The paper presents an overview of the new Russian law on eHealth and analyses legal issues concerning health information exchange and personal data processing in eHealth according to the Russian legislation
The edition is devoted to the Russian constitutional legal development in its past and present conditions. The contibutions propose a detailed description and exploration of constitutional institutions of modern Russian Federation: that is, President of Russia, the Government, the Superior Court, the Federal Assembly. It is electoral systerm and process in Russia is under study, too, as well as federal system of state management. Of special interest appears to be an overview of personal rights freedoms anf duties in the contemporary Russia. The contributions try to define place of modern Russia among other constitutional states. The volume is supplied by a list of most solid publications on Russian constitutionalism printed also in Russian.
As rights holders, courts, and policy makers worldwide struggle with the question of copyright infringement and the potential liability of internet service providers (ISPs) worldwide, Russia developed – and subsequently abandoned – a proposal for the creation of a global license to be imposed on ISPs which would allow for rights holders to be compensated for copyright-infringing activities carried out through those ISPs.
Russia is not the first jurisdiction to look at a global license as solution to the wide spread of copyright infringements online. By analysing the Russian proposal for a global license, this article addresses the sustainability of such a model on a wider scale by analysing the legal implications this may cause. In this context, this article will address the Russian proposal's legislative history before moving into a substantive discussion about the synergies between legal justifications and merits of a global license.
The development of e-Health in the digital economy requires a comprehensive information exchange between all stakeholders. This interaction is ensured through the interoperability of information systems, data, technical solutions, processes and management methods. In an interoperable information environment, a synergistic effect of interaction is achieved, in which each participant benefits from the use of data and increases the efficiency of their activities. Interoperability is necessary to create a single barrier-free information environment based on the principles of openness, transparency, reusability, technological neutrality, user-centricity, information security and privacy. The article reveals the principles of interoperability applicable to the field of e-Health with reference to the experience of the European Union where the concept of interoperability has been most developed. Each of the principles is examined through the prism of legal issues that need to be taken into account during their implementation. Particular attention is paid to standardization, information security requirements (including the security of medical devices and applications), conflict resolution between the principle of long-term storage of data for reuse and legislation on personal data.
The article points out the positive steps towards the regulatory and legal support of the interaction of health information systems in the Russian Federation. Thus, the Russian legislation provides the framework for development of the Unified state health information system (EGISZ). However, it stresses the fact that interoperability should not be isolated (intra-industry). Interoperability in a broad sense means openness of interaction with other information systems (intersectoral interaction), the architecture of which should also be built on similar universal standards. This purpose reasons the need to develop a unified strategy for interoperability in the Russian Federation. Such a strategy requires an integrated approach at the national level and participation of all stakeholders in its development and implementation.
Intellectual property law enshrines the monopoly of the copyright holder. It is absolutely necessary that this monopolism of the right holder does not contradict the public interest. The sphere of private and public relations in intellectual property law is currently one of the most relevant in the world. It causes interest in Russia. Separate articles have been published on this topic, but in the form of a monograph it is presented for the first time in this collected articles. Under the cover of this work are collected the articles of the authors whose views, academic schools, the practical experience are differ. We believe that this is an advantage of this collected articles, because it gives an idea of how difficult it is to achieve a balance between the monopolism of the right holder and the public interest.
Almost two years have passed since the adoption of the governmental program “Digital Economy”. However, as the texts of draft laws relating to regulation of data —the main asset in the digital economy —show, no holistic approach to its regulation has been developed so far. Instead, a fragmentary and chaotic approach dominates, with the main goals to ‘patch’ the existing legal framework and correct some extremes in law enforcement practice. At the same time, the massive usage of data in social life creates not only new business models and innovative solutions but also new risks, which cannot be adequately mitigated by using existing legal instruments of the analogue/offline age. Therefore, there is a pressing need for development of the concept of data regulation in the digital economy, which would reflect the core principles forming the future data governance framework. This paper represents an effort to provide such principles, based on the analysis of the existing experience of other jurisdictions and discussions at various forums.
This study concerns the use of crypto-currency with specific reference to the situation in Russia. A variety of such systems exist; Bitcoin, however, is perhaps the best-known example and will be used as synonymous with the concept throughout this article. Our findings not only show how the views of Russian government bodies are formed and developed, but also sheds light on the specific innovative methods which legal entities use for development of the economy. Consideration will be given to recent developments within Russia which has been more active than many countries in seeking to clarify the status of Bitcoin and providing for the regulation of the technology.
