�ݺ�ߣshows by User: NicolasPetit6

�ݺ�ߣshows by User: NicolasPetit6 / http://www.slideshare.net/images/logo.gif �ݺ�ߣshows by User: NicolasPetit6 / Wed, 15 May 2019 08:36:45 GMT �ݺ�ߣShare feed for �ݺ�ߣshows by User: NicolasPetit6 A Review of Competition Policy for the Digital Era (Cremer et al Report) /slideshow/a-review-of-competition-policy-for-the-digital-era-cremer-et-al-report/145743883 areviewofcompetitionpolicyforthedigitalera-npetit150519-190515083645
This slide presentation reviews the much awaited 2019 report "Competition Policy for the Digital Era" written by Jacques Crémer, Yves de Montjoye and Heike Schweitzer. The report sets out a rich list of options for future EU competition policy in the digital sector. Given the close involvement of DG COMP in the fact finding process, it is likely that the report will make impact in decision making circles. This presentation critically reviews the main suggestions of the report, and tries to identify those items that are most likely to inform future EU competition policy evolutions.]]>
This slide presentation reviews the much awaited 2019 report "Competition Policy for the Digital Era" written by Jacques Crémer, Yves de Montjoye and Heike Schweitzer. The report sets out a rich list of options for future EU competition policy in the digital sector. Given the close involvement of DG COMP in the fact finding process, it is likely that the report will make impact in decision making circles. This presentation critically reviews the main suggestions of the report, and tries to identify those items that are most likely to inform future EU competition policy evolutions.]]> Wed, 15 May 2019 08:36:45 GMT /slideshow/a-review-of-competition-policy-for-the-digital-era-cremer-et-al-report/145743883 NicolasPetit6@slideshare.net(NicolasPetit6) A Review of Competition Policy for the Digital Era (Cremer et al Report) NicolasPetit6 This slide presentation reviews the much awaited 2019 report "Competition Policy for the Digital Era" written by Jacques Crémer, Yves de Montjoye and Heike Schweitzer. The report sets out a rich list of options for future EU competition policy in the digital sector. Given the close involvement of DG COMP in the fact finding process, it is likely that the report will make impact in decision making circles. This presentation critically reviews the main suggestions of the report, and tries to identify those items that are most likely to inform future EU competition policy evolutions. <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/areviewofcompetitionpolicyforthedigitalera-npetit150519-190515083645-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds" /> This slide presentation reviews the much awaited 2019 report "Competition Policy for the Digital Era" written by Jacques Crémer, Yves de Montjoye and Heike Schweitzer. The report sets out a rich list of options for future EU competition policy in the digital sector. Given the close involvement of DG COMP in the fact finding process, it is likely that the report will make impact in decision making circles. This presentation critically reviews the main suggestions of the report, and tries to identify those items that are most likely to inform future EU competition policy evolutions.

A Review of Competition Policy for the Digital Era (Cremer et al Report) from Nicolas Petit

]]> 1274 7 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/areviewofcompetitionpolicyforthedigitalera-npetit150519-190515083645-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds presentation Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post

http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted

0 Nicolas Petit 27 september 18 - Hard Questions of Law and AI /NicolasPetit6/nicolas-petit-27-september-18-hard-questions-of-law-and-ai npetit-27september18-lawfuture-180928114651
This presentation discusses the hard legal questions raised by the research, development and implementation of Articificial Intelligence technologies. It discusses ethics, ex post v ex ante regulation, data biases, and the legal framework for various categories social harms.]]>
This presentation discusses the hard legal questions raised by the research, development and implementation of Articificial Intelligence technologies. It discusses ethics, ex post v ex ante regulation, data biases, and the legal framework for various categories social harms.]]> Fri, 28 Sep 2018 11:46:51 GMT /NicolasPetit6/nicolas-petit-27-september-18-hard-questions-of-law-and-ai NicolasPetit6@slideshare.net(NicolasPetit6) Nicolas Petit 27 september 18 - Hard Questions of Law and AI NicolasPetit6 This presentation discusses the hard legal questions raised by the research, development and implementation of Articificial Intelligence technologies. It discusses ethics, ex post v ex ante regulation, data biases, and the legal framework for various categories social harms. <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/npetit-27september18-lawfuture-180928114651-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds" /> This presentation discusses the hard legal questions raised by the research, development and implementation of Articificial Intelligence technologies. It discusses ethics, ex post v ex ante regulation, data biases, and the legal framework for various categories social harms.

Nicolas Petit 27 september 18 - Hard Questions of Law and AI from Nicolas Petit

]]> 249 7 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/npetit-27september18-lawfuture-180928114651-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds presentation Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post

