1,720,960 research outputs found
Shaping the field of EU Data Law
No full textThe lawmakers in Brussels have worked relentlessly in recent years on enacting legislation targeting data. Yet, data legislation and the associated research have so far been conducted through the lenses of traditional fields of law, such as copyright law and fundamental rights law. While some authors do use the term “EU data law”, almost no works exist that elaborate on the term and set out the value in conceptually working with an independent field of EU data law. To bridge this gap, the article demonstrates how EU data law can be classified as an autonomous legal field pursuant to the theory of factual classification. Furthermore, it shows how EU data law diverges from adjacent legal fields by striving to safeguard five distinct objectives stemming from data’s particular characteristics. The objectives can be summarised as protection of the following: (i) a competitive market, (ii) fundamental rights, (iii) consumers, (iv) trustworthiness and (v) Open Data. The article argues that to effectively create, interpret and enforce data legislation, it is necessary for the EU lawmaker to take into account all of these objectives, thus making classification an essential tool for ensuring a coherent body of data legislation. Moreover, the article advances that there is a dichotomy within EU data law between economic goals and fundamental rights. While such a dichotomy is not an issue in itself, it is problematic if it is not taken adequately into account by the legislator when proposing and enacting data legislation. The article concludes that the EU legislator must actively acknowledge the effects of the dichotomy in order to ensure a coherent data legislation capable of sustaining a digital European society
Shaping the field of EU Data Law
Full text linkThe lawmakers in Brussels have worked relentlessly in recent years on enacting legislation targeting data. Yet, data legislation and the associated research have so far been conducted through the lenses of traditional fields of law, such as copyright law and fundamental rights law. While some authors do use the term “EU data law”, almost no works exist that elaborate on the term and set out the value in conceptually working with an independent field of EU data law. To bridge this gap, the article demonstrates how EU data law can be classified as an autonomous legal field pursuant to the theory of factual classification. Furthermore, it shows how EU data law diverges from adjacent legal fields by striving to safeguard five distinct objectives stemming from data’s particular characteristics. The objectives can be summarised as protection of the following: (i) a competitive market, (ii) fundamental rights, (iii) consumers, (iv) trustworthiness and (v) Open Data. The article argues that to effectively create, interpret and enforce data legislation, it is necessary for the EU lawmaker to take into account all of these objectives, thus making classification an essential tool for ensuring a coherent body of data legislation. Moreover, the article advances that there is a dichotomy within EU data law between economic goals and fundamental rights. While such a dichotomy is not an issue in itself, it is problematic if it is not taken adequately into account by the legislator when proposing and enacting data legislation. The article concludes that the EU legislator must actively acknowledge the effects of the dichotomy in order to ensure a coherent data legislation capable of sustaining a digital European society
Defective data?:A comparative analysis of quality and usability obligations in B2B data contracts
No full textThe thesis has a twofold objective: Firstly, to examine which obligations related to the quality and usability of data a supplier undertakes under Danish, German, and English law when providing data pursuant to a B2B data contract. Secondly, to analyse the differences and similarities between the three jurisdictions to determine if a common core exists. The backdrop for the thesis is the rise of data-driven technologies. These technologies are built on large amounts of data and their overall performance is linked to the quality of such data. To develop high-grade data-driven technologies, companies therefore conclude data contracts to obtain high quality data. Yet, data and data markets differ from other objects treated in contract law. While recent research has taken first steps in examining how contract law overall can be adapted to data, almost no research have focused specifically on the supplier’s quality and usability obligations. The thesis fills this significant research gap. To analyse the law de lege lata, the thesis uses doctrinal study of the law. Doctrinal studies presume that an understanding of the legally relevant facts exists; this is not given in B2B data contracts due to the special characteristics of data. Part of the doctrinal analysis thus delimits the legally relevant facts for analysing quality and usability obligations. To identify a common core, the thesis employs a functional comparative method. The thesis starts by creating a foundation for analysing quality and usability obligations by identifying which contract types B2B data contracts can be classified as. B2B data contracts can take the form of sales or license contracts; quality and usability obligations can therefore be determined with reference to the rules on defects and legal defects for these contracts. The rules on defects state that the data must be of the nature required by the contract, fit for agreed purposes and of the agreed quality (agreed requirements). If no agreement exists, the data must be fit for the purposes, which data of the same kind is ordinarily used for, of a