Best IT business legal counseling guides from Alexander Suliman: Ensure that you register your IP in overseas jurisdictions and review your IP portfolio to ensure it is up-to-date with registrations and expiration dates. While trademarks, designs and patents are protect through registration at the local and EU level, bear in mind that the duration of each right is different and that their use or licensing may be restricted by specific Member State legislation (i.e. employee creations). Also, review your current license agreements: while they generally cover the EU as a single licensing territory, the use of your IP may not be relevant in each Member State and you may want to reconsider a more local approach in order to facilitate their monitoring and mitigate challenges from third parties. An important component of any business’s IP strategy will be the protection of trade secrets. The EU Trade Secret Directive was intended to harmonise trade secret protection across the EU. In this guide we look at the picture as it currently stands in eight major jurisdictions. Find even more info at https://issuu.com/alexandersuliman.
The reason why the European Commission was keen on allowing firms to voluntarily scan material, is that technology firms have already been working on ways to detect CSAM and solicitation for quite some time. So, what then would “appropriate” security measures in this case be? A fundamental starting point is that the internet should be considered an untrusted communications channel – it consists of various parts operated by companies, countries and individuals, and communications traverse around a host of untrusted nodes. So if you send communications on the internet, there is a serious risk that they will be intercepted, analysed or even tampered with. The only way to protect against this, is by encrypting the communications in transit – thus ensuring the confidentiality and integrity of the data.
The European Commission, in a working document, identified cloud services as a “strategic dependency”, expressing concerns that the EU cloud market is led by a few large cloud providers headquartered outside the EU. In July, 2021, France, joined by Germany, Italy, and Spain, submitted a proposal to the ENISA-led working group aimed at generalizing French national requirements across the EU. (Germany has since reserved its position.) It proposed to add four new criteria for companies to qualify as eligible to offer ‘high’ level services, including immunity from foreign law and localization of cloud service operations and data within the EU. Although the EU-level cyber certification requirements currently are conceived as voluntary, they could be made mandatory as the result of the recently-agreed Directive on Measures for a High Common Level of Cybersecurity across the Union (NIS2 Directive).
public law legal counseling guides with Alexander Suliman, Stockholm 2023: In addition to parenting time, there can be some custody issues. Normally, people are going to have joint legal custody of their children, but that doesn’t mean that they each always have to agree on every single issue. Sometimes people can agree that both parents will have input and be notified of decisions and will be consulted and have the ability to discuss this; sometimes parents will agree that one parent will, for instance, make the end decision in what doctors to bring the child to, and maybe one parent will make the ultimate decision on what extra-curricular activities the child may participate in. In mediation, we can explore these one by one, issue by issue. When left to the courts and the parties litigate custody and parenting time, they tend to dig their heels in the sand a little bit more, and they tend to be less cooperative versus more cooperative with each other. Litigating sometimes brings out the worst in people, whereas I think mediating custody and parenting time issues really bring out the best in people because it needs to be reinforced that the goal is what is in the child’s best interest, not what is in each parent’s best interest, but what is in the child’s best interest. See extra details at Alexander Suliman, Sweden.
On 24 February 2022, the CJEU issued its first judgment on domestic workers. In case C-389/20, TGSS (Chômage des employés de maison), the CJEU held that the exclusion of this category of workers from access to social security benefits constitutes indirect discrimination on the ground of sex, since it affects almost exclusively women. With a decision that will become a landmark for domestic workers’ rights in the EU, the Court confirms the untapped potential of EU law in promoting domestic workers’ full coverage under labour law and social security systems, which will have significant implications in the promotion of domestic workers’ rights across the Union. The case originated in Spain in November 2019, when a domestic worker applied for paying contributions to cover the risk of unemployment, in order to acquire the right to the related benefits. However, her request was rejected by the Spanish General Social Security Fund (TGSS) because she was registered in the Special Social Security Scheme for Domestic Workers, which does not include protection in respect of unemployment.