© 2025 SURF
MULTIFILE
MULTIFILE
Copyright enforcement by private third parties – does it work uniformly across the EU? Since the inception of Napster, home copying of digital files has taken a flight. The first providers of software or infrastructure for the illegal exchange of files were held contributory or vicariously liable for copyright infringement. In response, they quickly diluted the chain of liability to such an extent that neither the software producers, nor the service providers could be held liable. Moving further down the communication chain, the rights holders are now requiring Internet Service Providers (ISPs) that provide access to end customers to help them with the enforcement of their rights. This article discusses case-law regarding the enforcement of copyright by Internet Access Providers throughout Europe. At first glance, copyright enforcement has been harmonised by means of a number of directives, and article 8(3) of the Copyright Directive (2001/29/EC) regulates that EU Member States must ensure the position of rights holders with regard to injunctions against ISPs. Problem solved? Case law from Denmark, Ireland, Belgium, Norway, England, The Netherlands, Austria and the Court of Justice of the EU was studied. In addition, the legal practice in Germany was examined. The period of time covered by case law is from 2003 to 2013, the case law gives insight into the differences that still exist after the implementation of the directive.
Regular physical activity is regarded as an important component of a healthy lifestyle, decreasing the risk of many non-communicable diseases, mental health issues and increasing functioning and quality of life in older adults. Despite these benefits, a substantial segment of the older adult population remains sedentary or insufficiently physically active. In the Netherlands, depending of the definition and measurementmethod used, approximately 40–80% of Dutch adults aged 55 years and older can be considered physically inactive which matches data from other Western countries. For this reason, the GALM was developed. Aim of GALM was stimulating leisure-time physical activity in sedentary and underactive older adults aged 55–65 years. GALM is a community-based approach and distinguishes itself from other community-based strategies by way of the neighborhood-oriented recruitment phase and the versatile recreational sports activity program which is based on behavioral change and evolutionary-biological play theories. Since 1997, over 1.1 million older adults have been approached door-to-door, over 150.000 participated in the fitness test and over 100.000 participated in the GALM program. In this presentation, the theoretical background and short and long-term effects of participation in the GALM project on indicators of health and fitness will be presented.
The closing of schools and sports clubs during theCOVID-19 lockdown raised questions about thepossible impact on children’s motor skilldevelopment. Therefore we compared motorcompetence development over a one-year periodamong four different cohorts of primary schoolchildren. A total of 992 children from 9 primaryschools participated in this study (age 5 – 7; 47,5%boys) and were assessed two times, in grade 3 (T1)and in grade 4 (T2). Children in control group 1 and lockdown group 1 were assessed a third time aftertwo years (T3). Motor competence was measuredusing the 4-Skills Test. The mixed factorial ANOVAwith post hoc tests shows no significant differencesin motor development over the study period betweenthe lockdown groups and control groups (p > 0.05),but does show a difference between the twolockdown groups from T1 to T2 (p = 0.008). Whilesocioeconomic status (SES) was a modifier, sex andmotor ability did not modify the effects of thelockdowns. Our data show that the COVID-19lockdowns in the Netherlands did not generallyaffect motor development of young children. Incontrast, many studies have confirmed clear effectsof the pandemic lockdowns on physicalactivity1,2,3. Our study highlights the complexity ofboth motor skill development and the factors relatedto the pandemic lockdowns. We therefore suggestthat children’s motor skill development should beclosely monitored in the upcoming years.Specifically, we should pay attention to individualdifferences since it is still possible that certainchildren are impacted by the pandemic lockdowns.Moreover, long-term effects might emerge in thefuture.References1. de Sá, C. dos S. C., Pombo, A., Luz, C.,Rodrigues, L. P., & Cordovil, R. (2021). Covid-19social isolation in brazil: effects on the physicalactivity routine of families with children. RevistaPaulista de Pediatria, 39, e2020159.2. Hurter, L., McNarry, M., Stratton, G., &Mackintosh, K. (2022). Back to school afterlockdown: The effect of COVID-19 restrictions onchildren’s device-based physical activity metrics.Journal of Sport and Health Science, 11(4), 530–536.3. Moore, S. A., Faulkner, G., Rhodes, R. E.,Brussoni, M., Chulak-Bozzer, T., Ferguson, L. J.,Mitra, R., O’Reilly, N., Spence, J. C., Vanderloo, L.M., & Tremblay, M. S. (2020). Impact of theCOVID-19 virus outbreak on movement and playbehaviours of Canadian children and youth: Anational survey. International Journal of BehavioralNutrition and Physical Activity, 17(1), 85.
This article takes the 3rd Global Survey Report of the International Association of Universities (IAU) as a starting point. The results of this worldwide survey were published in September 2010. The article discusses four questions from the survey that include internationalisation at Home (IaH) and internationalisation of the curriculum as response items. outcomes of these four questions are commented on and, where relevant and possible, compared to the results of the previous survey, which was conducted in 2005 and published in 2006. It is argued that the sections of the Global Survey that mention internationalisation of the curriculum and IaH use terminology that is not always adequate for the purpose and at times even seems contradictory. The Global Survey includes a question on internal obstacles to internationalisation, which will also be discussed here. These obstacles include the lack of engagement and limited expertise of academic staff in relation to the internationalisation process. The response items for this question do not connect these obstacles to internationalisation of the curriculum explicitly, but it is argued here that a relationship indeed exists. The same is true for issues around foreign language proficiency, which may have a strong impact on internationalisation of the home curriculum. In the conclusion, several additional questions are raised that could serve to get a clearer picture of the development of internationalisation of the curriculum in a global perspective.
MULTIFILE