http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted

0 Full Course - Law and Regulation of Machine Intelligence - Bar Ilan University 2016 /slideshow/full-course-law-and-regulation-of-machine-intelligence-bar-ilan-university-2016/69606247 fullslidedeck-lawandregulationofmachineintelligence-161128182211
Discussions over the regulation of machine intelligence (“MI”) are all the rage as artificial intelligence (“AI”) and robotic technologies are introduced in society. Computer engineers’ fears that overly rigid regulations might stifle innovation have fueled proposals to create regimes of selective immunity for research on certain types of robotic applications. At the same time, ethical concerns have prompted calls for an all-out ban on research in relation to automated weapons. Some scholars even claim that robots will become so important to mankind that “a new branch of the law” is needed, “to grant their race and its individual members the benefits of legal protection”, much like society did with the environment. In the legal scholarship, several approaches are emerging. First, in virtually each and every specialist field of the law, experts in the trenches ponder how the rise of MI necessitates upgrades, revisions or adjustments to their legal discipline. Second, an alternative approach uses a functional methodology which identifies outstanding legal issues by class of technological applications (for instance, driverless vehicles, robotic prostheses (and exoskeletons), surgical robots, and robot companions). Third, an often used dichotomy is that between roboethics and robolaw, which distinguishes between the instruments of regulation, ie the ex ante incorporation of norms in intelligent machines (for instance, the three Asimov laws) versus the ex post setting of rules to regulate the execution of robotic technology in society. With this background, the overall ambition of this course is to map the potential regulatory needs created by MIs. More specifically, the goals of the course are to: (i) provide an overview of the state of play in relation to the introduction of MI in society; (ii) set out the main regulatory options discussed in the scholarship in relation to MI (disciplinary, functional and instrumental); (iii) envision the issue in terms of the consequences of the introduction of MI technology in society, and proceed on this basis to explore alternative consequentialist regulatory responses; (iv) understand the implications of those distinct regulatory approaches in dedicated fields of the law, ie liability law and the law of warfare. Students who follow this course will gain a good understanding of the prospective regulatory issues related to MI as well as of the theories of regulation. ]]>
Discussions over the regulation of machine intelligence (“MI”) are all the rage as artificial intelligence (“AI”) and robotic technologies are introduced in society. Computer engineers’ fears that overly rigid regulations might stifle innovation have fueled proposals to create regimes of selective immunity for research on certain types of robotic applications. At the same time, ethical concerns have prompted calls for an all-out ban on research in relation to automated weapons. Some scholars even claim that robots will become so important to mankind that “a new branch of the law” is needed, “to grant their race and its individual members the benefits of legal protection”, much like society did with the environment. In the legal scholarship, several approaches are emerging. First, in virtually each and every specialist field of the law, experts in the trenches ponder how the rise of MI necessitates upgrades, revisions or adjustments to their legal discipline. Second, an alternative approach uses a functional methodology which identifies outstanding legal issues by class of technological applications (for instance, driverless vehicles, robotic prostheses (and exoskeletons), surgical robots, and robot companions). Third, an often used dichotomy is that between roboethics and robolaw, which distinguishes between the instruments of regulation, ie the ex ante incorporation of norms in intelligent machines (for instance, the three Asimov laws) versus the ex post setting of rules to regulate the execution of robotic technology in society. With this background, the overall ambition of this course is to map the potential regulatory needs created by MIs. More specifically, the goals of the course are to: (i) provide an overview of the state of play in relation to the introduction of MI in society; (ii) set out the main regulatory options discussed in the scholarship in relation to MI (disciplinary, functional and instrumental); (iii) envision the issue in terms of the consequences of the introduction of MI technology in society, and proceed on this basis to explore alternative consequentialist regulatory responses; (iv) understand the implications of those distinct regulatory approaches in dedicated fields of the law, ie liability law and the law of warfare. Students who follow this course will gain a good understanding of the prospective regulatory issues related to MI as well as of the theories of regulation. ]]> Mon, 28 Nov 2016 18:22:11 GMT /slideshow/full-course-law-and-regulation-of-machine-intelligence-bar-ilan-university-2016/69606247 NicolasPetit6@slideshare.net(NicolasPetit6) Full Course - Law and Regulation of Machine Intelligence - Bar Ilan University 2016 NicolasPetit6 Discussions over the regulation of machine intelligence (“MI”) are all the rage as artificial intelligence (“AI”) and robotic technologies are introduced in society. Computer engineers’ fears that overly rigid regulations might stifle innovation have fueled proposals to create regimes of selective immunity for research on certain types of robotic applications. At the same time, ethical concerns have prompted calls for an all-out ban on research in relation to automated weapons. Some scholars even claim that robots will become so important to mankind that “a new branch of the law” is needed, “to grant their race and its individual members the benefits of legal protection”, much like society did with the environment. In the legal scholarship, several approaches are emerging. First, in virtually each and every specialist field of the law, experts in the trenches ponder how the rise of MI necessitates upgrades, revisions or adjustments to their legal discipline. Second, an alternative approach uses a functional methodology which identifies outstanding legal issues by class of technological applications (for instance, driverless vehicles, robotic prostheses (and exoskeletons), surgical robots, and robot companions). Third, an often used dichotomy is that between roboethics and robolaw, which distinguishes between the instruments of regulation, ie the ex ante incorporation of norms in intelligent machines (for instance, the three Asimov laws) versus the ex post setting of rules to regulate the execution of robotic technology in society. With this background, the overall ambition of this course is to map the potential regulatory needs created by MIs. More specifically, the goals of the course are to: (i) provide an overview of the state of play in relation to the introduction of MI in society; (ii) set out the main regulatory options discussed in the scholarship in relation to MI (disciplinary, functional and instrumental); (iii) envision the issue in terms of the consequences of the introduction of MI technology in society, and proceed on this basis to explore alternative consequentialist regulatory responses; (iv) understand the implications of those distinct regulatory approaches in dedicated fields of the law, ie liability law and the law of warfare. Students who follow this course will gain a good understanding of the prospective regulatory issues related to MI as well as of the theories of regulation. <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/fullslidedeck-lawandregulationofmachineintelligence-161128182211-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds" /> Discussions over the regulation of machine intelligence (“MI”) are all the rage as artificial intelligence (“AI”) and robotic technologies are introduced in society. Computer engineers’ fears that overly rigid regulations might stifle innovation have fueled proposals to create regimes of selective immunity for research on certain types of robotic applications. At the same time, ethical concerns have prompted calls for an all-out ban on research in relation to automated weapons. Some scholars even claim that robots will become so important to mankind that “a new branch of the law” is needed, “to grant their race and its individual members the benefits of legal protection”, much like society did with the environment. In the legal scholarship, several approaches are emerging. First, in virtually each and every specialist field of the law, experts in the trenches ponder how the rise of MI necessitates upgrades, revisions or adjustments to their legal discipline. Second, an alternative approach uses a functional methodology which identifies outstanding legal issues by class of technological applications (for instance, driverless vehicles, robotic prostheses (and exoskeletons), surgical robots, and robot companions). Third, an often used dichotomy is that between roboethics and robolaw, which distinguishes between the instruments of regulation, ie the ex ante incorporation of norms in intelligent machines (for instance, the three Asimov laws) versus the ex post setting of rules to regulate the execution of robotic technology in society. With this background, the overall ambition of this course is to map the potential regulatory needs created by MIs. More specifically, the goals of the course are to: (i) provide an overview of the state of play in relation to the introduction of MI in society; (ii) set out the main regulatory options discussed in the scholarship in relation to MI (disciplinary, functional and instrumental); (iii) envision the issue in terms of the consequences of the introduction of MI technology in society, and proceed on this basis to explore alternative consequentialist regulatory responses; (iv) understand the implications of those distinct regulatory approaches in dedicated fields of the law, ie liability law and the law of warfare. Students who follow this course will gain a good understanding of the prospective regulatory issues related to MI as well as of the theories of regulation.

