scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
JournalISSN: 2042-115X

European journal of law and technology 

About: European journal of law and technology is an academic journal. The journal publishes majorly in the area(s): The Internet & European union. It has an ISSN identifier of 2042-115X. Over the lifetime, 224 publications have been published receiving 1190 citations. The journal is also known as: EJLT.


Papers
More filters
Journal Article
TL;DR: In this article, a personal viewpoint on the rise of expert systems and why despite their failure, the appeal of commoditising legal expertise continues to allure the unwary is discussed.
Abstract: Those very few of us who were critical of the rise of legal expert systems in the early 1980s probably wonder, in idle moments, whether there is a possibility of rejuvenation of an approach which was once multi¬various and is now obscure and esoteric. Is it possible that after rising and falling, that legal expert system research programme could rise again? What were the conditions which gave impetus to the field and could they be repeated? In this article I want to return, with a personal viewpoint, on the rise of expert systems and why – despite their failure – the appeal of commoditising legal expertise continues to allure the unwary.

48 citations

Journal Article
TL;DR: The article argues that a qualified 'right to delete' should reflect a paradigm shift in attitudes to personal data on the internet: that the default should be that data can be deleted, and that those holding the data should need to justify why they hold it.
Abstract: This article looks at one of the potential for the establishment of a right to delete personal data. It asks whether a right to delete would be an appropriate, effective and proportionate tool in the context of personal data and if so what form should it take and what kind of an impact might it have. One version of the idea of a right to delete, the 'right to be forgotten', is of particular current interest: its mooted inclusion in the forthcoming revision of the Data Protection Directive has produced much debate and comment, some of it extremely negative, some emotional and some displaying both ignorance and misunderstanding. This article will argue that the right to be forgotten needs to be renamed and recast in order to address these negative reactions and the real concerns that underlie them. The article further argues that a qualified 'right to delete' should reflect a paradigm shift in attitudes to personal data on the internet: that the default should be that data can be deleted, and that those holding the data should need to justify why they hold it. This could help to shape a more privacy-friendly future for the internet, one that could provide a better balance between the needs to individuals for privacy, businesses for financial success and governments for security than currently exists.

30 citations

Journal Article
TL;DR: It is suggested that lessons can be drawn from EU competition law to limit the potential adverse consequences of the right to data portability particularly for small and medium-sized enterprises.
Abstract: The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) was published in the Official Journal of the European Union on 4 May 2016. It will become applicable on May 25, 2018. The GDPR comprises a new right to data portability for individuals, which requires data controllers to ensure that they can hand over the personal data that has been provided by the data subject himself/herself, in a structured, commonly used and transferable format. This paper critically examines the right to data portability and suggests that in order to ensure comprehensive data portability that reaches out to all relevant stakeholders, including businesses, the provisions in the GDPR need to be analysed by taking into account EU competition rules. It suggests that lessons can be drawn from EU competition law to limit the potential adverse consequences of the right to data portability particularly for small and medium-sized enterprises. It also asserts that EU competition rules, especially Article 102 TFEU and the essential facilities doctrine, can complement data portability by facilitating mandatory access to specific data. Keywords: The General Data Protection Regulation; article 20 of the GDPR; article 102 TFEU; data; data controller; the right to data portability; API; controller to controller transfer; competition law; essential facilities doctrine; network effects; Data Protection Directive

30 citations

Journal Article
TL;DR: In this article, the authors discuss the collection of personal information in the cloud and the legitimate exploitation of it by third parties, and propose a solution to the problem of privacy protection in the Cloud.
Abstract: Cloud computing can be defined as the provision of computing resources on-demand over the Internet. Although this might bring a number of advantages to end-users in terms of accessibility and elasticity of costs, problems arise concerning the collection of personal information in the Cloud and the legitimate exploitation thereof. To the extent that most of the content and software application are only accessible online, users have no longer control over the manner in which they can access their data and the extent to which third parties can exploit it.

28 citations

Journal Article
TL;DR: This paper explores one such facet of this race for global leadership in science and technology, addressing China’s massive investment in nanotechnology research and attempts to become a leading producer of nano-materials and nano-science knowledge hub.
Abstract: China’s rapid economic transformation over the last 3 decades has been remarkable both in terms of its speed and scale. As the Economist magazine reported recently, ‘In China each person now produces four times as much as in the early 1970s’ with as many as 400 million people being lifted from abject poverty into the ranks of an urban dwelling middle class in the space of a single generation (Economist, 2007). Much of this transformation has been off the back of China’s movement into low value adding manufacturing, in essence becoming the world’s assembly, manufacturing, textile, and footwear hub. China, however, is rapidly moving to reposition itself and climb up the value China, announcing its ambition to become a global leader in science and technology. This paper explores one such facet of this race for global leadership in science and technology, addressing China’s massive investment in nanotechnology research and attempts to become a leading producer of nano-materials and nano-science knowledge hub. As the paper highlights, however, science and technology innovation are underpinned by regulatory and institutional technologies, and require adroit policy supervision of complex innovation eco-systems. Whether China is able to leverage off its increasing wealth and funnel this into global leadership in science and technology, in large measure depends on still nascent regulatory systems.

25 citations

Performance
Metrics
No. of papers from the Journal in previous years
YearPapers
20235
202220
20206
201918
201812
20179