Pub Date : 2021-07-27DOI: 10.17323/2713-2749.2021.2.21.48
Elena Mazetova
Recent global trends are producing powerful growth in the digital environment, and its spread is prompting adoption of strict and comprehensive regulation to ensure data protection. This results in a number of difficulties, one of which is lack of consistency between data protection regulation and the regulatory regimes applicable to specific industries and institutions. That inconsistency is particularly evident in the field of international arbitration — one of the most widely used and convenient methods for resolving international disputes. The principles and fundamental concepts that largely define international arbitration, such as autonomy of the parties and confidentiality, have made its use very well accepted and widespread. However, data protection requirements often force the parties that are subject to them to make a difficult choice between the basic principles of international arbitration and the requirements of data protection regulation. This bind has come about because data protection regulation, which generally imposes comprehensive compliance obligations, rarely takes into account the specifics of the industries in which it will be applied. In this article it is analyzing application of the GDPR requirements that pertain to cross-border data transfer from the perspective of international arbitration in order to illustrate difficulties and regulatory gaps that may be encountered by the entities interested in thorough compliance with the applicable regulations.
{"title":"Data Protection Regulation and International Arbitration: Can There Be Harmonious Coexistence (with the GDPR Requirements Concerning Cross-Border Data Transfer)?","authors":"Elena Mazetova","doi":"10.17323/2713-2749.2021.2.21.48","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17323/2713-2749.2021.2.21.48","url":null,"abstract":"Recent global trends are producing powerful growth in the digital environment, and its spread is prompting adoption of strict and comprehensive regulation to ensure data protection. This results in a number of difficulties, one of which is lack of consistency between data protection regulation and the regulatory regimes applicable to specific industries and institutions. That inconsistency is particularly evident in the field of international arbitration — one of the most widely used and convenient methods for resolving international disputes. The principles and fundamental concepts that largely define international arbitration, such as autonomy of the parties and confidentiality, have made its use very well accepted and widespread. However, data protection requirements often force the parties that are subject to them to make a difficult choice between the basic principles of international arbitration and the requirements of data protection regulation. This bind has come about because data protection regulation, which generally imposes comprehensive compliance obligations, rarely takes into account the specifics of the industries in which it will be applied. In this article it is analyzing application of the GDPR requirements that pertain to cross-border data transfer from the perspective of international arbitration in order to illustrate difficulties and regulatory gaps that may be encountered by the entities interested in thorough compliance with the applicable regulations.","PeriodicalId":410740,"journal":{"name":"Legal Issues in the Digital Age","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122623376","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-27DOI: 10.17323/2713-2749.2021.2.3.20
Y. Tikhomirov, Nikolai Kichigin, Fatima V. Tsomartova, Sayana Balkhayeva
The coexistence of digitization and law fuels their mutual influence and calls for scholarly inquiry into their mutual impacts and the effects thereof. Technization of society has contributed to society’s development, and the objectives and vectors of this process have been in many ways informed by public and other social institutions, including law. Like before, digitization at its current stage combines social and technological mechanisms of managing societal processes, ingrained into the wide socio-economic context and connected with the implementation of the nation’s strategic objectives. Similar phenomena and processes have a strong impact beyond Russia’s borders as well. All this poses challenges for law. The article is an attempt to analyze legal challenges of digitization applying the method of comprehensive, intersectional and systemic analysis, which breaks down the excessive compartmentalization of sector-specific legal sciences and takes into account the relationship between national and international law, as well as advances in other social sciences. The new digital technologies transform law’s functionality, and this, firstly, is reflected in the dynamically developing sector-specific legislation, and secondly, adds a distinctive dimension to the new laws and regulations of general character that create the basis for digitization. Digitization transforms the way subjects of law operate and the volumes of legal relations between them; generates new forms of administrative decision-making and of liability for non-implementationof these decisions; problematizes the subject area of the legal nature of technical (electronic) legal acts and the place they occupy in the legislative and regulatory framework; highlights the issue of the potential and limitations of automation of law. The study leads the researchers to conclude that in the age of digital transformation of economy, social sphere and public administration, law steadily continues to function as the regulator of socio-economic and other processes in society, ensuring both stability and the necessary transformational activities of individuals and public institutions.
