Suchergebnisse

Public discussion in 2018, concerning the European Parliament, passing the Directive on copyright and related rights in the Digital Single Market, in the public discourse referred to as ACTA 2, evoked huge social emotions. The source of the conflict were two colliding values: the need to protect copyright and to ensure economic interest of authors and freedom of expression (freedom of the Internet), particularly important for users of works and Internet users. The decisions of the European Court of Justice, given on 29 July 2019 in the proceedings between Funke Medien NRW GmbH and Bundesrepublik Deutschland and the coincident decision in the case Spiegel Online GmbH vs Volker Beckow, deals with the above-given conflict of values. This article provides a description of the main arguments of the above-mentioned judgements of the ECJ and points at their consequences in the scope of changing the current interpretation of the provisions of copyright. The article also contains remarks on the influence of these decisions and their consequences for the disabling of content by providers of content-sharing service providers which violates freedom of expression considering the new Directive of 17 April 2019. The author presented arguments confirming that the Directive (EU) 2019/790 of 17 April 2019 on copyright and related rights in the Digital Single Market and the new way of interpreting copyright rules provided by the judgements of the ECJ has significantly changed the hitherto may of perceiving the rules of permissible use of works. ; Dyskusja publiczna z 2018 r. dotycząca uchwalenia przez Parlament Europejski dyrektywy w sprawie prawa autorskiego i praw pokrewnych na jednolitym rynku cyfrowym, nazywanej w dyskursie publicznym mianem ACTA 2, budziła ogromne emocje społeczne. U źródła tego konfliktu leżały dwie zderzające się ze sobą wartości: potrzeba ochrony praw autorskich i zabezpieczenia interesów ekonomicznych twórców oraz wolność wypowiedzi (wolność internetu), szczególnie istotna dla użytkowników utworów i użytkowników internetu. Wydane przez Trybunał Sprawiedliwości Unii Europejskiej w dniu 29 lipca 2019 r. orzeczenia w sprawie Funke Medien NRW GmbH przeciwko Bundesrepublik Deutschland oraz zbieżne z nim orzeczenie w sprawie Spiegel Online GmbH przeciwko Volkerowi Beckowi dotyczy wskazanego wyżej konfliktu wartości. Niniejszy artykuł zawiera opis głównych tez wskazanych wyżej rozstrzygnięć TSUE oraz wskazuje na ich konsekwencje w zakresie zmiany dotychczasowego sposobu interpretacji przepisów prawa autorskiego. W artykule zamieszczono także uwagi dotyczące wpływu tych rozstrzygnięć i ich konsekwencji w zakresie naruszającego wolność wypowiedzi blokowania treści przez podmioty świadczące usługi hostingowe w świetle wymagań nowej dyrektywy z dnia 17 kwietnia 2019 r. Ponadto wskazano argumenty świadczące o tym, że dyrektywa 2019/790/WE Parlamentu Europejskiego i Rady z dnia 17 kwietnia 2019 r. w sprawie prawa autorskiego i praw pokrewnych na jednolitym rynku cyfrowym oraz nowy, wytyczony w komentowanych orzeczeniach TSUE, sposób interpretacji przepisów prawa autorskiego istotnie zmienił dotychczasowy sposób postrzegania przepisów o dozwolonym użytku utworów.

