Information and Communication Technology Law

Blockchain technology is a new general-purpose technology that poses significant challenges to the existing state of law, economy, and society. Blockchain has one feature that makes it even more distinctive than other disruptive technologies: it is, by nature and design, global and transnational. Moreover, blockchain operates based on its own rules and principles that have a law-like quality. What may be called the lex cryptographia of blockchain has been designed based on a rational choice vision of human behavior. Blockchain adopts a framing derived from neoclassical economics, and instantiates it in a new machinery that implements rational choice paradigms using blockchain in a semi-automatic way, across all spheres of life, and without regard to borders. Accordingly, a global law and crypto-economics movement is now emerging owing to the spread of blockchain.

This Article suggests that such a rational choice paradigm is an insufficient foundation for the future development of blockchain. It seeks to develop a new understanding of blockchain and its regulation through code according to the emerging “law and political economy” framework. Blockchain is much more than a machine that enables the automation of transactions according to a rational choice framework. Blockchain should instead be understood as a technological infrastructure. Acknowledging the infrastructural dimension of blockchain technology may help identify a new role for the law in its interaction with blockchain, as well as for government in its interaction with the new technology. More precisely, identifying blockchain as an “infrastructural commons” helps us recognize that law and regulation should not be relegated to the role of merely facilitating the operation of the invisible hand of the market by and within blockchain, but should rather acquire more active roles, such as safeguarding access on non-discriminatory terms to users, on a model with net neutrality and other public utility safeguards. The Article closes by proposing a “law and political economy” framework for blockchain that is based on principles of publicness, trust, and interoperability.

Con la aparición del Bitcoin y otras criptomonedas, ha surgido una problemática, o discusión, en el Derecho Argentino (de fuente continental) relativa a la naturaleza jurídica que merecen las criptomonedas en general y Bitcoin en particular. Para evaluar esta problemática el autor se refiriere a los antecedentes históricos del concepto de cosa como objeto de derechos reales en contraposición a los objetos inmateriales de los derechos personales. El autor sugiere que la interpretación correcta es considerar al Bitcoin y a la mayoría de las criptomonedas como "cosas" que pueden ser objeto de derechos reales. A su vez, propone que los derechos recaerán sobre la clave privada y no sobre la dirección pública y/o sobre el saldo en la cadena de bloques.

This chapter discusses normative guidelines for the use of artificial intelligence in Germany against the backdrop of international debates. Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly changing our lives and our social coexistence. AI is a research question and a field of research producing an ever-increasing number of technologies. It is set of technologies that are still evolving. These are driven and influenced by guidelines in the form of laws or strategies. This chapter examines AI systems in public administration and raises the question of what guidelines already exist and what rends are emerging. After defining AI and providing some examples from government and administration, identify ethics and politics as possible points of reference for guidelines. This chapter presents the law, technology, organization, strategy and visions as possible ways to influence and govern AI along with describing current developments. The chapter concludes with a call for interdisciplinary research and moderate regulation of technology in order to enhance its positive potential.

The terms decentralized organization and distributed organization are often used interchangeably, despite describing two distinct phenomena. I propose distinguishing decentralization, as the dispersion of organizational communications, from distribution, as the dispersion of organizational decision-making. Organizations can be distributed without being decentralized (and vice versa), and having multiple management layers directly affects only distribution – not decentralization. This proposed distinction has implications for understanding the growth of digital platforms (e.g. amazon.com), which dominate the global economy in the 21st century. While prominent platforms typically use machine learning as their core technology to transform inputs (e.g. data) into outputs (e.g. matchmaking services), blockchain has emerged as an alternative technological blueprint. I argue that blockchain enables platforms that are both decentralized and distributed (e.g. Bitcoin), whereas machine learning fosters centralized communications and the concentration of decision-making (e.g. Facebook Inc.). This distinction has crucial implications for antitrust policy, which, I contend, should shift both its analysis and its target of action away from the corporate level and focus instead on the data level. Based on this essay’s framework, I make several predictions regarding the future of competition between centralized and decentralized platforms, the evolution of government regulation, and broader implications for managers in the digital economy and for the business schools charged with their education. I conclude with reflections on the opportunity to revive cybernetic thinking for preventing a dystopian future dominated by a handful of platform behemoths.

A brief presentation on algorithms and algorithmic weight on Competition Law. Technology, a tool or a weapon? A friend or a foe? This short-paper was elaborated for the final evaluation of Global Competition Law course, lectured by Professor Miguel Moura e Silva.

Uma breve apresentação do tema referente aos algoritmos e o seu peso no Direito da Concorrência. No fundo, será a tecnologia uma ferramenta ou uma arma? Um amigo ou inimigo? Este short-paper foi elaborado no âmbito do curso de Global Competition Law, leccionado em inglês pelo Professor Doutor Miguel Moura e Silva.

In recent years, the big data revolution has rapidly expanded from the private to the public sector. Today, government authorities at all levels analyze mass amounts of digital data produced by citizens and use it to inform their policy choices in such diverse areas as healthcare, education, transportation, and urban planning. Proponents of this trend assert that it not only yields better policies, but also facilitates political participation by allowing more people to influence governmental decisions at a low cost and with little effort.

