Across the member states of the Council of Europe, both the blocking and removal of online material are frequently treated in a similar way. However, the existence or the lack of a legislative framework specifically targeted to the internet, and the specificities of national regulatory "models" translate in different practices and can be a challenge for the states concerned. The Council of Europe commissioned to the Swiss Institute of Comparative Law a comparative study in respect of filtering, blocking and take-down of illegal content on the internet in the 47 member states of the Organisation. This study describes and assesses the legal framework but also the relevant case-law and practice in the field. It comprises a comparative analysis -- which is the subject of this publication -- and country reports (available on the website: www.coe.int/freedomofexpression).
[Langley, VA : Central Intelligence Agency], 2004.
Book — 259 p. in various pagings : digital, PDF file.
In January 2003, the DDO informed OIG that he had received allegations that Agency personnel had used unauthorized interrogation techniques with a detainee, Abd Al Rahim Al-Nashiri, at another foreign site, and requested that OlG investigate. Separately, OIG received information that some employees were concerned that certain covert Agency activities at an overseas detention and interrogation site might involve violations of human rights. In January 2003, OlG initiated a review of Agency counterterrorism detention and interrogation activities . This Review covers the period September 2001 to mid-October 2003. 2003.
The dissertation complements the existing literature at the intersection of intellectual property and private international law by providing new insights into cross-border enforcement of patent rights. It is a case study of one specific type of patent enforcement problems - problems associated with enforcement across national borders - and also a study of the impact that private international law mechanisms may have on substantive law. The dissertation shows that notwithstanding patent law territoriality, even under current substantive and procedural laws, patent cases arise in which cross-border enforcement is necessary. It explains why such cases exist and what kind of cross-border enforcement problems they generate; it also analyzes current proposals aimed at facilitating smoother recognition and enforcement abroad of decisions issued in such cases, and concludes that the proposals can function only if countries agree on deeper harmonization of patent laws. In the short-term, the U.S. may solve the problem by entering into bilateral or limited regional treaties on cross-border enforcement because the problem is, at least for now, geographically confined. In the long-term, countries should complement discussions on the proposals that will facilitate cross-border enforcement with a reopening of negotiations on creating a world patent or a regional patent. The dissertation is based on an empirical study of patent cases filed in the U.S. and Germany; it also draws on an extensive comparative study of the legislative and jurisprudential development of the patent laws of the two countries.
Washington, D.C. : U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Legislative Affairs, Office of Assistant Attorney General, 2012.
Book — 1 online resource (399 pages) : PDF, illustrations
"The DNA Analysis Backlog Elimination Act of 2000 as amended directs the Attorney General to submit a report to Congress no later, than 90 days at the end of each Fiscal Year ... The Office of Justice Programs' National Institute of Justice (NIJ) has primary responsibility for the administration of assistance programs related to DNA and forensics. NIJ has assembled the enclosed Report and accompanying attachments, which provide the information required by the Act."