Digital inheritance

THE JOSIP JURAJ STROSSMAYER UNIVERSITY OF OSIJEK FACULTY OF ECONOMICS IN OSIJEK - CROATIA HOCHSCHULE PFORZHEIM UNIVERSITY _____________________________________________________________ INTERDISCIPLINARY MANAGEMENT RESEARCH XIV INTERDISZIPLINÄRE MANAGEMENTFORSCHUNG XIV

Under the auspices of the President of the Republic of Croatia

Opatija, 2018

Published by: Josip Juraj Strossmayer University of Osijek, Faculty of Economics in Osijek Croatia, Postgraduate Doctoral Study Program in Management Hochschule Pforzheim University Croatian Academy of Sciences and Arts For the Publisher: Thomas Cleff, Ph.D., Dean, Germany Boris Crnković, Ph.D., Dean, Croatia Editors: Dražen Barković, Ph.D., Faculty of Economics in Osijek, Boris Crnković, Ph.D., Faculty of Economics in Osijek, Karl – Heinz Dernoscheg, Ph.D., International Business School Styria, Austria, Norbert Pap, Ph.D., University of Pecs, Hungary, Bodo Runzheimer, Ph.D., Pforzheim University, Business School, Germany, Dirk Wentzel, Ph.D., Hochschule Pforzheim University, Germany Technical editor: Jerko Glavaš, Ph.D., Editor, Faculty of Economics in Osijek, Croatia Aleksandar Erceg, Ph.D., Editor, Faculty of Economics in Osijek, Croatia Design: Krešimir Rezo, graf.ing. Krešendo, Osijek Print:

Studio HS internet d.o.o. Osijek

ISSN 1847-0408 Previous proceedings are indexed in: Web of Science, EBSCOhost, RePEc, EconPapers, Socionet

Program Committee: Željko Turkalj, Ph.D., Faculty of Economics in Osijek, chair academician Vlasta Piližota, academician Brano Markić, Zoran Jašić, Ph.D., Former Ambassador of the Republic of Croatia to the Republic of Austria, Gordana Deranja, Croatian Employers’ Association, Luka Burilović, Croatian Chamber of Economy, Ljubo Jurčić, Ph.D., Croatian Economic Association, Mladen Vedriš, Ph.D., Faculty of Law, University of Zagreb Ivan Miloloža, Ph.D., Faculty of dental medicine and health, Vedrana Jelušić Kašić, EBRD Thomas Cleff, Ph.D., Pforzheim University, Germany Organizational Committee: Jerko Glavaš, Ph.D., Chair Ivana Barković Bojanić, Ph.D., deputy chair Antun Biloš, Ph.D. Davorin Turkalj, Ph.D. Martina Briš Alić, Ph.D. Nataša Drvenkar, Ph.D. Ivan Kristek, Ph.D. Aleksandar Erceg, Ph.D. Ivan Kelić, Ph.D. Martina Harc, Ph.D. Jelena Legčević, Ph.D. Katica Križanović, univ.spec.oec. Tin Horvatin, mag.oec. Jelena Franjković, Ph.D. student Dina Liović, Ph.D. student Ana Pap, Ph.D. student Ana Trusić, Ph.D. student Ivana Unukić, Ph.D. student Zvonimir Savić, Croatian Chamber of Economy

CONTENTS

.

.

VORWORT .......................................................................................................................... XV FOREWORD....................................................................................................................... XVI Management

.

Dino Bruža and Andreja Rudančić INFLUENCE OF INFORMATION-COMMUNICATION TRENDS ON BUSINESS COMMUNICATION IN HOTEL INDUSTRY.................................3

.

Nemanja Milanović, Lena Đorđević and Nela Milošević IMPLEMENTING SPREADSHEETS IN MANAGEMENT ACCOUNTING COURSE: AN EXAMPLE OF BUDGETING AND SCENARIO ANALYSIS ... 23

.

Željka Kadlec, Josip Hetrih and Mladena Bedeković ATTRACTING INVESTMENTS IN THE ENTREPRENEURIAL ZONES OF SMALL TOWNS BY CREATING PRECONDITIONS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF SMALL AND MEDIUM ENTERPRISES ..............................44

.

Zlatko Barilović EMPLOYER PERCEPTION OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF PROJECT COMPETENCIES IN PROJECT MANAGEMENT GRADUATES ........................64

.