This Article argues, however, that the political participation that big data analysis currently enables is flawed in two main respects. First, such participation is usually passive and unintentional, and does not leave room for public deliberation over contested issues. Second, the apparent neutrality of big data may obscure the systematic exclusion of socioeconomically disempowered groups who do not produce digital data that can affect public policy. To explicate these problems, the Article turns to the work of political philosopher Hannah Arendt, especially to her conception of political action and speech and to her idea of the “right to have rights.” It then demonstrates these problems in recent big data initiatives in the fields of healthcare and urban planning.

Finally, the Article asserts that in view of its participatory deficits, big data-based policymaking in its present form may be incompatible with constitutional norms. It argues that under an uncommon yet plausible interpretation, the First Amendment may be understood to establish the positive right of citizens to participate in governmental policymaking in a manner that allows them to express reasoned opinions and engage in public deliberation. It also argues that the Fourteenth Amendment may be understood to establish the right to equal
participation in policymaking of all segments of the population, including socioeconomically disadvantaged groups. The Article explains how exactly these alleged constitutional rights apply to big data analysis and discusses some
measures that government authorities can take to meet their corresponding obligations without giving up the efficiency advantages of big data-based policymaking.

Die Digitalisierung schafft neue Spielregeln für den Wettbewerb und sie verändert die betriebliche Umgebung un-unterbrochen. Es stellt sich die Frage, wie die Unternehmen in ihrem Angebot und Geschäftsmodell darauf reagieren können. Agilität ist heutzutage das Schlüsselwort und das aktuelle Thema der Unternehmensführung.
Agile Softwareentwicklung ist ein Sammelbegriff für eine Reihe von Methoden und Praktiken, die auf Werten und Prinzipien des Manifests Agiler Softwareentwicklung  basieren. Die Kernidee besteht darin, die Prozesse möglichst einfach und somit beweglich (=agil) zu halten. Komplexe Softwareentwicklungen werden heutzutage fast  immer agil durchgeführt, was für die Vertragsgestaltung eine Herausforderung ist. Die allgemeingültigen Konzepte stoßen bei bestimmten IT-Verträgen an ihre Grenzen. Dieser Beitrag, der sich näher mit dem Bereich des IT-Vertragsrechts befasst, untersucht agile Methoden aus der rechtlichen Perspektive. Der Fokus liegt auf der Frage des anwendbaren Vertragstyps in der Vertragsgestaltung, der mangelhaften Erfüllung des  Vertrags, der Vergütung und den urheberrechtlichen Aspekten der agilen Softwareentwicklung.

The Stingray is a cellular tower emulator technically known as an IMSI
catcher. This emulation capability allows law enforcement, or anyone with
the technical expertise, to capture cellular data in transit to or from any
cellphone within the Stingray’s broadcast range, entirely without the person’s
knowledge or consent. This note argues that the Federal Communications
Commission should enact regulation under its Title II authority requiring
cellular service providers and device manufacturers to enhance their
encryption protocols pursuant to recommendations established by the
Communications Security, Reliability, and Interoperability committee, which
released its final report in early 2015. Additionally, the FCC should mandate
that SIM card manufacturers enable consumer access to already existing
security options, which are, as of this writing, permanently disabled during
manufacture. This will enable security conscious consumers to more
effectively protect their private communications against eavesdropping or
theft. This action will help to secure the national wireless infrastructure by
adding a stronger layer of cybersecurity to protect against crimes such as
identity theft, corporate espionage and against warrantless searches
conducted in violation of the Fourth Amendment which are becoming
increasingly frequent. In many cases, law enforcement use of this equipment
violates existing FCC regulations prohibiting the use of particular broadcast
technologies. These security enhancements would not compromise national
security or decrease the effectiveness of law enforcement, and can be done in
compliance the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act as
well as the Electronic Communications Privacy Act. Taking these first
essential steps toward a more secure wireless infrastructure will serve the
interests of both privacy and national security by preventing wireless voice
and data communications from being easily accessible over the airwaves by
widely available interception equipment.

Bitcoin, also known as a decentralized virtual currency (DVC), is regulated differently in the People’s Republic of China (PRC), Canada, and the United States, and represents a vastly underdeveloped area of the law. No country has currently backed Bitcoin. Launched in 2009, and founded by Satoshi Nakamoto,  Bitcoin is a “decentralized peer-to-peer virtual currency.” Other virtual currencies include Litecoin, Namecoin, Auroracoin, Peercoin, and Dogecoin – about 500 varieties in total – but research here primarily focuses on Bitcoin. A comparative analysis helps discern how these respective countries classify Bitcoin (e.g., a virtual object, currency, or potential security), and how these jurisdictions regulate, or intend to regulate, DVCs. Bitcoin is identified as a “currency,” throughout the paper, but the classification is heavily contested. Questions for analyses include: are there appropriate existing legal frameworks to regulate Bitcoin? What securities regulation challenges does Bitcoin pose? What are the consumer and investor protection concerns associated with Bitcoin compared to traditional financial exchanges? What are the cross-jurisdictional challenges of virtual currency transactions that operate over the Internet (e.g., money laundering, or fraudulent activities)? Research incorporates securities commission reports, social and political commentary from secondary sources, and relevant jurisprudence and legislation. Findings help situate the current climate of Bitcoin globally, and assess how its regulation differs relative to technological, economic, social, financial, and political forces.

