O acordo de leniência como instrumento de defesa da concorrência no Brasil

Orientador: Alexandre Ditzel Faraco. Coorientador: Egon Bockmann MoreiraMonografia (graduação) - Universidade Federal do Paraná, Setor de Ciências Jurídicas, Curso de Graduação em DireitoResumo: O presente estudo pretende abordar com destaque o Acordo de Leniência firmado entre o Conselho Administrativo de Defesa Econômica - CADE - e aqueles que são praticantes de cartéis. O acordo de leniência foi inserido na legislação concorrencial brasileira em 2000, tendo sido reformulado e modernizado desde então. Apesar ser uma ferramenta de grande destaque e notável eficiência no combate aos cartéis, no Brasil e no mundo, este tipo de acordo ainda provoca em nosso âmbito jurídico algumas questões importantes que merecem destaque. A doutrina aponta como uma das críticas principalmente o campo de intersecção do trabalho investigativo do CADE e das investigações dos crimes contra a ordem econômica, discutindo, portanto, qual deve ser o papel do Ministério Público no firmamento destes acordos. Além disso, com o advento da Lei nº 12.529/11 passou a ser possível firmar o Acordo de Leniência com aquele que é o líder da prática anticompetitiva, o que demanda do CADE uma análise mais minuciosa do caso a fim de excluir a possibilidade da procura pelo acordo para prejudicar os concorrentes. Apesar da necessidade de alguns ajustes, o programa de leniência do CADE já apresentou diversos casos de sucesso que serão brevemente abordados ao final do presente trabalh

Building a National IoT Plan: Policy Recommendations and the Case of Brazil

The Internet of Things (“IoT”) is an expression that refers to a whole set of new services and devices that includes at least three fundamental aspects: connectivity, use of sensors or actuators, and computational capacity for data processing and storage. The Internet of Things goes beyond connecting objects to each other; it also gives them the power to process data (thereby making them "smart"). For developing countries such as Brazil, the opportunities offered by the Internet of Things can compensate for shortcomings in infrastructure and services, and can improve innovation, quality of life, productivity, and even the economic complexity of our basket of export products. However, the way in which each country will seize this opportunity will depend on its specific aspirations and strategies. The broader economic, social, political, and legal context of the country should be considered, as well as the local development of information and communication technologies. For this reason, the National Bank for Economic and Social Development (BNDES), in partnership with the Ministry of Science, Technology, Innovation and Communications (MCTIC), has commissioned this study, "Internet of Things: An Action Plan for Brazil." This study, mapped by a consortium comprised by McKinsey & Company, the CPqD Foundation, and Pereira Neto | Macedo Law Firm, outlines the local technological and economic challenges related to the topic, as well as well as how to address legal issues inherent to the development of IoT in Brazil

From nanoliter to large-scale bioreactors: How integrated technologies bring antibody treatments to patients faster

