No description available.

Förskolan är en plats som historiskt påverkats av samhällets rådande normer och syn på lärande. Utvecklingen av samhället har resulterat i en utveckling av förskolan och i dag genomgår samhället en pågående digitalisering. I och med denna digitalisering har Skolverket (2017) tagit fram ett remissförslag för en revidering av förskolans läroplan där digitaliseringen fått en större roll. Denna systematiska litteraturstudie syftar därför till att skapa en översikt över hur digitaliseringen av samhället har påverkat läroplanens innehåll och förskolans verksamhet. Vidare är syftet att urskilja vilka möjligheter och begränsningar digitaliseringen kan ha på pedagogernas didaktiska arbetssätt som framkommer inom forskning som publicerats de senaste åtta åren. Samt vilken påverkan förskolepedagogers syn på och erfarenheter av digital teknik kan ha hur den används i lärandesyfte. Detta görs med utgångspunkt i John Deweys begrepp experience och de processer som begreppet innefattar samt de didaktiska frågorna hur? och med hjälp av vad? I forskningen framkommer att förskolepedagogers syn på digital teknik är direkt kopplad till deras erfarenheter av den. De förskolepedagoger som inte har erfarenhet eller kunskap om digital teknik har oftare en kritisk syn och inte förstår syftet med att använda den i lärandeaktiviteter. Men förskolepedagoger som fått erfarenheter genom utbildning har en positivare inställning till att integrera digital teknik och yngre barns egna erfarenheter av denna i lärandesyfte.

EU:s nya dataskyddsförordning, General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) träder i kraft den 25 maj 2018 och ersätter den nuvarande personuppgiftslagen. Syftet med förordningen är att reglera och stärka skyddet vid all behandling av persondata. Bakgrunden till förordningen grundar sig i att EU behöver anpassa sig till den digitala och teknologiska utvecklingen som skett på marknaden, vilket medfört att mängden persondata som myndigheter och tjänsteleverantörer hanterar har ökat explosionsartat. Tjänsteleverantörer får flertalet fördelar genom att besitta en stor mängd persondata. De kan genom detta bevaka individens beteendemönster för att kunna anpassa sina internetsidor, rikta reklam som överensstämmer med individens intressen och förbättra den allmänna upplevelsen av den givna tjänsten. Med hjälp av persondata har aktörer på marknaden kunnat "låsa in" sina kunder, genom att tillämpa höga flyttaavgifter för persondata. Detta har varit en faktor som ansetts utgöra en hämmande effekt för den innovativa och konkurrensmässiga utvecklingen, vilket har resulterat i att konkurrensrätten kommer att behöva samspela med den nya dataskyddsförordningen gällande hanteringen av personuppgifter. Europeiska unionens nya dataskyddsförordning kommer att gälla för EU:s samtliga medlemsstater och ersätter helt personuppgiftslagen i Sverige. En förhoppning med den nya förordningen är att den ska gynna en ökad konkurrens på den europeiska marknaden, skapa goda förutsättningar för den innovativa utvecklingen och ge en större kontroll till personuppgiftsgivaren . Till följd av den nya dataskyddsförordningen tillkommer nya rättigheter och skyldigheter för både juridiska och fysiska personer. För att få en klarare bild av rättsläget, kommer denna uppsats att beskriva och problematisera den nya rätten till dataportabilitet och dess samspel med de andra artiklarna i dataskyddsförordningen.