Traditional principles of contract law cannot be adequately applying, and certain modifications are necessary for it to be used in electronic contracts. This is largely because of the fact that, technology continues to be driven further and further head. Most commentators, believe that the existing law is inadequate, but disagree about what changes need to be made. This paper discusses whether traditional principles of contract law cannot be adequately applying or not.

"Cloud Computing. In Search of Lost Law in the Web 3.0" is one of the most complete essays on the cloud, giving informations on a bunch of aspects related to the considered technology, such as privacy, cybersecurity, disaster recovery, copyright, e-Government, e-School, e-Health, servitization, consumer protection, SMEs protection, right to access the Internet, green cloud and contracts, with some considerations of philosophy of law and general legal theory on the evolution of the property paradigm and on third enclosure movement. The esssay has been made studying all the relevant international, european, national and regional normative acts, included soft law instruments and the comparative analysis. Case law and the literature are central, with a multidisciplinary approach that makes capital of a number of computer science articles.

1. Cenni introduttivi e precisazioni metodologiche. - 2. La sfida tecnologica al diritto e ai diritti. - 3. Il cloud computing e la terza fase dell’era digitale. - 4. Per un inquadramento giuridico trasversale della nuvola. - 5. La protezione dei dati fra profili securitari e riservatezza. Soft law e armonizzazione per via contrattuale. - 6. Amministrativizzazione del diritto e disaster recovery. - 7. Il diritto d’autore, la terza enclosure e il nuovo paradigma appropriativo dell’immateriale. - 8. La modernizzazione delle amministrazioni: e-Government, e-School ed e-Health. - 9. La nuvola e il settore R&S. Qualche cenno a Horizon 2020. - 10. Diritto della crisi, servitization, transizione digitale e tutela degli attori deboli del mercato. - 11. La rilevanza per i diritti fondamentali. Il diritto ad Internet e il green cloud. - 12. Contratti cloud. Problema tassonomico e asimmetria di potere nei contratti alieni. - 13. Osservazioni conclusive

Il presente saggio intende mettere a fuoco il fenomeno del
cloud computing, tentando di setacciare i frammenti normativi dispersi in un fiume di norme difficilmente componibili a sistema, al fine di ricostruire il quadro giuridico vigente in materia. La certezza e la conoscibilità del diritto sono esigenze che si fanno viepiù pressanti in un terreno, come quello in esame, ancora tutto da dissodare e l’ignoranza del quale può a ragione far temere, con la prozia Léonie nella Recherche, che « la journée ne se passera pas sans pluie ». Ed è alla luce dell’attuale incertezza che si spiega il singolare fenomeno per cui, secondo una ricerca del 2014, gran parte delle imprese italiane ha familiarità con la nuvola informatica, laddove solo una sparuta minoranza ha già iscritto in bilancio una posta per la transizione verso il nuovo paradigma. Non ci si limiterà a porre nel buratto il diritto positivo tradizionalmente inteso (sovrastatale, nazionale e regionale), ma, altresì, strumenti di soft law interni ed europei, nonché i contributi di autorità amministrative indipendenti e le riflessioni della più attenta
dottrina anche extra-giuridica. Ciò nella convinzione che l’interdisciplinarità in questo campo non sia una scelta rimessa alla discrezionalità del singolo, ma un imperativo epistemologico. Chiudendo quante alle premesse metodologiche, si precisa che, dopo aver descritto il funzionamento della nuvola informatica e aver dato conto di alcuni documenti normativi a carattere generale, si procederà a una ricostruzione di tipo tematico, in modo tale da fornire, tanto al teorico, quanto al pratico, un agile strumento di lavoro, che allevî dalla faticosa lettura della congerie di atti riguardanti il cloud, potendosi concentrare anche solo sugli aspetti di contingente interesse.

THIS IS ONLY FOR RESEARCH PURPOSES. NO COMMERCIAL USE IS PERMITTED

Over the years, there has been invention of new technologies to better enhance sports performance/organizations. At first, it was the invention of the printing technology which made it possible to reach several persons in the world. As a result of man quest for something new and different brought about the invention of information and technologies (ICT). ICTs are technologies made by man for the purpose of executing activities in organizations for effectiveness and efficiency. The birth of the internet which has been an outstanding innovation in the coming of technologies in the history of mankind was brought into existence; which can be employed in sports where athletes and officials can use it to communicate with each other in performing the day-day administrative and social functions. The key concern and question in this paper is whether an empirical link can be established between the application of social networking media activity and organization of competitions and management of sports.

