Akandji-Kombe, J, Positive Obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights: A Guide to the Implementation of the European Convention on Human Rights(Council of Europe 2007)Google Scholar

Angelopoulos, Ch, European Intermediary Liability in Copyright: A Tort-Based Analysis (Kluwer Law International 2016)Google Scholar

Apathy, P and Klingenberg, G, Einführung in das römische Recht (Böhlau 1994)Google Scholar

Aubry, Ch and Rau, C, Cours de Droit civil Francias (2nd ed., Marchal und Billard 1935)Google Scholar

Bacher, K, Die Beeinträchtigungsgefahr als Voraussetzung für Unterlassungsklagen im Wettbewerbsrecht und in anderen Gebieten des Zivilrechts (1996)Google Scholar

Baldus, Ch, “Beseitigungs- und Unterlassungsanspruch” in Rixecker, Roland and others (eds.) Münchener Kommentar zum BGB (6th ed., C. H. Beck 2013)Google Scholar

Ben-Shahar, O, “Causation and Foresee-ability” in Encyclopedia of Law and Economics (vol. 2, Springer 2001)Google Scholar

Boháček, M, Actio negatoria k dějinám zápůrči žaloby (Nákl. České Akad. Věd a Umění 1938)Google Scholar

Bryce, J, Studies in History and Jurisprudence (Oxford University Press 1901)Google Scholar

Buckland, W, A Text-Book of Roman Law: From Augustus to Justinian (Cambridge University Press 2007)Google Scholar

Buckland, W and McNair, A, Roman Law and Common Law (2nd ed., Cambridge University Press 1952)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Busche, J, Stoll, P-T, and Wiebe, A (eds.), TRIPs – Internationales und europäisches Recht des geistigen Eigentums (2nd ed., Heymanns 2012)Google Scholar

Calabresi, G, The Costs of Accidents (Yale University Press 1970)Google Scholar

Campbell, J, Lives of the Lord Chancellors and Keepers of the Great Seal of England, from the Earliest Times till the Reign of Queen Victoria (7th ed., Baron 1885)Google Scholar

Collins, L, The Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act 1982 (Butterworths 1983)Google Scholar

Conrad-Baldenstein, U, Die Actio Negatoria mit besonderer Berücksichtigung der Beweislast (Orell Füssli 1907)Google Scholar

Cooter, R, The Falcon's Gyre: Legal Foundations of Economic Innovation and Growth – Book 1 (Berkeley Law Books 2014) http://scholarship.law.berkeley.edu/books/1Google Scholar

Cooter, R and Porat, A, Getting Incentives Right: Improving Torts, Contracts and Restitution (Princeton University Press 2014)Google Scholar

Correa, C, Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights: A Commentary on the TRIPS Agreement (Oxford University Press 2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Döring, R, Die Haftung für eine Mitwirkung an fremden Wettbewerbsverstößen, Urheberrechts-, Marken-, Patent-, Gebrauchmuster- und Geschmacksmusterverletzungen (Deutscher Anwalt Verlag 2008)Google Scholar

Dreier, T and Hugenholtz, B (eds.) Concise European Copyright Law (2nd ed., Wolters Kluwer 2016)Google Scholar

Dreier, T and Schulze, G, Urheberrechtsgesetz: UrhG (4th ed., C. H.Beck 2013)Google Scholar

Eberl-Borges, Ch, et al., Julius von Staudingers Kommentar zum Bürgerlichen Gesetzbuch: Staudinger BGB – Buch 2: Recht der Schuldverhältnisse §§ 830-838 (Sellier/de Gruyter 2008)Google Scholar

Elkin-Koren, N and Salzberger, E, The Law and Economics of Intellectual Property in the Digital Age: The Limits of Analysis (Routledge 2013)Google Scholar

Erman, W and Westermann, P, Erman. Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch: Handkommentar mit AGG, EGBGB (Auszug), ErbbauRG, HausratsVO, LPartG, ProdHaftG, UKlaG, VAHRG und WEG (11th ed., Schmidt Otto 2008)Google Scholar

Geiger, Ch, “Implementing Intellectual Property Provisions in Human Rights Instruments: Towards a New Social Contract for the Protection of Intangibles” in Geiger, Christopher (ed.), Research Handbook on Human Rights and Intellectual Property (Edward Elgar 2014)Google Scholar

Gervais, D, The TRIPS Agreement: Drafting History and Analysis (Sweet & Maxwell 2012)Google Scholar

Grabenwarter, Ch and Vranes, E, Kooperation der Gerichte im europäischen Verfassungsverbund – Grundfragen und neuste Entwicklungen (Manzsche Verlags- und Universitätsbuchhandlung 2013)Google Scholar

Gursky, K, Julius von Staudingers Kommentar zum Bürgerlichen Gesetzbuch – Buch 3: Sachenrecht §§ 985–1011 (13th ed., Sellier/de Gruyter 1999)Google Scholar

Habersack, M, et al., Münchener Kommentar zum BGB (6th ed., C. H. Beck 2013)Google Scholar

Hartmann, A, Unterlassungsansprüche im Internet (C. H. Beck 2009)Google Scholar

Heise, A, Grundriss eines Systems des Gemeinen Civilrechts, Buch II (Mohr u. Winter 1807)Google Scholar

Helpman, E, The Mystery of Economic Growth (Belknap 2004)Google Scholar

Helpman, E and Trajtenberg, M, “A Time to Sow and a Time to Reap. Growth Based on General Purpose Technologies in Elhanan Helpman” in General Purpose Technologies and Economic Growth (MIT Press 1998)Google Scholar

Herrmann, E, Der Störer nach § 1004 BGB. Zugleich eine Untersuchung zu den Verpflichteten der §§ 907, 908 BGB (Duncker & Humbolt 1987)Google Scholar

Hofmann, F, Der Unterlassungsanspruch als Rechtsbehelf (Mohr Siebeck 2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hohloch, G, Die negatorische Ansprüche und ihre Beziehungen zum Schadensersatzrecht (Alfred Metzner Verlag 1976)Google Scholar

Holznagel, D, Notice and Takedown Verfahren als Teil der Providerhaftung (Mohr Siebeck 2013)Google Scholar

Holmes, O, The Common Law (Little, Brown 1881)Google Scholar

Honsell, H, Römisches Recht (Springer 2010)Google Scholar

Hügel, A, Haftung von Inhabern privater Internetanschlüsse für fremde Urheberrechtsverletzungen (C. H. Beck 2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Husovec, M, Doménová čítanka (EISi 2012)Google Scholar

Husovec, M, Zodpovednosť na Internete: podľa slovenského a českého práva (CZNIC 2014)Google Scholar

Jakobs, H and Schubert, W (eds.), Die Beratung des Bürgerlichen Gesetzbuchs: In systematischer Zusammenstellung der unveröffentlichten Quellen (De Gruyter 1978)Google Scholar

Johow, R, Die Vorlagen der Rektoren für die erste Kommission zur Ausarbeitung des Entwurfs eines Bürgerlichen Gesetzbuches – Sachenrecht, Teil 1, Allgemeine Bestimmungen, Besitz und Eigentum (first published 1880, De Gruyter 1991)Google Scholar

Kawasumi, Y, Von der römischen action negatoria zum negatorischen Beseitigungsanspruch des BGB (Nomos Verlag 2001)Google Scholar

Kerr, I and Cameron, I, “NYMITY, P2P & ISPS: Lessons from BMG Canada Inc. v. John Doe” in Strandburg, Katherine J. and Raicu, Daniela Stan (eds.), Privacy and Technologies of Identity: A Cross-Disciplinary Conversation (Springer 2005)Google Scholar

Klang, H, Kommentar zum ABGB 1, 2 (Verl. Österreich 1931)Google Scholar

Koziol, H, “Providerhaftung nach ECG und MedienG” in Berka, Walter, Grabenwarter, Christopher, and Holoubek, Michael (eds.) Persönlichkeitsschutz in elektronischen Massenmedien (Manz Verlag 2012)Google Scholar

Kramer, A, Zivilrechtlicher Auskunftsanspruch gegenüber Access Providern (Kovač 2007)Google Scholar

Kropp, J, Die Haftung von Host- und Access-Providern bei Urheberrechtsverletzungen Gebundene Ausgabe (Peter Lang 2012)Google Scholar

Landes, W and Posner, R, The Economic Structure of Tort Law (Harvard University Press 1987)Google Scholar

Larenz, K and Canaris, C, Lehrbuch des Schuldrechts II (13th ed., C. H. Beck 1994)Google Scholar

Larenz, K and Canaris, C, Methodenlehre der Rechtswissenschaft (3rd ed., Springer 2008)Google Scholar

Luby, Š, Výber z diela a myšlienok (IURA Edition 1998)Google Scholar

Maitland, F, Chaytor, A, and Whittaker, W, The Forms of Action at Common Law: A Course of Lectures Paperback (Cambridge University Press 1936)Google Scholar

Mancini, A, Ancient Roman Solutions to Modern Legal Issues: The Example of Patent Law (2nd ed., Buenos Books America 2007)Google Scholar

Marcus, N, “Blocking Web Sites – Experiences from Finland” in Axhamn, Johan (ed.), Copyright in a Borderless Online Environment (Norstedts Juridik 2012)Google Scholar

Mattei, U, Basic Principles of Property Law: A Comparative Legal and Economic Introduction (Praeger 2000)Google Scholar

Meagher, H, et al., Doctrines and Remedies (4th ed., Butterworths 2002)Google Scholar

