Interpretation Of Regulations Research Articles

Copyright Protection for AI-Generated Works

Since the 2010s, artificial intelligence (AI) has quickly grown from another subset of machine learning (ie deep learning) in particular with recent advances in generative AI, such as ChatGPT. The use of generative AI has gone beyond leisure purposes. It has now been widely used to generate music, news articles and image-based art works. This prompts a regulatory interpretation as to how AI-generated works should be appropriately used to eliminate their potential harm to society, but at the same time how it should be protected to foster human creativity and promote a well-functioning market. This article is an update from the author’s evidential report and speech on “AI and Intellectual Property Rights: IPR Protection for AI-Created Work” for the evidence meeting of the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Artificial Intelligence on 24 January 2022. It considers whether AI technologies should be granted status as copyright or patent owners by looking into existing regulations in the United Kingdom, European Union, United States and China. It further considers how generative AI copyright protection should be managed in the digital society to protect users and strike a fair balance among rightsholders. It argues that it would be beneficial to a well-functioning market if AI-generated works could be subject to collective management of copyright via copyright management organizations within countries. In addition, the article provides mapping of existing legislations in a comparative study and their interpretation for the application of AI-generated works protection and aims to bring together global policymakers and stakeholders to initiate joint efforts to promote international harmonization on intellectual property rights (IPR) protection for AI-generated works. Keywords: artificial intelligence; generative AI; AI-generated works; collective copyright management; computer-generated work; copyright protection.

What is a “Distinctive Nutritional Requirement”? A Position Paper of the Healthcare Nutrition Council

The Healthcare Nutrition Council (HNC) represents manufacturers of enteral nutrition formulas and oral nutrition supplements, including those categorized as medical foods and parenteral nutrition. HNC member companies, Abbott’s Nutrition Division, Nestlé Health Science, and Nutricia North America, a subsidiary of Danone S.A., manufacture a majority of the medical foods consumed in the United States. HNC is proposing a modernized interpretation of the medical food framework to reflect the evolution of nutrition science and health care. The medical food category was first defined in 1988 as part of the Orphan Drug Act. Since then, the scientific community's understanding of nutrition and the role it can play in disease management has progressed. HNC believes that a patient-centric approach is needed to foster research and innovation and to position medical foods as a viable solution in the dietary management of disease. HNC proposes that distinctive nutritional requirements refer to the clinical need for a specific nutritional intake (compared with the intake of healthy populations), which may exist by reason of abnormal physiologic manifestation or physical impairment associated with a disease or condition. The dietary management of these diseases and conditions results in clinically meaningful improvements, including but not limited to nutritional status, health outcomes, or quality of life. HNC believes that abnormal physiologic manifestation or physical impairment would include a limited, impaired, or disturbed capacity to ingest, digest, absorb, metabolize, or excrete ordinary food or certain nutrients or metabolites or other medically determined requirements for nutrients or other food substances of biological value. HNC recommends our position be considered as we build consensus across the industry. We request that the Food and Drug Administration modify and codify the current definition to reflect this. Patients and the health care system will benefit from a strong regulatory interpretation of the medical foods framework.

UAV Platforms for Data Acquisition and Intervention Practices in Forestry: Towards More Intelligent Applications

Unmanned air vehicle (UAV) systems for performing forestry applications have expanded in recent decades and have great economic benefits. They are validated to be more appealing than traditional platforms in various aspects, such as repeat rate, spatial resolution, and accuracy. This paper consolidates the state-of-the-art unmanned systems in the forestry field with a major focus on UAV systems and heterogeneous platforms, which are applied in a variety of forestry applications, such as wood production, tree quantification, disease control, wildfire management, wildlife conservation, species classification, etc. This review also studies practical applications under multiple forestry environments, including wild and managed forests, grassland, urban green parks, and stockyards. Special forest environments and terrains present customized demands for unmanned systems. The challenges of unmanned systems deployment are analyzed from environmental characterization, maneuverability and mobility improvement, and global regulatory interpretation. To better apply UAV systems into forestry, future directions are analyzed in terms of mobility enhancement and customized sensory adaption, which need to be further developed for synchronizing all possible agents into automatic functioning systems for forestry exploration.