The field of consumer Internet of Things (IoT) has exploded as business and researchers have sought to not only develop Internetconnected products but also define the common structure in which IoT devices will operate, including technological standards and responsive architectures. Yet, consumer IoT continues to present a host of potential risks to consumers, cascading from the multidimensional nature of IoT devices: IoT combines well-known consumer products with cutting-edge infrastructures including big data solutions, distributed data storage or “cloud,” and artificial intelligence (AI) utilities. The consumer device is no longer only the product, it is the product, the data, the algorithms, and the infrastructure.  Consumer products have shifted from analog to connected technologies, introducing new risks for consumers related to personal privacy, safety issues, and potential for discriminatory data. Broad, ubiquitous data collection, internet connectivity, predictive algorithms, and overall device functionality opacity threaten to undermine IoT market benefits by causing potential consumer injury: broad unfairness and disparate impact, data breaches, physical safety issues, and property damage. Existing regulatory regimes have not anticipated these damages to effectively avoid injury, and it is yet unknown how existing products liability, common law civil recovery under contracts or torts schemes, and due process procedures will apply to these products and the data they process. This Article explores the technology and market of IoT, potential consumer impacts resulting from a lack of consistent and complete legal framework, whether IoT regulation is appropriate, and how the United States can balance market needs for innovation with consistent oversight for IoT manufacturers and distributors.

The dawn of the cyber age and cyberspace inclusive of computers, computer networks, the internet, information technology, and virtual reality, means much of a person's personal and financial life is transacted over the cyberspace. States have also taken advantage of these modern technologies. This has afforded the opportunity for these tools to become the objects and media through which crimes and torts are committed.<br>Cybercrimes or computer-oriented crimes include but are not restricted to the hacking of computers or computer networks, cyberstalking, cybersquatting, child pornography, computer-related fraud, identity theft, impersonation, and cyberterrorism. On the other hand, cybertorts are torts which are committed on computer systems or a network of computer systems such as trespass to chattels, conversion, cyber defamation, negligent enablement of cybercrimes, etc. Recent global happenings including, ransomware and malware attacks, cybersquatting, cyberbullying and...

Nowadays algorithms can decide if one can get a loan, is allowed to cross a border, or must go to prison. Artificial intelligence techniques (natural language processing and machine learning in the first place) enable private and public decision-makers to analyse big data in order to build profiles, which are used to make decisions in an automated way.

This work presents ten arguments against algorithmic decision-making. These revolve around the concepts of ubiquitous discretionary interpretation, holistic intuition, algorithmic bias, the three black boxes, psychology of conformity, power of sanctions, civilising force of hypocrisy, pluralism, empathy, and technocracy.

The lack of transparency of the algorithmic decision-making process does not stem merely from the characteristics of the relevant techniques used, which can make it impossible to access the rationale of the decision. It depends also on the abuse of and overlap between intellectual property rights (the “legal black box”). In the US, nearly half a million patented inventions concern algorithms; more than 67% of the algorithm-related patents were issued over the last ten years and the trend is increasing.

To counter the increased monopolisation of algorithms by means of intellectual property rights (with trade secrets leading the way), this paper presents three legal routes that enable citizens to ‘open’ the algorithms.

First, copyright and patent exceptions, as well as trade secrets are discussed.

Second, the GDPR is critically assessed. In principle, data controllers are not allowed to use algorithms to take decisions that have legal effects on the data subject’s life or similarly significantly affect them. However, when they are allowed to do so, the data subject still has the right to obtain human intervention, to express their point of view, as well as to contest the decision. Additionally, the data controller shall provide meaningful information about the logic involved in the algorithmic decision.

Third, this paper critically analyses the first known case of a court using the access right under the freedom of information regime to grant an injunction to release the source code of the computer program that implements an algorithm.

Only an integrated approach – which takes into account intellectual property, data protection, and freedom of information – may provide the citizen affected by an algorithmic decision of an effective remedy as required by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU and the European Convention on Human Rights.

Recommended citation: Guido Noto La Diega, Against the Dehumanisation of Decision-Making – Algorithmic Decisions at the Crossroads of Intellectual Property, Data Protection, and Freedom of Information, 9 (2018) JIPITEC 3 para 1

Electronic or Digital Evidence & Cyber Law in India. The paper also talks of recent case laws and importance of certificate under Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act. computer printout or CD or DVD as a evidence. Email or CDR or ip address as a evidence in criminal and civil trials

The dawn of the cyber age and cyberspace inclusive of computers, computer networks, the internet, information technology, and virtual reality, means much of a person’s personal and financial life is transacted over the cyberspace. States have also taken advantage of these modern technologies. This has afforded the opportunity for these tools to become the objects and media through which crimes and torts are committed.