The paper focuses on various legal-related aspects of the application of blockchain technologies in the copyright sphere. Specifically, it outlines the existing challenges for distribution of copyrighted works in the digital environment, how they can be solved with blockchain, and what associated issues need to be addressed in this regard. It is argued that blockchain can introduce long–awaited transparency in matters of copyright ownership chain; substantially mitigate risks of online piracy by enabling control over digital copy and creating a civilized market for “used” digital content. It also allows to combine the simplicity of application of creative commons/open source type of licenses with revenue streams, and thus facilitate fair compensation of authors by means of cryptocurrency payments and Smart contracts. However, these benefits do not come without a price: many new issues will need to be resolved to enable the potential of blockchain technologies. Among them are: where to store copyrighted content (on blockchain or “off-chain”) and the associated need to adjust the legal status of online intermediaries; how to find a right balance between immutable nature of blockchain records and the necessity to adjust them due to the very nature of copyright law, which assigns ownership based on a set of informal facts, not visible to the public. Blockchain as a kind of time stamping service cannot itself ensure the trustworthiness of facts, which originate “off-chain”. Much work needs to be done on the legal side: special provisions aimed at facilitating user’s trust in blockchain records and their good faith usage of copyrighted works based on them need to be introduced and transactions with cryptocurrencies have to be legalized as well as the status of Smart contracts and their legal consequences. Finally, the economics of blockchain copyright management systems need to be carefully considered in order to ensure that they will have necessary network effects. If those issues are resolved in a satisfactory way, blockchain has the potential to rewrite how the copyright industry functions and digital content is distributed.
The use of data in society has seen an exponential growth in recent years. Data science, the field of research concerned with understanding and analyzing data, aims to find ways to operationalize data so that it can be beneficially used in society, for example in health applications, urban governance or smart household devices. The legal questions that accompany the rise of new, data-driven technologies however are underexplored. This book is the first volume that seeks to map the legal implications of the emergence of data science. It discusses the possibilities and limitations imposed by the current legal framework, considers whether regulation is needed to respond to problems raised by data science, and which ethical problems occur in relation to the use of data. It also considers the emergence of Data Science and Law as a new legal discipline.
This paper presents an analysis of Russian data retention regulations. The most controversial point of the Russian data retention requirements is an obligation to keep the content of communications that is untypical for legislation of European and other countries. These regulations that oblige telecom operators and Internet communication services to store the content of communications should come into force on July 1, 2018.
The article describes in detail the main components of the data retention mechanism: the triggers for its application, its scope, exemptions and barriers to its enforcement. Attention is paid to specific principles for implementation of content retention requirements based on the concepts of proportionality, reasonableness and effectiveness.
Particular consideration is given to the comparative aspects of the Russian data retention legislation and those applying in different countries (mainly EU member states). The article focuses on the differences between the Russian and EU approaches to the question of how to strike a balance between public security interests and privacy. While the EU model of data retention is developing in the context of profound disputes on human rights protection, the Russian model is mostly concentrated on security interests and addresses mainly economic, technological aspects of its implementation.
The paper stresses that a range of factors (legal, economic and technological) needs to be taken into account for developing an optimal data retention system. Human rights guarantees play the key role in legitimization of such intrusive measures as data retention. Great attention should be paid to the procedures, precise definitions, specification of entitled authorities and the grounds for access to data, providing legal immunities and privileges, etc. Only this extensive range of legal guarantees can balance intervention effect of state surveillance and justify data retention practices.
The paper is focused on the analysis of the problems that may be driven by mass tokenization of the objects of civil law, i.e. the creation of a digital representations of such objects in the form of a record in blockchain where the value of such objects is transferred subsequently by means of disposal of such tokens, which is a subject of separate rights to it. The paper outlines two core problems, which were inspired by recent legislative activities in Belarus and Russia: 1) a possible displacement of existing legal regimes of objects of civil rights by the legal regime of the token; 2) the problem of definition of the nature of rights to token (in rem vs. ad personam) as well as remedies for their violations. Provisions of the Belarus Decree “On the development of digital economy” of 21 December 2017 and drafts of the laws on blockchain and ICO, discussed in Russian Parliament and Government were taken to illustrate these problems.
The article analyses the main trends of Standard Essential Patents in European Union.