Технодетерминизм в частном праве: влияние биопринтинга на развитие концепции защиты права на цифровой образ

Анализ основных проблем, связанных с защитой права человека на цифровой образ в сфере биопринтинга. Определение эффективной модели деликтной ответственности за посягательства на цифровой образ человека, связанных с использованием биопринтных технологий.

Рубрика Государство и право
Вид статья
Язык русский
Дата добавления 24.06.2022
Размер файла 77,2 K

Отправить свою хорошую работу в базу знаний просто. Используйте форму, расположенную ниже

Студенты, аспиранты, молодые ученые, использующие базу знаний в своей учебе и работе, будут вам очень благодарны.

19. Romanets Yu. V. Vina kak osnovanie duk- hovnoy i yuridicheskoy otvetstvennosti [Guilt as a Basis of Spiritual and Legal Liability]. Rossiyskaya Yustitsiya - Russian Justitia. 2011. Issue 4. Pp. 61 (In Russ.).

20. Ruzanova V. D. Pravo na zashchitu personal 'nykh dannykh: grazhdansko-pravovoy aspekt [The Right to Personal Data Protection: a Civil Law Aspect]. Grazhdanskoe pravo - Civil Law. 2019. Issue 6. Pp. 17-20. (In Russ.).

21. Savel'ev A. I. Napravleniya regulirova- niya Bol 'shikh dannykh i zashchita neprikosnoven- nosti chastnoy zhizni v novykh ekonomicheskikh realiyakh [Big Data Regulation and Privacy Protection Practices in New Economic Realities]. Za- kon - ZAKON. 2018. Issue 5. Pp. 122-144. (In Russ.).

22. Soldatchenko A. L. Realizatsiya printsi- pov kontinual'nogo podkhoda v issledovaniyakh sotsial'noy zrelosti lichnosti [Realization of the Continuous Approach Principles in Research into Social Maturity]. Sibirskiy pedagogicheskiy zhurnal - Siberian Pedagogical Journal. 2010. Issue 12. Pp. 109-117. (In Russ.).

23. Solomeina E. Raspredelenie bremeni do- kazyvaniya po delam o kompensatsii moral'nogo vreda [Distribution of the Burden of Proof in Cases of Compensation for Moral Damage]. Arbitrazhnyy i grazhdanskiy protsess - Arbitrazh and Civil Procedure. 2008. Issue 8. Pp. 24-26. (In Russ.).

24. Tarabanov N. A., Gizbrekht E. S. Ratsional'nost' v nauke i religii: interval'nokontinual 'nyy podkhod [Rationality in Science and Religion: Interval-Continual Approach]. Antinomii - Antinomies. 2018. Issue 4. Pp. 21-34. (In Russ.).

25. Khesuani Yu. D., Sergeeva N. S., Mironov V. A., Mustafin A. G., Kaprin A. D. Vvedenie v 3D-bioprinting: istoriya formirovaniya napravle- niya, printsipy i etapy biopechati [Introduction to 3D-Bioprinting: the History, Principles and Stages]. Geny i kletki - Genes and Cells. 2018. Issue 3. Pp. 38-45. (In Russ.).

26. Shebanova N. A. Sovremennyy vneshniy oblik individuuma: svoboden li vybor? [Modern Appearance of the Individual: Is the Choice Free?]. Trudy Instituta gosudarstva i prava RAN - Proceedings of the Institute of State and Law of the RAS. 2017. Issue 4. Pp. 176-196. (In Russ.).

27. Shok budushchego: per. s angl. / E. Toff- ler [Shock of the Future: transl. from English; A. Toffler]. Moscow, 2002. 557 p. (In Russ.).

28. Erdelevskiy A. M. O prezumptsii prichi- neniya moral'nogo vreda [On the Presumption of Causing Moral Damage]. Khozyaystvo i pravo - Business and Law. 2017. Issue 11. Pp. 102-108. (In Russ.).

29. Yakovleva E. A. Povedencheskaya eko- nomika kak oblast' nauchnogo znaniya v sovre- mennoy ekonomicheskoy nauke [Behavioral Economics as a Field of Scientific Knowledge in Modern Economics]. Voprosy regulirovaniya ekonomi- ki - Journal of Economic Regulation. 2014. Vol. 5. Issue 2. Pp. 62-69. (In Russ.).

30. Ajunwa I. Genetic Testing Meets Big Data: Tort and Contract Law Issues. Ohio State Law Journal. 2014. Vol. 75. Issue 6. Pp. 1225-1262. (In Eng.).

