First Published in 1999. Routledge is an imprint of Taylor & Francis, an informa company.

This article contributes to the analysis of refusal to license cases as abuse of a dominant position pursuant Article 82 EC from an economic perspective. In the Microsoft case, the European Commission introduced an "Incentives Balance Test" to assess whether the refusal to give access to interface information can be justified by arguing that this information is protected by Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs): The Commission argued that if the overall innovative effects evoked by a compulsory license are significantly higher than (...) without this access, the IPR owner is obliged to license. This should be assessed through balancing the different incentives to innovate between the dominant firm and its competitors. In the paper we pursue two objectives: Firstly, we analyze to what extent the decision of the Court of First Instance, which confirmed the decision of the Commission, helps to clarify the criteria in refusal to license cases; in fact, it is disappointing in this regard. Secondly, we demonstrate that the basic idea of the Incentives Balance Test can be interpreted as a test whether the specific IPRs of the dominant firm can be defended from the perspective of the economics of IPRs. This implies that Article 82 allows competition law to correct economically not optimal IPRs through a specific economic analysis. This is followed by a broad overview on theoretical and empirical insights from economics of IPRs, innovation economics and competition and network economics that can help to develop a more general and sophisticated Innovation Effects Test that can be applied in Article 82 refusal to license cases. (shrink)

Michel de Montaigne trug über Jahrzehnte in den historischen Kalender "Ephemeris historica" (Paris 1551) des protestantischen Gelehrten Michael Beuther handschriftliche Notizen ein. Der Kalender ist Teil der im 16. Jahrhundert florierenden Praxis der reformatorischen Memorialkultur, zu deren bedeutenden Vertretern Philipp Melanchthon und Paul Eber gehören. Solche Jahresverzeichnisse waren immer nach dem gleichen Prinzip angelegt: Der Benutzer der "Ephemeris historica" fand in der Regel auf jeder Seite des Kalenders für diesen Tag erinnerungswürdige biblische oder historische Ereignisse im Druck aufgeführt, der frei (...) gebliebene Raum lud zum Einfügen eigener Beobachtungen ein. Die in dieser Weise als Merkbüchlein verwendete "Ephemeris" mutierte so unter medialen Gesichtspunkten zu einem Mischtext zwischen Druck und Handschrift. Indem Montaigne Lebenswendepunkte aus dem privaten Umfeld und politische Geschehnisse von grosser Bedeutung notiert, wird der Kalender zu einem faszinierenden Gedächtnis-Reservoir, mit den Worten Montaignes: zu einem "magasin de la memoire. (shrink)

Millionenjahrhaus: Zur Konzeption des Raumes der Ewigkeit im konstellativen Königtum in Sprache, Architektur und Theologie. By Stefanie Schröder. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag, 2010. Pp. 396, plates. €84.

Through the work of philosophers like Sellars, Davidson and McDowell, the question of how the mind is related to the world has gained new importance in contemporary analytic philosophy. This book demonstrates that Husserl's phenomenological analyses of the structure of consciousness can provide fruitful insights for developing an original approach to these questions.

We are concerned with modal logics in the class EM0 of extensions of M0 . G denotes re exive frames. MG the modal logic on G in the sense of Kripke. M is nite if M = MG for some nite G. Finite G's will be drawn as framed diagrams, e.g. G = ! ; G = ! ; the latter shorter denoted by . EM0 is a complete lattice with zero M0 and one M . If M M0 M0 (...) is a succ of M. An ip of M is an immediate predecessor of M. E.g. M ! and M are the only ip's of M in ES4. M[P] denotes the extension of M adding P as a \new axiom", e.g. S4 = M0 [p ! p]. M is nitely axiomatizable if M = M0 [P] for some formula P. One easily shows if M is f.a. then each predecessor is separated from M by an ip of M. It is known that each nite M is f.a. and has only nitely many succ's all of which are nite. (shrink)

"Ratgeber für das tägliche Leben, Lebenshilfe-Breviere, Literatur zum Zeitmanagement erlebt im Moment eine große Konjunktur. Psychologen, Theologen und Philosophen, aber auch Manager und ehemalige Mönche kümmern sich um dieses Themenfeld. Solche alltagsethische Orientierungsliteratur versucht, die gegenwärtige starke Nachfrage zu bedienen und gleichzeitig alte Traditionen aus der Philosophie der Antike, aus der Theologie der Kirchenväter und des Klosterlebens sowie aus der Alltagspsychologie aufzunehmen. Dieses Phänomen bedarf der theologischen Analyse aus Perspektiven der Sozialethik, der praktischen wie der systematischen Theologie. Es ergeben sich (...) Fragen nach dem Verständnis von Alltag, nach einer zeitgemäßen modernen Spiritualität. Im vorliegenden Band werden aktuelle alltagsethische Entwürfe analysiert; in einem zweiten Schritt werden konstruktive theologische Perspektiven entwickelt.". (shrink)