Establishing a Quantitative Framework for Regulatory Interpretation of Genetic Toxicity Dose-Response Data: MOE (Margin of Exposure) Case Study of 48 Compounds with both in vivo Mutagenicity and Carcinogenicity Dose-Response Data.

Quantitative relationships between carcinogenic potency and mutagenic potency have been previously examined using a benchmark dose (BMD)-based approach. We extended those analyses by using human exposure data for 48 compounds to calculate carcinogenicity- and genotoxicity-derived margin of exposure values (MOEs) that can be used to prioritize substances for risk management. MOEs for 16 of the 48 compounds were below 10,000, and consequently highlighted for regulatory concern. Of these, 15 were highlighted using genotoxicity-derived (micronucleus (MN) dose-response data) MOEs. Thirteen compounds were highlighted using carcinogenicity-derived MOEs; 12 compounds were overlapping. MOEs were also calculated using transgenic rodent (TGR) mutagenicity data. For 10 of the 12 compounds examined using TGR data, the results similarly revealed that mutagenicity-derived MOEs yield regulatory decisions that correspond with those based on carcinogenicity-derived MOEs. The effect of benchmark response (BMR) on MOE determination was also examined. Reinterpretation of the analyses using a BMR of 50% indicated that four out of 15 compounds prioritized using MN-derived MOEs based on a default BMR of 5% would have been missed. The results indicate that regulatory decisions based on in vivo genotoxicity dose-response data would be consistent with those based on carcinogenicity dose-response data; in some cases, genotoxicity-based decisions would be more conservative. Going forward, and in the absence of carcinogenicity data, in vivo genotoxicity assays (MN and TGR) can be used to effectively prioritise substances for regulatory action. Routine use of the MOE approach necessitates the availability of reliable human exposure estimates, and consensus regarding appropriate BMRs for genotoxicity endpoints. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Considerations for bioaccumulation studies in fish with nanomaterials

Nanomaterials (NMs) pose challenges in performing bioaccumulation studies in fish and in regulatory interpretation of results. Therefore, a clear guidance is needed to obtain reliable, reproducible and comparable results. By analysing all the available literature, we aim in this manuscript to identify the critical aspects that should be addressed in these type of studies. Seventy-eight studies from a total of 67 published articles were identified in which a variety of approaches were used: aqueous exposure (49 studies), dietary exposure (19), and pre-exposed animals for trophic transfer studies (10). The NMs tested included TiO2, Zn, ZnO, Cu, CuO, Ag, Au, CeO2, Fe2O3, Fe3O4, Se, CdS, CdSe/ZnS-QDs, CdTe/ZnS-QDs, graphene, fullerenol and MWCNTs. In general, there is a scarcity of bioaccumulation studies for the different NMs. In particular, studies that use the dietary exposure route are lacking. TiO2 NMs are the most studied for bioaccumulation potential in fish (20%), whereas very few data were available for CuO, FeO and carbon-based NMs. Different information gaps were identified in these studies that hamper overall conclusions to be made on the bioaccumulation potential of NMs. The main critical issues related to NM testing for bioaccumulation include: maintenance of stable exposure concentrations, the influence of feeding regimen on uptake and elimination, the use of appropriate feed spiking methodologies, the potential need for testing different concentrations, and the reporting of bioaccumulation endpoints (BCF/BMF). Each of these issues needs further guidance to allow proper use and reporting of NM bioaccumulation data for regulatory purposes.

X-ray Target Shielding and Leakage Radiation Inside the Treatment Capsule of the Zap-X.