Please click Additional Files below to see the full abstract

Competition in the regulation of Brazilian ports

A presente dissertação objetiva o estudo da concorrência na regulação dos portos brasileiros. Os serviços portuários sempre tiveram destaque nas relações comerciais, cabendo aos portos viabilizar quase totalmente as exportações do nosso país. Entretanto, ao longo das décadas, verificou-se a necessidade de atrair maior número de prestadores e investimentos. A partir das mudanças sofridas pelo conceito de serviço público e a adoção de interpretações que abarcavam a sua prestação num regime de concorrência, viu-se a possibilidade de modificação na sua forma de execução. Além dessa nova visão, percebeu-se que a relação do Estado com a economia também mudou profundamente ao longo dos anos, até alcançar o estágio de Estado Regulador. Nesse ponto, o Estado deu um passo para trás na prestação direta dos serviços públicos e assumiu o papel de regulador. Consequentemente, foram criadas agências reguladoras e publicadas inúmeras normas, inclusive no setor portuário. Mesmo diante das inovações, não houve avanços satisfatórios. A insuficiência de investimentos e as previsões de aumento de demanda resultaram na aprovação da Medida Provisória nº 592/2012 e, posteriormente, na Lei nº 12.815/2013, a qual pretendia modificar as regras de prestação de serviços portuários e viabilizar a entrada de novos agentes. A nova regulação do setor trouxe como uma de suas novidades a extinção da diferenciação de cargas, permitindo que os autorizatários pudessem movimentar mercadorias de qualquer origem. Foi instituída, assim, a concorrência entre os prestadores e a assimetria de regimes, podendo os serviços portuários serem prestados sob o regime público e o regime privado. Desde então, surgiram discussões sobre a presença e promoção da concorrência no setor, inclusive no que tange às autorizações dada a expectativa que estas viabilizem a entrada de novos sujeitos. Foram identificadas críticas em relação ao procedimento e aos requisitos para a obtenção da autorização portuária, posto que esses seriam desproporcionais para um instrumento do regime privado. Sobre esta questão concluiu-se que as autorizações portuárias são diferenciadas, não sendo meramente declaratórias, mas sim constitutivas. A complexidade do setor seria capaz de tornar compreensíveis as exigências do legislador, o qual tem competência para regular os regimes de exploração dos portos brasileiros. Ademais, ressalta-se o levantamento de dados da ANTAQ, os quais demonstraram que após a Lei nº 12.815/2013, o número de terminais de uso privado aumentou. Dessa forma, é possível concluir que o estado atual da regulação do setor portuário permite a existência de concorrência e, ao menos, na letra da lei, há o compromisso de fomentar a competição. Entretanto, não pode ser ignorado que a infraestrutura portuária ainda está longe do estado desejado, havendo, portanto, um longo caminho a ser percorrido.The present dissertation aims to study the competition in the regulation of Brazilian ports. Port services have always been prominent in commercial relationships, and ports are responsible for most part of the exports from our country. Nevertheless, over the decades, a need to attract more players and investments has been identified. From the changes suffered by the concept of public service, and the adoption of interpretations that embrace its provision in a regime of competition, the possibility to alter its form of execution was also recognized. In addition to this new vision, it has been noticed that the State\'s relationship with the economy has also changed profoundly over the years until reaching the status of a Regulatory State. At this point, the State took a step backward in the direct provision of public services, and adopted the role of regulator instead. Consequently, regulatory agencies were created and numerous rulings were published, including in the port sector. Even with so many innovations, there were no satisfactory improvements. The lack of investments and forecasts of increased demand resulted in the approval of the Provisional Measure no. 592/2012 and later in Law no. 12,815/2013, which aimed to modify the rules for the provision of port services and to facilitate the entry of new agents. The new regulatory framework brought as one of its innovations the extinction of the differentiation of loads, allowing the owners of port authorizations to transport goods of any origin. Competition between providers and the asymmetry of regimes were established, being now possible to provide port services under either a public or private regimes. From that moment on, there have been discussions about the presence and promotion of competition in the sector, also regarding the authorizations given the expectation that these enable the entry of new players. There has been criticism concerning the procedure and requirements to obtain a port authorization, as these would be disproportionate towards a private regime instrument. On this matter, it was concluded that port authorizations are differentiated, being not merely declaratory, but rather constitutive. The complexity of the sector could be said to have justified the demands of the legislator, which has jurisdiction to regulate the regimes for the exploration of Brazilian ports. Also, we highlight that the data collected from ANTAQ demonstrated that after Law no. 12,815/2013, the number of terminals for private use have increased. Therefore, it is possible to conclude that the current state of regulation of the port sector allows the existence of competition and, at least formally, there is a commitment to promote competition. However, it cannot be ignored that the port infrastructure is still far from the expected state of affairs, for which there is a long way to go

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (4th edition)

In 2008, we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, this topic has received increasing attention, and many scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Thus, it is important to formulate on a regular basis updated guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Despite numerous reviews, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to evaluate autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. Here, we present a set of guidelines for investigators to select and interpret methods to examine autophagy and related processes, and for reviewers to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of reports that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a dogmatic set of rules, because the appropriateness of any assay largely depends on the question being asked and the system being used. Moreover, no individual assay is perfect for every situation, calling for the use of multiple techniques to properly monitor autophagy in each experimental setting. Finally, several core components of the autophagy machinery have been implicated in distinct autophagic processes (canonical and noncanonical autophagy), implying that genetic approaches to block autophagy should rely on targeting two or more autophagy-related genes that ideally participate in distinct steps of the pathway. Along similar lines, because multiple proteins involved in autophagy also regulate other cellular pathways including apoptosis, not all of them can be used as a specific marker for bona fide autophagic responses. Here, we critically discuss current methods of assessing autophagy and the information they can, or cannot, provide. Our ultimate goal is to encourage intellectual and technical innovation in the field

Erratum to: Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (3rd edition) (Autophagy, 12, 1, 1-222, 10.1080/15548627.2015.1100356

non present