{"title":"Law and Digital Transformation","authors":"Y. Tikhomirov, Nikolai Kichigin, Fatima V. Tsomartova, Sayana Balkhayeva","doi":"10.17323/2713-2749.2021.2.3.20","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17323/2713-2749.2021.2.3.20","url":null,"abstract":"The coexistence of digitization and law fuels their mutual influence and calls for scholarly inquiry into their mutual impacts and the effects thereof. Technization of society has contributed to society’s development, and the objectives and vectors of this process have been in many ways informed by public and other social institutions, including law. Like before, digitization at its current stage combines social and technological mechanisms of managing societal processes, ingrained into the wide socio-economic context and connected with the implementation of the nation’s strategic objectives. Similar phenomena and processes have a strong impact beyond Russia’s borders as well. All this poses challenges for law. The article is an attempt to analyze legal challenges of digitization applying the method of comprehensive, intersectional and systemic analysis, which breaks down the excessive compartmentalization of sector-specific legal sciences and takes into account the relationship between national and international law, as well as advances in other social sciences. The new digital technologies transform law’s functionality, and this, firstly, is reflected in the dynamically developing sector-specific legislation, and secondly, adds a distinctive dimension to the new laws and regulations of general character that create the basis for digitization. Digitization transforms the way subjects of law operate and the volumes of legal relations between them; generates new forms of administrative decision-making and of liability for non-implementationof these decisions; problematizes the subject area of the legal nature of technical (electronic) legal acts and the place they occupy in the legislative and regulatory framework; highlights the issue of the potential and limitations of automation of law. The study leads the researchers to conclude that in the age of digital transformation of economy, social sphere and public administration, law steadily continues to function as the regulator of socio-economic and other processes in society, ensuring both stability and the necessary transformational activities of individuals and public institutions.","PeriodicalId":410740,"journal":{"name":"Legal Issues in the Digital Age","volume":"31 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123261354","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-27DOI: 10.17323/2713-2749.2021.2.49.67
Liudmila Terentieva
The author examines a special approach to establishing the sovereignty of the state in relation to cyberspace, the extraterritorial characteristics of which determine the question of the implementation of the territorial supremacy of the state. The author concludes that the understanding of the state’s sovereignty in relation to cyberspace lies not in detailing a set of measures in the form of sovereign powers undertaken in this area, but in constructing the boundaries of cyberspace both in relation to the technical component of the network infrastructure that supports the smooth functioning of the Network, and in in relation to the virtual component of cyberspace. To achieve the goal of the study, the author proposed to combine social, technological and subjective approaches, understanding by cyberspace an artificial telecommunication environment for the implementation of public relations controlled by a wide range of subjects (states, intergovernmental organizations, non-governmental organizations, individuals, etc.), the functioning and maintenance of which is carried out by means of software-technical infrastructure in the form of its physical part (telecommunication networks, computers, servers, routers, processors, satellites, etc.) and a virtual part (operating systems, data transmission standards, hardware applications, software, etc.).