Cybercrimes or computer-oriented crimes include but are not restricted to the hacking of computers or computer networks, cyberstalking, cybersquatting, child pornography, computer-related fraud, identity theft, impersonation, and cyberterrorism. On the other hand, cybertorts are torts which are committed on computer systems or a network of computer systems such as trespass to chattels, conversion, cyber defamation, negligent enablement of cybercrimes, etc. Recent global happenings including, ransomware and malware attacks, cybersquatting, cyberbullying and cyber harassment, cyberwarfare, and child pornography have shown how these actions affect the private and financial life of citizens as well as the economic development and international reputation of states. In light of these, States have recognized the pertinent need to have in place laws combating cybercrimes and cybertorts.

This thesis aims at examining the response of legal systems to these crimes and torts. The international position will be looked at in respect of responsibilities of states, jurisdiction, and international cooperation, treaties and conventions dealing with cybercrimes and cybertorts. The position of other jurisdictions specifically the United States of America, the United Kingdom, India, and Kenya will be analysed. The position of Nigerian law will also be examined and its inadequacies will be highlighted, and lessons from other jurisdictions on better ways to combat these crimes and torts will be extracted, resulting in recommendations.

All three major areas of Intellectual Property Law recognize property rights in intangible products of the mind: copyright (artistic and literary expression), patent (inventions and innovations), and trademark (symbolic information). These bodies of law concern federally recognized rights; therefore, they are governed by federal statutes and administered by federal agencies. However, they differ both in theory and operation. It has become a matter of necessity to constantly review our intellectual property laws to catch up with the speed of innovation in this digital age and to address the challenges thrown up by globalization and significant advances in Information and Communication Technology (ICT). In as much as many facets of Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs) are dealt with in particular legislations enacted by the parliament, this paper provides an overview of the main laws dealing with IPRs in Nigeria.

The internet and social media have revolutionized activism. In response, governments seeking to curb opposition have recently learned to target the very same technologies that gave rise to activist empowerment in the first place. This article challenges the accepted framework for discussing these efforts by governments, focused on surveillance and privacy. It argues, first, that governments’ actions should be evaluated in the aggregate and understood as measures of digital domination, whose harm extends beyond the harm to individual privacy. Applying the republican concept of freedom as non-domination, the article suggests that the core harm resulting from governments’ actions is to activists’ freedom. Since activism is a check on the government, these measures also have devastating consequences for the freedom of the citizenry as a whole. Second, the article argues that governments’ reliance on digital militias allows them to sidestep the limits of their legitimate authority, therefore posing a grave threat to the rule of law. Finally, third, the article underscores that governments deploy digital measures of control beyond surveillance. Rather, they (1) gather information on activists; (2) disrupt communication channels; (3) flood online conversation to drown out the opposition; (4) deploy the state’s coercive power based on information gathered, and (5) mobilize digital militias to bully activists online. The article therefore proposes a new conceptual framework: rather than discuss political freedom through the lens of privacy, we ought to retain appreciation of privacy’s importance but refocus the discussion around individual freedom. Similarly, rather than subsume government control measures under the category of surveillance, we ought to recognize the much broader set of tools employed by them.

Resumo: Aborda-se os chamados métodos on-line de resolução de disputas (ODR-online dispute resolution), sobretudo para expor um novo ponto de vista sob o qual defendemos o direito processual passa a ser-e precisa ser-também analisado. O uso do ODR tem crescido em conjunto com o desenvolvimento de uma visão moderna do acesso à justiça, no sentido de que não se limita à solução adjudicada estatal e ela não deve ser ofertada como opção imediata e primária; quando o litígio é passível de ser resolvido por outros meios, a intervenção judicial não pode ser considerada sequer necessária ou útil. É o caso, com efeito, de promover e incentivar esses métodos (quando legítimos) para prevenir e evitar conflitos e ações judiciais e não apenas para resolvê-las quando já estiverem em curso (i.e., quando recursos públicos e privados já tiverem sido desnecessariamente despendidos). De forma crucial, aliás, O ODR fora-ou melhor, antes-da esfera judicial é um passo fundamental para cada vez mais se afastar o Brasil da "cultura da sentença" e aproximá-lo da tão desejada "cultura da pacificação".

Abstract: This paper addresses the so-called online dispute resolution methods (ODR) with the core purpose of presenting a new point of view under which we sustain procedural law is to (and must) be analyzed. The use of ODR has been growing alongside with the development of a modern theory of access to justice, in the sense that it is not limited to court adjudication, which must not be offered as the immediate and primary option; when conflicts can be resolved by other means, court intervention must not be considered even necessary or useful. Thus, it is the case to promote and foster such methods (when proved legitimate) to prevent and avoid conflicts and lawsuits and not only to solve the latter when they are already under way (i.e., when public and private resources would already have been unnecessarily expended). More importantly, ODR outside of-or better, before-the courts consist of a crucial step to increasingly move Brazil away from the existing "culture of the award" and approximate it to the desired "culture of pacification".

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is developing rapidly. Its unique ability to learn and solve unique problems without the help of humans put it into a new place. Therefore, AI is the only machine that can challenge the human civilization or can give humans their utopia, but before reaching there, humans must understand the working method of AI to foresee the challenges as well as to prepare the system to address those challenges.

