Search results

Aim of the present monograph is the economic analysis of the role of MNEs regarding globalisation and digital economy and in parallel there is a reference and examination of some legal aspects concerning MNEs, cyberspace and e‐commerce as the means of expression of the digital economy. The whole effort of the author is focused on the examination of various aspects of MNEs and their impact upon globalisation and vice versa and how and if we are moving towards a global digital economy.

The European Union’s Digital Markets Act (DMA) calls for far-reaching changes to the way economic activity will occur in EU digital markets. Before its remedies are imposed, it is critical to assess their impacts on individual markets, the digital sector, and the overall European economy. The European Commission (EC) released an Impact Assessment in support of the DMA that purports to evaluate it using cost/benefit analysis.

An economic evaluation of the DMA should consider its full impacts on dynamic competition. The Impact Assessment neither assesses the DMA's impact on dynamic competition in the digital economy nor evaluates the impacts of specific DMA prohibitions and obligations. Instead, it considers benefits in general and largely ignores costs. We study its benefit assessments and find they are based on highly inappropriate methodologies and assumptions. A cost/benefit study using inappropriate methodologies and largely ignoring costs cannot provide a sound policy assessment.

Instead of promoting dynamic competition between platforms, the DMA will likely reinforce existing market structures, ossify market boundaries, and stunt European innovation. The DMA is likely to chill R&D by encouraging free riding on the investments of others, which discourages making those investments. Avoiding harm to innovation is critical because innovation delivers large, positive spillover benefits, driving increases in productivity, employment, wages, and prosperity.

The DMA prioritizes static over dynamic competition, with the potential to harm the European economy. Given this, the Impact Assessment does not demonstrate that the DMA will be beneficial overall, and its implementation must be carefully tailored to alleviate or lessen its potential to harm Europe’s economic performance.

This paper aims to show how the European Commission is seeking to solve the problems of market fragmentation and inaccessibility of copyright content in the Digital Single Market. The analysis draws on a still unresolved conflict between the enforcement of national copyright titles and the European Union (EU) policy objective to ensure pan-European access to copyright works.

First, the paper focuses on the causal relationship between national copyright systems and the existing territorial partitions in the online content markets. Second, the paper reviews the piecemeal approach followed by the Commission in its recent legislative initiative aimed at ensuring the cross-border “portability” of online content services. Third, the paper points out how a much more radical approach the Commission has undertaken in an ongoing antitrust case against the territorial partitions created by major film producers and the biggest EU broadcasters might revisit the principle of copyright’s territoriality.

In particular, the paper explains why the application of Article 101 TFEU with regard to the licensing agreements creating areas of absolute territorial exclusivity might have potentially disruptive effects on the existing models of online distribution. While pointing out that this outcome will largely depend on how the ongoing antitrust case will be settled, the paper concludes that the liberalization of so-called “passive sales” might force content owners and broadcasters (or content suppliers) to re-structure markets for online content and to replace territoriality with other criteria that might help them differentiate their offerings and packages.

The modernization of copyright rules that the Juncker Commission has advocated since the start of its mandate aims to ensure that consumers can access services, music, movies and sporting events on their electronic devices wherever they are in Europe and regardless of borders. In May 2015, this pledge was transposed in the first pillar of the Commission Communication “A Digital Single Market Strategy for Europe”. In particular, the Commission announced its intention to propose, before the end of 2015, legislation to reduce differences and friction between national copyright regimes and prevent “unjustified” geo-blocking. In parallel, DG Competition of the European Commission in its capacity as antitrust authority is conducting a formal antitrust investigation aimed to examine whether territorial licensing agreements concluded by several US film studios with the largest European pay-tv broadcasters could be regarded as incompatible with Article 101 TFEU. For the first time, a paper aims to compare the expected outcome of the ongoing reform of the EU copyright framework vis-à-vis the potential outcome of the antitrust investigation led by DG Competition and identify the pros and cons of the two approaches followed by the Commission.

Consumption taxes are an integral part of government revenue in countries around the world and are often subject to consumer evasion. The rapid rise of electronic commerce has exacerbated this problem as cross-border selling over the internet has enabled foreign businesses to sell and avoid collection and remittance of tax on their sales.

In this paper, we search for the solution to this problem through the analysis of three tax collection models: vendor, financial institution, and internet service provider (ISP). In addition, we examine administrative tools that enable more effective collection as well as inducements for taxpayers or collection agents to carry out their responsibility.

We conclude that the ISP collection model is not feasible at this time. On the other hand, we find that the vendor model, when supplemented with appropriate administrative tools and inducements, and the financial institution model, both represent viable options for policymakers to consider.

This article seeks to take a critical look at the proposed Common European Sales Law (CESL).

The article looks at the rationales given to support the enactment of the CESL. The approach is critical in nature seeking to vet the plausibility of the rationales given for a new regulation The article also takes a critical look at the CESL's structure and trilogy of coverage – sale of goods, supply of digital content, and supply of services.