{"title":"The Issue of State Sovereignty in Cyberspace","authors":"Liudmila Terentieva","doi":"10.17323/2713-2749.2021.2.49.67","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17323/2713-2749.2021.2.49.67","url":null,"abstract":"The author examines a special approach to establishing the sovereignty of the state in relation to cyberspace, the extraterritorial characteristics of which determine the question of the implementation of the territorial supremacy of the state. The author concludes that the understanding of the state’s sovereignty in relation to cyberspace lies not in detailing a set of measures in the form of sovereign powers undertaken in this area, but in constructing the boundaries of cyberspace both in relation to the technical component of the network infrastructure that supports the smooth functioning of the Network, and in in relation to the virtual component of cyberspace. To achieve the goal of the study, the author proposed to combine social, technological and subjective approaches, understanding by cyberspace an artificial telecommunication environment for the implementation of public relations controlled by a wide range of subjects (states, intergovernmental organizations, non-governmental organizations, individuals, etc.), the functioning and maintenance of which is carried out by means of software-technical infrastructure in the form of its physical part (telecommunication networks, computers, servers, routers, processors, satellites, etc.) and a virtual part (operating systems, data transmission standards, hardware applications, software, etc.).","PeriodicalId":410740,"journal":{"name":"Legal Issues in the Digital Age","volume":"22 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122147292","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-27DOI: 10.17323/2713-2749.2021.2.82.103
Sergey Garkusha-Bozhko
The development of information technologies in the modern world affects all spheres of human activity, including the sphere of military activities of states. The current level of development of military information technologies allows us to talk about a new fifth possible theatre of military operations, namely, cyberspace. The Tallinn Manual on International Law Applicable to Cyber Operations, developed in 2013 and updated in 2017 by experts from the NATO States, also confirms the likelihood of armed conflict in cyberspace. It is indisputable fact that cyber operations committed in the context of an armed conflict will be subject to the same rules of International Humanitarian Law that apply to such armed conflict. However, many cyber operations that can be classified as military operations may be committed in peacetime and are common cybercrimes. In such circumstances, it is imperative to distinguish between such cybercrimes and situations of armed conflict in cyberspace. Due to the fact, that there are only two types of armed conflict — international and non-international, this problem of differentiation raises the question of the typology of armed conflicts in relation to cyberspace. The main questions within the typology of cyber armed conflicts are: whether an international armed conflict can start solely as a result of a cyber-attack in the absence of the use of traditional armed force; and how to distinguish between ordinary criminal behaviour of individuals in cyberspace and non-international armed conflict in cyberspace? The purpose of this article is to provide answers to these urgent questions. The author analyses the following criteria that play a role in solving the above problems: criteria for assigning a cyber attack to a state and equating such a cyber-attack with an act of using armed force in a cyber armed conflict of an international character; and criteria for the organization of parties and the intensity of military actions in a non-international cyber armed conflict. Based on the results of this analysis, the author gives relevant suggestions for solving the above issues.
{"title":"Problems of Typology of Armed Conflicts in Cyberspace","authors":"Sergey Garkusha-Bozhko","doi":"10.17323/2713-2749.2021.2.82.103","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17323/2713-2749.2021.2.82.103","url":null,"abstract":"The development of information technologies in the modern world affects all spheres of human activity, including the sphere of military activities of states. The current level of development of military information technologies allows us to talk about a new fifth possible theatre of military operations, namely, cyberspace. The Tallinn Manual on International Law Applicable to Cyber Operations, developed in 2013 and updated in 2017 by experts from the NATO States, also confirms the likelihood of armed conflict in cyberspace. It is indisputable fact that cyber operations committed in the context of an armed conflict will be subject to the same rules of International Humanitarian Law that apply to such armed conflict. However, many cyber operations that can be classified as military operations may be committed in peacetime and are common cybercrimes. In such circumstances, it is imperative to distinguish between such cybercrimes and situations of armed conflict in cyberspace. Due to the fact, that there are only two types of armed conflict — international and non-international, this problem of differentiation raises the question of the typology of armed