Search results (625 cards)

Dec. 2, 2014

Breaking news

Internet requires regulation. It does not works solely because of the moral sense of the users or through vigilance of companies that develop on it.

The regulator of the virtual space can be imagined, or a regulator of the various possible activities that develop there, regulators then deploying their powers as when the activity takes place on the Internet. Thus, it is the case of advertising.

In the UK, the Advertising Standard Authority (ASA) monitors the advertising business, also on the Internet.

Its decision of 26 November 2014 is remarkable for several reasons. It punishes two non-professionals, namely two users Youtube tool. But in communication, non-market entrepreneurs sometimes have more weight than businesses. But on the Internet, users can sponsor their free activity, which is to monetize. In this case, the two had played on their Youtube channel short films that were advertisements.

The complaint made against them is that Youtube is not a support on which those who put content make it to commercial purposes. And other users could not understand they watched the advertisement and not a distraction film or information.

The Regulator imposes a sanction against Internet users not because they did a promotional contract with the company, in this case Cadbury wich  wants to promote Oreo cookies. By this contract, the entreprisee via the famous Internet users can reach consumers, which is permissible. They are punished because they have deceived the confidence of the other Internet users who can't imagine being the target of an advertisement. The fact that it is people with many fans on youtube counted in the severity of the Regulator. Indeed, they have more than 2 million subscribers. More than 1.3 million have seen the offending video. Only 243 people have not loved it.

Thus, in a virtual world always close to self-regulation, the notion of trust made to the information transmitters is the central concept of the system served by the Regulator power to impose sanctions,The author of the message is a professional or not is irrelevant. What matters is the importance that others give the message he sends.

Updated: June 3, 2010 (Initial publication: May 3, 2010)

Sectorial Analysis

Main information

The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) published a proposition to regulate speculation through futures and option contracts on the over-the-counter energy market on January 26, 2010. This proposition is being challenged by the CME Group (the principal American futures market operator), which claims that the CFTC does not have a legal mandate to regulate over-the-counter trading in energy, because such action would have to be authorised by a specific law.

Updated: Sept. 25, 2012 (Initial publication: May 3, 2010)

Sectorial Analysis

The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) published a proposition to regulate speculation through futures and option contracts on the over-the-counter energy market on January 26, 2010. This proposition is being challenged by the CME Group (the principal American futures market operator), which claims that the CFTC does not have a legal mandate to regulate over-the-counter trading in energy, because such action would have to be authorised by a specific law.


FRENCH

 

 

Rapport Sectoriel (Energie / Finance) : Le "CME Group" (principal opérateur de bourse de commerce aux Etats-Unis) conteste la proposition de "Commodity Futures Trading Commission — CFTC" (autorité de tutelle américaine des bourses de commerce) qui vise à réguler la spéculation sur les options et dérivés de l'énergie

La “Commodity Futures Trading Commission — CFTC” (l’autorité de tutelle américaine des bourses de commerce) publie le 26 janvier 2010 un projet visant à réguler la spéculation sur le marché de gré-à-gré énergétique. Cette proposition est vivement contestée par le CME Group (la principale bourse de commerce américaine), qui conteste que la CFTC n’est pas fondée légalement à réguler les échanges de gré-à-gré sur le marché de l’énergie, et qu’une telle compétence ne peut être accordée que par une loi spécifique.


SPANISH


El Grupo CME (operador principal de la bolsa de comercio americano)  desafía la propuesta de la “Commodity Futures Trading Commission – CTFC” (la autoridad de tutela americana de la bolsa de valores) del 26 de enero del 2010 de regular la especulación sobre energías futuras, contratos de opciones y derivados. 


La “Commodity Futures Trading Commission” - CFTC (la autoridad de tutela americana  de la bolsa de valores) publicó el día 26 de enero del 2010 una propuesta para regular la especulación sobre el mercado extrabursátil de energía a través de contratos a futuro y a opciones. Esta propuesta está siendo fuertemente refutada por el Grupo CME (el operador principal de la bolsa de valores americano) quien declara que la CFTC no tiene la competencia legal para regular las operaciones extrabursátiles de energía, ya que tal acción tendría que ser autorizada por una ley específica. 



GERMAN


Sektorialer Bericht (Energie / Finanz): Der CME Group (die Hauptwarenbörse Amerikas) hat sich gegen den Vorschlag der Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC - die amerikanische Aufsichtsbehörde für Warenbörse) geäußert, die Spekulation auf außerbörslichen Energiemärkten  zu regeln.

Die Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC, die amerikanische Aufsichtsbehörde für Warenbörse) hat am 26. Januar 2010 eine Entwurfsarbeit veröffentlicht, in der sie ihre Absicht erklärt, die Spekulation auf außerbörslichen  Energiemärkten  zu regeln. Dieser Entwurf wurde vom CME Group stark kritisiert. Der CME Group, die Hauptwarenbörse in den VS, behauptet, dass die CFTC keinen rechtlichen Auftrag hat, solch eine Reglung einzuführen. Erst ein spezifistiches Gesetz würde es ermöglichen können, laut der CME Group.

Sept. 4, 2017

Breaking news

The Internet has created an area of freedom, even libertarian space.

