Maurice Schellekens

Anonymity and software agents: An interdisciplinary challenge

Software agents that play a role in E-commerce and E-government applications involving the Internet often contain information about the identity of their human user such as credit cards and bank accounts. This paper discusses whether this is necessary: whether human users and software agents are allowed to be anonymous under the relevant legal regimes and whether an adequate interaction and balance between law and anonymity can be realised from both the perspective of Computer Systems and the perspective of Law.

Patenting Nanotechnology in Europe: Making a Good Start? An Analysis of Issues in Law and Regulation

Nanotechnology is the technology that concerns itself with the smallest units of matter and promises manipulation of matter on the level of individual molecules. It is expected that vastly improved quality of many kinds of products will be the result. The patenting of nanotech inventions is well under way in Europe, but going down to the most elemental level raises new and important questions. For example, how does patenting at the nano level relate to similar technology on the super-nano level? Also fundamental questions can be asked, such as: should matter at all be patentable at the most elemental level? This article seeks to give a first overview of questions of law and regulation concerning the patentability of inventions in the field of nanotechnology under the European Patent Convention.

Law-abiding and integrity on the internet: a case for agents

Abstract Software agents extend the current, information-based Internet to include autonomous mobile processing. In most countries such processes, i.e., software agents are, however, without an explicit legal status. Many of the legal implications of their actions (e.g., gathering information, negotiating terms, performing transactions) are not well understood. One important characteristic of mobile software agents is that they roam the Internet: they often run on agent platforms of others. There often is no pre-existing relation between the “owner” of a running agent’s process and the owner of the agent platform on which an agent process runs. When conflicts arise, the position of the agent platform administrator is not clear: is he or she allowed to slow down the process or possibly remove it from the system? Can the interests of the user of the agent be protected? This article explores legal and technical perspectives in protecting the integrity and availability of software agents and agent platforms.

Patentability of human enhancements

The patent system is dynamic. Its limits are redefined as industries evolve and explore new technologies. History has shown that campaigners for novel patents are likely to succeed, except where they meet persistent opposition from other interests groups. Human enhancing technologies may very well be the next field where the battle of patentability is fought. We define human enhancement as a modification aimed at improving individual human performance and brought about by science-based or technology-based interventions in the human body. Hence, in our analysis we use a broad concept of human enhancement, which may involve aspects of healing. This is the case, for example, where the healing of a condition yields a result that in some respects constitutes an enhancement compared to the situation that existed before the ailment set in. But purely restorative healing is not included in our definition of human enhancement. On top of that, we concentrate on human enhancements that rely on nanotechnology, biotechnology, information technology and cognitive science (NBIC) technologies. Thus, more traditional forms of human enhancement such as glasses, certain nutrients, learning and training fall outside our conception of human enhancement. Examples of human enhancement technologies include the following: implants and organ transplants (‘medical’), robotic arms and powered exoskeletons (‘mechanical’), drugs and doping (‘medicinal’), and neurostimulation and brain-computer interfaces (‘neural’).

Open Source Biotechnology: A Drug for Developing Countries' Health Problems?

In developing countries, many people suffer from diseases for which there are no drugs or for which drugs exist that they cannot afford because they are too expensive. The advent of genomics has sparked the idea that new drugs can be more easily developed and that genomics thus could lessen the health problems prevalent in developing countries. Until now, genomics has not been able to realise that promise. This paper explores whether, and if so, how open source biotechnology (hereinafter: OSB) can stimulate medical drug development specifically targeted at the health problems of developing countries.

Unreliable information on the internet : a challenging dilemma for the law

This paper examines what role the law can and should play with regard to unreliable information available on fast communication networks, such as the Internet. Users of electronic information find it increasingly difficult to assess its reliability. The traditional structures for assessing reliability are lacking or function inadequately. Clear social norms have not yet been developed. As regards the law, traditionally liability law is the first legal guard against undesirable societal developments. We conclude however, that liability law is an inadequate remedy for unreliable information. Self‐regulatory initiatives such as trust mark seals for websites providing reliable information offer a more promising perspective, although these also have their limitations, especially in the sphere of enforcement and legitimacy. In this paper, self‐regulation is nonetheless hailed as an important instrument because it provides an indispensable test‐bed for more concrete legal norms derived from reliability criteria ...

No-fault compensation schemes for self-driving vehicles

ABSTRACT ‘Who is liable if an accident happens with a self-driving vehicle?’ This question is often raised, but perhaps it can be made redundant. This article shows how so-called no-fault-compensation schemes (NFCS) can take over functions traditionally performed by liability schemes in the realm of self-driving vehicles. At the same time, it is highlighted that there is no such thing as ‘the’ NFCS’. NFCS come in many shapes and forms. The article elicits the main choices that NFCS raise and the policy implications they entail.