The aim of the study is to underline the importance of regulation – in the context of compliance – as a strategic tool and an element of the new strategic thinking. The concept of compliance is treated as an essential element of the proper functioning of the company. Compliance has to ensure the company's structure, which will also ensure that its operations will not infringe the law. The compliance function allows not only to optimize risk management, but also enables increasing the organizational culture of the company and is a factor that strengthens the competitiveness of the company. Compliance issues are subjected to scientific analysis and consultancy sector offers services with its implementation, as well as certification of the CMS. These phenomena are examined on the example of the market for new technologies and intellectual property rights on the Internet in reference to the achievements of economic analysis of law and the regulatory impact assessment. ; Celem opracowania jest zbadanie znaczenia regulacji – w kontekście compliance – jako narzędzia strategicznego oraz elementu nowego myślenia strategicznego. Koncepcja compliance jest traktowana jako niezbędny element prawidłowego funkcjonowania przedsiębiorstwa. Compliance to zapewnienie takiej struktury przedsiębiorstwa, która sprawi, iż w jego funkcjonowaniu nie będzie dochodziło do nieprawidłowości. Funkcja compliance pozwala nie tylko zoptymalizować zarządzanie ryzykiem, ale również podnosi kulturę organizacyjną przedsiębiorstwa i jest czynnikiem zwiększającym konkurencyjność przedsiębiorstwa. Zagadnienia compliance są poddawane analizie naukowej, a sektor doradztwa oferuje usługi doradcze przy implementacji i certyfikacji CMS. Zjawiska te są poddane badaniu na przykładzie rynku nowych technologii oraz praw własności intelektualnej w internecie, w nawiązaniu do dorobku ekonomicznej analizy prawa i oceny skutków regulacji.

The intention of the author of this paper is to present a scientific analysis of the influence of culture and the cultural diplomacy of the European Union on the animation and stimulation of Europe's integration process, which is in a constant state of perturbation and lack of stability. It examines the problem-related approach to the European Union's change and development strategy, including the "Europe 2020" strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth, which envisages the implementation of many new communal initiatives and practical solutions introduced by the European Union, including ones that concern both the cultural sector and the creative and audiovisual sector. The European Union, from 2020 onwards, intends to be ready to reach a high level of employment and efficiency, and a higher level of social integration. To enable this, the European Union must ensure attractive framework conditions for innovation and creativity. In that respect, the cultural sector and the creative and audiovisual sector are the source of groundbreaking ideas which may develop into products and services that could contribute to economic growth and job creation, thereby fighting the crisis and social problems. The economic and social crisis in Europe has also been influencing the world of culture. A series of problematic issues associated with the fragmentation of culture and its inventions are identified, including globalisation and digitalisation, underinvestment, inadequate protection of intellectual property and copyright, and insufficient international cultural cooperation. ; The intention of the author of this paper is to present a scientific analysis of the influence of culture and the cultural diplomacy of the European Union on the animation and stimulation of Europe's integration process, which is in a constant state of perturbation and lack of stability. It examines the problem-related approach to the European Union's change and development strategy, including the "Europe 2020" strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth, which envisages the implementation of many new communal initiatives and practical solutions introduced by the European Union, including ones that concern both the cultural sector and the creative and audiovisual sector. The European Union, from 2020 onwards, intends to be ready to reach a high level of employment and efficiency, and a higher level of social integration. To enable this, the European Union must ensure attractive framework conditions for innovation and creativity. In that respect, the cultural sector and the creative and audiovisual sector are the source of groundbreaking ideas which may develop into products and services that could contribute to economic growth and job creation, thereby fighting the crisis and social problems. The economic and social crisis in Europe has also been influencing the world of culture. A series of problematic issues associated with the fragmentation of culture and its inventions are identified, including globalisation and digitalisation, underinvestment, inadequate protection of intellectual property and copyright, and insufficient international cultural cooperation.

The article analyzes the present order, called neoliberal globalization. It serves American corporations from the arms, mining, financial and ICT sectors to accumulate the capital. They made Wall Street the financial center of the world where the surplus of Europe, Japan and Latin American is transformed into the American bonds. This order is embedded in the institutions created and steered by the American state. The competitive advantage in this phase of the evolution of capitalism is given not only by control over so-called intellectual property but also by conquering a possibly large market. That is the reason for the competition between huge mega-corporations such as American GAFA or Chinese BATX. Capitalism is affected by the planetary crisis. A decline of the economic growth rate will take place as a result of natural limits from 3% to the anticipated 1%, including a decreased productivity of the computer revolution. Mechanisms of the functioning of the world economy will change: reconstruction of energy industry and transport, pressure on recycling of minerals, transformation of the labour market together with the use of robotics and artificial intelligence, the end of consumptionism. The daily issues include the problem of supplementing economic globalization with a political control mechanism and including a new civilizational power, which China is becoming. The latter opt for a multipolar order, where local civilizations will preserve their separate character and where they will be able to create a system of supplying their economies with deficit raw material and outlets but without military bases and without following the USA in recognizing certain areas to be the "zones of vested interests". The world will be different but will it be worse?

