This volume examines the property transformations in post-communist Central Eastern Europe (CEE) and focuses on the role of restitution and privatisation in such transformations. It argues that the theorisation of 'restitution' in post-communist CEE is incomplete in the transitional justice scholarship and in the literature on correction of historical wrongs.
The book also argues that, for a more complete theorisation of (post-communist) restitution, the transformations of property in post-communist societies ought to be studied in a more holistic way. The main legal vehicles used for such transformations, privatisation and restitution, should not be studied separately and in abstract, but in their reciprocal relationship, and in connection to the dimension of justice which each could achieve. Finally, the book integrates 'privatisation' in a theory of post-communist transformation of property.
Intellectual property rights (IPRs), conventionally seen as quite distinct, are increasingly overlapping with one another in Europe. There are several reasons for this: the expansion of IPRs beyond their traditional borders, the creation of new IPRs at the EU level, the exploitation of gaps in the law by shrewd lawyers, and the use of unfair competition as an alternative when IPRs are either not available at all or have expired. The convergence of several IPRs on the same subject-matter poses a problem. As they are normally envisaged as water-tight categories, there are very few rules which cater for the sort of regime clash that any overlap of IPRs necessarily entails. This book's examines the appropriate rules to regulate overlaps and thereby avoid regime conflicts and undue unstructured expansion of IPRs. The book looks at the practical consequences of each overlap at the international, European, and national levels (where the laws of France, the UK, and Germany are reviewed). It then analyzes the reasons for the prohibition or authorization of overlaps. This analysis enables the determination of criteria that can be used to (re)map the overlaps to achieve appropriateness and legitimacy. The overarching principle - which guides this mapping exercise, and which is common to all IPRs - is that of free competition; IPRs are an exception to this principle, though a public domain must exist.
Rex's mission is to cure Erica of the hang-ups of childhood abuse by systematic desentisisation therapy - that is, exposing her to gradually increasing doses of what she dreads most, such as being touched or beaten. Results are slow in coming, but Rex is not a man to be easily discouraged. He believes that the Lord has laid this difficult task upon him. His duty is to be as severe as necessary in order to achieve success. He denies to himself that he enjoys it.
Direct Australian Search Lawyers Articles
Direct Australian Search Lawyers Books
Direct Australian Search Lawyers