The French Act of 1 February 2012 "to strengthen the ethics of sport and sports rights" has sought to resolve the issue of the use of short excerpts from sports other than broadcast rights holders. Prior to this, only a code of conduct existed, the uncertainty remaining, and also about the dimension of the extract and the support of the extract. The Act is now related to the extract in any medium, including the Internet, and gives the power to establish specific rules to the Conseil Supérieur de l'audiovisuel (CSA)- (French audiovisual regulatory). Furthermore, the Act of May 17, 2011 has extended the right to free diffusion in any event a great interest to the public. The Conseil Supérieur de l'audiovisuel (CSA) – (French audiovisual regulatory) has opened on April 4, 2012, a public consultation. It will be closed on 18 May.
The Morocco is overhaul its system of financial regulation. The Dahir related the Regulatory and Public Offering Authority was approved by the Council of the Government on April, 11 2012. The Conseil déontologique des valeurs mobilières (CDVM) - Council for the Code of Ethics in Securities is now called l’Autorité Marocaine du marché des Capitaux (AMMC) (the Moroccan Authority of capital markets). The Bill justifies the change of name and the use of the word "authority" by the wish expressed to ensure the independence of the Regulatory Authority and the reference to its monitoring power. This is takes the form of new powers for the Regulatory Authority which allows it to require information and sanction infringements. The Regulatory Authority establishes the standard form that any corporation interest in conducting a public offering must complete to receive the approval from the Regulatory Authority. The use of inside information is prohibited. The Bill organises the regular dissemination of information on the initiative of companies which conducted a public offering.
On December 10, 2010, the Commission de Régulation de l’Energie (CRE – French Commission for Energy Regulation) and the Autorité des marches financiers (French Securities Regulator – the AMF) entered into a memorandum of understanding (the MoU). Cooperation between these two sector based regulators is, for the most part, set against the background of, and aims at, a better (or, rather, burgeoning) regulation of the market for CO2 emission allowances and is grounded in the following principles:
- both regulators undertake to transmit information necessary to fulfilling each other’s respective expanded legal mandate, i.e.:
o protecting investments made in CO2 emission allowances (e.g. by detecting and punishing market abuses, i.e. insider trading, market manipulations, dissemination of false information) for the AMF and;
o overseeing transactions made by market participants on the spot and derivatives markets for CO2 emission allowances to make sure that such transactions are in line with transactions made on the markets for electricity and natural gas for the CRE;
- such mutual information is to notably take the form of regular bilateral meetings at various levels and mutual information may now cover data that the AMF had to keep confidential due to strict legal privilege restrictions applicable to its officers.
It is sometimes argued that the competitive freedom will destroy the "old regulated world", platforms being the perfect example of this fresh wind, the invention of the adjective "disruptive" which could express a "novelty" before which it is only suitable to bow.
In 2014, the French Constitutional Council justified its decision by referring to "the public order of parking", which the municipality is mistress... The justification given here is to protect the occupant.
Indeed all rideshare drivers will be obliged provide proof that they are subject to health checks, especially on drugs and provide criminel check also.
This is justified because Regulation of an activity implies control of those who exercise it and equal competitors can justify that for the same activity some are removed, especialy in view of the protection of the person transported.
The third new requirement is of a different nature: the driver must prove that it is not in debt to the municipality. Why not, since the infrastructure of the city allows them to exercise the economic activity in question. This is another underlying objective, which lies rather in the idea of an exchange between the city and the one who transports people, the beneficiary of infrastructure should not be otherwise debtor that it enjoys public infrastructure.
The latter provision shows that the "contract" is increasingly not between the carrier and transported - via the virtual platform - but between the very concrete public space and one that circulates and do not live there.
We know the importance of the credit mortgage c in the United States and the place of its failure in the financial crisis of 2008 and those that erupted. The refinancing market of the real estate loans is held by three operators, including Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. This market is regulated and overseen by the Federal Housing Agency (FHFA). This agency has the power to adjust as needed to lower the principal amount of mortgage debt if market value of purchased assets decline also. But he Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) sought for this purpose by the same firms of refinancing acting at the request of the Government, refused to allow such an adjustment. On July 31, 2012, the Secretary of the Treasury of the United States is expressed "concern" of such refusal, which risk to distressed companies of refinancing of mortgages, including the rescue has already cost so much at the first time.
The translated summaries are done by the Editors and not by the Authors.
ENGLISH
“Global Financial Integration, Thirty Years on. From reform to crisis”
combines many academic contributions on international financial
governance, that each offer original and in-depth analysis of the
financial crisis’ causes. To safeguard the authors’ legal and economic
reasoning, the bibliographical report has been divided in three parts
and will be brought to The Journal of Regulation’s readers in three
successive issues . The following report analyses the third part of the
volume.