Mehring, T, Beteiligung und Rechtswidrigkeit bei § 830 I 2 BGB. Zugleich ein Beitrag zur Behandlung der Fälle von Anteilszweifeln und Opfermehrheiten (Duncker & Humblot 2003)Google Scholar

Menell, P, “Intellectual Property: General Theories” in Encyclopedia of Law & Economics: Volume II (Springer 2000)Google Scholar

Mießner, S, Providerhaftung, Störerhaftung und Internetauktion (Peter Lang 2008)Google Scholar

Mugdan, B (ed.), Die gesamten Materialien zum Bürgerlichen Gesetzbuch für das Deutsche Reich: Band III (Deker's Verlag 1899–1900)Google Scholar

Münzberg, W, Verhalten und Erfolg als Grundlagen der Rechtswidrigkeit und Haftung (Vittorio Klostermann 1966)Google Scholar

Mylly, T, “Constitutional Perspective” in Pilla, Justine (ed.) The Unitary EU Patent System (Oxford University Press 2014)Google Scholar

Neuner, R, Privatrecht und Prozeßrecht (Bensheimer 1925)Google Scholar

OECD, The Role of Internet Intermediaries in Advancing Public Policy Objectives (OECD Publishing 2011)Google Scholar

Ohly, A, “Three Principles of European IP Enforcement Law: Effectiveness, Proportionality, Dissuasiveness” in Drexl, J (ed.) Technology and Competition, Contributions in Honor of Hanns Ullrich (Larcier 2009)Google Scholar

Ohly, A, “Urheberrecht in der digitalen Welt – Brauchen wir neue Regelungen zum Urheberrecht und dessen Durchsetzung?” in Bachmann, G (ed.) Verhandlungen des 70. Deutschen Juristentages (C. H. Beck 2014)Google Scholar

Ohly, A and Sosnitza, O, Gesetz gegen den unlauteren Wettbewerb (6th ed., C. H. Beck 2014)Google Scholar

Olson, M, The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups (Harvard University Press 1974)Google Scholar

Paulus, A, “Schutz des geistigen Eigentums” in Isensee, Josef and Kirchhof, Paul (eds.), Handbuch des Staatsrechts der Bundesrepublik Deutschland, Band XI (C. H. Beck 2013)Google Scholar

Peguera, M, La exclusión de responsabilidad de los intermediarios en Internet (Editorial Comares 2007)Google Scholar

Peukert, A, Die Gemeinfreiheit: Begriff, Funktion, Dogmatik (Mohr Siebeck 2012)Google Scholar

Picker, E, “Der ‘dingliche Anspruch’” in Koziol, Helmut and Rummel, Peter (eds.) Im Dienste der Gerechtigkeit: Festschrift für Franz Bydlinski (Springer 2002)Google Scholar

Picker, E, Der negatorische Beseitigungsanspruch (Mohr 1972)Google Scholar

Picker, E, “Prävention durch negatorischen Schutz” in Tichý, Luboš and Hrádek, Jiří (eds.) Prevention in Law (Centrum Právní Komparatistiky PFUK v. Praze 2013)Google Scholar

Pieroth, B, et al., Grundrechte. Staatsrecht II (C. H. Beck 2014)Google Scholar

Pigou, A, The Economics of Welfare (first published 1920, Macmillan 1932)Google Scholar

Pihlajarinne, T, Internetvälittäjä ja tekijänoikeuden loukkaus (Lakimiesliiton Kustannus 2012)Google Scholar

Pollock, F and Maitland, W, The History of English Law (2nd ed., Cambridge University Press 1893)Google Scholar

Posner, R, An Introduction to Economic Analysis of Law (Aspen 1982)Google Scholar

Posner, R, Economic Analysis of Law (Aspen 2003)Google Scholar

Posner, R, The Economics of Justice (Harvard University Press 1981)Google Scholar

Puchta, G, Über die negatorienklage (Rhein Museum 1827)Google Scholar

Randa, A, Právo vlastnické dle rakouského práva v. pořádku systematickém (Nákl. České Akademie Císaře Františka Josefa pro vědy, slovesnost a umění 1917)Google Scholar

Rawls, J, A Theory of Justice (Harvard University Press 1971)Google Scholar

Riordan, J, The Liability of Internet Intermediaries (Oxford University Press 2016)Google Scholar

Sassenberg, T and Mantz, R, WLAN und Recht. Aufbau und Betrieb von Internet-Hotspots (Erich Schmidt Verlag 2014)Google Scholar

Savola, P, Internet Connectivity Providers as Involuntary Copyright Enforers: Blocking Websites in Particular (IPR University Center 2015)Google Scholar

Schäfer, H, “Tor Law: General” in Encyclopedia of Law and Economics: Volume II (Springer 2001)Google Scholar

Schäfer, H, et al., The Economic Analysis of Civil Law (Edward Elgar 2004)Google Scholar

Schapiro, L, Unterlassungsansprüche gegen die Betreiber von Internet-Auktionshäusern und Internet-Meinungsforen (Mohr 2011)Google Scholar

Scheder-Bieschin, F, Modernes Filesharing (OlWIR Verlag 2013)Google Scholar

Schmidt, E and Cohen, J, The New Digital Age: Reshaping the Future of People, Nations and Business (Knopf 2013)Google Scholar

Schneider, A, Vom Störer zum Täter? (Nomos 2012)Google Scholar

Schwabe, J, Die sogennante Drittwirkung der Grundrechte (Goldman 1971)Google Scholar

Shavell, S, Economic Analysis of Accident Law (Harvard University Press 1987)Google Scholar

Siber, H, Die Passivlegitimation bei der rei vindicatio als Beitrag zur Lehre von der Aktionenkonkurrenz (Deichert 1907)Google Scholar

Sliwka, Ch, Herausgabeansprüche als Teil des zivilrechtlichen Eigentumsrechts? die rei vindicatio und funktionsäquivalente Ansprüche des Eigentümers gegen den Besitzer im französischen, englischen und deutschen Recht (Logos 2012)Google Scholar

Smith, A, An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations (first published 1776, David Campbell 1991)Google Scholar

Smith, M, Elements of Law, in Studying Law (2nd ed., Vanderbilt 1955)Google Scholar

Spindler, G, et al., Teledienstegesetz (C. H. Beck 2004)Google Scholar

Spry, I, Equitable Remedies: Injunctions and Specific Performance (5th ed., Sweet & Maxwell 1997)Google Scholar

Spry, I, Equitable Remedies: Injunctions and Specific Performance (9th ed., Sweet & Maxwell 2013)Google Scholar

Stein, I, Der Auskunftsanspruch gegen Access-Provider nach § 101 UrhG (Kovač 2012)Google Scholar

Teplitzky, O, Wettbewerbsrechtliche Ansprüche und Verfahren (Carl Heymanns Verlag 2011)Google Scholar

Tuhr, A, Der Allgemeine Teil des Deutschen Bürgerlichen Rechts, Band I. Allgemeine Lehren und Personenrecht (first published 1910, Duncker & Humblot 2013)Google Scholar

Ufer, F, Die Haftung der Internet Provider nach dem Telemediengesetz (Kovač 2007)Google Scholar

van Boom, W, “Compensating and Preventing Damage: Is There Any Future Left for Tort Law?” in Tiberg, Hugo (ed.), Festskrift till Bill W. Dufwa – Essays on Tort, Insurance Law and Society in Honour of Bill W. Dufwa: Volume I (Jure Förlag 2006)Google Scholar

van Schewick, B, Architecture & Innovation: The Role of the End-to-End Arguments in the Original Internet (MIT Press 2010)Google Scholar

von Bar, Ch, Verkehrspflichten richterliche Gefahrsteuerungsgebote im deutschen Deliktsrecht (Heymann 1980)Google Scholar

von Savigny, F, System des heutigen Römischen Rechts: Band 5 (Veit 1841)Google Scholar

von Staudinger, J (ed.), Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch (13th ed., Sellier-deGruyter 1993)Google Scholar

Wagner, E, Gesetzliche Unterlassungsansprüche im Zivilrecht: zugleich eine Untersuchung des Beseitigungsanspruchs (Manz 2004)Google Scholar

Walter, A, Störerhaftung bei Handeln Dritter (Peter Lang 2011)Google Scholar

Walter, M and Goebel, D, “Enforcement Directive” in Walter, M and von Lewinski, S (eds.), European Copyright Law: A Commentary (Oxford University Press 2010)Google Scholar

Wang, J, Regulating Hosting ISPs’ Responsibilities for Copyright Infringement: The Freedom to Operate in the US, EU and China (PhD Thesis 2016)Google Scholar

Welp, K, Die Auskunftspflicht von Access-Providern nach dem Urheberrechtsgesetz (C. H. Beck 2009)Google Scholar

Wenzel, K, et al., Das Recht der Wort- und Bildberichterstattung: Handbuch des Äußerungsrechts (5th ed., Otto Schmidt 2003)Google Scholar

Wetzel, R, Die Zurechnung des Verhaltens Dritter bei Eigentumsstörungstatbeständen (Mohr Siebeck 1971)Google Scholar

Windscheid, B, Die Actio des römischen Civilrechts vom Standpunkte des heutigen Rechts (Buddeus 1856)Google Scholar

Windscheid, B, Lehrbuch des Pandektenrecht, I. Band (Verlagshandlung von Julius Buddeus 1862)Google Scholar

