Suchergebnisse

The desire to explore new worlds and to exchange ideas and goods should be the impetus behind the Internet, the virtual Silk Road connecting the east and west. The Chinese government considers the Internet a vital part of its modernization plans. There are millions of Chinese citizens online and that number continues to grow. China's policy towards online privacy regulation will have a significant impact on the rest of the world. Technology has outpaced law in the arena of privacy regulation. Some scholars believe the Internet should be unregulated. Others fear that commerce will overrun privacy concerns. The sheer volume of information on the Internet makes it hard to regulate, especially in the controversial environment surrounding the issue of state regulation of the Internet. The United States and Europe have divergent views of privacy. The European Union recognizes informational privacy as a fundamental right. The U.S. construes data privacy as a matter of commerce. China recognizes a substantive privacy right and has a privacy provision in its constitution, balancing privacy against the needs of state security. In China, privacy means something different than it does in the U.S. The premature establishment of a U.S. data protection agency could disadvantage the U.S. in negotiations with China.

The desire to explore new worlds and to exchange ideas and goods should be the impetus behind the Internet, the virtual Silk Road connecting the east and west. The Chinese government considers the Internet a vital part of its modernization plans. There are millions of Chinese citizens online and that number continues to grow. China's policy towards online privacy regulation will have a significant impact on the rest of the world. Technology has outpaced law in the arena of privacy regulation. Some scholars believe the Internet should be unregulated. Others fear that commerce will overrun privacy concerns. The sheer volume of information on the Internet makes it hard to regulate, especially in the controversial environment surrounding the issue of state regulation of the Internet. The United States and Europe have divergent views of privacy. The European Union recognizes informational privacy as a fundamental right. The U.S. construes data privacy as a matter of commerce. China recognizes a substantive privacy right and has a privacy provision in its constitution, balancing privacy against the needs of state security. In China, privacy means something different than it does in the U.S. The premature establishment of a U.S. data protection agency could disadvantage the U.S. in negotiations with China.

Telecommunication facility has been provided in most countries
as a user pay public service managed, typically, through the Post,
Telegraph and Telephone departments or by some government-owned
monopoly. The tradition has been to regard it as a natural monopoly to
be supplied by the public sector.1 This perception has changed.
Telecommunication is now increasingly recognised as a prime mover of the
modern day economy. It is opening to participation by the private
sector. The economic benefits of telecommunications are enormous, both
as a growth industry in its own right and in terms of its impact on
economic development. It has a significant social role in transforming
how people communicate, become informed or do business. Additionally, it
is also environment-friendly because it disseminates information without
shifting goods or people. The practice now in vogue is to establish a
regulatory agency with a high degree of independence from both operator
and government. The regulator's task is to implement government policy,
ensure performance accountability by the operators and other players in
respect of economic and social policy objectives, resolve disputes
between competitors, monitor changing industry conditions and advise
government on developments bearing on policy. The regulatory agency acts
as a buffer between telecom operators and government, helping to ensure
the separation of functions.

Evaluates technical and financial joint ventures in the 1980s.

Considers the conditions under which Japanese firms are able to invest in India. Outlines the increasing Japanese investment over the period from 1970 to 1986, providing examples from particular Japanese industrial ventures. Concludes that Japanese industries have performed well, though suggests that more use of local parts might be encouraged. (RSM)