31. Ammar J. Defective Computer-Aided Design Software Liability in 3D Bioprinted Human Organ Equivalents. Santa Clara High Technology Law Journal. 2019. Vol. 35. Issue 3. Pp. 37-67. (In Eng.).

32. Balkin J. M. Information Fiduciaries and the First Amendment (February 3, 2016). UC Davis Law Review. 2016. Vol. 49. Issue 4. Yale Law School, Public Law Research Paper No. 553. Available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2675270. (In Eng.).

33. Barnett K., Harder S. Disgorgement of Gains and `Reasonable Fee' Damages. Remedies in Australian Private Law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2018. Pp. 431-468. DOI: 10.1017/9781108265188.024. (In Eng.).

34. Barocas S., Selbst A.D. Big Data's Disparate Impact (2016). California Law Review. 2016. Vol. 104. Pp. 671-732. Available at: https://ssrn. com/abstract=2477899; http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ ssrn.2477899. (In Eng.).

35. Benatti F. Danno all'immagine. Digesto Civile. Torino: UTET, 2011. Vol. VI. Pp. 275-279. (In Ital.).

36. Bergmann S. Publicity Rights in the United States and Germany: A Comparative Analysis.

37. Loyola of Los Angeles Entertainment Law Journal. 1999. Vol. 19. Pp. 479-480. (In Eng.).

38. Brean D. H. Patent Enforcement in Cyberterritories (April 12, 2018). Cardozo Law Review. 2019. Vol. 40. Available at: https://ssrn.com/ abstract=3161823. (In Eng.).

39. Calo R. Digital Market Manipulation (August 15, 2013). George Washington Law Review. 2014. Vol. 82. Issue 4. Pp. 995-1051. University of Washington School of Law Research Paper No. 2013-27. Available at: https://ssrn.com/ abstract=2309703; http://dx.doi.org/ 10.2139/ssrn. 2309703. (In Eng.).

40. Calo R. Privacy, Vulnerability, and Af- fordance. DePaul Law Review. 2017. Vol. 66. Pp. 591-604. (In Eng.).

41. Castells M. The Rise of the Network Society: The Information Age: Economy, Society, and Culture. Wiley, 2010. 597 p. (In Eng.).

42. Di Ciommo F. Privacy in Europe After Regulation (EU) No 2016/679: What Will Remain of the Right to Be Forgotten? The Italian Law Journal. 2017. Vol. 3. Issue 2. Pp. 623-646. (In Eng.).

43. Dobrinskaya D. E., Martynenko T. S. Defining the Digital Divide in Russia: Key Features and Trends Monitoring. Monitoring of Public Opinion: Economic and Social Changes. 2019. Vol. 153. Issue 5. Pp. 100-119. (In Eng.).

44. Englard I. The Philosophy of Tort Law. Dartmouth Pub Co., 1993. 254 p. (In Eng.).

45. Fletcher G. P. Fairness and Utility in Tort Theory. Harvard Law Review. 1972. Vol. 85. Issue 3. Pp. 537-573. Available at: https://scholar- ship. law.columbia.edu/ faculty_scholarship/1024. (In Eng.).

46. Gajda A. What If Samuel D. Warren Hadn't Married a Senator's Daughter? Uncovering the Press Coverage that Led to the Right to Privacy. Michigan State Law Review. 2008. Vol. 35. Pp. 35-59. (In Eng.).

47. Gatt L. Preface. The Contradictions of the Privacy Law. European Journal of Privacy Law & Technologies. 2020. Special Issue. Pp. VII-X. (In Eng.).

48. Geistfeld M. The Coherence of Compensation-Deterrence Theory in Tort Law (July 12, 2013). DePaul Law Review. 2012. Vol. 61. NYU School of Law, Public Law Research Paper No. 13-38. NYU Law and Economics Research Paper No. 1322. Available at: https://ssrn.com/ab- stract=2293124. (In Eng.).

49. Gilead I. On the Justifications of Strict Liability. European Tort Law 2004 (Helmut Ko- ziol & Barbara.C. Steininger eds.). 2005. Pp. 28

50. Available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2489685. (In Eng.).

51. Keating G.C. Distributive and Corrective Justice in the Tort Law of Accidents. Southern California Law Review. 2000. Vol. 74. Issue 1. Pp. 193-224. (In Eng.).

52. Knetsch J. The Compensation of Non- Pecuniary Loss in GDPR Infringement. European Journal of Privacy Law & Technologies. 2020. Special Issue. Pp. 63-70. (In Eng.).

53. Koziol H. Punitive Damages - A European Perspective. Louisiana Law Review. 2008. Vol. 68. Pp. 741-764. (In Eng.).

54. Lane J., Stodden V., Bender S., Nissenbaum H. Privacy, Big Data and the Public Good: Frameworks for Engagement. Cambridge University Press, 2014. 344 p. (In Eng.).