Ivana Šandrk Nukić and Blanka Gigić Karl IMPORTANCE OF STRATEGIC PLANNING IN CULTURE: THE CASE OF MUSICAL EVENTS .................................................................................80

.

Kristina Brščić, Tina Šugar and Drago Ružić TOURISTS’ PERCEPTIONS OF DESTINATION – EMPIRICAL STUDY OF DESTINATION POREČ ...............................................................................................97

.

Igor Pureta and Tanja Pureta THE ROLEs OF LEADERSHIP STYLES AND ENTREPRENEURIAL ORIENTATION IN DISTINGUISHING MORE FROM LESS UCCESSFUL ORGANIZATIONS .................................................................................. 112

.

Branimir Dukić, Goranka Majić and Stojanka Dukić STRUCTURAL MODEL OF THE FORMS OF BUSINESS ORGANIZATION IN THE REPUBLIC OF CROATIA ......................................... 131

.

Aleksandar Erceg and Vice Gulam IMPORTANCE OF ALIGNMENT OF ORGANIZATION’S STRATEGY AND PROJECT MANAGEMENT ................................................................................ 155

.

Martina Briš Alić, Martina Harc and Dino Vida PATIENT’S WILLINGNESS TO CO-FINANCE HIGHER LEVELS OF HEALTHCARE ........................................................................................... 172

.

Dijana Kozina, Vedrana Vukadinović and Marko Tadić THE IMPORTANCE OF MANAGEMENT AND COST ESTIMATION IN MANAGERIAL DECISION MAKING ..................................... 184

V

Dina Đelmo Smajlović AN ANALYSIS OF THE STATE OF ATTITUDES OF THE LOCAL COMMUNITY TOWARDS TOURISM DEVELOPMENT IN THE CITY OF RIJEKA................................................................................................. 208 .

Dejan Balić, Kristijan Šimičić and Vinko Samardžić STRATEGIC POTENTIAL OF THE OSIJEK ZOO FOR CONTINENTAL TOURISM OF THE REPUBLIC OF CROATIA .......................................................... 228 .

Nataša Rupčić and Domagoj Švegar DETERMINANTS OF CONFLICT MANAGEMENT BEHAVIOR: DOES THE CHOICE OF MAJOR AND STUDY PROGRESS PLAY A ROLE? ...................................................................................................................... 244 .

Emina Bačevina, Zrinka Malešević and Domagoj Pavić EUROPEAN SOCIAL FUND IN THE REPUBLIC OF CROATIA, GOOD GOVERNANCE - RESULTS ACHIEVED AND PLANS AHEAD ........ 264 .

Ante Orlović POLICE MANAGEMENT– POLICE OFFICERS’ PERCEPTION OF THE STATUS (QUALITATIVE LEVEL) OF FUNDAMENTAL FUNCTIONS OF MANAGEMENT IN THE POLICE ORGANIZATION .......................................... 286 .

Waldemar Osmólski, Adam Koliński and Davor Dujak METHODOLOGY OF IMPLEMENTING E-FREIGHT SOLUTIONS IN TERMS OF INFORMATION FLOW EFFICIENCY ........................................... 306 .

Ivana Nobilo, Ivan Herak and Dejan Laninović THE MARKETING ORGANISATIONAL STRUCTURES TOWARDS THINK-FEEL-DO MODEL ............................................................................................. 326

INTERDISCIPLINARY MANAGEMENT RESEARCH XIV

.

Bahtijar Berisha and Ivan Kristek THE DEMAND FOR AUDIT SERVICES FROM NON-GOVERNMENT ORGANIZATIONS: EVIDENCES FROM THE KOSOVO ................................... 340 .

Edvard Badurina KNOWLEDGE ACQUISITION FROM DATA IN BUSINESS INTELLIGENCE MODELS AS A SOURCE OF COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE O+C14F COMPANIES ....................................................................................................... 353 .

Anna Borucka FORECASTING OF FIRE RISK WITH REGARD TO READINESS OF RESCUE AND FIRE-FIGHTING VEHICLES ..................................................... 373 .

Martina Bienefeld, Zrinka Stanić and Helena Štimac THE IMPORTANCE OF ESTABLISHING HUMAN RESOURCE OFFICES IN CROATIAN HEALTHCARE INSTITUTIONS – A KEY TO THEIR SUBSISTENCE ............................................................................... 396 .

