Pub Date : 2020-11-04DOI: 10.17323/2713-2749.2020.2.144.162
A. Kozyrin
The rapid development of information technologies and digitalization of the global economy is compelling the Russian customs service to quickly create an electronic customs system that can coexist alongside the traditional paper customs control. The creation of electronic customs aligns with the development strategies outlined in Presidential Decree No. 204 “On national goals and strategic development tasks of the Russian Federation through 2024” of 7 May 2018. Electronic customs contributes to the development of international cooperation, exports, and an attractive investment climate. The first results of electronic customs are impressive: more than a third of all customs declarations are registered automatically, and more than a quarter of all low-risk declarations are issued automatically with the average release time reduced to about five minutes. The creation of electronic customs is an integral part of the digitalization processes in Russian economy. Customs operations are being automated and modern information and communication technologies are being introduced, and these changes provide significant savings in both time and money. The article discusses new approaches in electronic customs operation: the risk management system, personal accounts for foreign economy actors, and unified personal accounts. It also points out the main difficulties in digitalizing customs operations (lack of preparation for e-customs among Russian organisations, the low level of existing digitalization in many EAEU countries, etc.). All organisations, regardless of their economic clout, may now take advantage of digitized customs operations (reduced customs procession times, lower overhead costs, no appear-ance in person at customs offices, etc.), but the true winners are small and medium-size businesses, many of which formerly could not bear the high overhead costs associated with customs clearance and control and were in effect barred from accessing foreign markets. The article discusses the main institutions of modern electronic customs, how electronic customs may contribute to effective resistance to corruption in public service, as well as prospects for further digitalization of customs operations. declaration
{"title":"E-Customs and Customs Regulation in the Russian Federation","authors":"A. Kozyrin","doi":"10.17323/2713-2749.2020.2.144.162","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17323/2713-2749.2020.2.144.162","url":null,"abstract":"The rapid development of information technologies and digitalization of the global economy is compelling the Russian customs service to quickly create an electronic customs system that can coexist alongside the traditional paper customs control. The creation of electronic customs aligns with the development strategies outlined in Presidential Decree No. 204 “On national goals and strategic development tasks of the Russian Federation through 2024” of 7 May 2018. Electronic customs contributes to the development of international cooperation, exports, and an attractive investment climate. The first results of electronic customs are impressive: more than a third of all customs declarations are registered automatically, and more than a quarter of all low-risk declarations are issued automatically with the average release time reduced to about five minutes. The creation of electronic customs is an integral part of the digitalization processes in Russian economy. Customs operations are being automated and modern information and communication technologies are being introduced, and these changes provide significant savings in both time and money. The article discusses new approaches in electronic customs operation: the risk management system, personal accounts for foreign economy actors, and unified personal accounts. It also points out the main difficulties in digitalizing customs operations (lack of preparation for e-customs among Russian organisations, the low level of existing digitalization in many EAEU countries, etc.). All organisations, regardless of their economic clout, may now take advantage of digitized customs operations (reduced customs procession times, lower overhead costs, no appear-ance in person at customs offices, etc.), but the true winners are small and medium-size businesses, many of which formerly could not bear the high overhead costs associated with customs clearance and control and were in effect barred from accessing foreign markets. The article discusses the main institutions of modern electronic customs, how electronic customs may contribute to effective resistance to corruption in public service, as well as prospects for further digitalization of customs operations. declaration","PeriodicalId":410740,"journal":{"name":"Legal Issues in the Digital Age","volume":"12 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-11-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127618861","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 : 2020-11-04DOI: 10.17323/2713-2749.2020.2.93.143
Mikhail S. Zhuravlev, O. Blagoveshchenskaya
The pandemic is a watershed event that has prompted both an evaluation of the achievements of information and communications technology (ICT) and also a re-evaluation of the prospects for developing social processes compatible with ICT. Much has been already been accomplished in Russia and throughout the world. But in the current pandemic, telemedicine is facing new challenges. This article discusses the state of the art in telemedicine and the prospects for its development in the changing conditions wrought by the pandemic. Examples are provided of the solutions that telemedicine can offer in such a difficult period, and the risks due to widespread use of telemedicine are analyzed. The impact of telemedicine is extensive with consequences for technology, management, and law. This article is a multidisciplinary study of telemedicine from the perspective of management and law. The article examines how telemedicine technologies have been implemented and developed, the obstacles to telemedicine’s advance in various countries, and the legislative frameworks that governs it. The article’s interdisciplinary study is based on an integrated methodology which combines: a formal logical approach to analysis of the legislation concerning telemedicine; a comparison of the development of telemedicine across several countries; and a sociological method to identify the attitude of Russian medical staff toward telemedicine and its impact. Although telemedicine has been developed and regulated separately by each country, there are general development trends, such as collection and analysis of electronic health records (EHR), devices and systems to simplify communication between doctors and with chronically ill patients, and others. Legislation is one of the significant barriers to the development of telemedicine in different countries. However, the pandemic has been a catalyst for legislative change, and it is precisely those changes that will eliminate the key problem in telemedicine that beset Russia where telemedicine now resembles separate pieces in a puzzle.