conflicts in relation to cyberspace. The main questions within the typology of cyber armed conflicts are: whether an international armed conflict can start solely as a result of a cyber-attack in the absence of the use of traditional armed force; and how to distinguish between ordinary criminal behaviour of individuals in cyberspace and non-international armed conflict in cyberspace? The purpose of this article is to provide answers to these urgent questions. The author analyses the following criteria that play a role in solving the above problems: criteria for assigning a cyber attack to a state and equating such a cyber-attack with an act of using armed force in a cyber armed conflict of an international character; and criteria for the organization of parties and the intensity of military actions in a non-international cyber armed conflict. Based on the results of this analysis, the author gives relevant suggestions for solving the above issues.","PeriodicalId":410740,"journal":{"name":"Legal Issues in the Digital Age","volume":"14 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125601653","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-27DOI: 10.17323/2713-2749.2021.2.68.81
Shubhendu Gupta, Reeta Sony
The dawn of the neocolonial project has seen the emergence of a new space: data. Data is a raw material that can be stitched, processed and marketed in the same way as the East India Company (EIC) used to do with India’s cotton. EIC, which started as one of the world’s first joint-stock companies, turned into a wild beast, building a corporate lobby with the help of lawyers and MP shareholders to amend legislation in its favor. The EIC became a particularly atrocious and innovative colonial project that directly or indirectly controlled continents, thanks to an army larger than the army of any nation-state at the time. The Drain Theory of Dadabhai Naroji have opened India’s eyes to how the EIC was taking raw material from the country and converting it into a finished product that was marketed in India again in the same way as raw data is being processed outside India and then marketed here today. In today’s digital era, big corporations need not own big armies, as companies are protected by nation-states and bailed out when required. Today, one does not need to travel overseas to explore and conquer Gold, God and Glory; instead, they are a click away. The neocolonial project runs on digital platforms, while the popular narrative of bridging the digital divide and giving internet access to millions of people resembles the idea of the “white savior” liberating the “noble savage” through modern Western education. Facebook’s grand plan of providing free internet to all can be best understood as a neocolonial strategy to mine the data of billions by equating it with water and land. Similarly, the Cambridge Analytica scandal provides an example of how neocolonial forces can influence the fundamental democratic process of electing a government. Therefore, nations endorsing democratic values should be especially wary of the trap of neocolonialist forces, as such nations are particularly vulnerable to their project. This paper critically study the cyber security infrastructure and policies in India and analyze the India’s approach towards cyber sovereignty and data colonialism and thereafter examine the India’s strategic position in cyberspace and suggest policy recommendations.
新殖民主义项目的曙光见证了一个新空间的出现:数据。数据是一种原材料，可以被缝制、加工和销售，就像东印度公司(East India Company, EIC)过去处理印度棉花一样。EIC最初是世界上最早的股份制公司之一，后来变成了一头野兽，在律师和国会议员股东的帮助下，建立了一个企业游说团体，以修改有利于自己的立法。EIC成为了一个特别残暴和创新的殖民项目，直接或间接地控制了各大洲，这要归功于当时一支比任何民族国家的军队都要庞大的军队。Dadabhai Naroji的流失理论让印度人看到了EIC是如何从印度获取原材料，并将其转化为成品，再在印度销售的，就像印度境外处理原始数据，然后在这里销售一样。在当今的数字时代，大公司不需要拥有庞大的军队，因为公司受到民族国家的保护，并在需要时得到纾困。今天，人们不需要到海外去探索和征服黄金、上帝和荣耀;相反，他们是一个点击。新殖民主义项目在数字平台上运行，而弥合数字鸿沟、让数百万人接入互联网的流行说法，类似于“白人救世主”通过现代西方教育解放“高贵野蛮人”的想法。Facebook向所有人提供免费互联网的宏伟计划，最好被理解为一种新殖民主义战略，通过将互联网等同于水和土地，来挖掘数十亿人的数据。同样，剑桥分析公司丑闻提供了一个例子，说明新殖民主义势力如何影响选举政府的基本民主过程。因此，支持民主价值观的国家应特别警惕新殖民主义势力的陷阱，因为这些国家特别容易受到新殖民主义计划的影响。本文批判性地研究了印度的网络安全基础设施和政策，分析了印度对网络主权和数据殖民主义的态度，随后研究了印度在网络空间的战略地位，并提出了政策建议。
{"title":"Quest of Data Colonialism and Cyber Sovereignty: India’s Strategic Position in Cyberspace","authors":"Shubhendu Gupta, Reeta Sony","doi":"10.17323/2713-2749.2021.2.68.81","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17323/2713-2749.2021.2.68.81","url":null,"abstract":"The dawn of the neocolonial project has seen the emergence of a new space: data. Data is a raw material that can be stitched, processed and marketed in the same way as the East India Company (EIC) used to do with India’s cotton. EIC, which started as one of the world’s first joint-stock companies, turned into a wild beast, building a corporate lobby with the help of lawyers and MP shareholders to amend legislation in its favor. The EIC became a particularly atrocious and innovative colonial project that directly or indirectly controlled continents, thanks to an army larger than the army of any nation-state at the time. The Drain Theory of Dadabhai Naroji have opened India’s eyes to how the EIC was taking raw material from the country and converting it into a finished product that was marketed in India again in the same way as raw data is being processed outside India and then marketed here today. In today’s digital era, big corporations need not own big armies, as companies are protected by