The pay affected by the first hundred American companies to their best paid corporate officersrepresent more than 2 billion, notably because they include stock options. For the moment, the provision of the Dodd-Frank Act requiring companies to publish the ratio between the remuneration of the officers and the average remuneration of employees, whose the Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) must control effectiveness, is not currently observed.
Europe is definitely the zone of the world in which the protection of persons is thought.
Elle le fait par des textes, dont le très fameux Réglement adopté en 2016 relative à la protection des personnes physiques à l'égard du traitement à caractère personnel et à la libre circulation de ces données,dit "RGPD", recopié par exemple en Californie par la loi du 12 juillet 2018, par des initiatives nationales, comme la prochaine loi française contre les discours de haine dans l'espace numérique, par de nombreuses études et rapports - le droit souple étant aussi importante que le Droit pénal en Droit de la Compliance, mais encore par des décisions de justice.
Europe does this by texts, including the very famous Regulation adopted in 2016 relating to the treatment of personal data for their free circulation and the protection of peope concerned by them ( known as General Data Protection Regulation - GDPR ), copied for example in California by the Act of 12 July 2018, by national initiatives, such as the next French law against hate speech in the digital space, by numerous studies and reports - Soft Law being as important as Criminal Law in Law of Compliance system -, but also by court decisions.
Indeed, judicial decisions were at the origin of the movement of the person protection, with the creation of a "right to be forgotten" by the 2014 Google Spain decision of the Court of Justice of the European Union.
Economic regulation systems only work if regulators are independent, which implies in a minimal way that they are not corrupt. Few countries meet this basic requirement. Côte d'Ivoire has a telecommunications Agency, which is a State Corporation. By order of March 21, 2012, the Government creates the telecommunications regulatory authority. On May 4, 2012, the Board of Directors of the Agency of telecommunications convened to an extraordinary session and put an end to the mandate of its Director General, because of "serious shortcomings observed in the performance of his duties". He was immediately replaced by a telecommunication engineer, previously technical adviser to the Ministry. He was assigned the mission of preparing the transition of the system to an effectively independent, autonomous and impartial regulator.
Usually the companies in charge of a public service established with the State of the "plan contract". In application of the "Code de l'aviation civile (Civil Aviation Code), the private company "Aéroports De Paris - ADP" (Paris Airports) establishes a "contract of regulation". This one develops "contracts of economic regulation". They must generate visibility for the company and for the customers, set ceilings for the royalty, set quality objectives, respect the just remuneration of invested capital. The new "regulation agreement" concluded between the French State and "Aéroports De Paris - ADP" (Paris Airports) covers the 2011-2015 period, presented as a period of transition towards the profitability of capital. This contract was signed in July 2010. The contract was presented to investors June 27, 2012 in its implementation, "Aéroports De Paris - ADP (Paris Airports) progressing in its profitability.
"Acting in a neutral way" is an oxymoron. "Companies often require however that States use their powers in a neutral way (eg tax neutrality). In regulated sectors, some are right or even duty , of not being neutral. Firstly, it is the State, which requires the market for other purposes, other temporalities and other values. Secondly, they are also the "crucial operators", which are sort of regulators of second degree, such as transmission system operators or companies capital markets firms. The difficulty increases when the systeme requires neutrality of regulators and judges, when first build economic policy and the second create jurisprudence. Their consistency, impartiality and rationality can create an objectifiable neutralitys
FRENCH
«Agir de façon neutre» est un oxymoron. «Les entreprises ont souvent besoin, cependant, que les États utilisent leurs pouvoirs de manière neutre (neutralité fiscale par exemple).
Dans les secteurs réglementés, certains ont le droit ou même le devoir de ne pas être neutre. Tout d’abord, c’est l’État, qui insère le marché à d’autres fins, d’autres temporalités et d’autres valeurs. En second lieu, ils sont aussi les «opérateurs crucial», qui sont des sortes de régulateurs du second degré : par exemple les opérateurs de réseaux de transport ou de entreprises de marchés financiers.
La difficulté augmente lorsque le systeme économique et politique exige la neutralité des autorités de régulation et des juges, alors que les premiers construisent la politique économique et les seconds construisent la jurisprudence. Le respect qu'ils doivent avoir de l'impartialité et d'une rationalité suffisamment objectivables pourra permettre cette objectivité requise.
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.
On April 27, 2010, the European Parliament’s Committee for Health voted to introduce an amendment to the European Commission’s ‘Pharmacovigilance and Prescription Medicine Package’, which would introduce a strict regime for online prescription medicine sellers.
Little is known about how to ‘regulate the Internet’…
Outline solutions, however, do seem to have to be found in ex-post mechanisms since Regulation (broadly speaking) understand ex-ante and ex-post mechanisms as a continuum, and since Regulators increasingly concentrate ex-post mechanisms in their hands as an effective way to ensure execution of the ex-ante prescriptions they themselves elaborated.
Ex-ante mechanisms aim at making algorithms more ‘loyal’.
As long as we hope for devices to be trustworthy and to be held accountable for their ‘loyalty’, we give merits to the idea that we probably should “take liability seriously”.
The applicant based its claim to hold the companies liable on the grounds that they let terrorist groups use their networks: “The suit claims the companies “knowingly permitted” the Islamic State group, referred to in the complaint as “ISIS”, to recruit members, raise money and spread “extremist propaganda” via their social-media services”.
Conversely, the defendants unanimously claimed that they had actively implemented ‘policies’ against extremist material, and that they were working with law enforcement entities to improve regulations on the matter. Self-regulation and ethics versus common liability law.
The companies also pointed out the fact that they were not publishers, hence they could not face liability for the material users post on their networks. This is not, however, the issue at stake: the complaint concerns the use of the network not as a mere way to broadcast messages, but as a way to recruit murderers, provide them with convenient tools to communicate and to prepare criminal operations—allegations for which law does not exempt social media companies from liability.
These allegations are worth being ‘taken seriously’, should the law be unclear on whether the companies could be charged indeed, and should the total exemption from liability of such companies pleading for their ‘neutrality’ be the exception rather than the norm.
The question of principle is thus as follows: is exemption from liability of those who hold the ‘digital space’ together really the norm?
If so, their exemption from liability needs to be extended to a scenario that had not been covered by the law yet. If not, then common liability law is the rightful legal basis to assess whether the companies can be found liable or not—provided that a direct causal link between the unlawful act and an actual harm suffered by the applicant can be demonstrated.
A "cookie", so named because its shape recalls the shape of the cake, allows a site to remember the tastes of the user through visits and purchases which he made and decide to reuse this information. A European directive decided to limit these practices, the English legislature has provided the obligation for sites to warn the user that connects that a cookie identifies him and agrees of this acquisition of personal information, the justification for the Act is the protection of personal information that a third party data protection may thus have without the consent of the person concerned.
The Act came into application in the United Kingdom on May 25, 2012. Some companies they say it technically inapplicable, both as relevant information to justify the application of the consent form and what form the consent of the user should take. They are more concerned because the entire device is subjected to penal sanctions.
In the United States, the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA), on 1994 allows some services of the State which justify it, in particular the F.B.I, to carry out telephone tapping. But the technology also allows the transmission of voice by other means than the phone, especially via the Internet. However, wiretapping as a threat to individual liberties, only an Act may extend the powers of listening, on the phone on the modes of transmission of voice on the Internet. In this view, the F.B.I. is developing which is intended to become an extension of the Act of 1994.
