Suchergebnisse

This Journal's previous piece on current developments in EC intellectual property noted that this area of law is dominated by the drive towards harmonisation.1 This drive continues, and its success has been such that it can now begin to be seen in an overarching context of globalisation. The idea of a unified global system for the protection of intellectual property now seems at least conceivable, even if not immediately achievable. It is even possible to state that some stages have been achieved on the journey, most notably the TRIPs Agreement. Since adherence to this is a requirement of World Trade Organization (WTO) membership, the arguments in its favour have suddenly become "persuasive". It represents a tremendous achievement in terms of the protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights throughout the world. The World Intellectual Property Organisation's contribution here and elsewhere has been immense.

International audience ; In recent years, copyright law has been subject to a series of legislative reforms aimed at preserving the self-regulating feature of the copyright regime in the digital environment. However, as the law does no longer reflect their expectations, a growing number of right holders are relying on private ordering in order to adjust the default provisions of the copyright regime with a variety of contractual means. Within the digital environment, the establishment of an alternative regime of property rights could however facilitate the exploitation and the dissemination of digital works, allowing for the copyright owners to maintain a certain level of control over the exploitation of theirs works while simultaneously decreasing the level of discrepancies that may occur between copyright law and property law. The regime would distinguish between the copyright protection granted to the work as an intellectual creation and the specific terms and conditions governing the exploitation of any given instance of the work, into which the copyright owner could introduce a series of restrictions and/or obligations enforceable erga omnes. Digital works would therefore become more akin to virtual goods which could be alienated independently of any contractual relationship, given that the rights and obligations regulating the consumption of a work would now be vesting into the actual instance of the work. By getting rid of the contractual relationship that is today required for the consumption of digital works, the ownership thereof could be transferred to any third party and the doctrine of exhaustion be reintroduced, thereby allowing for the market for information goods to develop with fewer constraints.

This article examines the institutions of private property in a Property-Owning Democracy (POD). It aims at determining in which system, POD or Welfare State Capitalism (WSC), the requirements of the arguments justifying private property rights are better satisfied. It had been classically argued that private property rights are legitimate (a) because the worker has a (natural right) on the fruits of his labour (the labour justification), (b) because securing private property rights implements a structure of economic incentives that ultimately benefits all individuals in the society (the efficiency justification), and (c) because private property promotes individual autonomy (the liberty justification). In each section of this article, I briefly sketch the logic of each argument and examine how it is satisfied or not in a POD in comparison to WSC. My conclusion is that on many aspects, a POD better fulfills the requirements of those three arguments than does WSC.Keywords: Property-Owning Democracy; Property Rights; Private Property; Labour Justification; Rawls. ; info:eu-repo/semantics/published

This book deals with the property and inheritance system of the matrilineal Minangkabau of West Sumatra in the context of legal pluralism.

Fragility of land tenure and property rights has both caused and exacerbated displacement in Colombia. In response, the government has established a legal framework to address the problem and, ultimately, to prevent further displacement. The rebuilding of community relationships and institutional trust are central to the success of this approach.

Discusses the distinctions between property investment/development
companies and property developer/trading companies, and notes the
differences in valuation methodology. Explains that the valuation of
property investment/development company shares is based on estimated net
asset value (NAV), and the process by which the shares may be traded on
the stock market at a discount or a premium to this. Identifies the
factors which influence the discount or premium to NAV and suggests a
framework whereby the shares may be evaluated in a more explicit manner.

Saving for retirement is fraught with risk and uncertainty. For those not privileged by participation in a defined benefit pension plan, the issue is made complex by problematic decision rules: the options available are variable in terms of their costs and possible consequences, there is considerable uncertainty surrounding the anticipated outcomes of different options, and it is quite unclear whether conventional savings instruments are better or worse than simply relying upon housing and property. In this paper the problem of saving for the future is conceptualised and interrogated against respondents' views and opinions as reported in the Money section of The Sunday Times. Those interviewed are representative of a distinctive segment of the UK working population and face, more than most, the prospect of being largely responsible for their retirement income. Due regard is paid to the age and reported incomes of respondents in relation to their professed intentions just as consideration is given to their apparent risk predispositions. It is noted that many respondents preferred property over pensions across the four years considered—from the peak of the bubble through to the onset of the age of austerity. An interpretation of this preference is offered, emphasising the control of risk apparent in many people's perceptions of the value of property.