Zdenko Prohaska, Bojana Olgić Draženović and Ivan Uroda VALUATION OF ZERO COUPON BONDS IN EXCEL ....................................... 409 .

VI

.

Zorislav Kalazić, Damir Butković and Andreja Hašćek FROM CAMERA OBSCURA TO IPHONE: WHAT IS THE FUTURE OF DIGITAL STOCK PHOTO INDUSTRY? .......................................... 420

.

Mario Dadić, Ante Bačić and Iva Mihanović THE ROLE OF MOTIVATION IN HUMAN RESOURCES MANAGEMENT ...................................................................................... 440

.

Maja Šimunić, Ljubica Pilepić Stifanich and Marina Perišić Prodan THE LEVEL OF HOTEL RESERVATION SYNCHRONIZATION PROCESSES USING INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY TOOLS....................... 451

.

Ivan Miloloža, Aleksandar Včev and Damir Šebo MARKET SUCCESS OF CROATIAN ENTERPRISES: IMPACT OF LEADERSHIP STYLES ............................................................................ 471

.

Joško Dvornik, Vice Mihanović and Ante Mihanović MARITIME POTENTIALS OF THE REPUBLIC OF CROATIA WITH THE PARTICULAR EMPHASIS ON THE CITY OF SPLIT .................................................................................................................... 493

.

Ivan Miškulin, Boris Crnković and Maja Miškulin TYPES OF LEADERSHIP IN MANAGEMENT BOARDS OF UNIVERSITY CONSTITUENT UNITS AND THEIR IMPACT ON KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT .................................................................................. 504

.

Ante Belamarić, Goran Ledinščak and Željko Holik FINANCIAL BENCHMARKING OF CROATIAN OFFSET PRINTING INDUSTRY .................................................................................................... 523

.

Željko Vojinović, Sanja Živković and Dragan Vojinović THE CONCEPT OF INTEGRATED MARKETING COMMUNICATIONS OF FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS OF BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA IN THE FUNCTION OF MANAGING RELATIONS WITH CONSUMERS ................................................... 544

General Economics

.

Damir Ribić and Nikolina Pleša Puljić EDUCATION AS A FACTOR OF SUCCESS IN AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION OF TOBACCO ...................................................................................... 563

.

Ljubo Jurčić and Anita Čeh Časni GOVERNMENT SPENDING BEHAVIOUR: HOW BIG PUBLIC SECTOR DO WE REALLY NEED? ................................................................................ 579

VII

Microeconomics, Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics Faruk Hadžić and Dino Hadžialić NEW ECONOMIC POLICY – MACROECONOMIC REFORMS FOR ACCELERATED ECONOMIC GROWTH OF BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA ...................................................................................................... 595 .

Ružica Lončarić, Tihana Sudarić and Jadranka Deže CONSUMER ENTNOCENTRISM ON GLOBAL FOOD MARKET .................. 618 .

Zvonimir Savić ARCHITECTURE OF INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK FOR EU COHESION (REGIONAL) POLICY IMPLEMENTATION IN SLOVENIA, HUNGARY AND SLOVAKIA - ROLE MODELS FOR CROATIA? ..................... 636 .

Amir Fejzić and Jasmina Osmanković UNEMPLOYMENT DYNAMICS: THE CASE OF THE SEE5 COUNTRIES.............................................................................................................. 662 .

International Economics Dražen Holmik ECONOMIC DIPLOMACY IN THE TIME OF GLOBALIZATION ................... 685 .

Magdalena Klopott HOW BREAKING THE INTEGRITY OF THE COLD CHAIN MAY CONTRIBUTE TO GLOBAL WARMING?................................................................ 703 .

INTERDISCIPLINARY MANAGEMENT RESEARCH XIV

Financial Economics Branko Matić, Maja Vretenar Cobović and Mirko Cobović HARMONIZATION OF THE CROATIAN PENSION SYSTEM WITH A EUROPEAN SOCIAL MODEL - PERSPECTIVES AND CHALLENGES..... 725 .

Izabela Pruchnicka-Grabias STOCK MARKETS REACTIONS TO NEGATIVE DECISIONS OF STANDARD & POOR’S RATING AGENCY - EIGHT CASE STUDIES ........ 743 .

