Satellites are increasingly used for remote sensing, aiding in disaster management, however they also raise privacy concerns. Despite the existence of international instruments such as the Outer Space Treaty, Principles Relating to Remote Sensing of the Earth from Outer Space and International Charter Space and Major Disasters, there are no specific rules addressing satellite misuse leading to privacy breaches during natural disasters. This article ex- amines the existing legal frameworks for satellite regulation and privacy in Australia and Indonesia, two disaster- prone countries, with the aim of determining their adequacy for addressing privacy concerns arising from satellite use during natural disasters. By conducting a comparative analysis of both legal frameworks vis-à-vis relevant international law, this article highlights the gaps that affect their applicability and effectiveness. It finds that inter- national rules on the use of satellites for remote sensing activities generally lack binding force, and do not address the issue of privacy breaches resulting from satellite misuse. Both countries also lack specific legal frameworks addressing privacy breaches caused by satellite misuse during disasters. It recommends that in the absence of unequivocal and specific provisions under international law, both countries could review and rely on their national legal frameworks to address potential privacy issues due to advancing remote sensing capabilities. The provision of Article VI of the Outer Space Treaty requires states to authorise and ensure continued supervision of activities of non-governmental entities in outer space. This provision could be relied on to impose, through the instrumentality of domestic laws, restrictions, or conditions on space activities, including privacy provisions. Existing space legislation requiring liability insurance could also be extended to include privacy provisions.

This paper analyzes the form of transactions made with the use of electronic and other technical means (electronic form). The research aims to determine the essential features and develop an optimal model of regulation of electronic transactions form, considering foreign experience, theoretical advances, and judicial practice. The relevance of the study is explained by the increasing number of e-transactions which require adequate legal regulation and law enforcement practice. The author consecutively describes internationally recognized regulatory principles of electronic transactions form (non-discrimination, technological neutrality, functional equivalence) and their implementation in Russian and foreign law. In addition, the author analyzes the issue of the correlation between the written and electronic forms, considers and rejects arguments in favor of singling out electronic methods of will formation as an independent (sui generis) form of transactions. Considering the current Russian judicial practice and foreign experience, the study determines the criteria and methods of reliable determination of a person effecting an electronic transaction. On the grounds of dogmatic and political arguments, the overly formalistic idea that the use of a qualified electronic signature is the only way of such identification is rejected. The author also formulates an optimal interpretation of the Russian Civil Code requirement on the reproducibility of the electronic transaction content on a tangible medium unchanged. Based on the results of the study, practical recommendations are described to help judges make fair and reasoned decisions in specific situations interpreting the provisions of the Russian Civil Code on the electronic form of transactions.

The rapid development of biotechnologies requires taking comprehensive steps to actualise and consolidate actions. In order to introduce new technologies into life in the most rapid and appropriate way, it is imperative to establish mechanisms and instruments that meet contemporary challenges. This article presents an overview of institutional innovations of the European Union, which create favourable conditions, including for the protection of research results in the field of biotechnology. At the same time, this paper highlights new risks arising from the “information hunt” implicitly announced in the field of biotechnology. Particular attention is paid to the efforts to cooperate and harmonise approaches to the protection of intellectual rights in the biotechnology realm by the European Union and the European Patent Organisation. For the purposes of this article, one of the key factors in considering the new European Unitary Patent System through a biotechnologies perspective is the fact that the acts governing the activity contain distinctive provisions that are specific to biotechnologies. The latter manifests both in the acts introducing the System and in the current format of the Unitary Patent Court. The article states that the EU is endeavouring to provide the new institution with digital tools. Such tools are provided both at the stage of familiarising oneself with the rules and procedures of the Unified Patent Court and for performing key actions when dealing directly with a European unitary patent. However, the digitalisation of some procedures entails certain risks, primarily related to data security (e.g., sensitive development data or personal data of people involved in biotechnological developments may be made public). Once biotechnology development data are lost, there are serious consequences, both financial and scientific. In this regard, the article points out what protection formats are currently proposed and indicates that there is a need to further develop this field.