55. Lindenfeld E. 3D Printing of Medical Devices: CAD Designers as the Most Realistic Target for Strict, Product Liability Lawsuits. University of Missouri-Kansas City Law Review. 2016. Vol. 85. Issue 1. Pp. 79-103. (In Eng.).

56. Logeais E., Schroeder J.-B. The French Right of Image: An Ambiguous Concept Protecting the Human Persona. The Loyola of Los Angeles Entertainment Law Journal. 1998. Vol. 18. (In Eng.).

57. Luna F. Elucidating the Concept of Vulnerability: Layers not Labels. International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics. 2009. Vol. 2 (1). Pp. 121-139. (In Eng.).

58. Malgieri G., Niklas J. Vulnerable Data Subjects. Computer Law & Security Review. 2020. Vol. 37. Article 105415. Available at: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S 0267364920300200. (In Eng.).

59. Magnus U. Damages for Non-Pecuniary Loss in German Contract and Tort Law. The Chinese Journal of Comparative Law. 2015. Vol. 3. Issue 2. Pp. 289-307. Available at: https://doi.org/ 10.1093/cjcl/cxv011. (In Eng.).

60. Markel D. Retributive Damages: A Theory of Punitive Damages as Intermediate Sanction (February 3, 2009). Cornell Law Review. 2009. Vol. 94. Pp. 239-340. Available at: https://ssrn. com/abstract=991865. (In Eng.).

61. Menezes C. A. Civil Liability for Processing of Personal Data in the GDPR. European Data Protection Law Review. 2019. Vol. 5. Issue 4. Pp. 492-499. (In Eng.).

62. Ochara N.M. The Nature of Digital Transformation. 2016. Available at: https://ssrn. com/abstract=2804294. (In Eng.).

63. O'Dell E. Compensation for Breach of the General Data Protection Regulation (June 25, 2017). Dublin University Law Journal. 2017. Vol. 40 (1). (ns) 97-164. Available at: https://ssrn. com/abstract=2992351. (In Eng.).

64. Osborn L. Regulating Three-Dimensional Printing: The Converging Worlds of Bits and Atoms (July 20, 2013). San Diego Law Review. 2014. Vol. 51. Pp. 553-621. Available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2348894. (In Eng.).

65. Palmer V. (ed.). The Recovery of Non- Pecuniary Loss in European Contract Law (The Common Core of European Private Law). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015. 534 p. (In Eng.).

66. Polito P. The Protection of Our Image: Between the Right to One's Own Image and the Right of Publicity. The Italian Law Journal. 2018. Special Issue. Pp. 69-81. (In Eng.).

67. Reiter E. H. Personality and Patrimony: Comparative Perspectives on the Right to One's Image (2001-2002). Tulane Law Review. 2002. Vol. 76. Pp. 673-726. (In Eng.).

68. Ruda-Gonzalez A. Liability for the Unauthorized Use of Personal Data in Social Networks: the Case for Collective Redress. European Journal of Privacy Law & Technologies. 2020. Special Issue. Pp. 80-92. (In Eng.).

69. Rushkoff D. Present Shock: When Everything Happens Now. Penguin, 2013. 296 p. (In Eng.).

70. Strugala R. Art. 82 GDPR: Strict Liability or Liability Based on Fault? European Journal of Privacy Law & Technologies. 2020. Special Issue. Pp. 71-79. (In Eng.).

71. Van Dam C. European Tort Law. Oxford University Press, 2013. 656 p. (In Eng.).

72. Venchiarutti A. The Recognition of Punitive Damages in Italy: A Commentary on Cass Sez Un 5 July 2017, 16601, AXO Sport, SpA v NOSA Inc. Journal of European Tort Law. 2018. Vol. 9. Issue 1. Pp. 104-122. (In Eng.).

73. Warren S.D., Brandeis L. D. The Right to Privacy. Harvard Law Review. 1890. Vol. 5. Pp. 193-220. (In Eng.).

74. Webster F. Theories of the Information Society. Psychology Press, 2002. 304 p. (In Eng.).

75. Whistler J. McNeill. Eden versus Whistler: The Baronet & the Butterfly: a Valentine with a Verdict (Classic Reprint). FB&C Limited, 2015. 114 p. (In Eng.).

Размещено на Allbest.ru


Подобные документы

Работы в архивах красиво оформлены согласно требованиям ВУЗов и содержат рисунки, диаграммы, формулы и т.д.
PPT, PPTX и PDF-файлы представлены только в архивах.
Рекомендуем скачать работу.