Moderní metody zpracování velkých datových souborů umožňují mimo jiné provádět i detailní a sofistikované analýzy judikatury. Vedle základních vzájemných vazeb a odkazů lze analyzovat v prakticky neomezeném rozsahu i nejrůznější formální a obsahové aspekty soudních rozhodnutí v libovolně širokých souvislostech. Tento příspěvek se v kontextu aktuálního vývoje příslušných technologií zabývá informační kvalitou soudního rozhodnutí a jejím vztahem k informačním efektům užití judikatury v kontinentálně evropské právní kultuře. V diskusní části tohoto příspěvku pak je argumentována legitimita restriktivního regulatorního přístupu k analytickým nástrojům, jejichž užití by mohlo vést k omezení nezávislosti soudce.
Territoriality represents one of the key ontological features of the continental legal culture. It has developed throughout the centuries and its recent shape was laid down at the dawn of the law of nations in the late medieval period. Territoriality of law is conceptually linked with sovereignty. Before Grotius (1901) and de Vattel (1797), sovereignty was mostly a factual concept, whereby a sovereign had jurisdiction only if she was able to constitute and maintain factual control over people residing in a certain territory. Consequently, the traditional concept of sovereignty consisted of territory, population and effective power over these two. The fact-based establishment of international order led to permanent violent conflict because armed action represented a regular tool in political competition between various nations. Overall exhaustion of nations from permanent wars, expressed in the Peace of Westphalia, led to the establishment of recognition as an additional criterion of sovereignty (Beaulac 2004). Unlike the first three factual elements, i.e., people, territory and power, recognition was of a normative nature. It meant that sovereignty was no longer only a matter of factual effective control, but rather of normative (legal) recognition by the international community. Consequently, it was no longer possible to claim sovereignty based on military control, but rather on legal compliance under the established rules and principles of the newly founded complex international legal order. The shift of sovereignty from a factual to a normative concept also meant that all sovereigns were considered equal, regardless of their powers or the size of their sovereign domains.
Article 11 (Processing which does not require identification); Article 13 (Information to be provided where personal data are collected from the data subject) (see too recitals 60–62); Article 14 (Information to be provided where personal data have not been obtained from the data subject) (see too recital 61); Article 92 (Exercise of the delegation) (see too recital 166).
Digitisation of cultural content represents one of most challenging problems of contemporary IP law. Cultural artefacts, let it be books, paintings or 3D objects, are often very old, so there are no issues in copyright protection of their content. However, the public availability of such content is in these cases strongly limited namely due to physical conditions of the carriers and subsequent conservation demands. Digitisation might serve here as powerful enabler of re-use of these works that are frequently of enormous cultural value. On the other hand, getting useful (and re-usable) digital images of 2D or 3D cultural objects means to invest into advanced technologies that are able to capture the respective content while protecting its fragile carriers from physical damage or destruction. Consequently, there is a need for business models that can motivate investors by offering them valuable consideration for such efforts. Recently, such business models are based namely on exclusive agreements between digitisers and cultural institutions that, together with specific copyright protection of digitised images in some jurisdictions, create new form of legal barriers to re-use of even very old cultural content. The paper critically discusses these new restrictive legal instruments namely in the light of the revised PSI re-use directive.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.