The flood of words is sometimes hateful. Never mind. This would be the price of freedom: it corresponds to the project of those who conceived the Internet, the places of expression and creation, even the worst, and the political and legal culture of the United States, a system in which the freedom of expression has constitutional value.

This in particular allows for the development of ideas spreading so-called "neo-Nazi" thinking, as the Stormfront site has been doing for years.

On August 25, 2017, the private company, Network Solutions that hosts the site and provides it with the domain name terminated hosting and deleted the domain name.

The host also banned the web master from rebuilding the site or transferring it in any way.

This case gives rise to a debate on the rise of extremists in the United States on the one hand and the limit of freedom of expression on the other.

What is here to be noted is the power of a web host in the matter.

___

At first glance, a private company does not have to make the police, let alone morality, and to remove the use of a domain name, that is to "kill" a site. But it must be taken into account that three years had passed and that this site, the basis of future events of KKK, prospered.

The manager who made the decision found it necessary to justify himself, as a Regulatory Authority would have done, giving grounds for a sanction decision, even though he can avail himself of the general conditions of use that are accepted by the entities that create and operate the sites.

Read more below.

Dec. 9, 2014

Breaking news

The administration of President Barack Obama issued November 26, 2014 a draft of 25 November 2014, coming from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and subject to contributions to regulate the emission of greenhouse gases.

Companies are protesting because this will increase the cost of regulation. We are now witnessing a clash between supporters of the economic strength of the country and the promoters of the environment.

The President's rationale is this: that environmental regulation is justified because it will prevent many diseases and even death from respiratory failure. However, social programs and Obamacare are the major challenges of his presidency.

Therefore, the discussion is about the relationship between "regulation" and "sector": if the Regulation is related simply to the environment, then the argument of additional financial regulation advanced by firms is relevant.

Indeed, the principle of proportionality being key in regulatory techniques, there is disproportionality between the means and the goal.

But if the charges have to end not only the preservation of the environment but also public health and human lives then more burdens on business are justified.
Thus, depending on whether one attaches one or more goals in a constraint, it justifies more or less charge. Companies have interest in claiming that the regulation serves only one purpose. The state has an interest in claiming that the regulation uses several if it wants additional burden on businesses.
This is the speech that President Barack Obama, whose political maneuvering margins are low, is being built.

Updated: Sept. 17, 2012 (Initial publication: Sept. 8, 2012)

Breaking news

Libor is the rate set by the bank statements, anticipating purchases liquidity between them. The Libor rate is the result of self-regulation. On this rate, the financial system leans to fix rates many different financial transactions. However, now many banks are sued by authorities, for manipulation. The banks made false statement or organize a cartel, producing a rate in their favor. From the condemnation of the Barclays 26 June 2012 by the Financial Services Authority (FSA), the commencement of proceedings, the constitution of the Commission to think reform Libor estimated pernicious, banks choose their strategy. Most prefer to cooperate fully in themselves investigation leading home and helping the authorities. This was the case of the Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS). Today it is the case of Société Générale (SocGen).

Updated: May 29, 2012 (Initial publication: May 15, 2012)

Breaking news

The Autorité de régulation des communications électroniques et des postes (ARCEP - French regulator of Telecommunications and Posts) granted a licence for a new entrant, Free, what was widely challenged. This allocation was made in exchange f a number of commitments of recipient, especially towards the virtual mobile networks operators (MVNO). Indeed, FREE must allow them to use its facilities and its authorisation, the satisfaction of the commitment which has the effect of fostering competition in the mobile phone market. However, some virtual mobile networks operators (MVNO) complained that Free would not respect its commitments in that the offer of host that FREE have made in exchange, of a higher price of retail price, which is contrary to the principle of opening up competition. The regulator opens proceedings against FREE.

Updated: Nov. 26, 2012 (Initial publication: Nov. 26, 2012)

Breaking news

La banque UBS a informé le 26 novembre 2012 qu'elle avait sanctionné par la Financial Services Authority (FSA) pour un comportement illicite de son ex-trader. Son communiqué insiste sur le fait que l'amende est moindre de 30% que celle qui aurait pu être prononcée, car la banque a, depuis la découverte du manquement, amélioré ses contrôles internes et la formation de son personnel. En considération de cette amélioration de gouvernance, qui donne un gage de bon fonctionnement du système à l'avenir, le régulateur, à l'intérieur même de son système de sanction, adoucit celui-ci. On mesure ici que la sanction ex post est utilisée comme moyen ex ante pour construire une plus efficace gouvernance, partie intégrante de la régulation financière et bancaire.

Feb. 26, 2013

05. Court of Justice of the European Union

Updated: Aug. 28, 2012 (Initial publication: Aug. 24, 2012)

Breaking news

The "Conseil constitutionnel" (French Constitutional Council), on the occasion of the control of the "Loi de finance rectificative" (amending finance law) adopted, may make rules relating to the regulation. Thus, a Senate amendment had slipped into legislation a tax of 5% on the resale of a television channel, when it had been obtained by the purchaser on account of the assignment for the benefit of a licence conferred by the State free of charge. The provision is considered non-compliant with the Constitution in that it does not have enough in connection with the organization of the finances of the State and that it pursues another goal: here to avoid that an operator plays with the mechanisms of regulation for purely financial purposes. This struggle by the Council against the "legislative cavaliers" didn’t mean that a measure of this type is later taken by a law, since such concern can be justified.