1,720,957 research outputs found
Securities: Its Conception and Protection of Interests of its Holders
No full textTheoretical studies of the problems of the securities markets in the Russian Federation incline to one or other of the two traditional approaches. The first consists of comparing the definition of "valuable paper" set forth in the current legislation of the Russian Federation, with the theoretical model of "Wertpapiere" elaborated by German scholars more than 90 years ago. The problem with this approach is, in Mr. Pentsov's opinion, that any new features of the definition of "security" that do not coincide with the theoretical model of "Wertpapiere" (such as valuable papers existing in non-material, electronic form) are claimed to be incorrect and removed from the current legislation of the Russian Federation. The second approach works on the basis of the differentiation between the Common Law concept of "security" and the Civil Law concept of "valuable paper".
Mr. Pentsov's research, presented in an article written in English, uses both methodological tools and involves, firstly, a historical study of the origin and development of certain legal phenomena (securities) as they evolved in different countries, and secondly, a comparative, synchronic study of equivalent legal phenomena as they exist in different countries today. Employing the first method, Mr. Pentsov divided the historical development of the conception of "valuable paper" in Russia into five major stages. He found that, despite the existence of a relatively wide circulation of valuable papers, especially in the second half of the 19th century, Russian legislation before 1917 (the first stage) did not have a unified definition of valuable paper. The term was used, in both theoretical studies and legislation, but it covered a broad range of financial instruments such as stocks, bonds, government bonds, promissory notes, bills of exchange, etc.
During the second stage, also, the legislation of the USSR did not have a unified definition of "valuable paper". After the end of the "new economic policy" (1922 - 1930) the stock exchanges and the securities markets in the USSR, with a very few exceptions, were abolished. And thus during the third stage (up to 1985), the use of valuable papers in practice was reduced to foreign economic relations (bills of exchange, stocks in enterprises outside the USSR) and to state bonds. Not surprisingly, there was still no unified definition of "valuable paper".
After the beginning of Gorbachev's perestroika, a securities market began to re-appear in the USSR. However, the successful development of securities markets in the USSR was retarded by the absence of an appropriate regulatory framework. The first effort to improve the situation was the adoption of the Regulations on Valuable Papers, approved by resolution No. 590 of the Council of Ministers of the USSR, dated June 19, 1990. Section 1 of the Regulation contained the first statutory definition of "valuable paper" in the history of Russia.
At the very beginning of the period of transition to a market economy, a number of acts contained different definitions of "valuable paper". This diversity clearly undermined the stability of the Russian securities market and did not achieve the goal of protecting the investor. The lack of unified criteria for the consideration of such non-standard financial instruments as "valuable papers" significantly contributed to the appearance of numerous fraudulent "pyramid" schemes that were outside of the regulatory scheme of Russia legislation.
The situation was substantially improved by the adoption of the new Civil Code of the Russian Federation. According to Section 1 of Article 142 of the Civil Code, a valuable paper is a document that confirms, in compliance with an established form and mandatory requisites, certain material rights whose realisation or transfer are possible only in the process of its presentation. Finally, the recent Federal law No. 39 - FZ "On the Valuable Papers Market", dated April 22 1996, has also introduced the term "emission valuable papers". According to Article 2 of this Law, an "emission valuable paper" is any valuable paper, including non-documentary, that simultaneously has the following features: it fixes the composition of material and non-material rights that are subject to confirmation, cession and unconditional realisation in compliance with the form and procedure established by this federal law; it is placed by issues; and it has equal amount and time of realisation of rights within the same issue regardless of when the valuable paper was purchased. Thus the introduction of the conception of "emission valuable paper" became the starting point in the Russian federation's legislation for the differentiation between the legal regimes of "commercial papers" and "investment papers" similar to the Common Law approach.
Moving now to the synchronic, comparative method of research, Mr. Pentsov notes that there are currently three major conceptions of "security" and, correspondingly, three approaches to its legal definition: the Common Law concept, the continental law concept, and the concept employed by Japanese Law. Mr. Pentsov proceeds to analyse the differences and similarities of all three, concluding that though the concept of "security" in the Common Law system substantially differs from that of "valuable paper" in the Continental Law system, nevertheless the two concepts are developing in similar directions. He predicts that in the foreseeable future the existing differences between these two concepts will become less and less significant.