Customs Administration as Part of the Structure of Public Administration after Poland's Accession to the European UnionPoland's accession to the European Union has generated a number of challenges related to the adjustment of the state customs administration to EU standards. Poland faced the task of improving the functioning of its Customs Administration, which was particularly important due to the fact that the Polish eastern border is automatically the external border of the European Union. The aim of this article is to present the reform of the customs administration, its basic functions and tasks as well as to highlight the role of the Polish customs administration for the economic development of the state and the single customs area of the European Union. It should be emphasised that the importance of the customs administration has significantly increased since EU acces- sion as the Polish State undertook to protect the public, the environment and cultural heritage. Since the very first day of its EU membership, Poland has been bound by the provisions of the original Treaties and acts adopted by the institutions. In the light of the commitments, the Polish customs administration supports conducting legitimate business (gambling market surveillance, protection of intellectual property rights) and protects society and the environment against risks (prevention of imports of dangerous goods, protection against illegal export of endangered species of plants and animals, and export control). In order to make a comprehensive analysis of the changes it is necessary to pay attention to the sources of the customs law in the Polish legal system. Since the date of Poland's EU accession, the key role has been played by the Community Customs Code and the Common Customs Tarif. Poland places much emphasis on the modernisation and improvement of the functioning of the border with Russia, Ukraine and Belarus. The modernisation of border crossings will contribute to an improved safety of travellers and officers as well as to a reduced risk of smuggling of hazardous materials into the single area of the customs union.

Zamierzeniem autorki niniejszego artykułu jest naukowa analiza wpływu kultury i dyplomacji kulturalnej Unii Europejskiej na pobudzanie i stymulowanie procesu integracji Europy, który pozostaje dziś w nieustannym zaburzeniu i braku stabilności. Chodzi tu o problemowe podejście do unijnych strategii zmiany i rozwoju, w tym strategii "Europa 2020" - na rzecz inteligentnego i zrównoważonego rozwoju sprzyjającego włączeniu społecznemu, które zakładają realizację wielu nowych unijnych wspólnotowych inicjatyw i rozwiązań praktycznych, także tych dotyczących sektora kultury oraz sektora kreatywnego i audiowizualnego. Unia Europejska po roku 2020 zamierza być gotowa do osiągnięcia wysokiego stopnia zatrudnienia i wydajności oraz większej spójności społecznej. Aby to było realne Unia musi zapewnić bardziej atrakcyjne warunki ramowe dla innowacji i kreatywności. Pod tym względem sektor kultury oraz sektor kreatywny i audiowizualny są źródłem nowatorskich pomysłów, które mogą zamienić się w produkty i usługi przyczyniające się do wzrostu gospodarczego i tworzenia miejsc pracy, pomagając stawić czoła kryzysowi i problemom społecznym. Kryzys gospodarczy i społeczny w Europie rozprzestrzenia się również na świat kultury. Identyfikujemy tu katalog trudno rozwiązywalnych problemów związanych z rozdrobnieniem sfery kultury i jego wytworów, globalizacją i digitalizacją, niedoinwestowaniem, niewłaściwą ochroną własności intelektualnej i praw autorskich oraz niewystarczającą międzynarodową współpracą kulturalną. ; The intention of the author of this paper is to present a scientific analysis of the influence of culture and the cultural diplomacy of the European Union on the animation and stimulation of Europe's integration process, which is in a constant state of perturbation and lack of stability. It examines the problem-related approach to the European Union's change and development strategy, including the "Europe 2020" strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth, which envisages the implementation of many new communal initiatives and practical solutions introduced by the European Union, including ones that concern both the cultural sector and the creative and audiovisual sector. The European Union, from 2020 onwards, intends to be ready to reach a high level of employment and efficiency, and a higher level of social integration. To enable this, the European Union must ensure attractive framework conditions for innovation and creativity. In that respect, the cultural sector and the creative and audiovisual sector are the source of groundbreaking ideas which may develop into products and services that could contribute to economic growth and job creation, thereby fighting the crisis and social problems. The economic and social crisis in Europe has also been influencing the world of culture. A series of problematic issues associated with the fragmentation of culture and its inventions are identified, including globalisation and digitalisation, underinvestment, inadequate protection of intellectual property and copyright, and insufficient international cultural cooperation.