The ZAP-X represents the first-of-its-kind "self-shielded" therapeutic radiation device, which by novelty, challenges regulators to accommodate it within the existing regulatory framework for radiation protection. To facilitate informed regulatory interpretation, X-ray radiation leakage from the ZAP-X was measured inside the shielded treatment capsule at the level of the patient and X-ray target plane. Measurements were performed on a clinically commissioned system calibrated for reference conditions to deliver 1cGy/MU. Radiation was measured with a FLUKE 451 survey meter and a RadCal ionization chamber as both exposure and dose and presented as a percentage of the system reference dose. Measurements were taken at thirteen locations, eight in the patient plane and five in the X-ray target plane. The results showed a maximum X-ray leakage of 0.000986% in the patient plane and 0.000907% in the target plane. These results are 30 - 100 times lower than existing recommendations as referenced by IEC guidelines standard 60601-2-1 (2020) for radiotherapy linear accelerators (LINACs). Although most conventional LINACs apply a safety factor of 2-5 to the design of collimator shielding and patient dose sparing, the ZAP-X delivers less than 10% of the patient whole body dose compared to this standard, originating from the X-ray target. Even though the ZAP-X intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) factor is significantly higher than conventional Linacs, the absolute dose originating from leakage radiation remains lower by 25. The amount of unintended dose received by the patient's body distant from the isocenter is of interest from the perspective of both clinical and radiation safety. As this whole-body dose is decreased, the resulting treatment-related cancer incidence and mortality rates are decreased accordingly.

Improving Quality Assurance at South Carolina Vocational Rehabilitation Department: Developing a New Electronic Tool

When the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) was signed into law in 2014, the South Carolina Vocational Rehabilitation Department (SCVRD) considered how to best evaluate and measure compliance in light of the new performance measures. For many years, SCVRD used a paper form to measure quality assurance within cases across the state. This project developed a new, electronic program based on WIOA definitions and regulatory interpretation provided by the Rehabilitation Services Administration (RSA), as well as rehabilitation counselor competencies, and evaluated its effectiveness in the field. Participants reported satisfaction with the instrument’s ease of use and ability to reflect accurately the agency’s efforts concerning the new WIOA standards. This information will be used to demonstrate the quality of the VR program to stakeholders, train staff on the paradigm shift of the new WIOA service delivery model, and ensure the agency continues to serve a national leader in its commitment to meeting the vocational needs of individuals with disabilities.

Déclaration des erreurs médicamenteuses dans les recherches portant sur le médicament : place du pharmacien des essais cliniques ?

The investigational drugs circuit has specific risks, and medication errors may occur in clinical trials, possibly associated with adverse reactions. These risks must therefore be managed. In fact, there are few reports of medication errors during clinical trials. In a context of regulatory interpretation difficulties on this subject, we conducted a national survey that highlighted the heterogeneity of the methods used by academic sponsors to collect, code and report medication errors and the need to develop a culture of reporting these errors in clinical trials. This is why the REVISE group (safety officers of French institutional sponsors) has issued recommendations to clarify the sponsor and investigator responsibilities and guide them in the management of medication errors. These new guidelines recommend that any serious or potentially serious medication error or other "special situation" (e.g. overdose, misuse, quality defect) should be notified immediately to the sponsor by the investigator. The clinical research pharmacist place is strategic to detect medication errors and other special situations. The integration of the pharmacist into the reporting system, in collaboration with the investigator, could be discussed with clinical research professionals and health authorities.

Audit professional scepticism and the classics: does pyrrhonism serve the practitioner

This analysis draws on an ancient philosophy to offer how audit regulatory discourse and judicial interpretation come to represent, or fail to represent, the mindset of the philosophical skeptic. Ancient teachings of Pyrrho of Elis, Sextus Empiricus and their modernist peers are brought to bear on concepts formed around what it means to be a 'skeptic'. International auditing standards, ethical codes, personal interviews and a lengthy New Zealand legal judgement reveal professional understandings. Professional discourses are found to be a reductionist form of the skeptical mindset whereby philosophical intent gives way to narrowly-defined and risk-directed interpretations. There is an economy to the professional-sceptic recognising an end-point to enquiry and a less reflexive form of critique. Conclusions reached thus question the authenticity and depth of professional interpretations. Implications for practice offer that a greater commitment to a free-form improvisational enquiry with less dogma-inspiring structures would more closely represent the sceptical pursuit.