Wright, D, Remedies (Federation Press 2010)Google Scholar

Zachariä, K, Handbuch des Französichen Civilrechts, Erste Band (Akademische Buchhandlung von Ernst Mohr 1853)Google Scholar

Zippelius, R, Juristische Methodenlehre (11th ed., C. H. Beck 2012)Google Scholar

Ahrens, H, “21 Thesen zur Störerhaftung im UWG und im Recht des Geistigen Eigentums” WRP [2007] 1281Google Scholar

Angelopoulos, Ch, “Are Blocking Injunctions against ISPs Allowed in Europe? Copyright Enforcement in the Post-Telekabel Legal Landscape” [2014] GRUR International 1089Google Scholar

Angelopoulos, Ch, “Filtering the Internet for Copyright Content in Europe” [2009] IRIS Plus 5Google Scholar

Ardia, D, “Free Speech Savior or Shield for Scoundrels: an Empirical Study of Intermediary Immunity Under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act” (2010) 43 Loyola of LA Law Review 373Google Scholar

Armbrüster, Ch, “Eigentumsschutz durch den Beseitigungsanspruch nach § 1004 I 1 BGB und durch Deliktsrecht” (2003) 43 Neue Juristische Wochenschrift 3087Google Scholar

Baker, B, “ACTA: Risks of Third Party Enforcement for Access to Medicines” [2010] PIJIP, Research Paper no. 1Google Scholar

Barry, J, et al., “Coasean Keep-Away: Voluntary Transaction Costs” (2014) 14–149 San Diego Legal Studies Paper 60Google Scholar

Bechtold, S and Tucker, C, “Trademarks, Triggers, and Online Search” (2014) 11(4) Journal of Empirical Legal Studies 718Google Scholar

Berger, A and Janal, R, “Suchet und Ihr werdet finden? Eine Untersuchung zur Störerhaftung von Online-Auktionshäusern” [2004]CR 917Google Scholar

Bezzenberger, G, “Der negatorische Beseitigungsanspruch und die Kosten der Ersatzvornahme” [2005] Juristenzeitung 373Google Scholar

Bezzenberger, T, “Der negatorische Beseitigungsanspruch und die Kosten der Ersatzvornahme” [2005] JZ 373Google Scholar

Blake, T, et al., “Consumer Heterogeneity and Paid Search Effectiveness: A Large Scale Field Experiment” [2014] Working paper http://faculty.haas.berkeley.edu/stadelis/Tadelis.pdfGoogle Scholar

Blevins, J, “Uncertainty as Enforcement Mechanism: The New Expansion of Secondary Copyright Liability to Internet Platforms” (2013) 34 Cardozo Law Review 1821Google Scholar

Bölling, M, “Unterlassungsantrag und Streitgegenstand im Falle der Störerhaftung” [2013] GRUR 1092Google Scholar

Bornkamm, J, “E-Commerce Directive vs. IP Rights Enforcement – Legal Balance Achieved?” [2007] GRUR International 642Google Scholar

Boutin, A, “Screening for Good Patent Pools through Price Caps on Individual Licenses” (2016) 8(3) American Economic Journal: Microeconomics 64Google Scholar

Brabyn, J, “Protection Against Judicially Compelled Disclosure of the Identity of News Gatherers’ Confidential Sources in Common Law Jurisdictions” (2006) 69 The Modern Law Review 895CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bradford, S, “Shooting the Messenger: The Liability of Crowdfunding Intermediaries for the Fraud of Others” (2015) 83 University of Cincinnati Law Review 371Google Scholar

Breshnahan, T and Greenstein, S, “The Economic Contribution of Information Technology: Towards Comparative and User Studies” (2001) 11(1) Journal of Evolutionary Economics 95Google Scholar

Breshnahan, T and Trajtenberg, M, “General Purpose Technologies: Engines of Growth” (1995) 65(1) Journal of Econometrics 83Google Scholar

Breyer, P, “Verkehrssicherungspflichten von Internetdiensten im Lichte der Grundrechte” [2009] MMR 14Google Scholar

Bridy, A, “ACTA and the Specter of Graduated Response” (2011) 26(3) American University International Law Review 558–577Google Scholar

Bridy, A, “Carpe Omnia: Civil Forfeiture in the War on Drugs and the War on Piracy” (2014) 46 Arizona State Law Journal 683–727Google Scholar

Bridy, A, “Graduated Response American Style: ‘Six Strikes’ Measured Against Five Norms” (2012) 23(1) Fordham Intellectual Property, Media & Entertainment Law Journal 1–66Google Scholar

Bridy, A, “Graduated Response and the Turn to Private Ordering in Online Copyright Enforcement” (2010) 89 Oregon Law Review 81Google Scholar

Bridy, A, “Internet Payment Blockades” (2015) 67(5) Florida Law Review 1523–1568Google Scholar

Bridy, A, “Notice and Takedown in the Domain Name System: ICANN's Ambivalent Drift into Online Content Regulation” (forthcoming) Washington and Lee Law Review https://ssrn.com/abstract=2920805Google Scholar

Bridy, A, “Three Notice Failures in Copyright Law” (2016) 96 Boston University Law Review 777–832Google Scholar

Brimsted, K and Chesney, G, “The ECJ's Judgment in Promusicae: The Unintended Consequences – Music to the Ears of Copyright Owners or a Privacy Headache for the Future? A Comment” (2008) 24 Computer Law & Security Review 275–279Google Scholar

Calabresi, G, “Concerning Cause and the Law of Torts: An Essay for Harry Kalven” (1975) 43 University of Chicago Law Review 69Google Scholar

Calabresi, G and Hirschoff, J, “Toward a Test for Strict Liability in Torts” (1972) 81 Yale Law Journal 1055Google Scholar

Calabresi, G and Melamed, D, “Property Rules, Liability Rules, and Inalienability: One View of the Cathedral” (1972) 85 Harvard Law Review 1089Google Scholar

Carrier, M, “SOPA, PIPA, ACTA, TPP: An Alphabet Soup of Innovation-Stifling Copyright Legislation and Agreements” (2013) 11(2) Northwestern Journal of Technology and Intellectual Property 1Google Scholar

Castets-Renard, C, “Le renouveau de la responsabilité délictuelle des intermédiaires de l'internet” [2012] Recueil Dalloz 827Google Scholar

Chesbrough, H and Teece, D, “When Is Virtual Virtuous? Organizing for Innovation” (1996) 74 Harvard Business Review 128Google Scholar

Cheung, A and Pun, K, “Comparative Study on the Liability for Trademark Infringement of Online Auction Providers” (2009) 31(11) European Intellectual Property Review 559Google Scholar

Ciolino, D and Donelon, E, “Questioning Strict Liability in Copyright” (2001–2002) 54 Rutgers Law Review 351Google Scholar

Coase, R, “Adam Smith's View of Man” (1976) 19 Journal of Law and Economics 529Google Scholar

Coase, R, “The Federal Communications Commission” (1959) 2 Journal of Law and Economics 1Google Scholar

Coase, R, “The Problem of Social Cost” (1960) 3 Journal of Law and Economics 1Google Scholar

Conradi, M, “Liability of an ISP for Allowing Access to File Sharing Networks” (2003) 19 Computer Law & Security Report 289CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cooter, R, “The Cost of Coase” (1982) 11 The Journal of Legal Studies 1Google Scholar

Cooter, R, “Liberty, Efficiency, and Law” (1972) 50 Law and Contemporary Problems 141Google Scholar

Cooter, R, “Torts as the Union of Liberty and Efficiency: An Essay on Causation” (1987) 63 Chicago Kent Law Review 523Google Scholar

Cooter, R, et al., “Liability Rules, Limited Information, and the Role of Precedent” (1979) 10(1) The Bell Journal of Economics 366Google Scholar

Coudert, F and Werkers, E, “In The Aftermath of the Promusicae Case: How to Strike the Balance?” (2010) 18 International Journal of Law and Information Technology 50Google Scholar

Crabit, E, “La directive sur le commerce électronique. Le projet ‘Méditerranée’” (2000) 4 Revue du Droit de l'Union Européenne 749Google Scholar

Craswell, R, “Kaplow and Shavell on the Substance of Fairness” (2003) 32 Journal of Legal Studies 245–276Google Scholar

Cregan, Q, “Roving Injunctions and John Doe Orders Against Unidentifiable Defendants in IP Infringement Proceedings” (2011) 6(9) Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice 623Google Scholar

Czychowski, Ch, “Auskunftsansprüche gegenüber Internetzugangsprovidern ‘vor’ dem 2. Korb und ‘nach’ der Enforcement-Richtlinie der EU” [2004] MMR 514Google Scholar

Czychowski, Ch and Nordemann, J, “Grenzenloses Internet – entgrenzte Haftung?” [2013] GRUR 986Google Scholar

Danaher, B, et al., “The Effect of Piracy Website Blocking on Consumer Behavior” (SSRN, 2015) http://ssrn.com/abstract=2612063Google Scholar

Danaher, B, et al., “Government-Sanctioned and Market-Based Anti-piracy Measures Can Both Mitigate Economic Harm from Piracy” (2017) 60(2) ACM 68Google Scholar

Danaher, B, et al., “The Effect of Graduated Response Anti-piracy Laws on Music Sales: Evidence from an Event Study in France” (2014) 62(3) Journal of Industrial Economics 541Google Scholar

Dietz, A, “Verfassungsklauseln und Quasi-Verfassungsklauseln zur Rechtfertigung des Urheberrechts – gestern, heute und morgen” [2006] GRUR International 1Google Scholar