nation-states and bailed out when required. Today, one does not need to travel overseas to explore and conquer Gold, God and Glory; instead, they are a click away. The neocolonial project runs on digital platforms, while the popular narrative of bridging the digital divide and giving internet access to millions of people resembles the idea of the “white savior” liberating the “noble savage” through modern Western education. Facebook’s grand plan of providing free internet to all can be best understood as a neocolonial strategy to mine the data of billions by equating it with water and land. Similarly, the Cambridge Analytica scandal provides an example of how neocolonial forces can influence the fundamental democratic process of electing a government. Therefore, nations endorsing democratic values should be especially wary of the trap of neocolonialist forces, as such nations are particularly vulnerable to their project. This paper critically study the cyber security infrastructure and policies in India and analyze the India’s approach towards cyber sovereignty and data colonialism and thereafter examine the India’s strategic position in cyberspace and suggest policy recommendations.","PeriodicalId":410740,"journal":{"name":"Legal Issues in the Digital Age","volume":"63 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114639314","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-05-04DOI: 10.17323/2713-2749.2021.1.3.16
E. Talapina
Digitalization has become omnipresent today. No longer limited to the security sphere, digital technologies are actively transforming society as a whole. However, the conservative institution of law does not always respond promptly to changes, and many lawyers believe that the traditional legislation in force is sufficient to handle this new object of regulation. Yet the fact is that this object cannot be called traditional from the regulatory standpoint. Technology has a powerful impact on both law and the state and so requires new solutions. Under such circumstances, it is important to gain a legal understanding of digitalization without delay. The purpose of this article is to analyze the current state of legal regulation of digital technologies in Russia. By employing classical legal methods for analyzing doctrine, legislation and jurisprudence, the author comes to the conclusion that digital law is a new branch of law. At the same time, its most significant aspect is the regulation of digital rights — subjective rights associated with the use of digital technologies. Despite the neutral and universal character of technologies, a comparative legal approach allows us to identify the specific features of Russian digital law, as well as the nuances of the regulation and protection of digital rights in Russia. The present article reflects the author’s position and strives to inspire further discussion about these issues.
{"title":"Digital Law and Digital Rights in Russia: Polemical Notes","authors":"E. Talapina","doi":"10.17323/2713-2749.2021.1.3.16","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17323/2713-2749.2021.1.3.16","url":null,"abstract":"Digitalization has become omnipresent today. No longer limited to the security sphere, digital technologies are actively transforming society as a whole. However, the conservative institution of law does not always respond promptly to changes, and many lawyers believe that the traditional legislation in force is sufficient to handle this new object of regulation. Yet the fact is that this object cannot be called traditional from the regulatory standpoint. Technology has a powerful impact on both law and the state and so requires new solutions. Under such circumstances, it is important to gain a legal understanding of digitalization without delay. The purpose of this article is to analyze the current state of legal regulation of digital technologies in Russia. By employing classical legal methods for analyzing doctrine, legislation and jurisprudence, the author comes to the conclusion that digital law is a new branch of law. At the same time, its most significant aspect is the regulation of digital rights — subjective rights associated with the use of digital technologies. Despite the neutral and universal character of technologies, a comparative legal approach allows us to identify the specific features of Russian digital law, as well as the nuances of the regulation and protection of digital rights in Russia. The present article reflects the author’s position and strives to inspire further discussion about these issues.","PeriodicalId":410740,"journal":{"name":"Legal Issues in the Digital Age","volume":"214 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"117352915","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-05-04DOI: 10.17323/2713-2749.2021.1.123.144
Y. Gracheva, S. Malikov, A. Chuchaev