Full Course - Law and Regulation of Machine Intelligence - Bar Ilan University 2016 from Nicolas Petit

]]> 2023 26 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/fullslidedeck-lawandregulationofmachineintelligence-161128182211-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds presentation Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post

http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted

0 Tech Giants, the Moligopoly Hypothesis and Conglomerate Competition /slideshow/tech-giantsn-the-moligopoly-hypothesis-and-conglomerate-competition/63814114 techgiantsmoligopolyhypothesisandconglomeratecompetition-160707141149
This presentation discusses the nature of competition amongst the US technology giants. It focuses on Google, Apple, Facebook, Amazon and Microsoft (GAFAM). It suggests that the current categorization of those firms as monopolies is wrong. It is based on a misguided frame of reference, which is blind to competition that occurs outside of the core market where those companies operate. Antitrust agencies and regulators should take a more holistic view of the conglomerate competition that exists amongst those firms. They should in particular look at how those companies "compete against the non consumption", in search for new and low end market footholds. The presentation makes a number of policy proposals, including using innovation-based screens and tests to decided which cases to prioritize and exonerate.]]>
This presentation discusses the nature of competition amongst the US technology giants. It focuses on Google, Apple, Facebook, Amazon and Microsoft (GAFAM). It suggests that the current categorization of those firms as monopolies is wrong. It is based on a misguided frame of reference, which is blind to competition that occurs outside of the core market where those companies operate. Antitrust agencies and regulators should take a more holistic view of the conglomerate competition that exists amongst those firms. They should in particular look at how those companies "compete against the non consumption", in search for new and low end market footholds. The presentation makes a number of policy proposals, including using innovation-based screens and tests to decided which cases to prioritize and exonerate.]]> Thu, 07 Jul 2016 14:11:49 GMT /slideshow/tech-giantsn-the-moligopoly-hypothesis-and-conglomerate-competition/63814114 NicolasPetit6@slideshare.net(NicolasPetit6) Tech Giants, the Moligopoly Hypothesis and Conglomerate Competition NicolasPetit6 This presentation discusses the nature of competition amongst the US technology giants. It focuses on Google, Apple, Facebook, Amazon and Microsoft (GAFAM). It suggests that the current categorization of those firms as monopolies is wrong. It is based on a misguided frame of reference, which is blind to competition that occurs outside of the core market where those companies operate. Antitrust agencies and regulators should take a more holistic view of the conglomerate competition that exists amongst those firms. They should in particular look at how those companies "compete against the non consumption", in search for new and low end market footholds. The presentation makes a number of policy proposals, including using innovation-based screens and tests to decided which cases to prioritize and exonerate. <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/techgiantsmoligopolyhypothesisandconglomeratecompetition-160707141149-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds" /> This presentation discusses the nature of competition amongst the US technology giants. It focuses on Google, Apple, Facebook, Amazon and Microsoft (GAFAM). It suggests that the current categorization of those firms as monopolies is wrong. It is based on a misguided frame of reference, which is blind to competition that occurs outside of the core market where those companies operate. Antitrust agencies and regulators should take a more holistic view of the conglomerate competition that exists amongst those firms. They should in particular look at how those companies "compete against the non consumption", in search for new and low end market footholds. The presentation makes a number of policy proposals, including using innovation-based screens and tests to decided which cases to prioritize and exonerate.