Elaborating on the substantial parallels between Molina’s and Kant’s attempts to reconcile human freedom with divine foreknowledge and natural causal determinism respectively, my aim is to establish a proper historical connection as well. Leibniz is shown to be the crucial mediator in two respects: (i) Kant knew Molina’s account of divine knowledge in general in its Leibnizian version through Baumgarten’s Metaphysica. In this work, scientia media plays no role in the explication as to how God knows absolute future contingents. (ii) (...) In the Critique of Practical Reason Kant resorted to doctrines similar to Molina’s in his criticism of Leibniz’s alternative explication which drew on complete concepts of monads. (shrink)

Buridan endorsed the principles that any impossible, and a fortiori any self-contradictory, proposition entails each proposition. These principles are usually referred to as ‘Ex impossibili quodlibet’ (EIQ) and ‘Ex contradictione quodlibet’ (ECQ). Buridan further considered the instance ECCQ according to which any proposition follows from the conjunction of two contradictory propositions. Buridan showed how ECCQ can be proven by means the usual laws of conjunction and disjunction. Furthermore, he discovered that EIQ can be derived from ECCQ by means of the (...) principle that if a conclusion q follows from two premises, one of which is necessary, then q follows from the other premise alone. Buridan thought that this principle would be provable; but his proof turned out to be circular since it presupposed EIQ. Nevertheless, EIQ is validated by the definition of a ‘bona consequentia’. Somewhat more exactly, according to Buridan one may distinguish between inferences which are formally valid, ‘materially’ valid, and valid ‘as of now’. It is shown that formally valid inferences satisfy ECQ while ‘materially’ valid inferences satisfy EIQ. Furthermore, inferences which are valid ‘as of now’ satisfy the principle ‘Ex falso quodlibet’ saying that any false proposition ‘as of now’ entails every proposition. (shrink)

This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be (...) preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. To ensure a quality reading experience, this work has been proofread and republished using a format that seamlessly blends the original graphical elements with text in an easy-to-read typeface. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant. (shrink)

Research Integrity (RI) is high on the agenda of both institutions and science policy. The European Union as well as national ministries of science have launched ambitious initiatives to combat misconduct and breaches of research integrity. Often, such initiatives entail attempts to regulate scientific behavior through guidelines that institutions and academic communities can use to more easily identify and deal with cases of misconduct. Rather than framing misconduct as a result of an information deficit, we instead conceptualize Questionable Research Practices (...) (QRPs) as attempts by researchers to reconcile epistemic and social forms of uncertainty in knowledge production. Drawing on previous literature, we define epistemic uncertainty as the inherent intellectual unpredictability of scientific inquiry, while social uncertainty arises from the human-made conditions for scientific work. Our core argument—developed on the basis of 30 focus group interviews with researchers across different fields and European countries—is that breaches of research integrity can be understood as attempts to loosen overly tight coupling between the two forms of uncertainty. Our analytical approach is not meant to relativize or excuse misconduct, but rather to offer a more fine-grained perspective on what exactly it is that researchers want to accomplish by engaging in it. Based on the analysis, we conclude by proposing some concrete ways in which institutions and academic communities could try to reconcile epistemic and social uncertainties on a more collective level, thereby reducing incentives for researchers to engage in misconduct. (shrink)

In 1932, Wolfgang Pauli was a world-renowned physicist and had already done the work that would win him the 1945 Nobel Prize. He was also in pain. His mother had poisoned herself after his father's involvement in an affair. Emerging from a brief marriage with a cabaret performer, Pauli drank heavily, quarreled frequently and sometimes publicly, and was disturbed by powerful dreams. He turned for help to C. G. Jung, setting a standing appointment for Mondays at noon. Thus bloomed (...) an extraordinary intellectual conjunction not just between a physicist and a psychologist but between physics and psychology. Eighty letters, written over twenty-six years, record that friendship. This artful translation presents them in English for the first time. Though Jung never analyzed Pauli formally, he interpreted more than 400 of his dreams--work that bore fruit later in Psychology and Alchemy and The Analysis of Dreams. As their acquaintance developed, Jung and Pauli exchanged views on the content of their work and the ideas of the day. They discussed the nature of dreams and their relation to reality, finding surprising common ground between depth psychology and quantum physics. Their collaboration resulted in the combined publication of Jung's treatise on synchronicity and Pauli's essay on archetypal ideas influencing Kepler's writings in The Interpretation of Nature and the Psyche. Over time, their correspondence shaped and reshaped their understanding of the principle they called synchronicity, a term Jung had suggested earlier. Through the association of these two pioneering thinkers, developments in physics profoundly influenced the evolution of Jungian psychology. And many of Jung's abiding themes shaped how Pauli--and, through him, other physicists--understood the physical world. Of clear appeal to historians of science and anyone investigating the life and work of Pauli or Jung, this portrait of an incredible friendship will also draw readers interested in human creativity as well as those who merely like to be present when great minds meet. (shrink)