Blockchain technology is a new general-purpose technology that poses significant challenges to the existing state of law, economy, and society. Blockchain has one feature that makes it even more distinctive than other disruptive technologies: it is, by nature and design, global and transnational. Moreover, blockchain operates based on its own rules and principles that have a law-like quality. What may be called the lex cryptographia of blockchain has been designed based on a rational choice vision of human behavior. Blockchain adopts a framing derived from neoclassical economics, and instantiates it in a new machinery that implements rational choice paradigms using blockchain in a semi-automatic way, across all spheres of life, and without regard to borders. Accordingly, a global law and cryptoeconomics movement is now emerging owing to the spread of blockchain.

This Article suggests that such a rational choice paradigm is an insufficient foundation for the future development of blockchain. It seeks to develop a new understanding of blockchain and its regulation through code according to the emerging "law and political economy" framework. Blockchain is much more than a machine that enables the automation of transactions according to a rational choice framework. Blockchain should instead be understood as a technological infrastructure. Acknowledging the infrastructural dimension of blockchain technology may help identify a new role for the law in its interaction with blockchain, as well as for government in its interaction with the new technology. More precisely, identifying blockchain as an "infrastructural commons" helps us recognize that law
and regulation should not be relegated to the role of merely facilitating the operation of the invisible hand of the market by and within blockchain, but should rather acquire more active roles, such as safeguarding access on non-discriminatory terms to users, on a model with net neutrality and other public utility safeguards. The Article closes by proposing a "law and
political economy" framework for blockchain that is based on principles of publicness, trust, and interoperability.

The future of digital societies will increasingly depend on the identification of a fair balance between the economic value of data and the respect for the fundamental individual and collective rights, such as the protection of personal identity, the equality of opportunities, the freedom of expression and the pluralism of information. The Regulation (EU) 2016/679 undoubtedly makes a relevant step forward this balance, but new and complex challenges are already emerging. The increasing diffusion of platforms and more and more sophisticated profiling activities, as well as the implementation of artificial intelligence and automated individual decisions-making, risk drastically limiting the freedom of choice and severely impacting the individuals' fundamental rights. Furthermore, because of the more and more pyramidal and intricate use of data for subsequent and often unknown purposes , data subject risk to fully lose control of his/her personal information. In such a light, the paper aims to assess the threats and opportunities of the new digital landscape and to analyse the effective capacity of the GDPR and, in particular, of the model of informed and unambiguous consent to successfully face these further and complex issues within the ever-changing panorama of digital societies.

This article sheds light on the pressing issue of software patents by giving an account of the approaches followed in Europe, the US and India. The occasion of this study is the adoption in 2016 of the final version of the Indian guidelines on the examination of computer-related inventions, which have been surprisingly overlooked in the legal literature. The main idea is that the Internet of Things will lead to a dramatic increase of applications for software patents and if examiners, courts, and legislators are not careful, there is a concrete risk of a surreptitious generalised grant of patents for computer programs as such (in Europe) and for abstract ideas without inventive concept (in the US). The clarity provided by the Indian guidelines, following a lively public debate, can constitute good practice that Europe and the US should take into account. Conversely, the sea of patent software looks very stormy in the US, where, after some reversals of the leading case Alice Corp v CLS Bank International, there seems to be the risk of swelling the ranks of speculative schemers who make it their business to watch the advancing wave of improvement, and gather its foam in the form of patented monopolies. Some good news, however, comes from a dissenting opinion that innovatively suggests bringing free speech into the reasoning on patents.

PLEASE CITE AS: Guido NOTO LA DIEGA, Software patents and the Internet of Things in Europe, the United States, and India, in European Intellectual Property Review, 2017, 39(3), 173-184.