Freedom of Expression in the US Constitution: Formation and Development

The essence of such rights as the right to freedom of expression and the right to freedom of speech has been analyzed. Based on the United States regulations, the author has compared approaches to understanding and interpreting freedom of speech and freedom of expression.
 Freedom of expression has been studied as one of the dominant values of constitutionalism, a precondition for democracy and the rule of law. Historical aspects of the formulation of the right to freedom of speech in the United States of America, as well as its consistent regulatory enshrinement and interpretation have been analyzed. Different approaches to the constitutional proclamation of the freedom of speech have been researched and the optimal formulation of the said law has been clarified. Particular attention has been paid to the differences between American and European concepts of freedom of expression, and fundamentally different points in its understanding.
 The importance of banning the oppression of freedom of expression for the development of a democratic society and the market for ideas has been substantiated.
 Particular attention has been paid to the study of the formation and development of these rights under US law and their enactment. Based on a comparison of American and Ukrainian options for guaranteeing this right, their advantages and disadvantages have been highlighted, which may assist in gaining positive experience for Ukraine.
 The author has made conclusions regarding the higher level of guaranteeing the right to freedom of expression and freedom of speech in the practice of the United States, although these rights are more detail enshrined in Ukrainian law.
 The author has argued in favor of the fact that Ukraine should take into account the American approach to the protection of the right to freedom of expression and freedom of speech, as well as to establish a mechanism for their observance as fundamental personal human and civil rights.

Quantitative Interpretation of Genetic Toxicity Dose-Response Data for Risk Assessment and Regulatory Decision-Making: Current Status and Emerging Priorities.

The screen-and-bin approach for interpretation of genotoxicity data is predicated on three false assumptions: that genotoxicants are rare, that genotoxicity dose-response functions do not contain a low-dose region mechanistically characterized by zero-order kinetics, and that genotoxicity is not a bona fide toxicological endpoint. Consequently, there is a need to develop and implement quantitative methods to interpret genotoxicity dose-response data for risk assessment and regulatory decision-making. Standardized methods to analyze dose-response data, and determine point-of-departure (PoD) metrics, have been established; the most robust PoD is the benchmark dose (BMD). However, there are no standards for regulatory interpretation of mutagenicity BMDs. Although 5-10% is often used as a critical effect size (CES) for BMD determination, values for genotoxicity endpoints have not been established. The use of BMDs to determine health-based guidance values (HBGVs) requires assessment factors (AFs) to account for interspecies differences and variability in human sensitivity. Default AFs used for other endpoints may not be appropriate for interpretation of in vivo mutagenicity BMDs. Analyses of published dose-response data showing the effects of compensatory pathway deficiency indicate that AFs for sensitivity differences should be in the range of 2-20. Additional analyses indicate that the AF to compensate for short treatment durations should be in the range of 5-15. Future work should use available data to empirically determine endpoint-specific CES values; similarly, to determine AF values for BMD adjustment. Future work should also evaluate the ability to use in vitro dose-response data for risk assessment, and the utility of probabilistic methods for determination of mutagenicity HBGVs. Environ. Mol. Mutagen. 61:66-83, 2020. © 2019 Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada.

The Authority and Interpretation of Regulations

AbstractIn the past half century, governments have increasingly relied on regulations—secondary legislation issued by administrative bodies and departments—to impose obligations on private parties, multiplying the occasions for regulatory interpretation. This article develops a theory of regulatory interpretation. It argues that such a theory involves understanding the authority of regulations. Turning to the public law of the UK, US, and Australia, this article identifies an intriguing similarity; in each case, regulations have authority when they rationally and nonarbitrarily implement delegated power within the means permitted by statute. The article then argues that this account of regulatory authority justifies a common approach to interpretation in which the object of interpretation is the purpose the regulation seeks to implement, discerned from the regulation's text and accompanying explanation of its purpose, and constrained by background legal norms.