Dootson, P and Suzor, N, “The Game of Clones and the Australia Tax: Divergent Views about Copyright Business Models and the Willingness of Australian Consumers to Infringe” (2015) 38(1) University of New South Wales Law Journal 206Google Scholar

Döring, R, “Die Haftung für eine Mitwirkung an Wettbewerbsverstößen nach der Entscheidung des BGH ‘Jugendgefährdende Medien bei eBay’” [2007] WRP 1131Google Scholar

Dreier, T, “Die Umsetzung der Urheberrechtsrichtlinie 2001/29/EG in deutsches Recht” [2002] ZUM 28Google Scholar

Drexl, J, “The European Unitary Patent System: On the ‘Unconstitutional’ Misuse of Conflict-of-Law Rules” [2015] Max Planck Institute for Innovation & Competition Research Paper No. 15Google Scholar

Dworkin, R, “What Is Equality? Part 2: Equality of Resources” (1981) 10 Philosophy & Public Affairs 283Google Scholar

Ch, Eberl-Borges, “§ 830 und die Gefährdungshaftung” [1996] Archiv für civilistische Praxis 196Google Scholar

Editorial, “After Åkerberg Fransson and Melloni” (2013) 9 European Constitutional Law Review 170Google Scholar

Editorial, , “The Court of First Instance of Athens (Monomeles Protodikio Athinon): ‘Security Measures Against ISPs’” [2013] IIC 468Google Scholar

Eichmann, H, “Die Durchsetzung des Anspruchs auf Drittauskunft” [1990] GRUR 575Google Scholar

Einhorn, M, “Copyright, Prevention, and Rational Governance: File-Sharing and Napster” (2001) 24 Columbia Journal of Law & the Arts 449Google Scholar

Ekker, A, “Anonimiteit en uitingsvrijheid op het Internet; het onthullen van identificerende gegevens door Internetproviders Verschenen” (2002) 11/12 Mediaforum 348Google Scholar

Elkin-Koren, N, “Copyright Law and Social Dialogue on the Information Superhighway: The Case Against Copyright Liability of Bulletin Board Operators” (1995) 13 Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal 345Google Scholar

Engels, G, “BGH: ‘Autocomplete’-Funktion: Verantwortlichkeit eines Suchmaschinenbetreibers für persönlichkeitsrechtsverletzende Begriffsvorschläge” [2013] MMR 535Google Scholar

Faria, N, et al., “The Early Spread and Epidemic Ignition of HIV-1 in Human Populations” (2014) 346 Science 56Google Scholar

Feiler, L, “Website Blocking Injunctions under EU and US Copyright Law – Slow Death of the Global Internet or Emergence of the Rule of National Copyright Law?” (2012) TTLF Working Papers No. 13Google Scholar

Freytag, S, “Verantwortlichkeit für rechtswidrige Inhalte nach der E-Commerce-Richtlinie” [2000] CR 600Google Scholar

Frischmann, B and Lemley, M, “Spillovers” (2007) 107 Columbia Law Review 257Google Scholar

Gasser, U and Schulz, W, “Governance of Online Intermediaries: Observations from a Series of National Case Studies” [2015] Berkman Center Research Publication No. 2015–5 7 http://ssrn.com/abstract=2566364Google Scholar

Gilles, S, “Negligence, Strict Liability, and the Cheapest Cost-Avoider” (1992) 78 Virginia Law Review 1291Google Scholar

Gilles, S, “Rule-Based Negligence and the Regulation of Activity Levels” (1992) 21 The Journal of Legal Studies 319Google Scholar

Ginsburg, J, “Separating the Sony Sheep from the Grokster Goats: Reckoning the Future Business Plans of Copyright-Dependent Technology Entrepreneurs” (2008) 50 Arizona Law Review 577Google Scholar

Glatstein, B, “Tertiary Copyright Liability” (2004) 71 The University of Chicago Law Review 1605Google Scholar

Goold, P, “Corrective Justice and Copyright Infringement” (2013) 16 Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment and Technology Law 251Google Scholar

Gounalakis, G, “Rechtliche Grenzen der Autocomplete-Funktion von Google” [2013] NJW 2321Google Scholar

Green, J, “On the Optimal Structure of Liability Laws” (1976) 7(2) The Bell Journal of Economics 553Google Scholar

Groussot, X, “Case C–275/06, Productores de Música de España (Promusicae) v. Telefónica de España SAU, Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 28 January 2008” (2008) 45 Common Market Law Review 1745Google Scholar

Gursky, K, “Zur neueren Diskussion um § 1004 BGB” [1989] Juristische Rundschau 397Google Scholar

Güth, W, et al., “An Experimental Analysis of Ultimatum Bargaining” (1982) 3 Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 367Google Scholar

Haber, E, “The French Revolution 2.0: Copyright and the Three Strikes Policy” (2011) 2(2) Harvard Journal of Sports & Entertainment Law 297Google Scholar

Halldórsdóttir, H, “Enforcement of Copyright” (2004) 47 Scandinavian Studies in Law 168Google Scholar

Hamdani, A, “Who's Liable for Cyberwrongs” (2002) 87 Cornell Law Review 901Google Scholar

Harper, J, “Against ISP Liability” (2005) 28 REG. 30Google Scholar

Haskel, D, “A Good Value Chain Gone Bad: Indirect Copyright Liability in Perfect 10 v. Visa” (2008) 23 Berkeley Technology Law Journal 405Google Scholar

Heald, P, “How Notice-and-Takedown Regimes Create Markets for Music on YouTube: An Empirical Study” (2014) Working Paper, http://ssrn.com/abstract=2416519Google Scholar

Heidinger, R, “Die zivilrechtliche Inanspruchnahme von Access-Providern auf Sperre urheberrechtsverletzender Webseiten” [2011] ÖBl 153Google Scholar

Henry, P and Luo, H, “WiFi: What's Next?” [2002] IEEE Telecommunications Magazine 66Google Scholar

Hewicker, J, et al., “Der Abmahnkosten-Ersatzanspruch im Urheberrecht” [2014] NJW 2753Google Scholar

Hindelang, S, “Circumventing Primacy of EU Law and the CJEU's Judicial Monopoly by Resorting to Dispute Resolution Mechanisms Provided for in Inter-se Treaties? The Case of Intra-EU Investment Arbitration” (2012) 39 Legal Issues of Economic Integration 179Google Scholar

Hoeren, T and Yankova, S, “The Liability of Internet Intermediaries – The German Perspective” [2012] IIC 501Google Scholar

Hoffman, E and Spitzer, M, “The Coase Theorem: Some Experimental Tests” (1982) 25 Journal of Law and Economics 75Google Scholar

Hofmann, F, “Die Haftung des Inhabers eines privaten Internetanschlusses für Urheberrechtsverletzungen Dritter” [2014] ZUM 654Google Scholar

Hofmann, F, “Markenrechtliche Sperranordnungen gegen nicht verantwortliche Intermediäre” [2015] GRUR 123Google Scholar

Husovec, M, “Accountable, Not Liable: Injunctions Against Intermediaries” (2016) TILEC Discussion Paper No. 2016–012Google Scholar

Husovec, M, “CJEU Allowed Website Blocking Injunctions With Some Reservations” (2014) 9 (8) Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice 631Google Scholar

Husovec, M, “Injunctions Against Innocent Third Parties: Case of Website Blocking” (2013) 4 JIPITEC 116Google Scholar

Husovec, M, “Intellectual Property Rights and Integration by Conflict: The Past, Present and Future” (2016) 18 Cambridge Yearbook of European Legal Studies 239Google Scholar

Husovec, M and Peguera, M, “Privately Litigated Disconnecting Injunctions” [2015] IIC 10Google Scholar

Husovec, M and van Dongen, L, “Website Blocking, Injunctions and Beyond: View on the Harmonization from the Netherlands” [2017] GRUR 9Google Scholar

Hylton, K, “Missing Markets Theory of Tort Law” (1996) 90 Northwestern University Law Review 977Google Scholar

Jaeger, T, “Shielding the Unitary Patent from the ECJ: A Rash and Futile Exercise” [2013] IIC 389Google Scholar

Jakobsen, S, “Injunctions Against Mere Conduit of Information Protected by Copyright – A Scandinavian Perspective” (2011) IIC 151Google Scholar

Jakobsen, S, “Mobile Commerce and ISP Liability in the EU” (2011) 1 International Journal Law Information Technology 46Google Scholar

James, W and Smith, J, “Is Further Legislation Really Necessary to Level the Playing Field? A UK Perspective” (2004) 20(5) Computer Law & Security Review 356Google Scholar

Jones, Ch, “Sources of US Economic Growth in a World of Ideas” (2002) 92(1) American Economic Review 220Google Scholar

Kahneman, D, et al., “Experimental Tests of the Endowment Effect and the Coase Theorem” (1990) 98 Journal of Political Economy 1325Google Scholar

Kaplow, L, “Optimal Deterrence, Uninformed Individuals, and Acquiring Information about Whether Acts Are Subject to Sanctions” (1990) 6 Journal of Law, Economics, & Organization 93Google Scholar

Kaplow, L and Shavell, S, “Why the Legal System is Less Efficient than the Income Tax in Redistributing Income” (1994) 23 Journal of Legal Studies 667Google Scholar

Kelly, G, “A Court-Ordered Graduated Response System in Ireland: The Beginning of the End?” (2016) 11(3) Journal of Intellectual Property Law and Practice 183Google Scholar

