Digitisation is changing not only our society but also markets, strategies and business models, which has increased competition in many markets. At the same time, large companies with a digital business model, such as Amazon, in particular, are experiencing a rapid rise, which has triggered a debate about fair competitive conditions. However, it is not only the company’s significant market power that is a cause for concern. The increasing vertical integration of platform operators such as Amazon, which makes them direct competitors of their own platform users, also raises competition law issues. Against this backdrop, it is the aim of this article to analyse Amazon’s business model in more detail from a competition law perspective. The analysis aims to identify which parts of the company’s business model and the resulting strategies may be seen as problematic under competition law.

This article explores the possibility of replacing the traditional administrative supervision over the gig industry in favour of regulatory instruments rooted in economy. While regulation in this sense is not uncommon in the Enlish-speaking countries, even outside infrastructural sectors, in continental Europe, administrative supervision of business still prevails. The current approach of states, including administration, legislative authorities and courts, towards the gig economy can be attributed to the misconception expressed in the EU and national court decisions presuming that companies such as Uber, offering an electronic platform, form one entity with thousands of businesses performing services such as Uber drivers. This paper asserts that regulatory authorities with their powers of correcting the anomalies of the market, are better suited for platform-based services. States should use their powers to liberalise doing business, rather than restrict new, inventive forms of business to the detriment of the customers.

“You can get lost when standing still too.” These words of Edward Stachura are a metaphor of the main proposition of the paper. It aims to suggest a way to “set the ball rolling” by designing the paths of education for lawyers anew, with civil society in mind, and not just thinking of the requirements of legal training. Lawyers with knowledge in the field of information technology, interdisciplinary lawyers for business, lawyers-guardians of the rule of law and justice all need study programmes to take their predispositions, goals, skills, and abilities – all at different levels – into account. The purpose of the article is to shed light on the extra-legal barriers hindering the taking of a practical step ahead. The author shows three main ways of educating lawyers and explains why they are so important and why they call for changes in study programmes. Next, the author points to the obstacles faced by reformers and suggests exploring their actual impact on education in law and the level thereof.

Jerzy Stelmach, Sztuka manipulacji, Warszawa 2018

Celem niniejszego artykułu jest analiza ustawy Prawo przedsiębiorców w zakresie regulacji wprowadzającej możliwość wykonywania działalności gospodarczej bez obowiązku jej uprzedniej rejestracji. Poniższe rozważania zawierają krytyczną analizę potencjalnych skutków przepisów wprowadzonych w ramach Konstytucji Biznesu, które to regulacje przewidują możliwość wykonywania działalności o wszystkich cechach działalności gospodarczej, bez konieczności uzyskania wpisu w rejestrze.

AAktualne programy studiów prawniczych w Polsce mają wciąż charakter „analogowy”, nauczyciele akademiccy w dużej części są nadal „analogowi”, a studenci i aplikanci zamieszkują inny świat: to „digitalni (cyfrowi) tubylcy”, inaczej mówiąc to homo zappiens, czyli „nieustannie klikający”. Z drugiej strony programy są przesycone prawie wyłącznie dogmatyką prawa, a rynek potrzebuje absolwentów prawa do gospodarki, także z wiedzą o zasadach działania rynku, biznesu i przedsiębiorstw, w tym ze specjalnymi miękkimi kompetencjami, zupełnie innymi niż wymagane są od wieków w sądach. Autorka przedstawia argumenty na rzecz koniecznej reformy studiów prawniczych w związku z powyższymi zjawiskami.