Ivana Bestvina Bukvić, Marija Šain and Maja Haršanji PROJECT FINANCING OF CULTURAL AND CREATIVE INDUSTRIES IN CROATIA - ANALYSIS OF THE CREATIVE EUROPE PROGRAMME (2014-2020) RESULTS ........................................................................................................ 763 .

Mustafe Hasani, Sakip Imeri, Ramadan Kryeziu “DOING BUSINES” WB REPORT AND IMPACT ON FDI IN BALCAN COUNTRIES WITH FOCUS IN KOSOVO ............................................ 782 .

VIII

.

Marina Stanić Šulentić, Tin Horvatin and Milan Stanić COMPARATIVE FINANCIAL ANALYSIS OF RAILWAY WORKSHOP .......... 796

.

Markus Hafele and Sarah Katharina Stiegeler DIE BEHANDLUNG VON KONZERNUMLAGEN – PROBLEME IN DER PRAXIS .......................................................................................... 806

Public Economics Mladen Vedriš, Nataša Drvenkar and Damir Butković PUBLIC PROCUREMET STRATEGY – POLICY REMARKS AND CHALLENGES FOR THE REPUBLIC OF CROATIA.............................................. 823

.

Velma Pijalović and Lejla Lazović-Pita SHOULD EXCISE DUTIES ON SOFT DRINKS IN BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA BE INCREASED? ............................................................................. 842

Health, Education and Welfare

.

Tena Čačić CONCEPT OF EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS AS SUSTAINABLE ORGANIZATIONS ............................................................................................................ 867

.

Suzana Obrovac Lipar THE ECHOES OF GLOBALIZATION AT THE UNIVERSITIES IN CROATIA: THE ANALYSIS OF WEB SITES AND TRENDS IN THE STUDENT EXCHANGE ................................................................................................. 881

.

Tihana Škojo and Renata Jukić THE LEADS’ OF ART ENSEMBLES PERCEPTION OF NECESSARY COMPETENCES ................................................................................................................. 897

.

Ivana Barković Bojanić, Dajana Džeba and Mate Perišić SILVER ECONOMY AND AGING POPULATION: MYTHS, REALITIES AND BUSINESS OPPORTUNITIES .................................................. 912

.

Agneza Aleksijević PUBLIC PERCEPTION OF PRIMARY HEALTH CARE QUALITY IN THE REPUBLIC OF CROATIA ............................................................................... 927

.

Sanja Španja and Sara Pejaković EDUCATION FOR HANDLING CONFLICT IN THE ORGANIZATION .... 953

.

Mirko Pešić, Sanja Pešić and Marija Baban Bulat FREE MOVEMENT OF WORKERS: THE CASE OF HEALTH CARE WORKERS MIGRATING WITHIN THE EU............................................... 969

IX

Law and Economics Emina Jerković REDUCING THE TAX COMPLIANCE GAP BY IMPROVING TAX ADMINISTRATION ................................................................................................ 983 .

Nenad Rančić, Winona Wenning and Ozren Pilipović ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF ECJ JUDGEMENT IN JOINED CASES C-503/13 & C-504/13: PRODUCT RECALLS REGARDING MEDICAL DEVICES ........................................................................................................1001 .

Vesna Škare Ožbolt and Igor Bojanić THE EFFICIENCY OF THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE AND POSSIBILITIES OF ITS IMPROVEMENT .............................................................1018 .

Dubravka Klasiček DIGITAL INHERITANCE .............................................................................................1050 .

Pavao Gagro, Duško Ljuština and Ante Baran DATA MANAGEMENT AND KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT IN NOTARY PUBLIC SERVICE .................................................................................... 1069 .

Business Administration and Bussines Economics Jose Vargas-Hernández INTERCULTURAL BUSINESS MANAGEMENT DEVELOPMENT A ND EDUCATION PROGRAMS IN BUSINESS SCHOOLS .............................1099 Urban Bacher and Torsten Winkler AMAZON – GESCHÄFTSMODELL UND SWOT-ANALYSE .......................... 1130 .

INTERDISCIPLINARY MANAGEMENT RESEARCH XIV

.

Marketing Gabrijela Žalac, Ana Odak and Mario Banožić CROATIAN VIEWS ON THE FUTURE OF COHESION POLICY POST 2020 .......................................................................................................... 1147 .