The Canons of Regulatory Textualism

By cabining Auer deference, Kisor v. Wilkie has made new space for regulatory interpretation. Yet the lower courts have given barely a thought to the fundamental methodological questions, particularly whether the appropriate tools of regulatory interpretation might differ from those of statutory interpretation. Academic commentators have given the issue more attention, positing intentionalist, purposivist, and first-generation textualist approaches. This Article proposes a new approach that follows the formalist move made by textualism’s second generation. While textualism’s first generation largely concerned itself with positivist critiques of the idea of congressional intent, the second generation concerned itself with the constitutional legitimacy of enacted text. Using the details of the Administrative Procedure Act to separate the legitimate and legally effective regulatory text from the merely legally significant regulatory preamble, this Article considers several tools (organized as canons) for decoding the public meaning of a regulation. In contrast to statutory textualism, several such canons make use of materials generated throughout the administrative process. A Whole Text Rule incorporates the published “statement of basis and purpose.” A Hard Look Canon favors interpretations consistent with the reasons given in the administrative record. A Logical Outgrowth Canon reads ambiguous language so that it is not too far afield from the notice of proposed rulemaking. And, finally, a Delegation Canon avoids interpretations necessarily premised on an agency’s untenable view of its statutory authority.

Improving Water Utilities' Access to Source Water Protection and Emergency Response Data

Many data critical for the development of source water protection and emergency planning are currently unusable from a lack of data standards, poor data management, and misguided regulatory interpretation related to data access for water utilities. In an effort to enable drinking water utilities to develop more responsive source water protection plans and emergency response programs, relevant data were mined and integrated into a live, cloud‐based geographic information system called WaterSuite. More than 457 data sets and contaminant information for 1,347 chemicals and mixtures were successfully acquired for use in WaterSuite and contributed to source water protection efforts of 102 US water systems. Given their role as the primary stewards of drinking water for their respective communities, water utilities and those acting on their behalf should have access to these data. Significant barriers to these data and recommendations for improvement through setting of standards and regulatory reform are discussed.