{"title":"Telemedicine: Current State and COVID-19 Lessons","authors":"Mikhail S. Zhuravlev, O. Blagoveshchenskaya","doi":"10.17323/2713-2749.2020.2.93.143","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17323/2713-2749.2020.2.93.143","url":null,"abstract":"The pandemic is a watershed event that has prompted both an evaluation of the achievements of information and communications technology (ICT) and also a re-evaluation of the prospects for developing social processes compatible with ICT. Much has been already been accomplished in Russia and throughout the world. But in the current pandemic, telemedicine is facing new challenges. This article discusses the state of the art in telemedicine and the prospects for its development in the changing conditions wrought by the pandemic. Examples are provided of the solutions that telemedicine can offer in such a difficult period, and the risks due to widespread use of telemedicine are analyzed. The impact of telemedicine is extensive with consequences for technology, management, and law. This article is a multidisciplinary study of telemedicine from the perspective of management and law. The article examines how telemedicine technologies have been implemented and developed, the obstacles to telemedicine’s advance in various countries, and the legislative frameworks that governs it. The article’s interdisciplinary study is based on an integrated methodology which combines: a formal logical approach to analysis of the legislation concerning telemedicine; a comparison of the development of telemedicine across several countries; and a sociological method to identify the attitude of Russian medical staff toward telemedicine and its impact. Although telemedicine has been developed and regulated separately by each country, there are general development trends, such as collection and analysis of electronic health records (EHR), devices and systems to simplify communication between doctors and with chronically ill patients, and others. Legislation is one of the significant barriers to the development of telemedicine in different countries. However, the pandemic has been a catalyst for legislative change, and it is precisely those changes that will eliminate the key problem in telemedicine that beset Russia where telemedicine now resembles separate pieces in a puzzle.","PeriodicalId":410740,"journal":{"name":"Legal Issues in the Digital Age","volume":"6 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-11-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"120964766","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 : 2020-11-04DOI: 10.17323/2713-2749.2020.2.173.177
Nail R. Akhmetzakirov
The global digitalization trend has embraced all spheres of life, including the justice system, and Kazakhstan is no exception. Back at the Sixth Judiciary Convention in 2013, the first president of Kazakhstan, Elbasy Nursultan Nazarbayev, ordered the broad introduction of new information technologies in courts. This was reflected in many strategic documents, including the 100 Concrete Steps National Plan and the state’s Digital Kazakhstan program. The experience of using new technologies in the Republic’s courts earned positive reviews both within the country and abroad. Thanks to the digita lization of its courts, Doing Business ranked Kazakhstan 4th among 190 countries for contract enforcement and 2nd for judicial quality. This result has been achieved through the systematic development of a number of information systems and services over the past five years. These include the Törelik system, the Internet portal of the judicial authorities, the Court Office service, electronic mailing systems and others. These have simplified the justice system significantly, making it mobile, transparent and easy to understand. Electronic justice saves citizens both money and time. Each of these steps deserves individual mention. News
{"title":"Digitalizing Kazakhstan’s Courts: Keeping Up with the Times","authors":"Nail R. Akhmetzakirov","doi":"10.17323/2713-2749.2020.2.173.177","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17323/2713-2749.2020.2.173.177","url":null,"abstract":"The global digitalization trend has embraced all spheres of life, including the justice system, and Kazakhstan is no exception. Back at the Sixth Judiciary Convention in 2013, the first president of Kazakhstan, Elbasy Nursultan Nazarbayev, ordered the broad introduction of new information technologies in courts. This was reflected in many strategic documents, including the 100 Concrete Steps National Plan and the state’s Digital Kazakhstan program. The experience of using new technologies in the Republic’s courts earned positive reviews both within the country and abroad. Thanks to the digita lization of its courts, Doing Business ranked Kazakhstan 4th among 190 countries for contract enforcement and 2nd for judicial quality. This result has been achieved through the systematic development of a number of information systems and services over the past five years. These include the Törelik system, the Internet portal of the judicial authorities, the Court Office service, electronic mailing systems and others. These have simplified the justice system significantly, making it mobile, transparent and easy to understand. Electronic justice saves citizens both money and time. Each of these steps deserves individual mention. News","PeriodicalId":410740,"journal":{"name":"Legal Issues in the Digital Age","volume":"21 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-11-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130317766","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 : 2020-11-04DOI: 10.17323/2713-2749.2020.2.3.23
Lindsey Whitlow