Dejan Tubić, Rikard Bakan and Juralj Randelj THE MARKETING ACTIVITIES AND BARRIERS OF THE AGROTOURISM ECONOMIES OF CONTINENTAL REGION OF THE REPUBLIC OF CROATIA: TFF OWNERS PERCEPTION .....................1162 .

Dominik Paparić, Jesenka Ricl and Dražen Ćućić THE ISLAND OF RAB-TOURISM POSITIONING AND DESTINATION BRANDING........................................................................................ 1175 .

X

Thomas Cleff, Laura Marie Hansmann and Nadine Walter The Quantified Self – A Theoretical Framework and Empirical Study on Marketing Opportunities within the Self-Tracking Environment..............................................................1198 Željko Turkalj, Tihomir Vranešević and Tajana Marušić SOCIAL MEDIA AND IT`S IMPACT ON CLASSICAL MARKETING CHANNELS OF COMMUNICATON......................................................................... 1225 Žarko Stilin, Jasen Mesić and Ivan Ružić THE INFLUENCE OF E-MARKETING ON VOTERS.......................................... 1244 Lidija Nujić, Tonina Palić and Martina Herak THE IMPACT OF SOCIAL MEDIA INFLUENCERS ON TOURISM INDUSTRY..................................................................................................... 1258 Ivana Lacković and Eugen Ferenček THE ROLE OF DIGITAL MARKETING AND MARKETING AGENCIES IN MODERN BUSINESS......................................................................... 1276 Zlatko Rešetar, Zdravko Tolušić and Nikolina Pavičić Rešetar IMPACT OF CONSUMER PREFERENCES ON PRODUCT AND PRODUCT................................................................................................................. 1290 Kenan Mahmutović IMPACT OF E-MARKETING ORIENTATION ON MARKETING PERFORMANCE: CASE OF EUROPEAN REAL ESTATE BROKERAGE INDUSTRY............................................................................................... 1308

Accounting Bodo Runzheimer DER NEUE STANDARD IFRS 16 DER EUROPÄISCHEN UNION ZUR LEASINGBILANZIRUNG.................................................................................... 1337 Ivo Mijoč, Marija Ileš and Biljana Brocić THE ROLE OF INTERNAL AUDIT IN INCREASING QUALITY OF BUSINESS OPERATIONS OF INSURANCE COMPANIES................................ 1358 Ivana Dražić Lutilsky, Dina Liović and Matej Marković THROUGHPUT ACCOUNTING: PROFIT-FOCUSED COST ACCOUNTING METHOD............................................................................................. 1382 Dubravka Pekanov Starčević, Ana Zrnić and Emil Mihalina ENVIRONMENTAL ACCOUNTING IN CROATIA: A REVIEW OF CORPORATE REPORTING PRACTICES................................... 1396

XI

Economic Development, Technological Change, and Growth Radul Milutinović, Slađana Benković and Biljana Stošić THE REVIEW OF EXTERNAL SOURCES OF INNOVATION FINANCING........................................................................................ 1413 .

Ivana Sataić THE ROLE OF EUROPE 2020 STRATEGY IN CROATIAN ECONOMY AND THE ECONOMY OF THE EUROPEAN UNION ....................................... 1432 .

Josip Jukić, Dražen Barković and Ivona Blažević ANALYSIS OF THE IMPACT OF SHORTENING / EXTENDING OF PROJECT DURATION ON TOTAL COSTS ............................................................ 1447 .

Ivana Varičak and Silvija Vitner Marković THE ROLE OF SECTORAL SPECIALIZATION IN THE CREATION OF SMART TOURISM DESTINATION.................................................................... 1460 .

Višnja Bartolović and Danijela Vinković ACTIVE LABOR MARKET POLICIES - FINDINGS FROM BROD-POSAVINA COUNTY ....................................................................................... 1472 .

Zrinka Starešinić and Mia Duška Franić STRUCTURAL AND INVESTMENT FUNDS AND THEIR IMPACT ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF CROATIA ....................... 1489 .

Jerko Glavaš, Tibor Santo and Biljana Tuševski BUSINESS PROCESS MANAGEMENT AS A PRECONDITION OF PRINTING INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT .............................................................. 1504 .