Jim Crow Terminals: The Desegregation of American Airports by Anke Ortlepp

Reviewed by: Jim Crow Terminals: The Desegregation of American Airportsby Anke Ortlepp Martin T. Olliff III Jim Crow Terminals: The Desegregation of American Airports. By Anke Ortlepp. Politics and Culture in the Twentieth-Century South. (Athens: University of Georgia Press, 2017. Pp. xii, 207. Paper, $26.95, ISBN 978-0-8203-5121-6; cloth, $74.95, ISBN 978-0-8203-5093-6.) Anke Ortlepp, professor of British and American history at the University of Kassel, has written this slightly mistitled book about airports governed by de jure racial segregation almost exclusively in the American South. She adds to civil rights movement literature that until now has focused on Jim Crow railcars, tramways, and buses by outlining the rise of racially segregated southern airports in the years after World War II and the multiple lines of successful resistance to Jim Crow at these physical symbols of modernity and middle-class status. In many ways, Ortlepp's account of airport desegregation conforms to the familiar narrative of racial segregation and resistance: Jim Crow occurred in physical spaces and drew resistance in the post–World War II United States from organized and individual activists as well as some travelers who were simply fed up. Resisters protested at the segregated facilities and sued airport authorities and concessionaires. Local officials and airport managers used states' rights arguments, subterfuge, intransigence, and prevarication to forestall these challenges to the "southern way of life" (p. 19). In other important ways, however, Ortlepp's story differs from those of other segregated facilities because almost all air passengers were interstate travelers, airplane seating itself was not segregated, and the federal government played a much more direct role in funding and regulating airports than it did bus terminals and lunch counters. Such complications exposed Jim Crow airports to federal regulations and Department of Justice desegregation lawsuits. [End Page 790] Ortlepp devotes two chapters to private resistance. Chapter 3 details direct action against Jim Crow airports that emerged in the wake of successful challenges to segregation in the 1950s. Led by the Congress of Racial Equality and local groups, these protests mirrored the Freedom Rides and lunch counter sit-ins that occurred at approximately the same time. Chapter 4 employs case studies to detail NAACP-assisted lawsuits aimed at airports and contractors, usually restaurants. Although airport facilities were managed by municipalities and subject to local laws, the Civil Aeronautics Administration, succeeded by the Federal Aviation Agency, oversaw the airlines that used the terminals and provided funding to construct them. Thus, civil rights advocates pursued changes through federal regulations and even federal legislation. Ortlepp follows the twists and turns of multiple federal antisegregation actions: Michigan congressman Charles C. Diggs Jr.'s 1955 airport survey; regulatory interpretation; and attempts by senators in the 1960s, including Jacob K. Javits of New York, to secure racial equality through the Federal Airport Act, committee investigations, and amendments to appropriations bills. More compelling and successful in securing racial equity were lawsuits brought by the Department of Justice's Civil Rights Division against airports that used Federal-Aid Airport Program funds to build illegally segregated facilities or that ignored court orders in private suits. Ortlepp examines federal suits against Montgomery and Birmingham, Alabama, and New Orleans and Shreveport, Louisiana, but her treatment of these cases is uneven. She discusses the first three in satisfying detail but gives Shreveport very short shrift, an odd oversight as she twice notes that Shreveport's was the last U.S. airport to desegregate. Ortlepp opens a particularly interesting line of inquiry by examining the physicality of Jim Crow airport facilities through the lens of spatial analysis. Although she does well in analyzing segregated airports, she misses an opportunity to provide a sufficiently thorough theoretical or historiographical foundation so that scholars may apply her ideas to other segregated spaces. Nevertheless, Jim Crow Terminals: The Desegregation of American Airportsis an important and accessible book that examines resistance to Jim Crow in an area that has escaped scholarly attention. At the same time, Ortlepp has left enough intriguing traces for other historians to extend her work. Martin T. Olliff III Troy University Copyright © 2018 The Southern Historical Association

Regulatory interpretation: regulators, regulated parties, and the courts

AbstractWhile regulators, firms, and the courts must all be able to interpret regulations to best address economic and social issues, regulatory interpretation may vary greatly across parties. After introducing a framework to explain the impact of the complexity of written regulations and the complexity of the regulatory environment on regulatory interpretation, this paper utilizes regulatory examples to explore the challenges associated with regulatory interpretation. Several recent initiatives designed to improve regulatory efficacy are examined to assess potential methods available to reduce challenges associated with regulatory interpretation. When considered with the public policy implementation literature and research on networks in public policy, several implications emerge from the consideration of regulatory interpretation and recent regulatory initiatives. Regulators should pursue strategies to minimize the number of possible interpretations in the design of regulation and seek improved regulatory mechanisms to alleviate regulatory interpretation challenges. Furthermore, theoretical models should acknowledge regulatory interpretation to better assist in the design and implementation of regulation.

Beyond ‘having a domestic'? Regulatory interpretation of European Data Protection Law and individual publication

Statutory Data Protection Authorities (DPAs) who act as the guardians of data protection across the European Economic Area (EEA) have faced unprecedented interpretative challenges as a result of the explosion of indeterminate publication by individuals in the form of blogs, social networking and other online forums. Through both a questionnaire and systematic review of EEA DPA websites, this article finds that these regulators have generally adopted a strict interpretation of the law here, although considerable internal variation is also present. Almost all see data protection as engaged, around half argue that publication in the general social networking context requires data subject consent and even when individual publication is targeted towards the collective public many DPAs demonstrate some reluctance to apply the special expressive purposes (aka the journalistic) derogation. This article argues for an alternative tripartite approach under the forthcoming Regulation which accommodates the competing free expression rights and also the limited capabilities reasonably to be expected of private individuals on a sounder and more consistent basis. The law's personal exemption should cover individual publication so long as this does not pose a serious prima facie risk to privacy or other fundamental data protection rights. The special expressive purposes derogation should protect individuals who are disseminating a message to the collective public without discrimination. Finally, the Regulation's new freedom of expression clause should ensure that individual publication which principally instantiates self-expression is subject only to the core of data protection's substantive and supervisory provisions.

