English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The movement of goods illegal and counterfeit in the circuit of the economy and the labor market, has put in place of criminal policy internal supranational and a primary need of confiscation and destruction in relation to safety issues transnational linked to all forms of counterfeiting, piracy agro-food to fraud in industrial brands of high fashion et similia: from here the major node of the procedure of destruction of goods illegal and counterfeit subject to seizure and confiscation and respect of guarantees communities of the criminal process, especially in the light of the amendment of art. 260, co. 3 bis and ter, c.p.p. with the d.l. 23-5-2008, n. 92 and subsequent amendments (so-called Safety Package). In line with the criminal policy of ''security'', in l. 23-7-2009, n. 99, the so-called Decree Development, between the ''darrangements for the development and the internationalization of enterprises, as well as in the field of energy'' and  wanted to redesign, with analytical provisions of particular edge, the perimeter of the criminal-law protection ''Dei property rights industrial'' through the introduction of four new hypothesis of offenses of counterfeiting (artt. 473, 474, 474 b and c, 517 b and c, c.p.) and related hypothesis of obligatory confiscation (art. 474 bis and 517 ter c.p.), with implications concerning the regime differentiated penitentiary (art. 4 bis, co. 1 ter, ord. penit.) in relation to the cases of belonging to criminal association aimed to commit new offenses referred to in articles 473-474 c.p. (arts. 416 bis, 6o Co., c.p. and 51, co. 3 bis, c.p.p.), as well as the regulatory body containing the so-called ''responsability of administrative entities'', within the meaning of art. 19, d.lg. 8-6-2001, n. 231.

Destruction of illegal things and devices to contrast the counterfeiting