas for further research. ; Third Annual Acquisition Research Symposium ; Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

Preliminary Material /Matteo Nicolini , Francesco Palermo and Enrico Milano -- Territory and Conflicts: Is International Law the Problem? /Beatrice I. Bonafè -- Territory and the Law of Ownership: From Misunderstanding to Opportunity /Francesco Palermo -- Beyond Majoritarian Autonomy? Legislative and Executive Power-Sharing in European Regions /Karl Kössler -- Studying Territorial Autonomy as a Multiplicity of Ways to Institutionalise Ethnicity /Alexander Osipov -- In Search of a Fair Balance between the Inviolability of Borders, Self-determination and Secession in International Law /Antonello Tancredi -- Territorial Entitlement and Exit Scenarios /Jure Vidmar -- Internationalised Territorial Regimes as Solution to Conflicts? /Maria Chiara Vitucci -- Transferring Crimea from Russia to Ukraine: Historical and Legal Analysis of Soviet Legislation /Oleksandr Yarmysh and Alina Cherviatsova -- Constitutions and Territorial Claims: Lessons from the Former Soviet Space /Caterina Filippini -- Territorial (Se)Cession in Light of Recent Events in Crimea /Veronika Bílková -- Multiple Identities in a Unitary State: Tracing the Origins of the Ukrainian Crisis Back /Simone Stefan -- Shrinking Autonomy for Tatarstan and Gagauzia: The Perils of Flexible Institutional Design /Federica Prina -- The Intractable Case of Northern Kosovo in the Light of the 2013 Brussels Agreement /Enrico Milano -- Territorial and Ethnic Divide: A New Legal Geography for Cyprus /Matteo Nicolini -- International Economic Law and Conflict Resolution: The West Bank between Dominium, Land Ownership and Land Grabbing /Federica Cristani -- Dutch-German Boundary Relations in the Eems-Dollard (Ems-Dollart) Estuary: An Implicit Condominium? /Harry H.G. Post -- Conclusion: Laws and Conflicts over Territories /Giuseppe Nesi -- Index /Matteo Nicolini , Francesco Palermo and Enrico Milano.

Award date: 30 November 2016 ; Supervisor: Giorgio Monti ; The European enforcement landscape is undergoing significant changes that are leading to a departure from the actors, tools and processes traditionally associated with delivering justice. This thesis examines these themes while developing a solution to the private enforcement gap that continues to leave a large number of victims without a remedy, particularly if they have suffered low-value individual harm as a result of competition infringements. In order to ensure that the private enforcement of EU competition law leads to the effective enforcement of EU rights and to the full compensation of all victims, a collective redress device must be developed. In particular, this thesis will explore whether optimal private enforcement outcomes could be achieved through the integration of collective alternative dispute resolution ('collective ADR') into a regulatory enforcement architecture as a first choice redress avenue. To date, the use of collective ADR as a private enforcement mechanism has not been considered as a serious policy option on the European level. While this thesis focuses on the use of collective ADR in the context of competition enforcement, it also confronts issues that could be expanded to private enforcement in other fields. Ultimately, the enforcement toolbox should be diversified not only to ensure the successful fulfilment of the regulatory goals, but also to facilitate the transformations that are occurring in the enforcement landscape more broadly.