Il tema della Privacy è un tema assai caro in quanto nella società in cui viviamo noi oggi, dove le informazioni molto spesso circolano in maniera incontrollata e dove la tecnologia a tratti pare evolversi indiscriminatamente è essenziale riconoscere e garantire questo diritto essenziale per vivere serenamente. Ma esattamente in cosa si sostanzia il diritto alla Privacy? Innanzitutto bisogna ammettere che si tratta di un diritto che ha fatto il suo ingresso nella storia esattamente nel 1890, quando i giuristi Samuel Warren e Luis Brandeis pubblicarono sulla rivista Harvard Law Review un articolo dal titolo inconfondibile "The right to privacy". Non è un caso se il diritto alla Privacy nasce proprio a cavallo tra il XIX e il XX secolo, periodo in cui nacquero le prime macchine fotografiche portatili e i primi giornali scandalistici che invasero le vite dei personaggi più conosciuti ed in voga dell'epoca. Queste circostanze costrinsero i due avvocati a soffermarsi sull'importanza che vi fosse una esigenza a mantenere riserbo in merito a questioni che riguardavano la sfera più intima e personale dei soggetti. Nacque quindi l'esigenza di frenare questo fenomeno e quindi sorse il concetto di privacy come tutela della sfera privata e della riservatezza, senza dimenticare peròl l'sigenza della collettività, e quindi l'interesse pubblico, a conoscere certe informazioni. Un altro anno importante per lo sviluppo della privacy il 1928, quando si pose la questione dello scrutinio pubblico da parte delle autorità nel combattere i reati, in particolare il caso Olmstead vs U.S accese i riflettori sulla possibilità di effettuare intercettazione attraverso strumenti di captazione che non necessitassero l'utilizzo di cimici nei telefoni, al fine di ottenere informazioni utili su attività, svolte anche nell'ambito privato, nei confronti dei soggetti indagati, il tutto senza le apposite garanzie previste dalla legge. Anche in questo caso la privacy viene intesa come sottrazione di quella parte che non può essere sottoposta a scrutinio pubblico. La Privacy ed il modo di interpretarla è evoluto profondamente dal 1890 ad oggi e questo è dipeso da fattori che riguardano anche l'entrata dell'umanità in una nuova era: l'Iperstoria. Come dice Luciano Floridi nel suo testo intitolato "La quarta rivoluzione", nella Iperstoria si ravvisa un nuovo modo di registrare, trasmettere ma soprattutto processare le informazioni; ma non è finita qui. Nell' Iperstoria si ravvisa anche una vera e propria dipendenza dal ciclo dell'informazione, le moderne società non possono fare a meno di esso in quanto il benessere economico-sociale, la crescita e lo sviluppo generale dipendono strettamente dalle ICT, ovvero dalle Information and Comunication Technologies. Questa stretta dipendenza dal ciclo dell'informazione ci ha reso per molti versi molto deboli e vulnerabili, per questo porre dei limiti alla circolazione delle informazioni personali è un tema cruciale. È doveroso sottolineare come in realtà vi siano diversi tipi di privacy che si sostanziano in una particolare libertà da. In primo luogo c'è la privacy fisica che si sostanzia nella libertà del soggetto da interferenze di carattere fisico o intrusioni tangibili della sua sfera personale, che si sostanziano in una intrusione nello spazio vitale dell'individuo. In secondo lugo vi è una privacy fisica che si sostanzia nella libertà dell'individuo da eventuali pressioni di carattere psicologico che possono manipolare la mente dell'individuo.

Digital technologies are in the process of reconfiguring our democracy. While we look for orientation and guidance in this process, the relationship between technology and democracy is unclear and seems to be in f lux. Are technology and democracy mirroring each other? 1 The internet was first hailed as genuinely democratic technology and ultimate enabler of democracy. It is now often perceived as a major threat to democracy. The story of artificial intelligence (AI) might turn out to be quite the opposite. While there are many ref lections on AI as a threat to or even as the end of democracy, 2 some voices highlight the democratic potentials of AI. 3 As is often the case, the research results depend on the premises underlying the research. This chapter is based on the assertion that technologies and media shape human affairs to a large extent, but that technology in turn is also shaped by human choices and decisions. There is a huge potential to endanger, game or even abolish democratic processes. On the contrary, there might also be opportunities to further democracy. Therefore, the extent to which AI impacts democracy is subject to the paths that are chosen in research, development and application of AI in society. The main purpose of this chapter is to highlight the room for choice in the construction of AI and its impacts on the future of democracy. It will also inquire into how law and jurisprudence relate to these questions. From this perspective, current impacts of AI on democracy have an important indicative function. But in the face of further possibilities of inventions and regulative measures on different levels, they are only precursors to what will and should be possible. In that sense, this chapter is also an attempt to deal with developments and inventions we cannot yet grasp. The main argument is that it might be possible to inf luence them nevertheless. Therefore, the chapter will ref lect on the possibility and necessity to democratize AI from a legal and jurisprudential perspective. It will then look at different ways to democratize AI.