This essays main focus is to further develop the understanding and describe six different types of tenure. The essay investigate similarities and differences between the types of tenure on the Stockholm housing market. The most common types of leaseholds, ownership apartments, and rental apartments will be described but and also new types of leases will be described. Such as cooperative rental apartments, condominiums, low purchase price apartments and rental purchases. The latter two are new forms of types of ownership and have emerged as an attempt by developers to bring young adults and low-wage earners into the housing market. Firstly, The qQuestion formulations in this essay are constructed to investigate similarities and differences which exist between the different forms of submission. Secondly, the questions target what kind of current costs for housing and the non-recurrent costs for purchasing. Finally, the purposes for the introduction of the new forms of leasing. The study has been conducted through literature studies and also interviews with market developers. Therefore, based on the study questions, respondents have answered the basis for our presentation and discussion of a descriptive analysis of the various forms of submission. Based on the results of the study, it can be clarified that the rental apartments can be the most advantageous in terms of the cost. But then it is taken into account that the queue is about 10 years for getting an apartment. Further, the results indicate that individuals that has a capital and the opportunity to purchase a ownership apart, the queue isn’t a matter and the individual has an opportunity to make a profit or loss on a later sale of the residence. Taking account to amortization of loans, an ownership apartment can be most advantageous from an economic perspective. Condominiums has been found to have a relatively low fee but the monthly cost become relatively high depending on the high purchase price. The results of this study shows that co-operative rental apartments have been found to have a low monthly cost. But the problem is that they are bothered by a long queue and also that the individual is dependent of a input gains. The two new types of low purchase price apartments and rental purchases on the market are so newly established which makes it difficult to make an accurately interpret of their impact on the housing market today. / I denna uppsats beskrivs sex olika upplåtelseformer och undersöker likheter och skillnader dem emellan på Stockholms bostadsmarknad. Dels kommer de vanligaste upplåtelseformerna bostadsrätter och hyresrätter beskrivas men även nya upplåtelseformer såsom kooperativa hyresrätter, ägarlägenheter, låginsatslägenheter samt hyrköp. De två sistnämnda är nya upplåtelseformer som uppkommit som ett försök av aktörer att få in unga vuxna och låginkomsttagare på bostadsmarknaden. Frågeställningar som kommer tas upp i arbetet är vilka likheter och skillnader det finns mellan de olika upplåtelseformerna. Vilka olika fasta och löpande kostnader som uppkommer i de olika upplåtelseformerna samt vilka syften som finns med införandet av de nya upplåtelseformerna. Genom litteraturstudier och intervjuer med aktörer har studiens frågeställningar besvarats och ligger till grund för presentation och diskussion av en beskrivande analys de olika upplåtelseformerna. Utifrån studiens resultat kan det konstateras att hyresrätten kan vara mest förmånlig med tanke på kostnaden, i beräkningarna bör det dock beaktas att kötiden är ungefär 10 år. Har individen ett kapital och möjlighet att förvärva en bostad är inte individen beroende av någon kötid, då finns det även möjlighet till att göra en vinst eller förlust på en senare försäljning av bostaden. Räknas amortering på lån bort kan en bostadsrätt vara mest fördelaktig från ett ekonomiskt perspektiv. Ägarlägenhet har visat sig ha en relativt låg avgift men månadskostnaden har blivit relativt hög beroende av den höga köpeskillingen. Kooperativa hyresrätter har i vår studie visat sig ha en låg månadskostnad men besväras av en lång kötid och individen är beroende av ett kapital för att kunna bosätta sig i den upplåtelseformen. De två nya upplåtelseformerna låginsatslägenhet och hyrköp är så pass nyetablerade att de har varit vanskligt att göra en exakt tolkning av dess påverkan på bostadsmarknaden.

The International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID), has seen an increased transparency in the past couple of decades. The participation of third parties in the proceedings and the disclosure of documents or information regarding the arbitrations are some of the most important and controversial issues regarding transparency nowadays. The purpose of this thesis is to analyze the evolution of transparency in ICSID, as well as specific cases that dealt with issues of third party participation and the disclosure of documents or information in investment treaty arbitration, and analyze the decisions taken by the tribunals. The evolution of transparency within the history of ICSID allows us to see the principal amendments made, and how transparency has been evolving in favor of investment treaty arbitration, providing more confidence, openness and legitimacy on this system of dispute resolution. Nevertheless, transparency is not a panacea. Excessive transparency might bring more challenges than benefits, depending on the circumstances on a case-by-case basis, therefore, it is necessary to consider the effects that transparency may produce in investment treaty arbitration, and find a right balance with elements such as confidentiality, the power of the tribunals and the will of the disputing parties in the arbitration, among others. This thesis proposed that even if there is always space for improvements, the evolution of transparency has reach a limit where further changes would be futile and prejudicial for the system of investment treaty arbitration. This would bring a series of challenges, such as, an extra burden to the disputing parties, a delay on the proceedings, and in certain cases leaving the result of the arbitration in hands of the public scrutiny, the media or turning the dispute in a political matter.