If Asimo Thinks, Does Roomba Feel? The Legal Implications of Attributing Agency to Technology

Just as our interactions with other people are shaped by our concepts about their beliefs, desires, and goals (i.e., theory of mind), our interactions with intelligent technologies such as robots are shaped by our concepts about their internal operations. Multiple studies have demonstrated that people attribute anthropomorphic features to technological agents in certain contexts, but researchers remain divided on how these attributions arise: What default assumptions do people make about the internal operations of intelligent technology, and what events or additional information cause us to alter those default assumptions? This article explores these open questions and some of their implications for law and policy. First, we review psychological research exploring people's attributions of agency, with particular focus on attributions to technological entities. Next, we define and describe one popular account of this research---a account that assumes a reflexive tendency to broadly attribute humanlike properties to technological agents. We then summarize mounting evidence that people are often more cautious in attributing human properties than the promiscuous agency account suggests. We seek to integrate the mounting evidence for a account with the promiscuous agency account through the transition model of agency. Finally, we explore how selective agency, promiscuous agency, and the transition model relate to a sample of robotics law and policy issues. We address, in turn, issues related to Fourth Amendment protection, copyright law, statutory and regulatory interpretation, and negligence litigation, identifying specific implications of the transition model of agency for each issue.

European Regulatory Interpretation of the Interface between Data Protection and Journalistic Freedom: An Incomplete and Imperfect Balancing Act?

Directive 95/46 required European Economic Area Member States to ensure a careful balancing between the inherently conflicting values of data protection and journalistic freedom of expression. Unfortunately, however, this was often not achieved during the transposition of the Directive into local law. At the same time, both Directive 95/46 and the Art. 7 of the EU Charter mandated Member States to set up supervisory Data Protection Authorities (DPAs) which in practice dominate the data protection landscape. In the light of this, EEA DPAs were surveyed on their understanding of the right to subject access and the practice of undercover political journalism, with the responses then compared to provisions in local data protection law. The results demonstrated that DPAs do seek a balance in this area even against contrary statute. Nevertheless, the balancing achieved often remains incomplete, normatively contestable, opaque and precarious. It is argued that, following the likely replacement of Directive 95/46 with a new Regulation, these challenges must be tackled through a combination of both legislative and regulatory action.

Our Three Commerce Clauses and the Presumption of Intrasentence Uniformity

This piece defends a presumption of intrasentence uniformity in constitutional, statutory, and regulatory interpretation. It also applies presumption to the Commerce Clause and concludes there is very little originalist evidence could overcome the presumption of a uniform meaning for regulate commerce. In particular, Section I defends the presumption of intrasentence uniformity in general terms. Section II applies the presumption to the Commerce Clause and concludes there is not enough textual or historical evidence to overcome the presumption regulate commerce has a uniform meaning throughout the Commerce Clause. Section III suggests under current judicial doctrine, congressional power differs as to all three Commerce Clause subparts. Section III also reveals the powers retained by the states as to all three subparts of the Commerce Clause vary as well. That is to say, the dormant aspect of the Commerce Clause applies differently to each subpart. Just to be clear, I do not contend intrasentence uniformity must always triumph. I merely defend a very strong presumption of intrasentence uniformity can be overcome by textual and historical evidence. I thus disassociate myself from Edward Corwin's forceful assertion that a word should have two quite different meanings in a single short sentence in which it occurs but once, is certainly a novelty to the science of hermeneutics and probably to of linguistics as well. In his zeal to champion a unified and broad Commerce Clause, Corwin went too far. A word can have two or more different meanings even in a short sentence in which the word occurs but once. Nonetheless, to my mind, the intuition underlying his overblown claim has undeniable appeal.