It is believed that the lexical distinction between two words necessarily involves the allusion to two different things. In this view, economic regulation differs from financial regulation. Based on what financial regulation is, which is not reduced to an addition of rules and regulations but is a set of mechanisms, institutions, decisions, principles and rules revolving around risk, competition law could be used as a means for financial regulation, although it is usually solely applied to ordinary markets of goods and services. But a new ambiguity has surfaced between financial regulation and economic regulation. Therefore, a wall between economic regulation and financial regulation cannot be built on the single difference between the “economic sector” such as the market of goods and services, and the “financial sector”. A more sophisticated partition could take into account the notion of « individual risk ».
GERMAN
Der Unterschied zwischen wirtschaftliche und finanzielle Regulierung.
Normalerweise weist ein lexikalischer Unterschied zwischen zwei Wörter darauf hin, dass man von zwei verschiedene Sachen spricht. Also sind die wirtschaftliche und die finanzielle Regulierung unterschiedlich. Die finanzielle Regulierung ist nicht eine ledigliche Addition von Gesetzen und Anordnungen, sondern eine Zusammenstellung von Mechanismen, Institutionen, Entscheidungen, Prinzipien und regeln, die sich mit dem Thema Risiko beschäftigen. Anhand dieser Tatsache könnte das Wettbewerbsrecht, das normalerweise erst für gewöhnlichen Waren- und Dienstleistungenmärkte gebraucht ist, auch im finanziellen Bereich Anwendung finden. Jetzt aber hat sich eine neue Zweideutigkeit zwischen wirtschaftlicher und finanzieller Regulierung entwickelt. Infolgedessen kann eine Begrenzung zwischen beide Regulierungen nicht nur aufgrund den Unterschied zwischen dem wirtschaftlichen (wie z.B. der Güter- und Dienstleistungensmarkt) und dem finanziellen Sektor. Eine anspruchsvollere Unterscheidung könnte den Begriff "individuellen Risiko" integrieren.
SPANISH
La distinción entre la Regulación económica y la Regulación financiera.
Se cree que la distinción léxica entre dos palabras necesariamente involucra la alusión a dos cosas. Teniendo esto en cuenta, la regulación económica difiere de la regulación financiera. Basándonos en lo que es la regulación financiera, lo cual no se reduce a una simple adición de reglas y regulaciones pero por lo contrario está compuesta por una serie de mecanismos, instituciones, decisiones, principios y reglas que dependen del riesgo, se podría decir que la ley de la competencia puede ser utilizado para la regulación financiera, aunque normalmente solo se aplica a mercados ordinario de bienes y servicios. Pero una nueva ambigüedad se ha dado entre la regulación financiera y la regulación económica. Por lo tanto, es imposible construir una pared entre la regulación económica y la regulación financiera basado simplemente en la diferencia entre el ‘sector financiero’ como lo es el mercado de bienes y servicios y el sector financiero. Una partición más sofisticada podría tomar en cuenta la noción del “riesgo individual.”
About electric Regulation, Senegal remained halfway. Indeed, it has instituted a regulator, the "Commission de Régulation du Secteur de l'Electricité - CRSE)" (Senegale Regulatory Commission of Electricity Sector), but it built the sector around a public operator, SENEGEL with which the State has concluded a concession contract . This operator has the legal monopoly on the transport and distribution. As for production, it has the right to purchase electricity produced by independent producers, as it can sell them electricity if necessary. The prices are regulated by the regulator, through a cap.
On 4 August 2012, the regulator has reported a plan of action. This is to make more transparent the relationship between the public operator and independent producers, the information being given to consumers. This is for encouraging them to act and obtain prices more favorable. This incentive is an alternative to net more liberalization of the sector.
On December 20, 2011, the European Commission adopted a decision based on the Almark ruling that expounds upon the four conditions necessary so that compensation paid by a State to any state-owned or private company entrusted with the operation of a public service not require prior notification of the European Commission, despite the general prohibition on State Aids. Each state has a wide margin of discretion in the definition of services that could be classified as being services of general economic interest. A communication and de minimis regulation will complete this decision.
The regulator of telecommunications of the Venezuala also controls the television channels. In October 2011, it heavily punished by a fine Globovision channel for how it had reported mutiny. The company has not paid the fine. Seized by the regulator, the Supreme Court of justice ordered the freeze of assets of the company for $ 5.6 million as long as execution would not be made. The following day, June 29, 2012, the fine was paid. It is not sure that democracy has its account.