Kim, J, “Strict Liability versus Negligence When the Injurer's Activity Involves Positive Externalities” (2006) 22 European Journal of Law and Economics 96Google Scholar

Kitz, V, “§ 101 a UrhG: Für eine Rückkehr zur Dogmatik” [2005] ZUM 298, 301Google Scholar

Köhler, H, “‘Täter’ und ‘Störer’ im Wettbewerbs- und Markenrecht – Zur BGH-Entscheidung ‘Jugendgefährdende Medien bei eBay’” [2008] GRUR 1Google Scholar

Kraakman, R, “Gatekeepers: The Anatomy of a Third-Party Enforcement Strategy” (1986) 2 Journal of Law, Economics & Organization 53Google Scholar

Kuczerawy, A, “Intermediary Liability & Freedom of Expression: Recent Developments in the EU Notice & Action Initiative” (2014) ICRI Research Paper No. 21Google Scholar

Kulk, S, “Filtering for Copyright Enforcement in Europe after the Sabam Cases” [2012] EIPR 791Google Scholar

Kuner, Ch, “Data Protection and Rights Protection on the Internet: The Promusicae Judgment of the European Court of Justice” [2008] European Intellectual Property Review 199Google Scholar

Kur, A, “The Enforcement Directive: Rough Start, Happy Landing?” [2004] IIC 821, 822Google Scholar

Kur, A, “‘Freeze Plus’ Melts the Ice – Observations on the European Design Directive” [1999] IIC 620Google Scholar

Kur, A, “Rough Start Happy Landing” [2004] IIC 821Google Scholar

Ladeur, K and Gostomzyk, T, “Der Schutz von Persönlichkeitsrechten gegen Meinungsäußerungen in Blogs” [2012] NJW 710Google Scholar

Laffranque, J, “Who Has the Last Word on the Protection of Human Rights in Europe?” (2012) 1 Juridica International 117Google Scholar

Landes, W and Lichtman, D, “Indirect Liability for Copyright Infringement: An Economic Perspective” (2003) 16 Harvard Journal of Law and Technology 395Google Scholar

Larusdottir, J, “Liability of Intermediaries for Copyright Infringement” (Stockholm Institute for Scandianvian Law paper 2010) 476Google Scholar

Lauinger, T, et al., “Clickonomics: Determining the Effect of Anti-Piracy Measures for One-Click Hosting” (20th Annual Network and Distributed System Security Symposium, San Diego, CA, February 2013)Google Scholar

Lawn, J, “The John Doe Injunction in Mass Protest Cases” (1998) 56 University of Toronto Faculty Law Review 101Google Scholar

Lehra, W and McKnight, L, “Wireless Internet Access: 3G vs. WiFi?” (2003) 27 Telecommunications Policy 351Google Scholar

Leistner, M, “Störerhaftung und mittelbare Schutzrechtsverletzung” [2010] GRUR 1Google Scholar

Leistner, M and Grisse, K, “Sperrverfügungen gegen Access-Provider im Rahmen der Störerhaftung (Teil 2)” [2015] GRUR 105Google Scholar

Leistner, M and Stang, F, “Die Neuerung der wettbewerbsrechtlichen Verkehrspflichten – Ein Siegeszug der Prüfungspflichten?” [2008] WRP 533Google Scholar

Lemley, M, “Faith-Based Intellectual Property” [2015] Stanford Public Law Working Paper No. 2587297Google Scholar

Lemley, M, “IP in a World Without Scarcity” [2014] Stanford Public Law Working Paper No. 2413974, http://ssrn.com/abstract=2413974Google Scholar

Lemley, M, “Property, Intellectual Property, and Free Riding” (2005) 83 Texas Law Review 1031Google Scholar

Lemley, M, “Rationalizing Internet Safe Harbors” (2007) 6 Journal of Telecommunications and High Technology Law 101Google Scholar

Lemley, M and Reese, A, “Reducing Digital Copyright Infringement Without Restricting Innovation” (2004) 56 Stanford Law Review 1345Google Scholar

Lemley, M and Weiser, P, “Should Property or Liability Rules Govern Information” (2007) 85 Texas Law Review 783Google Scholar

Levinsohn, J, “Protecting Copyright at the Expense of Internet Anonymity: The Constitutionality of Forced Identity Disclosure under 512(h) of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act” (2004) 23 Temple Environmental Law & Technology Journal 243Google Scholar

Litman, J, “DNS Wars: Trademarks and the Internet Domain Name System” (2000) 4 Journal of Small & Emerging Business Law 149Google Scholar

Lorrain, A, “Supreme Court (Cour de cassation): ‘Google/Keyword Suggestions’” [2013] IIC 380Google Scholar

Lynch, T, “Good Samaritan or Defamation Defender? Amending the Communications Decency Act to Correct the Misnomer of Section 230 Without Expanding ISP Liability” (2008) 19 Syracuse Science and Technology Law Reporter 1Google Scholar

Maaßen, S and Schoene, V, “Sperrungsverfügung gegen Access-Provider wegen Urheberrechtsverletzung?” [2011] GRUR-Prax 2011 394Google Scholar

MacCarthy, M, “What Payment Intermediaries Are Doing about Online Liability and Why It Matters” (2010) 25 Berkeley Technology Law Journal 1037Google Scholar

Malaga, M, “The European Patent with Unitary Effect: Incentive to Dominate?” [2014] IIC 621Google Scholar

Mallory, A, “Ninth Circuit Unmasks Anonymous Internet Users and Lowers the Bar for Disclosure of Online Speakers” (2012) 7 Washington Journal of Law of Technology & Arts 75Google Scholar

Mann, R, “Contracts – Only with Consent” (2004) 152 University of Pennsylvania Law Review 1873Google Scholar

Mann, R and Belzley, S, “The Promise of Internet Intermediary Liability” (2005) 47 William & Mary Law Review 239Google Scholar

Mantz, R, “Die Haftung des Betreibers eines gewerblich betriebenen WLANs und die Haftungsprivilegierung des § 8 TMG” [2013] GRUR-RR 497Google Scholar

Massaguer, J, “La responsabilidad de los prestadores de servicios en línea por las infracciones al derecho de autor y los derechos conexos en el ámbito digital. El Tratado de la OMPI sobre Derecho de Autor (WTC) y el Tratado de la OMPI sobre Interpretación o Ejecución y Fonogramas (WPPT)” (2003) 13 Revista de Propiedad Intelectual 11Google Scholar

Mayr, S, “Putting a Leash on the Court of Justice? Preconceptions in National Methodology v. Effet Utile as a Meta-Rule” (2013) 5(2) European Journal of Legal Studies 8Google Scholar

Meale, D, “NewzBin2: The First Section 97A Injunction against an ISP” (2011) 6 Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice 854Google Scholar

Medema, S, “Legal Fiction: The Place of The Coase Theorem in Law and Economics” (1999) 15 Economics and Philosophy 209Google Scholar

Menell, P, “Indirect Copyright Liability and Technological Innovation” [2009] UC Berkeley Public Law Research Paper No. 1415804Google Scholar

Merges, R, “Of Property Rules, Coase, and Intellectual Property” (1994) 94 Columbia Law Review 2655Google Scholar

Metzger, A, “A Primer on ACTA: What Europeans Should Fear About the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement” (2010) 2 JIPITEC 4Google Scholar

Milgrom, P, et al., “The Case for Unlicensed Spectrum” (2011) http://ssrn.com/abstract=1948257Google Scholar

Morrison, S, “Breaking iPhones Under CALEA and the All Writs Act: Why the Government Was (Mostly) Right” (forthcoming) Cardozo Law Review, https://ssrn.com/abstract=2808773Google Scholar

Nestoruk, I, “Dreifacher pauschaler Schadensersatz im polnischen Urheberrecht aus verfassungsrechtlicher” [2017] GRUR International 12Google Scholar

Nimmer, D, “Repeat Infringers” (2005) 52 Journal of the Copyright Society of the USA 167Google Scholar

Nolte, G and Wimmers, J, “Wer stört? Gedanken zur Haftung von Intermediären im Internet – von praktischer Konkordanz, richtigen Anreizen und offenen Fragen” [2014] GRUR 16Google Scholar

Nordemann, J, “Haftung von Providern im Urheberrecht – Der aktuelle Stand nach dem EuGH-Urteil v. 12.7.2011-C-324/09 – L'Oréal/eBay” [2011] GRUR 977Google Scholar

Nordemann, J, “Internet Copyright Infringement: Remedies Against Intermediaries – The European Perspective on Host and Access Providers” (2012) 59 Journal of the Copyright Society USA 773Google Scholar

Nordemann, J, “Internetpiraterie: High Court of Justice bejaht Anspruch von Markeninhabern auf Website-Sperrung – Eine Option auch für deutsche Rechteinhaber?” [2014] GRUR-Prax 513Google Scholar

Nordemann, J, “Nach TMG-Reform und EuGH McFadden” (2016) 11 GRUR 1097Google Scholar

Nowak, M, et al., “Fairness versus Reason in the Ultimatum Game” (2000) 283 Science 289Google Scholar

O'Sulivan, K, “Enforcing Copyright Online: Internet Provider Obligations and the European Charter of Human Rights” (2014) 36 European Intellectual Property Review 577Google Scholar

Pechan, L and Schneider, M, “Carriers and Trade Mark Infringements: Should Carriers Care?” (2010) 5(5) Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice 354Google Scholar

