In a digitalised environment under conditions of reduced limits and boundaries between physical and virtual worlds, people’s daily activities increasingly migrate to cyberspace. For this reason, legal issues relating to encryption, deciphering and codebreaking become increasingly topical. Due to the increased vulnerability of a wide range of people to exploitation, digitalisation implies an urgent need to develop measures for preserving privacy in digital life. Increasing vulnerabilities experienced in the social environment due to the Internet and network interactions can be attributed to the erasure of boundaries between people, which is facilitated by access to their data. In terms of providing general protection to online users, digital contracts, routine bank transfers and communications serve as an example. Cryptography, which allows the encoding of a message in an unintelligible format for those who do not have the appropriate key, represents one of the safest techniques for securely transmitting information online. In order to examine the relations between law and cryptology, the present work analyses Brazilian legal acts governing cryptography. Here, as well as defining cryptography, the main objective is to determine its main aspects and key features in order to examine the main legal issues and pecularities of legal regulation. It concludes that cryptography, as a mean to protect privacy on the Internet, does not exclude the necessity of law, but, on the contrary, legal regulation is essential to provide legal certainty to the cryptographic techniques.

The paper analyzes the limits of product liability of the marketplace for the actions of sellers (performers) in both countries. Research objectives are to identify the main trends in regulating the business of marketplace owners and prepare proposals for amendments to Russian legislation in view of the foreign experience. The relevance of the study is due to the global trend to expand the limits of liability of digital platforms, as evidenced by individual legislative initiatives in recent years, as well as doctrinal studies and discussions in the media. The paper consistently analyzes the special provisions of Russian legislation on consumer protection, which determine the legal status of the owners of marketplaces. Then it reviews the most significant legal disputes in Russia and the USA reflecting the main trends in the field of defining the limits of liability of the owner of the marketplace as an intermediary and directly the seller (performer). Besides, the author identifies and substantiates the main enforcement problems of the responsibility of owners of aggregators in Russia and in the USA. In particular, the author describes the controversial decisions of Russian courts regarding the legal status of the «owner of the aggregator» in the same legal entity. The courts’ formalistic approach based on the literal content of the marketplace owner’s agreements with users is also mentioned. Finally, it is concluded that it would be fair to consolidate the subsidiary liability of the «owners of aggregators» at the legislative level. 

Threats posed to human rights by the rapid development of artificial intelligence (AI) are considered, along with some potential legal mitigations. The active efforts of the EU in the field of AI regulation seem particularly relevant for research considering its approach centred on citizens’ rights. Thus, the present study aims to describe the key features of the EU approach to regulating AI in the context of human rights protection, as well as identifying both its achievements and deficiencies, and proposing improvements to existing provisions. The presented analysis of the proposed AI Act pays special attention to provisions that set out to eliminate or mitigate the main risks and dangers of AI. The currently intensive development of AI regulation in the EU (the Presidency Compromise Text presented by the Council of the EU, amendments of the European Committee of the Regions, opinions of interested parties and human rights organisations, etc.) makes this study especially timely due to its highlighting of problematic aspects. The analysis shows that, on closer examination, the proposed law leaves many sensitive and controversial issues unsettled. In the context of AI applications, the proposed solution is considered as an emergency measure in order to rapidly integrate purportedly trustworthy AI into human society. As a result of the analysis, the authors propose potential improvements to the AI Act, including the possibility to update the lists of all types of AI, clarify the concept of transparency and eliminate the self-assessment procedure. It is also necessary to consider the potential reclassification of some AI systems currently defined as presenting limited risk as systems presenting considerable risk or prohibited systems. 

The article attempts to evaluate the possibilities of using blockchain and smart contract technologies, as well as big data and artificial intelligence technologies in traditional commercial contracts. In addition, the author illustrates the legal risks of using information technologies and the limits of their implementation in the field of contract law. The goal chosen by the author predetermined the use of the formal legal method in the analysis of the current legal norms. At the same time, it is impossible to imagine the search for answers to the questions without referring to the comparative legal method: in the article, the author refers to the views of English and American scholars when considering the problems of using artificial intelligence technology in commercial contracts.

As a result of the research, the author comes to the conclusion that firstly smart contracts designed for automatic transactions on the Internet do not allow moving real goods in the real world, therefore the scope of their use is only limited to the conclusion, but not to the execution of contracts of sale. Secondly, a smart contract can completely supplant traditional contracts and obligations in mediation contracts aimed at performing only legal actions. Thirdly, there is a problem of ensuring the right to privacy when using big data, therefore, the commercial use of the collected data, though does improve sales, violates basic human rights. And finally, the mastered capabilities for automating the processes of selecting counterparties, determining and changing storage conditions, tracking the balance of goods in the warehouse, etc., allow author to discuss the potentially great possibilities of using AI in commerce. 

This paper provides comprehensive analysis of the evolution of approaches to antimonopoly regulation of digital market participants, the so-called “digital platforms”. So far business practices of digital platforms and their compliance with the antitrust rules have been widely studied by both the watchdogs of various countries and the expert community. However, a few years ago the research into these issues was not that thorough neither in science nor in practice Today, with sufficient experience on regulation of digital markets, legal acts are being drawn up in various jurisdictions that cover approaches to assessing the market position of digital platforms, as well as acceptable and unacceptable practices. Besides, specific control mechanisms are being designed to deter antitrust violations in digital markets. At the same time, digital technologies are evolving too fast. This will inevitably pose new challenges to regulators and science. New digital services, business models and options for expanding markets, for example, by developing ecosystem products, will appear. The paper presents analysis of the main stages in the development of antimonopoly regulation of digital markets: from the first antitrust cases against IT-companies to creation of special regulatory and control mechanisms of digital platforms. Furthermore, potential development of digital markets and their antitrust regulation both in Russia and abroad is considered. The paper offers review of legal acts and regulatory initiatives in the area of digital markets in different regions worldwide and refers to the key antitrust cases that have affected the regulatory approaches.