It would be difficult to imagine modern society without information and telecommunication networks, including media and social networks that promote the development of the economy, education, medicine, etc. Media and social networks are an important means of communication and especially so during the coronavirus lockdown; however, the more people are involved in cyberspace, the more crimes are committed there. The subject of this study is deviant behavior on media and social networks with the objectives of identifying the main types of deviant behavior, ascertaining the techniques used to impair public relations protected by criminal law, assessing the existing measures in criminal law that prevent deviant behavior on the internet, and proposing new measures that may be necessary. General scientific (dialectical, logical, systematic) and special legal (comparative legal, formal legal, legal modeling) methods are applied. More than 80% of cybercrime in Russia involves theft using modern social engineering technology for phishing. Although the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation has recommended otherwise, these thefts are treated as a different class in the theory of criminal law and judicial practice. One of the ways to achieve uniformity in law enforcement is to exclude special types of fraud from the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Another common way of taking possession of someone else’s property is to use a computer program to freeze a system until a certain amount of money has been transferred to a particular account. A gap in the treatment of such acts by criminal law is identified and ways to eliminate it are proposed. The 2020 pandemic highlighted the role of internet in spreading various pieces of fake news; Federal Law No. 100-FZ of April 1, 2020, which supplemented Articles 207.1 and 207.2 of the Criminal Code, was an effective and timely response. Media and social networks are often used as a platform forinciting, preparing and/or organizing the commission of a crime or other offenses.The study of cyberterrorism shows that there is no need to introduce an independentstandard for such acts. Cybercrime also includes attacks on privacy, and the articleexplores internet harassment in detail by delineating different types of it and the legalresponse to them. A proposal to amend the wording of Article 137 of the CriminalCode is judged sound.
{"title":"Criminal law treatment of deviant behavior in media and social networks","authors":"Y. Gracheva, S. Malikov, A. Chuchaev","doi":"10.17323/2713-2749.2021.1.123.144","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17323/2713-2749.2021.1.123.144","url":null,"abstract":"It would be difficult to imagine modern society without information and telecommunication networks, including media and social networks that promote the development of the economy, education, medicine, etc. Media and social networks are an important means of communication and especially so during the coronavirus lockdown; however, the more people are involved in cyberspace, the more crimes are committed there. The subject of this study is deviant behavior on media and social networks with the objectives of identifying the main types of deviant behavior, ascertaining the techniques used to impair public relations protected by criminal law, assessing the existing measures in criminal law that prevent deviant behavior on the internet, and proposing new measures that may be necessary. General scientific (dialectical, logical, systematic) and special legal (comparative legal, formal legal, legal modeling) methods are applied. More than 80% of cybercrime in Russia involves theft using modern social engineering technology for phishing. Although the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation has recommended otherwise, these thefts are treated as a different class in the theory of criminal law and judicial practice. One of the ways to achieve uniformity in law enforcement is to exclude special types of fraud from the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Another common way of taking possession of someone else’s property is to use a computer program to freeze a system until a certain amount of money has been transferred to a particular account. A gap in the treatment of such acts by criminal law is identified and ways to eliminate it are proposed. The 2020 pandemic highlighted the role of internet in spreading various pieces of fake news; Federal Law No. 100-FZ of April 1, 2020, which supplemented Articles 207.1 and 207.2 of the Criminal Code, was an effective and timely response. Media and social networks are often used as a platform forinciting, preparing and/or organizing the commission of a crime or other offenses.The study of cyberterrorism shows that there is no need to introduce an independentstandard for such acts. Cybercrime also includes attacks on privacy, and the articleexplores internet harassment in detail by delineating different types of it and the legalresponse to them. A proposal to amend the wording of Article 137 of the CriminalCode is judged sound.","PeriodicalId":410740,"journal":{"name":"Legal Issues in the Digital Age","volume":"39 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121959758","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-05-04DOI: 10.17323/2713-2749.2021.1.100.122
Y. Truntsevsky, V. Sevalnev