The issue of public disclosure of the design is regulated in Article 7 of Council Regulation (EC) no. 6/2002 of 12 December 2001 on Community designs. Pursuant to this provision, a design shall be deemed to have been made available to the public if it has been published following registration or otherwise, or exhibited, used in trade or otherwise disclosed, except cases where these events could not reasonably have become known in the normal course of business to the circles specialized in the sector concerned, operating within the Community. The design is made available to the public in a situation where these events could be known in the course of normal professional activity in an environment specialized in a given sector, operating within the Community. The list of methods of public disclosure contained in Article 7 of Council Regulation (EC) no. 6/2002 is not a closed catalog. Disclosure of the earlier design on the Internet causes difficulties in assessing whether it meets the conditions required for public access, i.e. whether the design could reasonably have become known in the normal course of business to the circles specialized in the sector concerned. Moreover, the disclosure of the design on the Internet generates problems of evidence related to proving the precise date of its disclosure to the public. The article analyzes the jurisprudence of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and European jurisprudence in recent years. In particular, attention was paid to the issues of evidence necessary to recognize that the Community design was made available on the Internet. The article concerns a topic that is current both among representatives of the doctrine and in jurisprudence (Polish and European). It has theoretical and practical significance, because the issue of evidence submitted by the parties on the fact that an industrial design is made available to the public is very often a problem at the stage of court proceedings. ; Kwestia publicznego ujawnienia wzoru wspólnotowego została uregulowana w art. 7 rozporządzenia Rady (WE) nr 6/2002 z dnia 12 grudnia 2001 r. w sprawie wzorów wspólnotowych. Zgodnie z tym przepisem wzór uznaje się za udostępniony publicznie, jeżeli został opublikowany po zarejestrowaniu, wystawiony, wykorzystany w handlu, lub w inny sposób ujawniony, z wyjątkiem przypadków, gdy wydarzenia te nie mogły stać się dostatecznie znane podczas zwykłego toku prowadzenia spraw środowiskom wyspecjalizowanym w danej branży, działającym we Wspólnocie. Publiczne udostępnienie wzoru następuje w sytuacji, gdy zdarzenia te mogły być znane w toku prowadzenia normalnej działalności zawodowej w środowisku wyspecjalizowanym w danym sektorze, działającym we Wspólnocie. Wyliczenie sposobów publicznego ujawnienia zawarte w art. 7 rozporządzenia Rady (WE) nr 6/2002 nie stanowi katalogu zamkniętego. Ujawnienie wzoru wcześniejszego w Internecie powoduje trudności w ocenie, czy to udostępnienie spełnia przesłanki wymagane dla publicznego udostępnienia wzoru, tzn. czy wzór mógł dotrzeć do wiadomości osób zajmujących się zawodowo dziedziną, której wzór dotyczy. Ponadto ujawnienie wzoru w Internecie generuje problemy dowodowe związane z wykazaniem precyzyjnej daty jego publicznego udostępnienia. W artykule dokonano analizy praktyki orzeczniczej Urzędu Unii Europejskiej ds. Własności Intelektualnej (EUIPO) i orzecznictwa europejskiego z ostatnich lat. Zwrócono uwagę zwłaszcza na kwestie dowodowe konieczne dla uznania udostępnienia wzoru wspólnotowego w Internecie. Artykuł dotyczy tematu, który jest obecnie aktualny zarówno wśród przedstawicieli doktryny, jak i w orzecznictwie (polskim i europejskim). Ma on znaczenie teoretyczne i praktyczne, ponieważ kwestia dowodów zgłaszanych przez strony na okoliczność publicznego udostępnienia wzoru przemysłowego bardzo często stanowi problem na etapie postępowania sądowego.