The article exposes some of the shortcomings of the CESL and the dangers to substantive private law of crafting a regulation based on political feasibility.

The CESL as proposed offers some innovative ideas in areas of the bifurcation of businesses into large and small to medium‐sized enterprises (SMEs), as well as rules covering digital content and the supply of trade‐related services. In the end, the analysis suggests a more thorough review is needed to better understand the CESL's interrelationship with the Convention on Contracts for the International Sales Law (CISG) and EU consumer protection law.

Further analysis is needed and unanswered questions need to be answered prior to the enactment of the CESL into law. A practical first step would to begin with a more targeted law focused on internet trading and licensing contracts.

This article questions the rationales given for the enactment of an ambitious new regulation covering disparate areas of sale of goods, supplying (licensing) of digital content, trade‐related services, and consumer protection. It further questions the rationality and practicality of the creation of the designation of SMEs as types of businesses in need of extra protections not currently provided by contract law's general policing doctrines.

This paper aims to investigate the scale and drivers of cross-border real estate development in Western Europe and Central and Eastern Europe.

Placing cross-border real estate development within the framework of foreign direct investment (FDI), conceptual complexities in characterizing the notional real estate developer are emphasized. Drawing upon a transaction database, this paper proxies cross-border real estate development flows with asset sales by developers.

Much higher levels of market penetration by international real estate developers are found in the less mature markets of Central and Eastern Europe. Analysis suggests a complex range of determinants with physical distance remaining a consistent barrier to cross-border development flows.

This analysis adds significant value in terms of understanding cross-border real estate development flows. In this study, a detailed examination of the issues based on a rigorous empirical analysis through gravity modelling is offered. The gravity framework is one of the most confirmed empirical regularities in international economics and commonly applied to trade, FDI, migration, foreign portfolio investment inter alia. This paper assesses the extent to which it provides useful insights into the pattern of cross-border real estate development flows.

Among the top management issues covered in this section are: leadership to promote change; issues of corporate culture; effective international strategy; environmental leadership; investment in Eastern Europe; and developing “world‐class” manufacturing strategy.

The COVID-19 pandemic has demonstrated the increasing need for digital solutions to maintain economic and social activities remotely. Times of physical distancing made it clear that besides keeping trade running, they are crucial for education, health, work, etc. During the pandemic, e-commerce has played a growing role in global economic activity as part of the wider digital economy. As social distancing and movement restrictions become normal, businesses and consumers have become increasingly digital and provide and buy more goods and services online.

The noteworthy development in this process is that much earlier than the pandemic, in 2015, the European Commission started developing a Digital Single Market strategy which is aiming at bringing distinctive digital markets together across the Union. The Digital Single Market is a modern version of the European Union (EU) Common Market established in 1957, which allowed the free movement of goods, services, capital, and people all around the region. The fact that such an application was started long before the pandemic provided some vital advantages to the countries involved in the strategy during the pandemic process.

This study is investigating how the EU Digital Market and the policy implementations connected to it helped digital transformation of the countries of the EU. Digital Economy and Society Index, and E-Commerce and internet access data of Single Market countries are investigated within the scope of the study. The data covering 2011–2021 period is collected from the Eurostat database. When we studied the data, although it is possible to talk about a benefit for the EU in general, less developed countries of the region benefited more from the process.

This article aims to take a critical look at the proposed Common European Sales Law (CESL) and its field of application.

The article provides a comparative analysis of the scope of application of CESL with that of the Convention on Contracts for the International Sales of Goods (CISG). The approach is critical in nature in that it questions the regulation of business‐to‐business (B2B) transactions under CESL. It also takes a critical look at the CESL and its coverage of three areas of contracting – sale of goods, supply of digital content, and supply of services.

The article exposes some of the shortcomings of the CESL in relation to its field of application.

The CESL as proposed offers an optional regulation that complicates the law of transborder sales within the European Union (EU) and between EU member states and non‐EU states. The article recommends that CESL not extend its coverage to B2B transactions and leave transborder commercial transactions to the CISG. The article also suggests other changes to improve the CESL.

Further analysis is needed and more defined rules should be considered before CESL is enacted into law.

This article questions the wide scope of application of CESL. It further questions the rationality and practicality of the CESL's coverage of B2B transactions.

Investigates the differences in protocols between arbitral tribunals and courts, with particular emphasis on US, Greek and English law. Gives examples of each country and its way of using the law in specific circumstances, and shows the variations therein. Sums up that arbitration is much the better way to gok as it avoids delays and expenses, plus the vexation/frustration of normal litigation. Concludes that the US and Greek constitutions and common law tradition in England appear to allow involved parties to choose their own judge, who can thus be an arbitrator. Discusses e‐commerce and speculates on this for the future.