The purpose of the present article is to gain an understanding of the opportunities and difficulties created by the introduction and development of the practice of network (smart) contracts. Our research methodology is based on a holistic set of principles and methods of scholarly analysis employed by modern legal science. It uses a dialectical method involving both general approaches (structural system method, formal logical method, analysis and synthesis of individual elements, individual features of concepts, abstraction, generalization, etc.) and particular methods (legal technical, systematic, comparative, historical, and grammatical methods, method of the unity of theory and practice, etc.). We analyze the views of lawyers and other specialists from Russia and abroad, legislative innovations in the field of digital technologies, the practice of blockchain-based smart contracts, and the main risks (whether legal, technological, operational, or criminogenic) of smart contracts for economic activities with a study of their causes. In the present-day situation, it is necessary to move from the legal definition of the smart contract and its legal and technological characteristics, advantages and disadvantages to the implementation of startups in a wide range of areas, especially business, public regulation, and social relations. Scholarly and information support for such processes will contribute to the development of industry, public administration and digital technology applications to improve the life of individual citizens and society as a whole. The introduction of smart contracts does not require the adoption of new laws or regulations. Instead, one should adapt and, possibly, modify existing legal principles at the legislative and judicial levels to pave the way for the use of smart contracts and other new technologies. The system of contract law provides a sufficient framework for regulating transactions without the introduction of any new legal categories. We propose approaches to the legal definition of the smart contract and identify a set of problems that must be solved at the legislative and technical legal levels in order to implement smart contracts effectively in different spheres of life.
{"title":"Smart contract: from definition to certainty","authors":"Y. Truntsevsky, V. Sevalnev","doi":"10.17323/2713-2749.2021.1.100.122","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17323/2713-2749.2021.1.100.122","url":null,"abstract":"The purpose of the present article is to gain an understanding of the opportunities and difficulties created by the introduction and development of the practice of network (smart) contracts. Our research methodology is based on a holistic set of principles and methods of scholarly analysis employed by modern legal science. It uses a dialectical method involving both general approaches (structural system method, formal logical method, analysis and synthesis of individual elements, individual features of concepts, abstraction, generalization, etc.) and particular methods (legal technical, systematic, comparative, historical, and grammatical methods, method of the unity of theory and practice, etc.). We analyze the views of lawyers and other specialists from Russia and abroad, legislative innovations in the field of digital technologies, the practice of blockchain-based smart contracts, and the main risks (whether legal, technological, operational, or criminogenic) of smart contracts for economic activities with a study of their causes. In the present-day situation, it is necessary to move from the legal definition of the smart contract and its legal and technological characteristics, advantages and disadvantages to the implementation of startups in a wide range of areas, especially business, public regulation, and social relations. Scholarly and information support for such processes will contribute to the development of industry, public administration and digital technology applications to improve the life of individual citizens and society as a whole. The introduction of smart contracts does not require the adoption of new laws or regulations. Instead, one should adapt and, possibly, modify existing legal principles at the legislative and judicial levels to pave the way for the use of smart contracts and other new technologies. The system of contract law provides a sufficient framework for regulating transactions without the introduction of any new legal categories. We propose approaches to the legal definition of the smart contract and identify a set of problems that must be solved at the legislative and technical legal levels in order to implement smart contracts effectively in different spheres of life.","PeriodicalId":410740,"journal":{"name":"Legal Issues in the Digital Age","volume":"51 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129457418","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-05-04DOI: 10.17323/2713-2749.2021.1.42.63
V. Kalyatin
The broad use of artificial intelligence in creating intellectual works poses difficulties for legislators and courts in choosing the proper legal framework for such works and defining the place of artificial intelligence in the legal system as a whole. In this article, we shall study different models of regulating such issues and analyze the prospects and consequences of their use. We show that only a few of many different models for copyrighting AI-generated works are viable and that the most promising among them is the introduction of a special limited related right for the person who organizes the use of the AI application. This model resembles already existing civil law approaches to protecting the rights of phonogram producers, broadcasting and cablecasting organizations, and database creators. Thus, the inclusion of artificial intelligence into the IP domain does not require reconstructing the legal framework but only adapting existing approaches.