The author of this article aims at presenting a particular aspect of the political philosophy of Hans-Hermann Hoppe, an Austrian school economist and anarchocapitalist philosopher. The purpose of this article is to present and analyse the part of his thinking concerning a ruler, as known as "caretaker" and "trustee". The critique of democratic ruler is one of the most important, or even the most important part in the Hoppe's critique of democracy. It is mostly based on a comparison of an essence of a democratic caretaker and a private ruler – a classical monarch. The author presents an intellectual profile of Hoppe, being a German who decided to emigrate to United States of America. In the USA he used to work as a scientist and studied along with Murray Rothbard – one of the leaders of Austrian school economists and libertarian. The author also presents the methodological view of Hoppe, which is based on an a priori knowledge. The Hoppe's critique of democratic caretaker consists of two ways of argumentation. The first one is based on the critique of public ruler per se. Hoppe states that a private-owned government is better than a publicowned one. To prove this statement, Hoppe uses an apparatus of economics. He proves that a democratic caretaker has a higher time preference than a king. It has a bad influence on the ruled people. According to Hoppe, public ruler must to concentrate on consuming and not taking care about a capital values of the resources of the government. The only thing which is profitable for him is to be taking care about current income of the government. The author of this article states such an apriorical portrait of a public ruler is not valid and presents arguments on his point of view. The most important part of the author's argumentation is that the Hoppe's view is correct only on a condition that a basic purpose of a democratic ruler is to get rich. When it is not valid, Hoppean deductive portrait becomes useless. The second line of Hoppe's argumentation is based on bad effects of general election. As the philosopher claims, it causes that the highest political function can be held practically only by bad persons who inter alia desire the property of others. The author of this article claims that this sort of critique is less radical, but a better one. The critique of democratic ruler in political philosophy of Hoppe seems to be a substantialistical one, when the thinker bases on an apriorical essence of caretaker. However, the philosopher approaches to accidental sort of critique, as he stays in a field of his second way of argumentation.

The author of this article aims at presenting a particular aspect of the political philosophy of Hans-Hermann Hoppe, an Austrian school economist and anarchocapitalist philosopher. The purpose of this article is to present and analyse the part of his thinking concerning a ruler, as known as "caretaker" and "trustee". The critique of democratic ruler is one of the most important, or even the most important part in the Hoppe's critique of democracy. It is mostly based on a comparison of an essence of a democratic caretaker and a private ruler – a classical monarch. The author presents an intellectual profile of Hoppe, being a German who decided to emigrate to United States of America. In the USA he used to work as a scientist and studied along with Murray Rothbard – one of the leaders of Austrian school economists and libertarian. The author also presents the methodological view of Hoppe, which is based on an a priori knowledge. The Hoppe's critique of democratic caretaker consists of two ways of argumentation. The first one is based on the critique of public ruler per se. Hoppe states that a private-owned government is better than a publicowned one. To prove this statement, Hoppe uses an apparatus of economics. He proves that a democratic caretaker has a higher time preference than a king. It has a bad influence on the ruled people. According to Hoppe, public ruler must to concentrate on consuming and not taking care about a capital values of the resources of the government. The only thing which is profitable for him is to be taking care about current income of the government. The author of this article states such an apriorical portrait of a public ruler is not valid and presents arguments on his point of view. The most important part of the author's argumentation is that the Hoppe's view is correct only on a condition that a basic purpose of a democratic ruler is to get rich. When it is not valid, Hoppean deductive portrait becomes useless. The second line of Hoppe's argumentation is based on bad effects of general election. As the philosopher claims, it causes that the highest political function can be held practically only by bad persons who inter alia desire the property of others. The author of this article claims that this sort of critique is less radical, but a better one. The critique of democratic ruler in political philosophy of Hoppe seems to be a substantialistical one, when the thinker bases on an apriorical essence of caretaker. However, the philosopher approaches to accidental sort of critique, as he stays in a field of his second way of argumentation.