Real-Time Bidding Versus EU Data Protection Law: A Cross-Disciplinary Analysis of Legal Bases and Compliance Challenges

This dissertation analyses the various legal bases available for real-time bidding while arguing why consent is the only legal basis different stakeholders of real-time bidding can use to process personal data under EU data protection law, even though multiple companies use legitimate interest as one of the legal bases to process personal data. What constitutes consent for processing personal data is then heavily explored throughout this dissertation while highlighting the importance of facilitating transparency to reduce information asymmetry in the current digital advertising market. It then delves deep into the drawbacks of the current mechanisms employed to obtain consent in the advertising industry, primarily real-time bidding, to establish the current practices of real-time bidding as illegal in most scenarios, making the practice of real-time bidding one of the most significant privacy risks existing in the EU’s Digital world today.

From Cadbury Purple to Tiffany Blue: The Complexities of Colour Trademarking in Europe

This article explores the legal framework surrounding the registration of colours as trademarks in Europe, examining both the challenges and criteria that define their eligibility. Colour, as a powerful branding tool, is often associated with iconic brands like Cadbury and Tiffany & Co., whose distinctive hues have become integral to their identity. However, trademarking colours presents unique legal hurdles, including the need for distinctiveness, clarity, and precise representation. The article delves into key legal theories, such as shade confusion and colour depletion, and highlights landmark cases like Libertel Groep BV v Benelux-Merkenbureau and Société des Produits Nestlé SA v Cadbury UK Ltd, which shaped the application of these rules. Through a cross-disciplinary analysis, it addresses the complexities of balancing brand identity with fair competition, illustrating how European courts manage the tension between protecting intellectual property and preventing monopolistic practices in the marketplace. This discussion is framed within the broader context of European Union and UK trademark law, offering insights into the future of colour trademarks and the evolving standards of distinctiveness and non-functionality in intellectual property.

Timing, Challenges, and Dilemmas: A Critical Analysis of Regulating Artificial Intelligence

In this summative assessment, I delve into the complexities and validity of the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation's (ITIF) statement on the regulation of artificial intelligence (AI). The ITIF argues that lawmakers should delay AI regulation until there is a deeper understanding of the technology, warning of potential risks from premature legislation. Through a critical examination, I assess whether it is indeed "too early" to regulate AI, given the uncertainties surrounding emerging technologies. This exploration considers key regulatory theories, such as the Collingridge Dilemma and the pacing problem, which highlight the dual challenges of insufficient information at early stages and difficulty in controlling technology once it is deeply integrated. Additionally, I analyze various factors regulators should account for when deciding on the timing and approach to legislation, including ex-ante issues like AI’s opacity, risks of algorithmic bias, and information asymmetry between tech developers and policymakers. The paper also explores recent regulatory models, like the EU’s AI Act, which aim to preemptively address AI risks. Ultimately, this assessment advocates for a balanced regulatory approach that adapts to AI’s evolving landscape, ensuring that the benefits of innovation are harnessed while safeguarding societal interests.

Navigating Liability and Safety in Autonomous Vehicle Law: An Analysis of the UK's Automated and Electric Vehicles Act 2018

In this summative assessment I critically examines the UK's Automated and Electric Vehicles Act 2018, a pioneering legal framework aimed at governing the use and liability of autonomous vehicles. With rapid technological advancements in autonomous driving, questions surrounding liability, road safety, and regulatory adequacy have become increasingly pertinent. The Act seeks to shift liability from drivers to manufacturers and insurers, establishing a unique liability framework that addresses the complexities of automated driving. However, this analysis identifies key limitations, such as the Act’s narrow definition of "automated vehicle," potential loopholes in semi-autonomous scenarios, and challenges in enforcing product liability. Additionally, the absence of specific provisions for data privacy, cybersecurity, and driver training raises further questions about comprehensive safety on the roads. By exploring these issues, this document offers insights into the future of autonomous vehicle legislation, advocating for a balanced regulatory approach that fosters innovation while prioritizing public safety and accountability.