quality ordinary in data of the same kind, and correspond to a provided sample (default requirements). An exception to the rules is that the recipient of the data cannot make a claim for defects the recipient knew about prior to conclusion of the contract. The thesis’ contention is that the rules on defects rest on a set of presumptions that are unclear for B2B data contracts. Among others, the rules presume that “data of the same kind” is identifiable and that a common understanding of data quality exists. To remedy this, the thesis elaborates on each of the presumptions in order to identify the legally relevant facts for analysing the supplier’s obligations. On the basis of the informed presumptions, the thesis analyses each of the agreed and default requirements. The rules on legal defects require the supplier to provide data to which no third party can claim any rights. As many different types of data exist, it differs, however, if third parties have rights in data. Therefore, the thesis examines the different rights that can exist in data and assesses their relevance in B2B data contracts. The thesis concludes that a common core exists between the three jurisdictions. Parties from the three jurisdictions can therefore conclude B2B data contracts with relative confidence that the supplier’s quality and usability obligations are similar. Overall, the thesis’ contribution lies in its extensive comparative analysis of the supplier’s quality and usability obligations in B2B data contracts; such analysis is the first of its kind. The thesis’ conclusions provide the springboard for the future development of contractual practices for B2B data contracts.The thesis has a twofold objective: Firstly, to examine which obligations related to the quality and usability of data a supplier undertakes under Danish, German, and English law when providing data pursuant to a B2B data contract. Secondly, to analyse the differences and similarities between the three jurisdictions to determine if a common core exists. The backdrop for the thesis is the rise of data-driven technologies. These technologies are built on large amounts of data and their overall performance is linked to the quality of such data. To develop high-grade data-driven technologies, companies therefore conclude data contracts to obtain high quality data. Yet, data and data markets differ from other objects treated in contract law. While recent research has taken first steps in examining how contract law overall can be adapted to data, almost no research have focused specifically on the supplier’s quality and usability obligations. The thesis fills this significant research gap. To analyse the law de lege lata, the thesis uses doctrinal study of the law. Doctrinal studies presume that an understanding of the legally relevant facts exists; this is not given in B2B data contracts due to the special characteristics of data. Part of the doctrinal analysis thus delimits the legally relevant facts for analysing quality and usability obligations. To identify a common core, the thesis employs a functional comparative method. The thesis starts by creating a foundation for analysing quality and usability obligations by identifying which contract types B2B data contracts can be classified as. B2B data contracts can take the form of sales or license contracts; quality and usability obligations can therefore be determined with reference to the rules on defects and legal defects for these contracts. The rules on defects state that the data must be of the nature required by the contract, fit for agreed purposes and of the agreed quality (agreed requirements). If no agreement exists, the data must be fit for the purposes, which data of the same kind is ordinarily used for, of a quality ordinary in data of the same kind, and correspond to a provided sample (default requirements). An exception to the rules is that the recipient of the data cannot make a claim for defects the recipient knew about prior to conclusion of the contract. The thesis’ contention is that the rules on defects rest on a set of presumptions that are unclear for B2B data contracts. Among others, the rules presume that “data of the same kind” is identifiable and that a common understanding of data quality exists. To remedy this, the thesis elaborates on each of the presumptions in order to identify the legally relevant facts for analysing the supplier’s obligations. On the basis of the informed presumptions, the thesis analyses each of the agreed and default requirements. The rules on legal defects require the supplier to provide data to which no third party can claim any rights. As many different types of data exist, it differs, however, if third parties have rights in data. Therefore, the thesis examines the different rights that can exist in data and assesses their relevance in B2B data contracts. The thesis concludes that a common core exists between the three jurisdictions. Parties from the three jurisdictions can therefore conclude B2B data contracts with relative confidence that the supplier’s quality and usability obligations are similar. Overall, the thesis’ contribution lies in its extensive comparative analysis of the supplier’s quality and usability obligations in B2B data contracts; such analysis is the first of its kind. The thesis’ conclusions provide the springboard for the future development of contractual practices for B2B data contracts
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
EU Regulation on Unfair and Nontransparent Terms in B2B Contracts
No full textAn English translation of the article U.2025B.150 "EU-regulering af urimelige og uklare vilkår i erhvervsaftaler
(Un)fair data contracts:A closer look at the unfairness test in the proposed EU Data Act
No full text
- …
