Copyright is essentially the right of the rightsholder of an original work to prohibit others from making or distributing unauthorised copies of his or her work. More specifically for this dissertation, when an end user deals with digital content, one of the aims of copyright becomes the balancing of the conflicting interests in ‘exclusivity’ on the one hand, and in ‘access to information’ on the other. Exclusivity is achieved by the rightsholders through technological protection measures to protect their commercial interests. Access to information is achieved where works are available to the general public without payment and technological protection measures and where the digital content is not directly marketed for commercial gain. Exclusivity and access to information are two conflicting cultures surrounding copyright in the digital era. It is submitted that unless we find a socio-economic-legal way for the dynamic coexistence of these two conflicting cultures by means of fair dealing, the culture of exclusivity will eventually dominate fair access to information. The transient nature of digital content means that rightsholders have little or no control over their works once the end user has obtained a legal digital copy of the work. The right ‘to prohibit’ end users from copying and distributing unauthorised copies is, therefore, largely meaningless unless a legal or other solution can be found to discourage end users from the unauthorised reproduction and distribution of unauthorised copies of the work. Currently, technological protection measures are used to manage such digital rights because legal permissions within the doctrine of fair dealing for works in printed (analogue) format are inadequate. It is, however, submitted that a legal solution to discourage end users from copying and distributing unauthorised copies rests on two pillars. Firstly, the solution must be embedded in state-of-the-art digital rights management systems and secondly the business model used by publishers, and academic publishers in particular, should change fundamentally from a business-to-consumer model to a business-to-business model. Empirical evidence shows that the printing of e-content will continue to be relevant far into the future. Therefore, the management of fair dealing to allow for the printing of digital content will become increasingly important at educational institutions that use e-books as prescribed course material. It is submitted that although the origination cost of print editions and e-books correspond, the relatively high retail price of e-books appears to be based on the fact that academic publishers of digital content do not have the legal or digital rights management tools to manage the challenges arising from the fair dealing doctrine. The observation that academic publishers are reluctant to grant collecting societies mandates to manage the distribution of digital content, and/or the right to manage the authorised reproduction (printing) of the digital content, supports this hypothesis. Ultimately, with technologies at our disposal, the fair use of content in digital and print format can be achieved because it should simply be cheaper to comply with copyright laws than to make unauthorised digital or printed copies of content that our society desperately needs to make South Africa a winning nation. / Mercantile Law / LL. M.

Vid en fastighetsöverlåtelse är det mycket information som ska utbytas på kort tid, mellan köpare, säljare och mäklare vad beträffar fastighetens fysiska skick och standard. I egenskap av en lojal, opartisk och sakkunnig person avseende fastighetsförsäljningar, har mäklaren ålagts en upplysningsplikt avseende sådant kring fastighetens skick som denne iakttagit, känner till eller annars har anledning att misstänka, som kan antas ha betydelse för köparen. Räckvidden av mäklarens upplysningsplikt gentemot köparen, avseende fysiska missförhållanden enligt FML 16§ 3st. kommer att utgöra uppsatsens brännpunkt. I detta inryms att söka klar-göra vilka typer av fysiska missförhållanden som en mäklare förväntas informera en köpare om, för att inte riskera att drabbas av någon typ av påföljd. Därutöver utreds förutsägbarheten och ändamålsenligheten kring FML 16§ 3st. Bedömningen av mäklarens upplysningsplikt ska även ses utifrån köparens och säljarens inbördes ansvarsområden för faktiska fel i fastigheten, samt i vilken omfattning det anses motiverat att mäklaren ikläder sig parternas ansvarsroller. Hänsyn i bedömningen får även tas till det faktum att mäklaren åläggs en grundläggande lojalitetsplikt som denne uppbär gentemot såväl köparen som säljaren. Problematiken kan i första hand härledas till tvetydiga och tämligen oklara förarbetsuttalanden, samt frånvaron av prejudicerade rättspraxis på området. Rättsreglerna kring bestämmelsen synes därav även vara svåra att tillämpa i de lägre domstolsinstanserna och hos tillsynsmyndigheten, FMN. Därav kvarstår osäkerhet kring rättsläget avseende omfattningen av mäklarens upplysningsplikt vad beträffar fysiska missförhållanden härlett till fastigheten. / When selling a property there is much information, in regards to the property’s physical standard, which should be discussed between the parties; the realtor, the buyer and the property owner. In relation to the buyer and the property owner, the realtor will be known as a loyal, independent person that carries expert know-ledge in regards to selling property. Therefore the realtor should carry the liability to inform the buyer about physical errors according to the property, that has been found, or for some other reason will be known, or if there is a reason to suspect an error, that can be of  importance to the buyer. The focus point of this thesis is the magnitude of the realtor’s liability to inform the buyer on physical errors, according to FML 16§ 3st., and to examine what kind of physical errors that the buyer have the right to be informed of. Because if the realtor do not respect the obligations according to FML 16§ 3st., legal sanctions will be given. The author will also examine if the legal rule, FML 16§ 3st., is predictable and appropriate. To examine the magnitude of the realtor’s liability to inform the buyer on physical errors, the legal relation between the buyer and the property owner has to be taken into account according to JB 4:19§. The fact that the realtor also carries a responsibility to submit to good faith and fair dealing will also be interesting. The principal legal issue will be based on the unclear preparatory work, regarding to FML (2011:666) 16§ 3st., and the magnitude of realtor’s liability to inform the buyer on physical errors. Furthermore, there is no case law given by the Swedish Supreme Courts, and that is one more reason why the area is so hard to apply. The legal position will therefore stay unclear, according the realtor’s liability to inform the buyer about physical errors of the property.