Tech Giants, the Moligopoly Hypothesis and Conglomerate Competition from Nicolas Petit

]]> 820 9 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/techgiantsmoligopolyhypothesisandconglomeratecompetition-160707141149-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds presentation Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post

http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted

0 On Binding Effect of Guidance Paper and AEC test /slideshow/on-binding-effect-of-guidance-paper-and-aec-test/63378133 onbindingeffectofguidancepaperandaectest-npetit220616-160623132724
The claim that the Guidance Paper on Article 102 TFEU has no binding effects on the EU Commission rests on fragile arguments which this ppt challenges. This finding may have implications for the future of the competition policy of the EU. ]]>
The claim that the Guidance Paper on Article 102 TFEU has no binding effects on the EU Commission rests on fragile arguments which this ppt challenges. This finding may have implications for the future of the competition policy of the EU. ]]> Thu, 23 Jun 2016 13:27:24 GMT /slideshow/on-binding-effect-of-guidance-paper-and-aec-test/63378133 NicolasPetit6@slideshare.net(NicolasPetit6) On Binding Effect of Guidance Paper and AEC test NicolasPetit6 The claim that the Guidance Paper on Article 102 TFEU has no binding effects on the EU Commission rests on fragile arguments which this ppt challenges. This finding may have implications for the future of the competition policy of the EU. <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/onbindingeffectofguidancepaperandaectest-npetit220616-160623132724-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds" /> The claim that the Guidance Paper on Article 102 TFEU has no binding effects on the EU Commission rests on fragile arguments which this ppt challenges. This finding may have implications for the future of the competition policy of the EU.

On Binding Effect of Guidance Paper and AEC test from Nicolas Petit

]]> 737 10 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/onbindingeffectofguidancepaperandaectest-npetit220616-160623132724-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds presentation Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post

http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted

0 Antitrust claims in a standards context - ASPI APEB LES - Paris 2016 /slideshow/antitrust-claims-in-a-standards-context-aspi-apeb-les-paris-2016/63096180 npetit-antitrustclaimsinastandardscontext-aspi-lesapebconference-paris2016-160615133138
�ݺ�ߣs on the use of antitrust arguments in patent litigation, in particular in relation to patents declared essential to an industrial standards, and which are encumbered by a FRAND commitment. The slides describe the evolution of the law in the 2015 judgment in Huawei v ZTE by the EU Courts, and the first cases dealt with in Germany since then. It also envisions the changes introduced by standard setting organizations to their patent policies, and whether this can trigger antitrust liability.]]>
�ݺ�ߣs on the use of antitrust arguments in patent litigation, in particular in relation to patents declared essential to an industrial standards, and which are encumbered by a FRAND commitment. The slides describe the evolution of the law in the 2015 judgment in Huawei v ZTE by the EU Courts, and the first cases dealt with in Germany since then. It also envisions the changes introduced by standard setting organizations to their patent policies, and whether this can trigger antitrust liability.]]> Wed, 15 Jun 2016 13:31:38 GMT /slideshow/antitrust-claims-in-a-standards-context-aspi-apeb-les-paris-2016/63096180 NicolasPetit6@slideshare.net(NicolasPetit6) Antitrust claims in a standards context - ASPI APEB LES - Paris 2016 NicolasPetit6 �ݺ�ߣs on the use of antitrust arguments in patent litigation, in particular in relation to patents declared essential to an industrial standards, and which are encumbered by a FRAND commitment. The slides describe the evolution of the law in the 2015 judgment in Huawei v ZTE by the EU Courts, and the first cases dealt with in Germany since then. It also envisions the changes introduced by standard setting organizations to their patent policies, and whether this can trigger antitrust liability. <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/npetit-antitrustclaimsinastandardscontext-aspi-lesapebconference-paris2016-160615133138-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds" /> �ݺ�ߣs on the use of antitrust arguments in patent litigation, in particular in relation to patents declared essential to an industrial standards, and which are encumbered by a FRAND commitment. The slides describe the evolution of the law in the 2015 judgment in Huawei v ZTE by the EU Courts, and the first cases dealt with in Germany since then. It also envisions the changes introduced by standard setting organizations to their patent policies, and whether this can trigger antitrust liability.

Antitrust claims in a standards context - ASPI APEB LES - Paris 2016 from Nicolas Petit

]]> 450 6 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/npetit-antitrustclaimsinastandardscontext-aspi-lesapebconference-paris2016-160615133138-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds presentation Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post

http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted

0 Introduction to the law of robots and AIs - lecture 5 /slideshow/introduction-to-the-law-of-robots-and-ais-lecture-5/61681343 introductiontothelawofrobotsandais-lecture5-160504184754
This slidedeck deals with liability issues, in other words who should pay for robot/AI generated harm. The presentation goes through the main principles of civil liability law, comes to some preliminary conclusions on the shape of cases to come in that area, and then discusses possible regulatory arrangements to address concerns of chilling effects of liability disputes on robotic innovation. It concludes with ruminations on the Coase theorem, and hints at other targets for civil liability cases. This is the 5th block of my lecture on the law of robots and AIs at the University of Liege (ULg)]]>
This slidedeck deals with liability issues, in other words who should pay for robot/AI generated harm. The presentation goes through the main principles of civil liability law, comes to some preliminary conclusions on the shape of cases to come in that area, and then discusses possible regulatory arrangements to address concerns of chilling effects of liability disputes on robotic innovation. It concludes with ruminations on the Coase theorem, and hints at other targets for civil liability cases. This is the 5th block of my lecture on the law of robots and AIs at the University of Liege (ULg)]]> Wed, 04 May 2016 18:47:54 GMT /slideshow/introduction-to-the-law-of-robots-and-ais-lecture-5/61681343 NicolasPetit6@slideshare.net(NicolasPetit6) Introduction to the law of robots and AIs - lecture 5 NicolasPetit6 This slidedeck deals with liability issues, in other words who should pay for robot/AI generated harm. The presentation goes through the main principles of civil liability law, comes to some preliminary conclusions on the shape of cases to come in that area, and then discusses possible regulatory arrangements to address concerns of chilling effects of liability disputes on robotic innovation. It concludes with ruminations on the Coase theorem, and hints at other targets for civil liability cases. This is the 5th block of my lecture on the law of robots and AIs at the University of Liege (ULg) <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/introductiontothelawofrobotsandais-lecture5-160504184754-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds" /> This slidedeck deals with liability issues, in other words who should pay for robot/AI generated harm. The presentation goes through the main principles of civil liability law, comes to some preliminary conclusions on the shape of cases to come in that area, and then discusses possible regulatory arrangements to address concerns of chilling effects of liability disputes on robotic innovation. It concludes with ruminations on the Coase theorem, and hints at other targets for civil liability cases. This is the 5th block of my lecture on the law of robots and AIs at the University of Liege (ULg)

