This report says Parliament should not introduce any new privacy statute. It concludes that in weighing the competing rights to privacy and freedom of expression, each case must be judged on its own merits. The bar for limiting freedom of expression must be set high, but the courts are now striking a better balance in dealing with applications for privacy injunctions. Criticism that privacy law has been "judge-made", noting that it evolved from the Human Rights Act is rejected. The Committee says the most important step towards improving protection of privacy is to provide for enhanced regulation of the media. The Press Complaints Commission lacked the power, sanctions or independence to be truly effective. Substantial changes to press regulation are needed to ensure that it encompasses all major news publishers including, in time, major bloggers. The Committee makes several recommendations including that the reformed regulator should: have access to a wider range of sanctions, including the power to fine; be cost-free to complainants; be able to determine the size and location of a published apology, and the date of publication; play a greater role in arbitrating and mediating privacy disputes. One possible mechanism the Committee suggests is for advertisers to agree to advertise only in publications that are members of the press regulator and subscribe to its rules. It also concludes that parliamentarians should ensure that material subject to an injunction is only revealed in Parliament when there is good reason to do so

Explains how the tailoring of injunctions in patent law works in Europe, the United States, Canada, and Israel.

The injunction is an exceptionally potent remedy, the grant or denial of which often leads to a cascade of serious consequences. This comprehensive and practical guide to injunctive relief covers all issues that are relevant to these types of motions from pre-filing considerations to appellate relief. The book also includes time-saving checklists, flowcharts to help practitioners decide whether to file such motions and statistics relating to how often these motions are granted/denied.

IAI Series No. 2 The International Arbitration Institute (IAI) series on international arbitration is a new periodic series of publications that will focus on cutting edge issues and developments in international arbitration. About the IAI: The International Arbitration Institute (IAI), an organization created under the auspices of the Comité Français de ľ Arbitrage (CFA), was created to promote exchanges in international arbitration. The IAI is designed to promote exchanges on current issues in the field of international commercial arbitration. Its activities include the regular organization of international conferences, colloquiums, as well as conducting various research projects. About the Book: Anti-suit injunctions are a device, originally found in common law countries, whereby a court - which retains its jurisdiction or anticipates to do so and which seeks to protect that jurisdiction or, more generally, the jurisdiction of the forum it deems to be the most appropriate - orders a party to refrain from bringing a claim before the courts of another State or before an arbitral tribunal or, if the party has already brought such a claim, orders that party to withdraw from, or the arbitrators to suspend, the proceedings. In the past few years, the use of anti-suit injunctions in the context of international arbitration has been spreading at a disturbing pace. The courts of many common law countries but also those of civil law tradition frequently resort to this device at a party's request, in order to disrupt the arbitration process or resist the enforcement of the award. How best to resolve those conflicts arising as a result of national courts' differing perspectives on the validity and scope of certain arbitration agreements? Are anti-suit injunctions in conformity with the requirements of public international law? When the courts of certain States enjoin a party to refrain from proceeding with an arbitration, should other courts enjoin them not to enjoin, or should they, like the U.S. Court of Appeal for the 5th Circuit in the Pertamina case, exercise a commandable "self-restriction"? These are just a few of the issues addressed in Anti-Suit Injunctions in International Arbitration.

In the European Union, courts have been expanding the enforcement of intellectual property rights by employing injunctions to compel intermediaries to provide assistance, despite no allegation of wrongdoing against these parties. These prospective injunctions, designed to prevent future harm, thus hold parties accountable where no liability exists. Effectively a new type of regulatory tool, these injunctions are distinct from the conventional secondary liability in tort. At present, they can be observed in orders to compel website blocking, content filtering, or disconnection, but going forward, their use is potentially unlimited. This book outlines the paradigmatic shift this entails for the future of the Internet and analyzes the associated legal and economic opportunities and problems.

Over the last 15 years, privacy actions have been recognised at common law or in equity across common law jurisdictions, and statutory privacy protections have proliferated. Apex courts are now being called upon to articulate the law governing remedies, including in high-profile litigation concerning phone hacking, covert filming and release of personal information. Yet despite the practical significance of the courts' approach to damages, injunctions and other remedies for breach of privacy, very little has been written on the topic. This book comprehensively analyses these developments from a comparative perspective and provides solutions to issues which are coming to light as higher courts forge this remedial jurisprudence and practitioners look for guidance. Significantly, the essays are important not only for what they say about remedies, but also for the attention they give to the nature of the new privacy actions, providing deep insights into substantive law. The book includes contributions by academics, practitioners and judges from Australia, Canada, England, New Zealand and the United States, who are expert in the legal disciplines implicated by privacy remedies, including torts, equity, public law and conflict of laws. By bringing together this range of perspectives, the book offers authoritative insights into this cutting-edge topic. It will be essential reading for all those seeking to understand and resolve the new issues associated with privacy remedies.

The "Overview of the Privacy Act of 1974," prepared by the Department of Justice's Office of Privacy and Civil Liberties (OPCL), is a discussion of the Privacy Act's disclosure prohibition, its access and amendment provisions, and its agency recordkeeping requirements. Tracking the provisions of the Act itself, the Overview provides reference to, and legal analysis of, court decisions interpreting the Act's provisions.

Through a collaboration among twenty legal scholars from North America, Europe and Asia, this book presents an international consensus on the use of patent remedies for complex products such as smartphones, computer networks, and the Internet of Things. This title is also available as Open Access on Cambridge Core.