Peguera, M, “The DMCA Safe Harbors and Their European Counterparts: A Comparative Analysis of Some Common Problems” (2009) 32 Columbia Journal of Law & the Arts 481Google Scholar

Peguera, M, “Internet Service Providers’ Liability in Spain: Recent Case Law and Future Perspectives” (2010) 1 JIPITEC 151Google Scholar

Pekka, S, “Proportionality of Website Blocking: Internet Connectivity Providers as Copyright Enforcers” (2014) 5(2) JIPITEC 116Google Scholar

Pekka, S and Neuvonen, R, “KHO 2013:136 – Verkkotunnusluettelon julkistamisen katsottiin edesauttavan lapsipornon levittämistä” (2014) 112 Lakimies 114Google Scholar

Perel, M and Elkin-Koren, N, “Accountability in Algorithmic Enforcement: Lessons from Copyright Enforcement by Online Intermediaries” [2015] Working paper, http://ssrn.com/abstract=2607910Google Scholar

Perel, M and Elkin-Koren, N, “Black Box Tinkering: Beyond Transparency in Algorithmic Enforcement” (forthcoming) Florida Law ReviewGoogle Scholar

Peukert, A, “Intellectual Property as an End in Itself?” [2011] European Intellectual Property Review 67Google Scholar

Peukert, A and Kur, A, “Stellungnahme des Max-Planck-Instituts für Geistiges Eigentum, Wettbewerbs- und Steuerrecht zur Umsetzung der Richtlinie 2004/48/EG zur Durchsetzung der Rechte des geistigen Eigentums in deutsches Recht” [2006] GRUR International 292Google Scholar

Poort, J, et al., “Baywatch: Two Approaches to Measure the Effects of Blocking Access to The Pirate Bay” (2014) 38 Telecommunications Policy 383Google Scholar

Posner, R, “A Theory of Negligence” (1972) 1 The Journal of Legal Studies 29Google Scholar

Posner, R, “Guido Calabresi's ‘The Costs of Accidents’: A Reassessment” (2005) 64 Maryland Law Review 12Google Scholar

Prentice, R, “Locating That Indistinct and Virtually Nonexistent Line Between Primary and Secondary Liability under Section 10(b)” (1997) 75 North Carolina Law Review 691Google Scholar

Randa, A, “Žaloba zápůrči” (1871) 10 Právník 181Google Scholar

Re, E, “The Roman Contribution to the Common Law” (1961) 29 Fordham Law Review 447Google Scholar

Reimer, D, “BGH: BGH 29.05.1964 Ib ZR 4/63 ‘Personalausweise’” [1965] GRUR 104Google Scholar

Reinbothe, J, “Die EG-Richtlinie zum Urheberrecht in der Informationsgesellschaft” [2001] GRUR International 733Google Scholar

Rice, C, “Meet John Doe: It Is Time for Federal Civil Procedure to Recognize John Doe Parties” (1996) 57 University of Pittsburgh Law Review 883Google Scholar

Roessing, T, “The Dispute over Filtering ‘Indecent’ Images in Wikipedia” (2013) 2 Masaryk University Journal of Law and Technology 303Google Scholar

Rühmkorf, A, “The Liability of Online Auction Portals: Toward a Uniform Approach?” (2010) 14(4) Journal of Internet Law 3Google Scholar

Sanchirico, W, “Deconstructing the New Efficiency Rationale” (2001) 86 Cornell Law Review 1003Google Scholar

Savola, P, “Proportionality of Website Blocking: Internet Connectivity Providers as Copyright Enforcers” (2014) 5 JIPITEC 116Google Scholar

Schlag, P, “Appreciative Comment on Coase's the Problem of Social Cost: A View from the Left” [1986] Wisconsin Law Review 919Google Scholar

Schruers, M, “The History and Economics of ISP Liability for Third Party Content” (2002) 88 Virginia Law Review 260Google Scholar

Schwab, S, “Coase Defends Coase: Why Lawyers Listen and Economists Do Not” (1989) 87 Michigan Law Review 1171Google Scholar

Scott, M, “Safe Harbors under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act” (2005) 99 New York University Journal of Legislation and Public Policy 115Google Scholar

Seifert, A, “Die horizontale Wirkung von Grundrechten. Europarechtliche und rechtsvergleichende Überlegungen” (2011) 18 Europäische Zeitschrift für Wirtschaftsrecht (EuZW) 696Google Scholar

Seltzer, W, “Free Speech Unmoored in Copyright's Safe Harbor: Chilling Effects of the DMCA on the First Amendment” (2010) 24 Harvard Journal of Law & Technology 171Google Scholar

Seng, D, “The State of the Discordant Union: An Empirical Analysis of the State of DMCA Takedown Notices” (2014) 18 Virginia Journal of Law and Technology 369Google Scholar

Shavell, S, “Liability and the Incentive to Obtain Information about Risk” (1992) 21(2) The Journal of Legal Studies 259Google Scholar

Sieber, U and Michael, F, “Drittauskunftsansprüche nach § 101a UrhG gegen Internetprovider zur Verfolgung von Urheberrechtsverletzungen” [2004] MMR 575Google Scholar

Sithigh, D, “The Fragmentation of Intermediary Liability in the UK” (2013) 8 Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice 522Google Scholar

Sobola, S and Kohl, K, “Haftung von Providern für fremde Inhalte” [2005] CR 443Google Scholar

Spindler, G, “Der Auskunftsanspruch gegen Verletzer und Dritte im Urheberrecht nach neuem Recht” [2008] ZUM 640Google Scholar

Spindler, G, “‘Die Tür ist auf’ – Europarechtliche Zulässigkeit von Auskunftsansprüchen gegenüber Providern – Urteilsanmerkung zu EuGH ‘Promusicae/Telefónica’” (2008) 7 GRUR 574Google Scholar

Spindler, G, “Europäisches Urheberrecht in der Informationsgesellschaft” [2002] GRUR 105Google Scholar

Spindler, G, “Haftung für private WLANs im Delikts- und Urheberrecht” [2010] CR 592Google Scholar

Spindler, G, “Zivilrechtliche Sperrverfügungen gegen Access Provider nach dem EuGH-Urteil ‘UPC Telekabel’” [2014] GRUR 826Google Scholar

Spindler, G and Dorschel, J, “Auskunftsansprüche gegen Internet-Service-Provider” [2005] Computer und Recht 341Google Scholar

Spindler, G and Dorschel, J, “Vereinbarkeit der geplanten Auskunftsansprüche gegen Internet-Provider mit EU-Recht” [2006] CR 341Google Scholar

Stadler, T, “Sperrungsverfügung gegen Access-Provider” [2002] MMR 343Google Scholar

Thaler, R, “Anomalies: The Ultimatum Game” (1988) 2 The Journal of Economic Perspectives 195Google Scholar

Trotter, H, “The Proper Legal Regime for ‘Cyberspace’” (1994) 55 University of Pittsburgh Law Review 993Google Scholar

Ullmann, E, “Einige Bemerkungen zur Meinungsfreiheit in der Wirtschaftswerbung” [1996] GRUR 948Google Scholar

Ungern-Sternberg, J, “Die Rechtsprechung des EuGH und des BGH zum Urheberrecht und zu den verwandten Schutzrechten im Jahre 2014” [2015] GRUR 205Google Scholar

Urban, J, Karaganis, J, and Schofield, B, “Notice and Takedown in Everyday Practice” (2016) UC Berkeley Public Law Research Paper No. 2755628, https://ssrn.com/abstract=2755628Google Scholar

Urban, J and Quilter, L, “Efficient Process or ‘Chilling Effects’? Takedown Notices Under Section 512 of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act” (2006) 22 Santa Clara Computer and High Technology Law Journal 621Google Scholar

Vogel, M, “Unmasking John Doe Defendants: The Case against Excessive Hand-Wringing over Legal Standares” (2004) 83 Or. L. Rev. 795Google Scholar

Weiß, W, “Grundrechtssutz durch den EuGH: Tendenzen seit Lissabon. Europäische Zeitschrift für Wirtschaftsrecht” [2013] EuZW 289Google Scholar

Wenzel, J, “Der Störer und seine verschuldensunabhängige Haftung im Nachbarrecht” [2005] NJW 241Google Scholar

Woodward, M, “TRIPS and NAFTA Chapter 17: How Will Trade-Related Multilateral Agreements Affect International Copyright?” (1996) 31 Texas International Law 269Google Scholar

Zingales, N, “Virtues and Perils of Anonymity: Should Intermediaries Bear the Burden?” (2014) TILEC Discussion Paper No. 025Google Scholar

Zittrain, J, “The Generative Internet” (2006) 119 Harvard Law Review 1974Google Scholar

Aguiar, L, et al., “Online Copyright Enforcement, Consumer Behavior, and Market Structure” (European Commission, 2015), https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/sites/default/files/JRC93492_Online_Copyright.pdfGoogle Scholar

Anderson, N, “Why the Feds Smashed Megaupload” (Ars Technica, 19 January 2012), http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/01/why-the-feds-smashed-megaupload/Google Scholar

Angelopolous, Ch, “CJEU in UPC Telekabel Wien: A Totally Legal Court Order…to Do the Impossible” (Kluwer Copyright Blog, 3 April 2014), http://kluwercopyrightblog.com/2014/04/03/upc-telekabel-wien/Google Scholar