Introduction to the law of robots and AIs - lecture 5 from Nicolas Petit

]]> 518 9 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/introductiontothelawofrobotsandais-lecture5-160504184754-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds presentation Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post

http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted

0 Introduction to the law of robots and AIs - Lecture 4 /slideshow/introduction-to-the-law-of-robots-and-a-is-lecture-4/61681188 introductiontothelawofrobotsandais-lecture4-160504184332
This slidedeck examines whether regulation is warranted in relation to robots and artificial intelligences. It proposes an analytical grid to address that complex issue, and runs the argument that discrete externalities, systemic externalities and existernalities may command distinct legal responses. This slidedeck is the 4th block of my course at the University of Liege (ULg). It is entitled "Whither Regulation for Machine Intelligence - A Proposed Framework" Nicolas Petit (c)]]>
This slidedeck examines whether regulation is warranted in relation to robots and artificial intelligences. It proposes an analytical grid to address that complex issue, and runs the argument that discrete externalities, systemic externalities and existernalities may command distinct legal responses. This slidedeck is the 4th block of my course at the University of Liege (ULg). It is entitled "Whither Regulation for Machine Intelligence - A Proposed Framework" Nicolas Petit (c)]]> Wed, 04 May 2016 18:43:32 GMT /slideshow/introduction-to-the-law-of-robots-and-a-is-lecture-4/61681188 NicolasPetit6@slideshare.net(NicolasPetit6) Introduction to the law of robots and AIs - Lecture 4 NicolasPetit6 This slidedeck examines whether regulation is warranted in relation to robots and artificial intelligences. It proposes an analytical grid to address that complex issue, and runs the argument that discrete externalities, systemic externalities and existernalities may command distinct legal responses. This slidedeck is the 4th block of my course at the University of Liege (ULg). It is entitled "Whither Regulation for Machine Intelligence - A Proposed Framework" Nicolas Petit (c) <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/introductiontothelawofrobotsandais-lecture4-160504184332-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds" /> This slidedeck examines whether regulation is warranted in relation to robots and artificial intelligences. It proposes an analytical grid to address that complex issue, and runs the argument that discrete externalities, systemic externalities and existernalities may command distinct legal responses. This slidedeck is the 4th block of my course at the University of Liege (ULg). It is entitled "Whither Regulation for Machine Intelligence - A Proposed Framework" Nicolas Petit (c)

Introduction to the law of robots and AIs - Lecture 4 from Nicolas Petit

]]> 462 8 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/introductiontothelawofrobotsandais-lecture4-160504184332-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds presentation Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post

http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted

0 Law of robots and AIs - Future of Lawyers - Lecture 3 https://de.slideshare.net/slideshow/law-of-robots-and-ais-future-of-lawyers-lecture-3/60053780 introductiontothelawofrobotsandais-lecture3-160326093152
Lecture on the future of lawyers in a world driven by robotics and AIs: quantitative legal prediction, big data, AI based problem solving, etc. I also discuss Susskind's work.]]>
Lecture on the future of lawyers in a world driven by robotics and AIs: quantitative legal prediction, big data, AI based problem solving, etc. I also discuss Susskind's work.]]> Sat, 26 Mar 2016 09:31:52 GMT https://de.slideshare.net/slideshow/law-of-robots-and-ais-future-of-lawyers-lecture-3/60053780 NicolasPetit6@slideshare.net(NicolasPetit6) Law of robots and AIs - Future of Lawyers - Lecture 3 NicolasPetit6 Lecture on the future of lawyers in a world driven by robotics and AIs: quantitative legal prediction, big data, AI based problem solving, etc. I also discuss Susskind's work. <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/introductiontothelawofrobotsandais-lecture3-160326093152-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds" /> Lecture on the future of lawyers in a world driven by robotics and AIs: quantitative legal prediction, big data, AI based problem solving, etc. I also discuss Susskind's work.

from Nicolas Petit

]]> 807 8 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/introductiontothelawofrobotsandais-lecture3-160326093152-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds presentation 000000 http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post

http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted

0 Introduction to the law of robots and AIs - lecture 3 - The Future of Lawyers? https://de.slideshare.net/slideshow/introduction-to-the-law-of-robots-and-ais-lecture-3-the-future-of-lawyers/59624766 introductiontothelawofrobotsandais-lecture3-160316100818
Third set of slides of my course at the University of Liege (ULg), Belgium, on the law and regulation of robots and artificial intelligences. Focus is on threats and opportunities for the legal community (with a discussion of Susskind's work)]]>
Third set of slides of my course at the University of Liege (ULg), Belgium, on the law and regulation of robots and artificial intelligences. Focus is on threats and opportunities for the legal community (with a discussion of Susskind's work)]]> Wed, 16 Mar 2016 10:08:18 GMT https://de.slideshare.net/slideshow/introduction-to-the-law-of-robots-and-ais-lecture-3-the-future-of-lawyers/59624766 NicolasPetit6@slideshare.net(NicolasPetit6) Introduction to the law of robots and AIs - lecture 3 - The Future of Lawyers? NicolasPetit6 Third set of slides of my course at the University of Liege (ULg), Belgium, on the law and regulation of robots and artificial intelligences. Focus is on threats and opportunities for the legal community (with a discussion of Susskind's work) <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/introductiontothelawofrobotsandais-lecture3-160316100818-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds" /> Third set of slides of my course at the University of Liege (ULg), Belgium, on the law and regulation of robots and artificial intelligences. Focus is on threats and opportunities for the legal community (with a discussion of Susskind's work)