Il fenomeno delle fake news è oggi più che mai diffuso. Le fake news sono infatti cresciute esponenzialmente proprio sfruttando le caratteristiche intrinseche che sono tipiche della quarta rivoluzione, ad esempio è stata sfruttata la celerità tipica del web per diffondere notizie fale o tendenziose. Come sappiamo la quarta rivoluzione ha portato grandi innovazioni nella nostra società infatti siamo diventati dipendenti dalle ICT, come afferma giustamente Luciano Floridi nel suo libro dall’omonimo titolo “La quarta rivoluzione”. Non solo, ma tutti noi siamo più che mai dipendenti dalla corretta gestione del ciclo dell’informazione e dalla processazione delle informazioni, in questo modo ci siamo proiettati in una nuova era: quella della iperstoria e delle infosfera. A tal proposito quindi, poter veicolare delle informazioni corrette, è divenuto essenziale poiché una notizia fittizia potrebbe avere degli esiti disastrosi.
Individuare una fake news è un compito tutt’altro che facile, le notizie false infatti sono molto subdole: spesso provengono da siti insospettabili, da fonti o testate giornalistiche autorevoli o da “penne” indubitabili. Le fake news non si palesano solo attraverso quegli articoli clickbait che ci compaiono a lato delle pagine internet che stiamo consultando; non possono nemmeno essere relegati a quel novero di contenuti che vengono condivisi da più utenti sui social e che millantano trattamenti dimagranti strabilianti e guadagni lauti. Le fake news pericoloso non sono quelle descritte poc’anzi, poiché esse possono essere facilmente riconosciute come tali instillando il dubbio negli utenti che ciò che stanno leggendo potrebbe non essere veritiero, tuttavia esistono una serie di fake news più subdole e difficili da individuare e sgominare. Una fake news non è solo la notizia che ha un contenuto totalmente falso ed infondato, una fake news potrebbe essere una notizia che pur narrando un fatto sostanzialmente vero omette alcuni essenziali particolari, utili a ricostruire la vicenda in maniera completa. Molto spesso sono proprio quei particolari a fare la differenza tant’è che la loro assenza può offrire una prospettiva totalmente differente sulla questione trattata fuorviando i lettori e fornendo una versione tendenziosa delle vicende ricostruite.
La soluzione che potrebbe palesarsi di fronte a noi è quella di indirizzare il mondo dell’informazione verso un’analisi estremamente oggettiva e neutrale dei fatti, tuttavia la totale oggettività e neutralità che a loro volta presumerebbero una totale astensione del proprio pensiero personale e politico rispetto le stesse vicende trattate, è pressoché un’utopia. Tutti noi elaboriamo informazioni, “processiamo” le informazioni, in piena linea con i dettami della quarta rivoluzione, ed ogni qual volta si pone in essere questo meccanismo intellettuale, inevitabilmente incorriamo in un’involontaria edulcorazione dei fatti. Tanto più che il vissuto, il livello culturale, le credenze e talvolta i giudizi degli altri, spesso anche solo inconsciamente, influenzano la lettura che diamo di una data informazione. Per questi motivi, non si può auspicare una soluzione che ci permetta di giungere alla oggettività assoluta, che è una mera chimera. La vera sfida, anche e soprattutto dal punto di vista legale, si svolge oggigiorno nell’individuazione di quella sottile linea di confine che indica oltre quale soglia la manipolazione dell’informazione possa dirsi fake news a tutti gli effetti.

This article is a useful tool for both Asian and European readers as regards some of the state-of-the-art technologies revolving around the Internet of Things (‘IoT’) and their intersection with cloud computing (the Clouds of Things, ‘CoT’) in both the continents. The main legal issues will be presented, with a focus on intellectual property, consumer protection, and privacy. India and the United Kingdom are selected because they are at the forefront of the IoT innovation in their respective countries. The IoT is an expanding and heterogeneous universe encompassing all Things which are capable of connectivity and are equipped with sensing and actuating capabilities. One can find Things in very diverse sectors, from agriculture to manufacturing, retail, healthcare, leisure, domotics, urban development, etc. Therefore, not only is providing an exhaustive and static definition of the IoT nearly impossible (or at least pointless), but also the endeavour of providing a complete picture of the phenomenon would be a cumbersome path towards failure. Consequently, I will give account only of the highlights of the IoT in India and the United Kingdom. In India, the IoT will be analysed through the prism of net neutrality, smart cities, manufacturing, computer-related inventions, and a recent bill on the surveillance aspects of the world’s largest biometric database (Aadhaar). In turn, I will look at the British context by analysing some (quasi) regulatory acts with a focus on privacy and consumer protection. One last caveat. When it comes to new technologies, one tends to be either ‘apocalyptic’ or ‘integrated’. Either the technology will save us all by leveraging a revolution leading to a disruptive innovation, or it will destroy our lives and the world will go to the dogs. I take a middle position and believe that through education, collective awareness, and soft law, one will be able to keep the human being at the centre of innovation, to unite people rather than divide them, to empower them and alleviate discrimination and poverty. What is important is neither should one delegate to technology nor to rely entirely on government: if the IoT is to actually become a revolution, it will do so due to the commitment of each and every one of us who will contribute to create the Internet of Citizens.

PLEASE CITE AS: Guido NOTO LA DIEGA, The Internet of Citizens. A lawyer’s view on some technological developments in the United Kingdom and India, in Indian Journal of Law & Technology, 2017, 12(1), 53-104.

This  article  analyzes  the  socio-political  factors  and  case  law  that  have led the EU legislature to rethink the fundamental right to personal data protection,  formulating  principles  of  extraterritorial  application  and taking  into  account  data  flow  in  the  Information  Society.  It  has  been crucial,  to  arrive  at  the  new  regulatory  system,  the  confrontation  with the U.S. government.

La présente section vise à rendre compte des principales décisions rendues par les cours et tribunaux de 2015 à 2017. A côté de ces décisions judiciaires à strictement parler, il nous a paru intéressant de présenter certains développements issus de la « jurisprudence » du Conseil de déontologie journalistique («CDJ»), organe d’autorégulation compétent pour les activités journalistiques des médias belges d’expression francophone et germanophone.

Conferência realizada na "II Jornada sobre o Regulamento Geral sobre Tratamento de Dados: desafios, problemas e soluções". Associação Portuguesa de Bibliotecários, Arquivistas e Documentalistas / Instituto Goethe. Lisboa, dia 24 de maio de 2019.