Artificial Intelligence (“AI”) systems have become vastly more sophisticated since the term was first used in the 1950s. Through the advent of machine learning and artificial neural networks, computers utilizing AI technology have become so advanced that a team of attorneys in the United Kingdom claim that their AI machine, DABUS, actually created patentable inventions. The team went so far as to file patent applications with the European Patent Office, the UK Intellectual Property Office, and the US Patent and Trademark Office. All applications named DABUS as the inventor. This sparked a heated debate within academic and legal communities that centered around whether AI can be an inventor, and, if so, what this might mean for the current state of patent law. This paper discusses the purposes of patent law through a brief look at its history, in an effort to highlight why patent law as it stands may no longer be onesize-fits-all. It considers the evolution of AI systems to explain how one might determine that a machine could be “creative” and therefore justifiably named as inventor. It surveys popular opinions and organizes them on a spectrum ranging from those who believe that patent law should stay as it is and that AI cannot be an inventor, to those who, more dramatically, advocate for the abolition of patent protection for AI inventions. This paper suggests that legislators be proactive in traversing this technological minefield rather than reactive, as technology will continue to outpace, and trample, law if left to its own machinations.
{"title":"When the Invented Becomes the Inventor: Can, and Should AI Systems be Granted Inventorship Status for Patent Applications?","authors":"Lindsey Whitlow","doi":"10.17323/2713-2749.2020.2.3.23","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17323/2713-2749.2020.2.3.23","url":null,"abstract":"Artificial Intelligence (“AI”) systems have become vastly more sophisticated since the term was first used in the 1950s. Through the advent of machine learning and artificial neural networks, computers utilizing AI technology have become so advanced that a team of attorneys in the United Kingdom claim that their AI machine, DABUS, actually created patentable inventions. The team went so far as to file patent applications with the European Patent Office, the UK Intellectual Property Office, and the US Patent and Trademark Office. All applications named DABUS as the inventor. This sparked a heated debate within academic and legal communities that centered around whether AI can be an inventor, and, if so, what this might mean for the current state of patent law. This paper discusses the purposes of patent law through a brief look at its history, in an effort to highlight why patent law as it stands may no longer be onesize-fits-all. It considers the evolution of AI systems to explain how one might determine that a machine could be “creative” and therefore justifiably named as inventor. It surveys popular opinions and organizes them on a spectrum ranging from those who believe that patent law should stay as it is and that AI cannot be an inventor, to those who, more dramatically, advocate for the abolition of patent protection for AI inventions. This paper suggests that legislators be proactive in traversing this technological minefield rather than reactive, as technology will continue to outpace, and trample, law if left to its own machinations.","PeriodicalId":410740,"journal":{"name":"Legal Issues in the Digital Age","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-11-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133928170","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 : 2020-07-25DOI: 10.17323/2713-2749.2020.1.124.134
M. Kolsdorf
Analysis of causes and outcome of recent judicial conflict between solid database companies.
近年来实体数据库公司司法纠纷的起因及结果分析。
{"title":"Commentary on the Legal Practice of Database Protection Protection of Allied Rights to Database: V Kontakte Ltd. v. Dabl Ltd.","authors":"M. Kolsdorf","doi":"10.17323/2713-2749.2020.1.124.134","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17323/2713-2749.2020.1.124.134","url":null,"abstract":"Analysis of causes and outcome of recent judicial conflict between solid database companies.","PeriodicalId":410740,"journal":{"name":"Legal Issues in the Digital Age","volume":"16 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116443865","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 : 2020-07-25DOI: 10.17323/2713-2749.2020.1.32.53
C. Hutchinson
Blockchain is a catch-all term for a combination of three technologies: distributed ledger, cryptology and network protocols. The first enables storing the same info in different places, the second allows secure transactions to be recorded and then encrypted on the distributed ledger. The third element governs the network and verifies transactions across the network automatically and independently. Considered by many as “the biggest technological innovation since the Internet” 1 , blockchain is a decentralized, more secure and transparent model for transactions that operates on an encrypted peer-to-peer basis. This model makes trust between parties superfluous by instead placing trust in the underlying technological platform. This would effectively remove the need for intermediaries whose business has been to make up for the lack of trust; these include banks, brokers, governments, internet platforms, law firms etc. 2 While reducing the costs of contract enforcement and thus facilitating trade, blockchain technology may have significant implications for antitrust law. As decentralized organizations such as blockchain are not recognized as legal persons, this raises questions about whether anticompetitive practices and their perpetrators can be identified. For exam-ple, can a non-entity hold a dominant position? Can blockchain create a “monopoly without a monopolist”? Finally, if a blockchain is dominant, which users and/or entities hold that dominant position? This article intends to highlight the challenges that blockchain presents to the analyses of unilateral anticompetitive practices 3 .