Third party funding (TPF) is a method of financing legal proceedings, in which a party not directly connected to the proceedings funds one of the disputing parties, usually in return for a percentage of the final monetary settlement. The interests behind TPF are that the funded party will have the resources to pursue their claim, while the funder will be able to profit from a percentage of the final settlement. Traditionally, within common law-systems, TPF was excluded through application of the common law torts of “Champerty and Maintenance”.[1] However, in the second half of the 20th century, many common law systems[2] abolished the torts of “Champerty and Maintence”.[3]This effectively opened up TPF as a valid litigation option for many resource poor litigants and birthed a niche industry of litigation financiers[4]. There is debate on TPF in general, with some believing that it allows legal recourse to include those that do not have the means to reasonably finance and confront legal wrongs imposed on them.[5]Others state that there is a danger of letting the funder interests supersede the claimant’s, as exemplified by some retaliatory cases[6] proceeding the Chevron v Ecuador arbitration, in which the funders had veto power over such aspects as the choice of attorneys and priority in the disbursement of a monetary award.[7] However, issues with the general system of TPF is not the focus of this thesis. Instead, focus will be on the issues it brings to the system of investment arbitration. While its operation is largely the same as within national jurisdictions, it does have the potential for damage of distinct principles and procedure of investment arbitration.  At first look, TPF seems to complement the system of arbitration as a whole. If one considers that, at its core, arbitration is a user determined dispute settlement system, then questions of funding should be determined by the parties themselves. This may suggest that due to its emphasis on “Party Autonomy”, TPF is more aligned with arbitration than it is with court-based litigation, where the principles of justice and fairness take a more preferential role. Nevertheless, “Party Autonomy” is not the sole principle of arbitration and does not mean that TPF is harmonious with either general arbitration or in particular investment arbitration. There is the general concern that a funder can actively change the process and end result of a dispute. This is seen through their influence over the funded party. As a funder will have a direct economic control over the funded party, they can dictate, as part of the funding agreement, outcomes such as early settlement, litigation strategies etc.[8] The choice of approach, and it is submission to a third party, however, is squarely within party autonomy and does not raise any fundamental concerns. What is concerning is affected parts of process that are out with party autonomy. One can see below that TPF can affect general trends and principles of arbitration, i.e. transparency and confidentiality , while also conflicting with core aspects of procedure such as jurisdiction and impartiality. This concern has given way to calls for regulation of TPF within the academic and global community. What was traditionally a “legal no mans land”[9] for investment arbitration, with little regard given to regulation, has now had extensive academic commentary and State reactions to regulating TPF. Yet, comprehensive regulation of TPF remains rare and piecemeal within the arbitral world. The majority of jurisdictions and arbitral institutions, while aware of the issues, have made no serious effort to remedy through regulation. That being said, there has been some work done in three distinct areas of regulation: (i) National laws (ii) Trade/Investment Treaties and (iii) Arbitral Rules. Each area’s success however can be described as mixed.   Therefore, the topic of this thesis is to first explore the potential issues of TPF and investment arbitration and then to examine and analysis the response to these issues through regulation. [1] Steyn LJ, in Giles v Thompson [1993] 3 All ER 321 at 328, explained the doctrines thusly: “In modern idiom maintenance is the support of litigation by a stranger without just cause. Champerty is an aggravated form of maintenance. The distinguishing feature of champerty is the support of litigation by a stranger in return for a share of the proceeds.” [2] In Civil law systems, unless TPF was not expressly excluded,  was mostly allowed. [3] For example see s.14(2), Criminal Law Act 1967 (England and Wales) or Maintenance, Champerty and Barratry Abolition Act 1993 (NSW, Australia) [4] There is now several prominent litigation financing companies such as: Burford Capital Ltd., Harbour Litigation Funding, IMF Bentham and Longford Capital. For a more in-depth review of the industry in general see Hancok, B, ‘Who Rules the World of Litigation Funding? ’March 30, 2017 , The American Lawyer. [5]Chen AD (2013), 'A Market For Justice: A First Empirical Look At Third Party Litigation Funding', at 1075 [6] Chevron Corp. v. Donziger, 800 F. Supp. 2d 484 (S.D.N.Y. 2011) [7] U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform (2018), “Third Party Litigation Funding” [8] Shaw G (2017), ‘Third-party funding in investment arbitration: how non-disclosure can cause harm for the sake of profit’, at 12 [9]  Van Boom WH (2011), ‘Third-Party Financing in International Investment Arbitration’, at 5

Pursuant to the European legislation it is required to use a registered trade mark genuinely. However, it does not directly follow from that legislation what exactly does the term “genuine use” represents. Finding of the proper meaning of the concept of genuine use requires profound analysis of the case-law of the CJEU which has made many comments to this issue in dozens of its decisions. Since these decisions usually deal with different specific questions relating to the concept of genuine use, the relevant case-law seems fragmented. However, putting these decisions together, it is possible to get fairly clear idea about the concept and what it requires. Therefore, this thesis provides its reader with a complex description and analysis of the concept of genuine use within the EU and its interpretation as presented by the CJEU. Besides, the thesis clarifies certain procedural aspects connected with the concept of genuine use, namely these related to proving of genuineness of a use of a trade mark and also these related to utilization of the concept of genuine use in various trade mark proceedings. Finally, the thesis analyses the relationship between the concept of genuine use and trade mark licenses.

Big Data is an interesting, developing and to some extent, vague area in respect of law. The actual value of Big Data is in its flow, not its sources. There are different options discussed which are considered as the tool to dictate ownership for Big Data, like, Copyright, Trade Secrets, Patent, Database Protection etc. However, there are also some ideas to come up with a new type of intellectual property right to deal with this. Among other available intellectual property rights, database, apparently, provides the most obvious protection for Big Data. In addition to it, laws regarding Big Data needs to be in conformity with privacy law, competition law, contract law etc. The research primarily concerns with big data database, and to identify the impact of big data, it includes some aspects of business practice. From a broader perspective, the research analyses the scope of third parties’ rights to match with the financial aspects of big data database. This research aims to identify how to balance different interests in using big data. There is no point to deny the need to control big data and simultaneously, privacy should be respected as well. It is therefore important who can access to these data and how far their right to access can be stretched. This access right extended to third parties is valuable as it is a must to ensure free flow of data which is a prerequisite for building the new data economy. In regard to methodology, the thesis is based on analytical approach where existing sources are being explained in the context of recent scenario.

The thesis begins by describing the current problems in the fragmented world of music copyrights indicating musicians are not being paid accurately due to lack of transparency in the calculation of royalties and this lead to legal battle. Later we investigate how blockchain technology can alleviate much of the difficulties associated with this complexity. We further explore the legislative and institutional support for the technology necessary for a successful implementation, in form of legislations and governmental projects. We find out that numerous authorities have started voting favourable legislations and recognizing the technology as a valid public ledger. Eventually, we confirm our findings by analysing existing laws.

No description available.