The Role of For-Profit Actors in Implementing Targeted Sanctions:The Case of the European Union

The evolution of sanctions from comprehensive to targeted has favored the inclusion of for-profit actors in the policy process. Sanctions are used to deal with security challenges and while the role of for-profit actors in the provision of public goods has been investigated, less has been said about their role in the provision of security. This chapter investigates the role of for-profit actors in the implementation of sanctions. More specifically, this chapter suggests a typology of regulatory environments that facilitates explaining and understanding the behavior of for-profit actors in implementing targeted sanctions. By looking at the quality of instructions provided by state authorities and their capacity to monitor the implementation of such decisions, the chapter argues that overcompliance, uneven and lack of compliance are more likely in certain regulatory environments rather than in others. The theoretical framework is tested on the case study of the restrictive measures of the EU. The data for this research was collected through semi-opened interviews and focus groups held in Brussels from 2013 to 2015

EU Copyright Law between Property and Fundamental Rights: A Proposal to Connect the Dots

Although scholars and stakeholders have long analyzed and tried to limit the clashes between copyright and fundamental rights caused by the recent developments of EU copyright law, none of their proposed solutions has been proven successful. This chapter is based on the assumption that the cause of this impasse lies in the systematic chaos generated by the incompatibility of EU and national copyright models. Since its onset, EU copyright law has substantially departed from Member States' common traditions, while Article 17.2 of the European Charter of Fundamental Rights (ECFR) completed the paradigm shift by formalizing the definition of copyright in proprietary terms. Due to the vagueness of CJEU's "fair balance" test and the different approaches of the ECFR and national constitutions to the functions, limits, and hierarchical rank of property rights, this classification has broadened the divide between EU and national case laws and caused several interpretative short circuits before national courts. The chapter argues that the only way out from the stalemate is a systematic reordering of this otherwise fragmented multilevel framework. To this end, it starts with a description of the main symptoms of the EU paradigm shift (§ 2) and compares the effects of copyright propertization before the CJEU and in selected Member States (§ 3). Then it proposed an integrated interpretation of CJEU's precedents in light of the common constitutional traditions (§ 4) and concludes by providing examples of how the new interpretative framework may help to restore the lost balance on more solid and stable systematic bases (§ 5)