{"title":"Rights to Intellectual Works Generated with Artificial Intelligence: A Russian View in the Global Context","authors":"V. Kalyatin","doi":"10.17323/2713-2749.2021.1.42.63","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17323/2713-2749.2021.1.42.63","url":null,"abstract":"The broad use of artificial intelligence in creating intellectual works poses difficulties for legislators and courts in choosing the proper legal framework for such works and defining the place of artificial intelligence in the legal system as a whole. In this article, we shall study different models of regulating such issues and analyze the prospects and consequences of their use. We show that only a few of many different models for copyrighting AI-generated works are viable and that the most promising among them is the introduction of a special limited related right for the person who organizes the use of the AI application. This model resembles already existing civil law approaches to protecting the rights of phonogram producers, broadcasting and cablecasting organizations, and database creators. Thus, the inclusion of artificial intelligence into the IP domain does not require reconstructing the legal framework but only adapting existing approaches.","PeriodicalId":410740,"journal":{"name":"Legal Issues in the Digital Age","volume":"179 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131515829","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-05-04DOI: 10.17323/2713-2749.2021.1.145.159
E. Russkevich
The article proves that the influence of exponential and combinatorial technological changes has led to a crisis of criminal law, which is expressed in the inability to perform its basic functions due to the permanent and dynamic external environmental impact. The author identifies the following fundamental provisions that should be relied on when making decisions on the modernization of criminal law: the emergence of a new (informational) method of committing a crime does not a priori indicate that it is more dangerous than the traditional one, but in many respects indicates the problem of lag social control from the development of society and changes in crime; the adaptation of the norms of the criminal law to the conditions of the information society should not be associated with the construction of “digital twins” of traditional criminal law prohibitions; the introduction of appropriate amendments to the content of the norms is justified only in cases where the adaptive capacity of criminal legislation to manifestations of digital crime exhausts itself; the recognition of the use of information technologies as a qualifying feature of a crime in general must comply with the criteria for differentiating criminal liability justified in science. The article separately substantiates that the emergence of a “digital personality” will complete the beginning of the transition from the traditional criminal law of the industrial society of the 20th century towards the criminal law of the digital world of the 21th century (criminal law 2.0). First of all, this is due to the fact that artificial intelligence and “digital personality” will fundamentally change the scope of criminal law protection.
{"title":"Palingenesis of Criminal Law in the Conditions of Digital Reality","authors":"E. Russkevich","doi":"10.17323/2713-2749.2021.1.145.159","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17323/2713-2749.2021.1.145.159","url":null,"abstract":"The article proves that the influence of exponential and combinatorial technological changes has led to a crisis of criminal law, which is expressed in the inability to perform its basic functions due to the permanent and dynamic external environmental impact. The author identifies the following fundamental provisions that should be relied on when making decisions on the modernization of criminal law: the emergence of a new (informational) method of committing a crime does not a priori indicate that it is more dangerous than the traditional one, but in many respects indicates the problem of lag social control from the development of society and changes in crime; the adaptation of the norms of the criminal law to the conditions of the information society should not be associated with the construction of “digital twins” of traditional criminal law prohibitions; the introduction of appropriate amendments to the content of the norms is justified only in cases where the adaptive capacity of criminal legislation to manifestations of digital crime exhausts itself; the recognition of the use of information technologies as a qualifying feature of a crime in general must comply with the criteria for differentiating criminal liability justified in science. The article separately substantiates that the emergence of a “digital personality” will complete the beginning of the transition from the traditional criminal law of the industrial society of the 20th century towards the criminal law of the digital world of the 21th century (criminal law 2.0). First of all, this is due to the fact that artificial intelligence and “digital personality” will fundamentally change the scope of criminal law protection.","PeriodicalId":410740,"journal":{"name":"Legal Issues in the Digital Age","volume":"56 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131714281","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：