{"title":"The Challenges of Blockchain Technology to Competition Law","authors":"C. Hutchinson","doi":"10.17323/2713-2749.2020.1.32.53","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17323/2713-2749.2020.1.32.53","url":null,"abstract":"Blockchain is a catch-all term for a combination of three technologies: distributed ledger, cryptology and network protocols. The first enables storing the same info in different places, the second allows secure transactions to be recorded and then encrypted on the distributed ledger. The third element governs the network and verifies transactions across the network automatically and independently. Considered by many as “the biggest technological innovation since the Internet” 1 , blockchain is a decentralized, more secure and transparent model for transactions that operates on an encrypted peer-to-peer basis. This model makes trust between parties superfluous by instead placing trust in the underlying technological platform. This would effectively remove the need for intermediaries whose business has been to make up for the lack of trust; these include banks, brokers, governments, internet platforms, law firms etc. 2 While reducing the costs of contract enforcement and thus facilitating trade, blockchain technology may have significant implications for antitrust law. As decentralized organizations such as blockchain are not recognized as legal persons, this raises questions about whether anticompetitive practices and their perpetrators can be identified. For exam-ple, can a non-entity hold a dominant position? Can blockchain create a “monopoly without a monopolist”? Finally, if a blockchain is dominant, which users and/or entities hold that dominant position? This article intends to highlight the challenges that blockchain presents to the analyses of unilateral anticompetitive practices 3 .","PeriodicalId":410740,"journal":{"name":"Legal Issues in the Digital Age","volume":"23 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114237888","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 : 2020-07-25DOI: 10.17323/2713-2749.2020.1.54.78
N. Dmitrik
The world is connected — governments, business and people are increasingly living and working in a globally connected digital space. People no longer identify themselves as belonging to spatial communities (neighborhood, town, city or country) but by subscribing to digital ecosystems like Apple or Android, Facebook or VKontakte, etc. Governments use digital platforms at the local, regional and national levels to administer certain powers and procedures (even electoral campaigns) and to get feedback from their citizens. As citizens become digital citizens — connected to a wide range of internet resources including electronic government, banking, local management systems, as well as to social media and global internet companies such as Google and Yandex — they simultaneously become subject to rights, rules, laws, and regulations locally and globally. But what are those rights and rules and what do they entail? Who has the responsibility of ensuring that all citizens have equal access to them and are protected from exploitation? What governs the way that global and local digital businesses operate? The article discusses the exercise and protection of rights in online and offline ecosystems in Russia with special attention given to enabling participation by citizens and to multiple stakeholders online and offline. The recommendations and conclusions here may be applicable to all countries experiencing digital transformation.
{"title":"Digital State, Digital Citizen: Making Fair and Effective Rules for a Digital World","authors":"N. Dmitrik","doi":"10.17323/2713-2749.2020.1.54.78","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17323/2713-2749.2020.1.54.78","url":null,"abstract":"The world is connected — governments, business and people are increasingly living and working in a globally connected digital space. People no longer identify themselves as belonging to spatial communities (neighborhood, town, city or country) but by subscribing to digital ecosystems like Apple or Android, Facebook or VKontakte, etc. Governments use digital platforms at the local, regional and national levels to administer certain powers and procedures (even electoral campaigns) and to get feedback from their citizens. As citizens become digital citizens — connected to a wide range of internet resources including electronic government, banking, local management systems, as well as to social media and global internet companies such as Google and Yandex — they simultaneously become subject to rights, rules, laws, and regulations locally and globally. But what are those rights and rules and what do they entail? Who has the responsibility of ensuring that all citizens have equal access to them and are protected from exploitation? What governs the way that global and local digital businesses operate? The article discusses the exercise and protection of rights in online and offline ecosystems in Russia with special attention given to enabling participation by citizens and to multiple stakeholders online and offline. The recommendations and conclusions here may be applicable to all countries experiencing digital transformation.","PeriodicalId":410740,"journal":{"name":"Legal Issues in the Digital Age","volume":"18 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"117194644","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：