Angelopolous, Ch, “On Online Platforms and the Commission's New Proposal for a Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market” (2017), https://juliareda.eu/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/angelopoulos_platforms_copyright_study.pdfGoogle Scholar

Baker, E, “The Official Twitch Blog Important: Changes to Audio in VODS” (The Official Twitch Blog, 6 August 2014), http://blog.twitch.tv/2014/08/3136/Google Scholar

Bitkom, , “Öffentliche WLAN-Zugänge fristen Nischendasein” (2015), www.bitkom.org/de/presse/8477_82493.aspxGoogle Scholar

Bundesministerium für Wirtschaft und Energie (BMWi), “Entwurf eines Zweiten Gesetzes zur Änderung des Telemediengesetzes (Zweites Telemedienänderungsgesetz – 2. TMG ÄndG)” (2015), www.bmwi.de/BMWi/Redaktion/PDF/S-T/telemedienaenderungsgesetz,property=pdf,bereich=bmwi2012,sprache=de,rwb=true.pdfGoogle Scholar

Commission, “Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions – Creating a Safer Information Society by Improving the Security of Information Infrastructures and Combating Computer-Related Crime – eEurope 2002,” (2000).Google Scholar

Commission, “Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament Pursuant to the Second Subparagraph of Article 251 (2) of the EC Treaty Concerning the Common Position of the Council on the Adoption of a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the Harmonisation of Certain Aspects of Copyright and Related Rights in the Information Society,” (2000)Google Scholar

Commission, “Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament Pursuant to the Second Subparagraph of Article 251 (2) of the EC Treaty Concerning the Council Common Position on the Proposal for a Directive on Certain Legal Aspects of Information Society Services, in Particular Electronic Commerce, in the Internal Market” (2000)Google Scholar

Commission, “Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on Measures and Procedures to Ensure the Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights” (2003)Google Scholar

Commission, ”Report by the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on Application of Directive 2004/48/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 29 April 2004 on the Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights” (2010)Google Scholar

Commission, “Report from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council and the European Economic and Social Committee – First Report on the Application of Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2000 on Certain Legal Aspects of Information Society Services, in Particular Electronic Commerce, in the Internal Market (Directive on Electronic Commerce)” (2003)Google Scholar

Commission, “Staff Working Document: Analysis of the Application of Directive 2004/48/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 29 April 2004 on the Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights in the Member States – Accompanying Document to the Report from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament and the European Social Committee on the Application of Directive 2004/48/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 29 April 2004 on the Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights” (2010)Google Scholar

Committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market, “Recommendation for Second Reading on the Council Common Position for Adopting a European Parliament and Council Directive on the Harmonisation of Certain Aspects of Copyright and Related Rights in the Information Society” (9512/1/2000 – C5–0520/2000)Google Scholar

Committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market, “Report on the Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on Measures and Procedures to Ensure the Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights” (2003, 46 – C5–0055/2003–2003/0024(COD))Google Scholar

Council of the European Union, “Common Position Adopted by the Council with a View to the Adoption of a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the Harmonisation of Certain Aspects of Copyright and Related Rights in the Information Society” (1997)Google Scholar

Debilio, R, “Red Light for Sabam's Pricing System for Internet Access Providers: Up- and Downstream IAP Traffic Do Not Constitute Communication or Making a Work Available to the Public” (Kluwer Copyright Blog, 6 May 2015), http://kluwercopyrightblog.com/2015/05/06/red-light-for-sabams-pricing-system-for-internet-access-providers-up-and-downstream-iap-traffic-do-not-constitute-communication-or-making-a-work-available-to-the-public/Google Scholar

Declaration by the Committee of Ministers on Internet governance principles; the Declaration of the Committee of Ministers on the protection of freedom of expression and freedom of assembly and association with regard to privately operated Internet platforms and online service providersGoogle Scholar

Declaration by the Committee of Ministers on the protection of freedom of expression and information and freedom of assembly and association with regard to Internet domain names and name stringsGoogle Scholar

Declaration of the Committee of Ministers on the Digital Agenda for Europe, the Declaration of the Committee of Ministers on network neutralityGoogle Scholar

Declaration of the Committee of Ministers on the management of Internet Protocol address resources in the public interestGoogle Scholar

Declaration on a European policy for new information technologies adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 7 May 1999Google Scholar

Declaration on freedom of communication on the Internet adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 28 May 2003; Recommendation No. R (2001) 8 of the Committee of Ministers on self-regulation concerning cyber contentGoogle Scholar

Telekom, Deutsche, “Comments on the ERG Consultation Document on ‘Wholesale Broadband Access via Cable’” (2004), http://berec.europa.eu/doc/publications/consult_add_cable_netw_chapter/dt.pdfGoogle Scholar

Bundestag, Deutscher 4. Wahlperiode, “Entwurf eines Gesetzes über Urheberrecht und verwandte Schutzrechte (Urheberrechtsgesetz)” (14 May 1965), http://dipbt.bundestag.de/doc/btd/04/034/0403401.pdfGoogle Scholar

Doroshow, K, “Finding of Copyright Infringement Liability as a Prerequisite for a Section 512(j) Injunction” (2016), www.scribd.com/document/273059624/mpaa-memoGoogle Scholar

Drexl, J, “Copyright, Competition and Development” (WIPO Report by the Max Planck Institute for Intellectual Property and Competition Law 2013), www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/ip-competition/en/studies/copyright_competition_development.pdfGoogle Scholar

Duarte, D, “Video Monetization, YouTube, and Multi-Channel Networks 101” (Dlrepoter, 3 April 2014), http://dlreporter.com/2014/04/03/video-monetization-youtube-and-multi-channel-partnerships-101/Google Scholar

Editorial, “Authorities Call for Wifi to Be Open after Deadly Italy Quake” (Famagusta Gazette, 29 May 2012), http://famagusta-gazette.com/authorities-call-for-wifi-to-be-open-after-deadly-italy-quake-p15591-69.htmGoogle Scholar

Editorial, “International Experts Find That Pending Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement Threatens Public Interests” (Naked Law, 23 June 2010), www.wcl.american.edu/pijip/go/acta-communiqueGoogle Scholar

Editorial, “Kartellamt stoppt Initiative gegen Piraterie” (Handelsblatt, 21 April 2015), www.handelsblatt.com/unternehmen/it-medien/urheberrechtsverletzungen-im-netz-kartellamt-stoppt-initiative-gegen-piraterie/11668680.htmlGoogle Scholar

Editorial, “MySpace Implements Video Filtering System to Block Unauthorized Use of Copyrighted Content” (Audible Magic, 12 February 2007), https://archive.today/RXbpGoogle Scholar

Editorial, “Wer hat sie verraten? Googles Youtube-Daten!” FAZ (Frankfurt, 5 November 2014), www.faz.net/aktuell/feuilleton/debatten/youtubes-daten-gefaehrden-islamkritiker-13247806-p3.htmlGoogle Scholar

Editorial, “YouTube Handed Out $1 Billion in Ad Money Thanks to Content ID” (Softpedia, 14 October 2014), http://news.softpedia.com/news/YouTube-Handed-Out-1-Billion-In-Ad-Money-Thanks-to-Content-ID-462088.shtmlGoogle Scholar

Edwards, L, “Role and Responsibility of Internet Intermediaries in the Field of Copyright and Related Rights” (WIPO report, 2009), www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/copyright/en/doc/role_and_responsibility_of_the_internet_intermediaries_final.pdfGoogle Scholar

EISi, “Third Party Intervention Submission by European Information Society Institute (EISi) In re Delfi AS v. Estonia” (EISi, 2014), www.eisionline.org/images/EISi-Delfi-Intervention.pdfGoogle Scholar

European Commission, “A Digital Single Market for Europe: Commission Sets Out 16 Initiatives to Make It Happen, http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-15–4919_en.htmGoogle Scholar

European Commission, “Electronic Commerce: Commission Proposes Legal Framework” (press release, 18 November 1998), http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-98–999_en.htm?locale=enGoogle Scholar

European Commission, “Memorandum of Understanding” (May 2011), http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/iprenforcement/docs/memorandum_04052011_en.pdfGoogle Scholar

European Commission, “Public Hearing on Directive 2004/48/EC and the Challenges Posed by the Digital Environment” (report, 7 June 2011), http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/iprenforcement/docs/conference20110607/hearing-report_en.pdfGoogle Scholar

European Observatory on Counterfeiting and Piracy, “Injunctions in Intellectual Property Right,” http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/iprenforcement/docs/injunctions_en.pdfGoogle Scholar

Friedman, J, “Sponsors of SOPA Act Pulled in 4 Times as Much in Contributions from Hollywood as from Silicon Valley” (Map Law, 1 May 2009), http://maplight.org/content/72896Google Scholar

Geist, M, “The Liberal Roundtable on the Digital Economy: My Comments” (Geist Blog, 11 February 2010), www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/4787/125/Google Scholar

German Council of Science and Humanities, “Prospects of Legal Scholarship in Germany Current Situation, Analyses, Recommendations” (October 2013), www.wissenschaftsrat.de/download/archiv/2558-12_engl.pdfGoogle Scholar

Goldman, E, “Stanford Technology Law Review Symposium on Secondary IP Liability” (Technology & Marketing Law Blog, 8 March 2011), http://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2011/03/stanford_techno.htmGoogle Scholar

Google, “Testimony of Katherine Oyama, Sr. Copyright Policy Counsel, Google Inc. House Judiciary Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property, and the Internet Hearing on ‘Section 512 of Title 17’” (13 March 2014), http://judiciary.house.gov/_cache/files/be93d452–945a-4fff-83ec-b3f51de782b3/031314-testimony-oyama.pdfGoogle Scholar