On the basis of his research, Mr. Pentsov arrived at the conclusion that the concept of "security" (and its equivalents) is not a static one. On the contrary, it is in the process of permanent evolution that reflects the introduction of new financial instruments onto the capital markets. He believes that the scope of the statutory definition of "security" plays an extremely important role in the protection of investors. While passing the Securities Act of 1933, the United States Congress determined that the best way to achieve the goal of protecting investors was to define the term "security" in sufficiently broad and general terms so as to include within the definition the many types of instruments that in the commercial world fall within the ordinary concept of "security' and to cover the countless and various devices used by those who seek to use the money of others on the promise of profits. On the other hand, the very limited scope of the current definition of "emission valuable paper" in the Federal Law of the Russian Federation entitled "On the Valuable Papers Market" does not allow the anti-fraud provisions of this law to be implemented in an efficient way. Consequently, there is no basis for the protection of investors. Mr. Pentsov proposes amendments which he believes would enable the Russian markets to become more efficient and attractive for both foreign and domestic investors
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Full text linkThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
Variations on the Author
Full text link“Variations on the Author” discusses two of Eduardo Coutinho’s recent films (Um Dia na Vida, from 2010, and Últimas Conversas, posthumously released in 2015) and their contribution to the general question of documentary authorship. The director’s filmography is characterized by a consistent yet self-effacing form of authorial self-inscription: Coutinho often features as an interviewer that rather than express opinions propels discourses; an interviewer that is good at listening. This mode of self-inscription characterizes him as an author who is not expressive but who is nonetheless markedly present on the screen. In Um Dia na Vida, however, Coutinho is completely absent form the image, while Últimas Conversas, on the contrary, includes a confessional prologue that moves the director from the margins to the center of his films. This article examines the ways in which these works stand out in the filmography of a director who offers new insights into the notion of cinematic authorship
Appropriate Similarity Measures for Author Cocitation Analysis
Full text linkWe provide a number of new insights into the methodological discussion about author cocitation analysis. We first argue that the use of the Pearson correlation for measuring the similarity between authors’ cocitation profiles is not very satisfactory. We then discuss what kind of similarity measures may be used as an alternative to the Pearson correlation. We consider three similarity measures in particular. One is the well-known cosine. The other two similarity measures have not been used before in the bibliometric literature. Finally, we show by means of an example that our findings have a high practical relevance.information science;Pearson correlation;cosine;similarity measure;author cocitation analysis
Does the Loss of Chance Doctrine Have a Chance in International Sport Arbitration?
Full text linkThe Article analyzes whether and, if so, how, the loss of chance doctrine providing the basis for claims against person who deprived victims of a chance of occurrence of a certain result or decreased this chance could be used in international sport arbitration at the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). It provides a comparative analysis of applicability of this doctrine under English law, French law, and the law of the State of New York to sport competitions and outlines potential problems of utilizing this doctrine in the CAS arbitration through domestic law based on choice-of-law rules. The Article argues that the result of application of these rules would be either unpredictable or predominantly unfavorable to athletes, because the CAS panels would likely end up with the application of Swiss law currently not recognizing this doctrine. Such an outcome may encourage the athletes to turn their eyes to state courts, undermining many years of attempts to uniformize resolution of international sport disputes, which started with the creation of the CAS in 1984. Following an explanation of the CAS role in the uniformization of legal regulation of international sport, the Article argues in favor of incorporation of the loss of chance doctrine into the so-called Lex Sportiva as an independent supra-national concept by the CAS, outlines its content, identifies potential objections against this concept and addresses them
The Concept of “Investment” at the Dawn of the Digital Era
Full text linkNew methods of doing international business, which have appeared in the process of digital transformation of economic and social life, have not gone unnoticed by a number of States that use tax and administrative methods to regulate them. One possible way to protect the interests of operators of digital business models from such regulation could be bringing claims against these States on the basis of bilateral and multilateral treaties for the promotion and protection of investments. Among the mandatory conditions for the presentation of such claims is the presence in the territory of a host State of protected “investments” within the meaning of an applicable treaty. This Article analyzes the meaning of the term “investment” in the pre-digital age as well as the exact content of the territorial link requirement with the host State. It describes four typical business models of the digital economy: (i) digital reseller; (ii) digital marketplace operator; (iii) search engine operator; and (iv) social network operator. It then analyzes the possibility of recognizing each business model’s intangible assets as “investments” for the purposes of investment treaties. It also identifies the shortcomings of the existing concept of “investment,” which was formed before the advent of the digital economy for the effective protection of digital assets and forecasts possible directions of development of existing arbitration practice to eliminate these shortcomings. The Article also identifies the emerging regulatory role of this concept in the digital era
Dispelling the Myths Behind First-author Citation Counts
Full text linkWe conducted a full-scale evaluative citation analysis study of scholars in the XML research field to explore just how different from each other author rankings resulting from different citation counting methods actually are, and to demonstrate the capability of emerging data and tools on the Web in supporting more realistic citation counting methods. Our results contest some common arguments for the continued
use of first-author citation counts in the evaluation of scholars, such as high correlations between author rankings by first-author citation counts and other citation
counting methods, and high costs of using more realistic citation counting methods that are not well-supported by the ISI databases. It is argued that increasingly available digital full text research papers make it possible for citation analysis studies to go beyond what the ISI databases have directly supported and to employ more
sophisticated methods
Recommended from our members
The Concept of “Investment” at the Dawn of the Digital Era
No full textNew methods of doing international business, which have appeared in the process of digital transformation of economic and social life, have not gone unnoticed by a number of States that use tax and administrative methods to regulate them. One possible way to protect the interests of operators of digital business models from such regulation could be bringing claims against these States on the basis of bilateral and multilateral treaties for the promotion and protection of investments. Among the mandatory conditions for the presentation of such claims is the presence in the territory of a host State of protected “investments” within the meaning of an applicable treaty. This Article analyzes the meaning of the term “investment” in the pre-digital age as well as the exact content of the territorial link requirement with the host State. It describes four typical business models of the digital economy: (i) digital reseller; (ii) digital marketplace operator; (iii) search engine operator; and (iv) social network operator. It then analyzes the possibility of recognizing each business model’s intangible assets as “investments” for the purposes of investment treaties. It also identifies the shortcomings of the existing concept of “investment,” which was formed before the advent of the digital economy for the effective protection of digital assets and forecasts possible directions of development of existing arbitration practice to eliminate these shortcomings. The Article also identifies the emerging regulatory role of this concept in the digital era
- …