from Nicolas Petit

]]> 587 6 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/introductiontothelawofrobotsandais-lecture3-160316100818-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds presentation Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post

http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted

0 Law of robots and AIs - lecture 2: Prospects for Society, Economics and the Substitution-Complement Model /slideshow/law-of-robots-and-ais-lecture-2-prospects-for-society-economics-and-the-substitutioncomplement-model/59624633 introductiontothelawofrobotsandais-lecture2-160316100515
Second set of slides of my course at the University of Liege (ULg), Belgium, on the law and regulation of robots and artificial intelligences. Focus is on the emerging social challenges raised by robots and AIs, with a specific emphasis on econ theory and the substitution v complement framework]]>
Second set of slides of my course at the University of Liege (ULg), Belgium, on the law and regulation of robots and artificial intelligences. Focus is on the emerging social challenges raised by robots and AIs, with a specific emphasis on econ theory and the substitution v complement framework]]> Wed, 16 Mar 2016 10:05:15 GMT /slideshow/law-of-robots-and-ais-lecture-2-prospects-for-society-economics-and-the-substitutioncomplement-model/59624633 NicolasPetit6@slideshare.net(NicolasPetit6) Law of robots and AIs - lecture 2: Prospects for Society, Economics and the Substitution-Complement Model NicolasPetit6 Second set of slides of my course at the University of Liege (ULg), Belgium, on the law and regulation of robots and artificial intelligences. Focus is on the emerging social challenges raised by robots and AIs, with a specific emphasis on econ theory and the substitution v complement framework <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/introductiontothelawofrobotsandais-lecture2-160316100515-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds" /> Second set of slides of my course at the University of Liege (ULg), Belgium, on the law and regulation of robots and artificial intelligences. Focus is on the emerging social challenges raised by robots and AIs, with a specific emphasis on econ theory and the substitution v complement framework

Law of robots and AIs - lecture 2: Prospects for Society, Economics and the Substitution-Complement Model from Nicolas Petit

]]> 446 7 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/introductiontothelawofrobotsandais-lecture2-160316100515-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds presentation Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post

http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted

0 Law of robots and AIs - Lecture 1 - State of the Art: Technology /slideshow/law-of-robots-and-ais-lecture-1-state-of-the-art-technology/59624501 introductiontothelawofrobotsandais-lecture1-160316100208
First set of slides of my course at the University of Liege (ULg), Belgium, on the law and regulation of robots and artificial intelligences. Focus is on the technological state of play.]]>
First set of slides of my course at the University of Liege (ULg), Belgium, on the law and regulation of robots and artificial intelligences. Focus is on the technological state of play.]]> Wed, 16 Mar 2016 10:02:08 GMT /slideshow/law-of-robots-and-ais-lecture-1-state-of-the-art-technology/59624501 NicolasPetit6@slideshare.net(NicolasPetit6) Law of robots and AIs - Lecture 1 - State of the Art: Technology NicolasPetit6 First set of slides of my course at the University of Liege (ULg), Belgium, on the law and regulation of robots and artificial intelligences. Focus is on the technological state of play. <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/introductiontothelawofrobotsandais-lecture1-160316100208-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds" /> First set of slides of my course at the University of Liege (ULg), Belgium, on the law and regulation of robots and artificial intelligences. Focus is on the technological state of play.

Law of robots and AIs - Lecture 1 - State of the Art: Technology from Nicolas Petit

]]> 535 8 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/introductiontothelawofrobotsandais-lecture1-160316100208-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds presentation Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post

http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted

0 IBC �ݺ�ߣs Petit - Abuse of Dominance - Huawei and Post Danmark /slideshow/ibc-slides-petit-abuse-of-dominance-huawei-and-post-danmark/58144837 ibc-slides-petit-huawei-and-postdanmark-160211114357
�ݺ�ߣs on recent developments in abuse of dominance law @IBC conference in Brussels (February 2016). Topics include rebates, patents and judicial review in EU competition law]]>
�ݺ�ߣs on recent developments in abuse of dominance law @IBC conference in Brussels (February 2016). Topics include rebates, patents and judicial review in EU competition law]]> Thu, 11 Feb 2016 11:43:57 GMT /slideshow/ibc-slides-petit-abuse-of-dominance-huawei-and-post-danmark/58144837 NicolasPetit6@slideshare.net(NicolasPetit6) IBC �ݺ�ߣs Petit - Abuse of Dominance - Huawei and Post Danmark NicolasPetit6 �ݺ�ߣs on recent developments in abuse of dominance law @IBC conference in Brussels (February 2016). Topics include rebates, patents and judicial review in EU competition law <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/ibc-slides-petit-huawei-and-postdanmark-160211114357-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds" /> �ݺ�ߣs on recent developments in abuse of dominance law @IBC conference in Brussels (February 2016). Topics include rebates, patents and judicial review in EU competition law