Hansen, E and Bowman, L, “Court: Napster Filters Must Be Foolproof” (Cnet News, 12 July 2001) http://news.cnet.com/Court-Napster-filters-must-be-foolproof/2100–1023_3–269837.htmlGoogle Scholar

Husovec, M, “Tank Man Hits the Constitutional Court: Copyright and Freedom of Expression” (Huťko's Technology Law Blog, 25 March 2015), www.husovec.eu/2015/03/tank-man-hits-constitutional-court.htmlGoogle Scholar

IFPI, “Digital Music Report 2015” (2015), www.ifpi.org/downloads/Digital-Music-Report-2015.pdfGoogle Scholar

IFPI, “Police Dawn Raid Stops Allofmp3.com Pirate Vouchers Scheme” (Enforcement Bulletin, 2007), www.ifpi.org/content/library/enforcement-bulletin-34.pdfGoogle Scholar

Jasserand, C, “France: Google Can Be Ordered to Filter Words Linking to Online Piracy Websites” (Kluwer Copyright Blog, 3 September 2012), http://kluwercopyrightblog.com/2012/09/03/france-google-can-be-ordered-to-filter-words-linking-to-online-piracy-websites/Google Scholar

JWFocus, “The Future of Online Video: Multi-Channel Video Strategy” (JW Focus: Entertainment, 1 March 2014)Google Scholar

Kur, A, “UDRP: A Study” (Max-Planck-Institute for Foreign and International Patent, Copyright and Competition Law Munich, 2010)Google Scholar

Lehman, B and Brown, R, “Intellectual Property and National Information Infrastructure” (Report of the Working Group on Intellectual Property Rights, 1995), www.uspto.gov/web/offices/com/doc/ipnii/ipnii.pdfGoogle Scholar

Linari, A, et al., “Typo-Squatting: The ‘Curse’ of Popularity” (Nominet.org, 2009), http://blog.nominet.org.uk/tech/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/full-paper-websci09.pdfGoogle Scholar

Litan, R and Rivlin, A, “Beyond the Dot.coms” (Brookings 2001), www.brookings.edu/research/books/2001/beyond-dotcomsGoogle Scholar

Machlup, F, “An Economic Review of the Patent System” (Study of Commission on Judiciary, Subcommittee on Patents, Trademarks, and Copyrights, 1958)Google Scholar

Marcel, R and Hilmar, S, “Funkstille auf dem Bürgersteig” (Der Spiegel, 1 July 2013)Google Scholar

Miller, C, “The Review Site Yelp Draws Some Outcries of Its Own” (New York Times, 3 March 2009)Google Scholar

Miller, C, “Yelp Will Let Businesses Respond to Web Reviews” (New York Times, 10 April 2009)Google Scholar

Moody, G, “Danish Court Orders Spanish Site Blocked because It Uses Trademarked English Word ‘Home’ as Part of Its Name” (Techdirt, 2012), www.techdirt.com/articles/20121228/09275521510/danish-court-orders-spanish-site-blocked-because-it-uses-trademarked-english-word-home-as-part-its-name.shtmlGoogle Scholar

Mullin, J, “Music Publishers Finally Pull the Trigger, Sue an ISP over Piracy” (Ars Technica, 28 November 2014), http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/11/music-publishers-finally-pull-the-trigger-sue-an-isp-over-piracy/Google Scholar

Net Names, “Behind the Cyberlocker Door: A Report on How Shadowy Cyberlocker Businesses Use Credit Card Companies to Make Milions” (Net Names, 2014), www2.itif.org/2014-netnames-profitability.pdfGoogle Scholar

Novak, V, “SOPA and PIPA Spur Lobbying Spike” (Open Secrets, 26 January 2012), www.opensecrets.org/news/2012/01/sopa-and-pipa-create-lobbying-spike/Google Scholar

Ofcom, “Site Blocking to Reduce Online Copyright Infringement: A Review of Sections 17 and 18 of the Digital Economy Act” (Ofcom, 2010), http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/internet/site-blocking.pdfGoogle Scholar

OSCE, “Joint Declaration on Freedom of Expression and the Internet” (2011)Google Scholar

Pappalardo, K, “A Tort Law Framework for Copyright Authorisation” (Thomas More School of Law, Australian Catholic University [PhD thesis] 2015)Google Scholar

Patent Office, “Consultation on UK Implementation of Directive 2001/29/EC on Copyright and Related Rights in the Information Society: Analysis of Responses and Government Conclusions” (2003), www.patent.gov.uk/about/consultations/responses/copydirect/index.htmGoogle Scholar

Patent Office, “The UK Implementation of the Directive on the Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights” (2005)Google Scholar

Principles of European Tort Law (PETL)Google Scholar

Principles, Definitions and Model Rules of European Private Law Draft Common Frame of Reference (DCFR)Google Scholar

Purnell, N, “FireChat Messaging App Gains Users during Hong Kong Protests” (Blogs WSJ, 2014), http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2014/09/29/firechat-messaging-app-gains-users-during-hong-kong-protests/Google Scholar

Recommendation 1332 (1997) of the Parliamentary Assembly on the scientific and technical aspects of the new information and communications technologiesGoogle Scholar

Recommendation CM/Rec (2007) 16 of the Committee of Ministers on measures to promote the public service value of the InternetGoogle Scholar

Recommendation CM/Rec (2008) 6 of the Committee of Ministers on measures to promote the respect for freedom of expression and information with regard to Internet filtersGoogle Scholar

Recommendation CM/Rec (2011) 8 of the Committee of Ministers to Member States on the protection and promotion of the universality, integrity, and openness of the InternetGoogle Scholar

Recommendation CM/Rec (2012) 3 of the Committee of Ministers to Member States on the protection of human rights with regard to search engines (adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 4 April 2012 at the 1139th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies)Google Scholar

Recommendation CM/Rec (2012) 4 of the Committee of Ministers to Member States on the protection of human rights with regard to social networking servicesGoogle Scholar

Recommendation No. R (99) 14 of the Committee of Ministers on universal community service concerning new communication and information servicesGoogle Scholar

Recommendation No. R (99) 5 for the protection of privacy on the InternetGoogle Scholar

Resolution 1120 (1997) of the Parliamentary Assembly on the impact of the new communication and information technologies on democracyGoogle Scholar

Shaheed, F, “Copyright Policy and the Right to Science and Culture” (UN Special Report, 2014)Google Scholar

Spangler, T, “Despite YouTube's Emmy, Google Still Has a Long Way to Go” (Variety, 24 October 2013) http://variety.com/2013/biz/news/despite-youtubes-emmy-google-still-has-a-long-way-to-go-1200756170/Google Scholar

Tassi, P, “The Injustice of the YouTube Content ID Crackdown Reveals Google's Dark Side” (Forbes, 19 December 2013), www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2013/12/19/the-injustice-of-the-youtube-content-id-crackdown-reveals-googles-dark-side/Google Scholar

Ueno, T and Kojima, R, “Indirect Infringement and Provisions Restricting Rights in Copyright Law” in Symposium “Koko ga hen da yo nihon-ho” – “Is Japanese Law a Strange Law?” (2008), www.zjapanr.de/index.php/zjapanr/article/viewFile/384/405Google Scholar

United Nations, General Comment on Freedom of Expression No. 34 (2011)Google Scholar

US Department of Commerce, DMCA Notice-and-Takedown Processes: List of Good, Bad, and Situational Practices (USPTO, 7 April 2015), www.uspto.gov/about-us/news-updates/us-commerce-department-announces-digital-millennium-copyright-actGoogle Scholar

US Fire Administration, “Technical Report Series, I-35W Bridge Collapse and Response” (2007), http://berec.europa.eu/doc/publications/consult_add_cable_netw_chapter/dt.pdfGoogle Scholar

Vargas, P, “Argentine Supreme Court Decides Landmark Intermediary Liability Case” (Stanford CIS Blog, 5 November 2014), https://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/blog/2014/11/argentine-supreme-court-decides-landmark-intermediary-liability-caseGoogle Scholar

Vermeer, D, “Vrije internettoegang ook in Nederland onder vuur” (Bits of Freedom, 4 January 2011), www.bof.nl/2011/01/04/vrije-internettoegang-ook-in-nederland-onder-vuur/Google Scholar

Vuopala, A, “Assessment of the Orphan Works Issue and Costs for Rights Clearance” (European Commission 2010), www.ace-film.eu/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/Copyright_anna_report-1.pdfGoogle Scholar

WAN-IFRA, “Online Comment Moderation: Emerging Best Practicies” (2013), www.wan-ifra.org/reports/Google Scholar

Weatherley, M, “Safe Harbour Provisions and Online Service Providers” (2015), discussion paperGoogle Scholar

Witt, D, “Copyright Match on Vimeo” (Vimeo, 23 May 2014), http://vimeo.com/blog/post:626Google Scholar

Wolfensberger, K, “Rapidshare wohl am Ende” (Netzwoche, 26 February 2014), www.netzwoche.ch/de-CH/News/2014/02/26/Rapidshare-wohl-am-Ende.aspxGoogle Scholar

Working Party 29, “Working Document on Data Protection Issues Related to Intellectual Property Rights” (2005), http://ec.europa.eu/justice/policies/privacy/docs/wpdocs/2005/wp104_en.pdfGoogle Scholar