IBC �ݺ�ߣs Petit - Abuse of Dominance - Huawei and Post Danmark from Nicolas Petit

]]> 1285 7 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/ibc-slides-petit-huawei-and-postdanmark-160211114357-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds presentation Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post

http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted

0 Lund moligopolists - presentation (09 11 15) n petit /slideshow/lund-moligopolists-presentation-09-11-15-n-petit/55252056 lund-moligopolists-presentation091115npetit-151118134607-lva1-app6892
Presentation on the dynamics of competition between digital economy firms like Google, Apple, Facebook, Amazon and Microsoft (“GAFAM”). It diagnoses a divorce between the discourse of the antitrust and trade regulation technocracy – ie specialist officials, lawyers and economists – which characterizes digital economy firms as lone monopolists active on narrow product markets sheltered from competition and the perception of other communities – ie technology pundits, business strategists and investors – who keep describing those firms as healthy oligopolists at war with each other. With this background, the presentation discusses the need for antitrust reform.]]>
Presentation on the dynamics of competition between digital economy firms like Google, Apple, Facebook, Amazon and Microsoft (“GAFAM”). It diagnoses a divorce between the discourse of the antitrust and trade regulation technocracy – ie specialist officials, lawyers and economists – which characterizes digital economy firms as lone monopolists active on narrow product markets sheltered from competition and the perception of other communities – ie technology pundits, business strategists and investors – who keep describing those firms as healthy oligopolists at war with each other. With this background, the presentation discusses the need for antitrust reform.]]> Wed, 18 Nov 2015 13:46:07 GMT /slideshow/lund-moligopolists-presentation-09-11-15-n-petit/55252056 NicolasPetit6@slideshare.net(NicolasPetit6) Lund moligopolists - presentation (09 11 15) n petit NicolasPetit6 Presentation on the dynamics of competition between digital economy firms like Google, Apple, Facebook, Amazon and Microsoft (“GAFAM”). It diagnoses a divorce between the discourse of the antitrust and trade regulation technocracy – ie specialist officials, lawyers and economists – which characterizes digital economy firms as lone monopolists active on narrow product markets sheltered from competition and the perception of other communities – ie technology pundits, business strategists and investors – who keep describing those firms as healthy oligopolists at war with each other. With this background, the presentation discusses the need for antitrust reform. <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/lund-moligopolists-presentation091115npetit-151118134607-lva1-app6892-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds" /> Presentation on the dynamics of competition between digital economy firms like Google, Apple, Facebook, Amazon and Microsoft (“GAFAM”). It diagnoses a divorce between the discourse of the antitrust and trade regulation technocracy – ie specialist officials, lawyers and economists – which characterizes digital economy firms as lone monopolists active on narrow product markets sheltered from competition and the perception of other communities – ie technology pundits, business strategists and investors – who keep describing those firms as healthy oligopolists at war with each other. With this background, the presentation discusses the need for antitrust reform.

Lund moligopolists - presentation (09 11 15) n petit from Nicolas Petit

]]> 1201 17 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/lund-moligopolists-presentation091115npetit-151118134607-lva1-app6892-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds presentation 000000 http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post

http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted

0 Competition law and the Unified Patent Court - �ݺ�ߣs 25 09 15 /slideshow/competition-law-and-the-unified-patent-court-slides-25-09-15/53266973 competitionlawandip-tqjceipi-slides250915-150928090535-lva1-app6891
Lecture on the Unified Patent Court (UPC) and how it should handle antitrust/competition law arguments. ]]>
Lecture on the Unified Patent Court (UPC) and how it should handle antitrust/competition law arguments. ]]> Mon, 28 Sep 2015 09:05:35 GMT /slideshow/competition-law-and-the-unified-patent-court-slides-25-09-15/53266973 NicolasPetit6@slideshare.net(NicolasPetit6) Competition law and the Unified Patent Court - �ݺ�ߣs 25 09 15 NicolasPetit6 Lecture on the Unified Patent Court (UPC) and how it should handle antitrust/competition law arguments. <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/competitionlawandip-tqjceipi-slides250915-150928090535-lva1-app6891-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds" /> Lecture on the Unified Patent Court (UPC) and how it should handle antitrust/competition law arguments.

Competition law and the Unified Patent Court - �ݺ�ߣs 25 09 15 from Nicolas Petit

]]> 1501 16 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/competitionlawandip-tqjceipi-slides250915-150928090535-lva1-app6891-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds presentation Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post

http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted

0 Loi macron - Frontières de l'autorité de la concurrence - N Petit https://fr.slideshare.net/slideshow/loi-macron-frontires-de-lautorit-de-la-concurrence-n-petit/53163867 loimacron-frontiresdelautoritdelaconcurrence-npetit-150924172940-lva1-app6891
Presentation (in French) on what the recent "Macron law" entails for the French Competition Agency. Delivered at the annual conference of the association of French competition practitioners ]]>
Presentation (in French) on what the recent "Macron law" entails for the French Competition Agency. Delivered at the annual conference of the association of French competition practitioners ]]> Thu, 24 Sep 2015 17:29:40 GMT https://fr.slideshare.net/slideshow/loi-macron-frontires-de-lautorit-de-la-concurrence-n-petit/53163867 NicolasPetit6@slideshare.net(NicolasPetit6) Loi macron - Frontières de l'autorité de la concurrence - N Petit NicolasPetit6 Presentation (in French) on what the recent "Macron law" entails for the French Competition Agency. Delivered at the annual conference of the association of French competition practitioners <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/loimacron-frontiresdelautoritdelaconcurrence-npetit-150924172940-lva1-app6891-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds" /> Presentation (in French) on what the recent "Macron law" entails for the French Competition Agency. Delivered at the annual conference of the association of French competition practitioners

from Nicolas Petit

]]> 669 13 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/loimacron-frontiresdelautoritdelaconcurrence-npetit-150924172940-lva1-app6891-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds presentation Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post

http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted

0 Problem practices in Competition Law - Presentation to CMA Academy /slideshow/problem-practices-in-competition-law-presentation-to-cma-academu-nicolas-petit/48991445 problempractices-cma2-nicolaspetit-150604135231-lva1-app6892
This presentation addresses the issue of the gap practices, that do not facially fall fould of the classic antitrust prohibitions (eg, planned obscolescence, shrouding, IP tracking, etc.). It adresses the issue of default legal instruments, such as Section V of the FTC act. A paper on this is in the making.]]>
This presentation addresses the issue of the gap practices, that do not facially fall fould of the classic antitrust prohibitions (eg, planned obscolescence, shrouding, IP tracking, etc.). It adresses the issue of default legal instruments, such as Section V of the FTC act. A paper on this is in the making.]]> Thu, 04 Jun 2015 13:52:31 GMT /slideshow/problem-practices-in-competition-law-presentation-to-cma-academu-nicolas-petit/48991445 NicolasPetit6@slideshare.net(NicolasPetit6) Problem practices in Competition Law - Presentation to CMA Academy NicolasPetit6 This presentation addresses the issue of the gap practices, that do not facially fall fould of the classic antitrust prohibitions (eg, planned obscolescence, shrouding, IP tracking, etc.). It adresses the issue of default legal instruments, such as Section V of the FTC act. A paper on this is in the making. <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/problempractices-cma2-nicolaspetit-150604135231-lva1-app6892-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds" /> This presentation addresses the issue of the gap practices, that do not facially fall fould of the classic antitrust prohibitions (eg, planned obscolescence, shrouding, IP tracking, etc.). It adresses the issue of default legal instruments, such as Section V of the FTC act. A paper on this is in the making.

Problem practices in Competition Law - Presentation to CMA Academy from Nicolas Petit

]]> 1229 7 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/problempractices-cma2-nicolaspetit-150604135231-lva1-app6892-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds presentation 000000 http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post

http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted

0 Patent hold up and the antitrustization of frand - A multi-sided reappraisal - Leeds conference /slideshow/patent-hold-up-and-the-antitrutization-of-frand-multisided-reappraisal-leeds/48410782 patenthold-upandtheantitrutizationoffrand-multi-sidedreappraisal-leeds-150521001845-lva1-app6891
This is my recent presentation at the Contemporary Challenges in Competition Law conference held by the University of Leeds on 15 May 2015: http://www.law.leeds.ac.uk/events/2015/contemporary-challenges-in-competition-law. 2015 (c) Nicolas Petit]]>
This is my recent presentation at the Contemporary Challenges in Competition Law conference held by the University of Leeds on 15 May 2015: http://www.law.leeds.ac.uk/events/2015/contemporary-challenges-in-competition-law. 2015 (c) Nicolas Petit]]> Thu, 21 May 2015 00:18:44 GMT /slideshow/patent-hold-up-and-the-antitrutization-of-frand-multisided-reappraisal-leeds/48410782 NicolasPetit6@slideshare.net(NicolasPetit6) Patent hold up and the antitrustization of frand - A multi-sided reappraisal - Leeds conference NicolasPetit6 This is my recent presentation at the Contemporary Challenges in Competition Law conference held by the University of Leeds on 15 May 2015: http://www.law.leeds.ac.uk/events/2015/contemporary-challenges-in-competition-law. 2015 (c) Nicolas Petit <img style="border:1px solid #C3E6D8;float:right;" alt="" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/patenthold-upandtheantitrutizationoffrand-multi-sidedreappraisal-leeds-150521001845-lva1-app6891-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds" /> This is my recent presentation at the Contemporary Challenges in Competition Law conference held by the University of Leeds on 15 May 2015: http://www.law.leeds.ac.uk/events/2015/contemporary-challenges-in-competition-law. 2015 (c) Nicolas Petit

Patent hold up and the antitrustization of frand - A multi-sided reappraisal - Leeds conference from Nicolas Petit

]]> 784 14 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/patenthold-upandtheantitrutizationoffrand-multi-sidedreappraisal-leeds-150521001845-lva1-app6891-thumbnail.jpg?width=120&height=120&fit=bounds presentation Black http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/post

http://activitystrea.ms/schema/1.0/posted

0 https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/profile-photo-NicolasPetit6-48x48.jpg?cb=1557909383 http://www.chillingcompetition.com https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/areviewofcompetitionpolicyforthedigitalera-npetit150519-190515083645-thumbnail.jpg?width=320&height=320&fit=bounds slideshow/a-review-of-competition-policy-for-the-digital-era-cremer-et-al-report/145743883 A Review of Competitio... https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/npetit-27september18-lawfuture-180928114651-thumbnail.jpg?width=320&height=320&fit=bounds NicolasPetit6/nicolas-petit-27-september-18-hard-questions-of-law-and-ai Nicolas Petit 27 septe... https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/fullslidedeck-lawandregulationofmachineintelligence-161128182211-thumbnail.jpg?width=320&height=320&fit=bounds slideshow/full-course-law-and-regulation-of-machine-intelligence-bar-ilan-university-2016/69606247 Full Course - Law and ...