Ivan Ambroš, Josip Faletar and Domagoj Kurtović CASCADE USE OF WOOD: CASE STUDY OF SPAČVA..................................... 1515 INTERDISCIPLINARY MANAGEMENT RESEARCH XIV

.

Michał Kuzia NEW URBAN MOBILITY MODEL IN SHARING ECONOMY CONTEXT .................................................................................................. 1526 .

Sofija Adžić and Branka Mihailović SMALL COUNTRIES` ECONOMY EFFICIENCY LESSONS AND POSSIBILITIES .................................................................................. 1545 .

Zlatko Zelenika and Drago Pupavac MATHEMATICAL MODELLING OF THE DEVELOPMENT FACTORS IN THE PORT OF RIJEKA......................................................................... 1558

Urban, Rural, and Regional Economics Katarina Marošević REGIONAL IMBALANCE OF THE REPUBLIC OF CROATIA THROUGH A DEMOGRAPHIC FRAMEWORK: STATE AND TRENDS .... 1571 .

XII

.

Branislav Peleš, Nedeljko Knežević and Krešimir Starčević THE IMPACT OF TOURISM ON RETAIL TRADE IN FOODSTUFFS MAINLY, IN THE REPUBLIC OF CROATIA, COMPARED FOR THE PERIOD 2010-2016 ............................................................................................................1586

.

Radmila Tatarin, Ana Gavran and Ivana Deže THE CURRENT POSITION OF FAMILY FARMS IN CROATIAORGANIC VS. CONVENTIONAL PRODUCTION .............................................. 1600

.

Karolina Gwarda SELECTIVE MUNICIPAL WASTE COLLECTION AS PART OF THE ZERO WASTE CITY CONCEPT ......................................................................1616 Anamarija Delić and Dora Perić INFLUENCE OF BUSINESS ECOSYSTEM ON RURAL TOURISM DEVELOPMENT.......................................................................................... 1636

.

Davorin Turkalj, Antun Biloš and Ivan Bogović IMPLICATIONS OF COASTAL CROATIA TOURIST ATTRIBUTES ON THE DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL OF CONTINENTAL CROATIA .......... 1652

.

Ivan Kelić, Sofia Turjak and Ivana Unukić GLOBAL AGRICULTURAL ENVIRONMENT AND CROATIAN AGRICULTURAL CHALLENGES – CAN BRANDING HELP? ......................... 1667

.

Mirela Kljajić-Dervić, Šemsudin Dervić and Selma Gutlić MOTIVATION AND SATISFACTION OF EMPLOYEES: A CASE OF BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA PUBLIC SECTOR ....................... 1681

Miscellaneous Categories

.

.

.

.

Dražen Vitez, Marko Prpić and Marin Pucar POLICE MANAGEMENT FOR COMMUNITY POLICING: CASE OF CROATIA ..........................................................................................................1701 Mladen Jurišić, Ivan Plaščak, Sanela Ravlić APPLICATION OF GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS (GIS) AND MULTI-CRITERIA DECISION ANALYSIS (MCDA) IN THE NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT ..............................................................1705 Ulrich Föhl, Carina Siefert: A TYPOLOGY OF CONSUMER BRAND RELATIONSHIPS .............................1722 Wolfgang Gohout: MARKMALSREDUNDANZ AM BEISPIEL EINER UHRENMARKEN-BEWERTUNG..............................................................................1738

XIII

DIGITAL INHERITANCE Dubravka KLASIČEK, Ph. D., Assistant Professor, Faculty of Law, University J. J. Strossmayer Osijek, Email: [email protected]

Abstract In the past, photos, documents, receipts, bills, music, movies etc. were tangible or were fixed on a tangible media such as CDs or DVD’s. After a person died, it was usually enough to go to his/her house or office and find all these items. Some of them were valuable, others were not, but all of them constituted inheritance. Today, for the most part, these items are digitized and stored on computers, smartphones, flash drives, email accounts, clouds, social media etc. Most of us have a lot of these digital assets, but almost none of us think about what will happen to them after we die. There are several issues concerning digital inheritance: digital assets are intangible and for the most part, their holder’s heirs will not be aware of them; many of them are password protected and heirs will not know log–in information; they tend to be numerous and a lot of them hold no financial or emotional value.

Dubravka Klasiček: DIGITAL INHERITANCE

These problems could be solved if individuals made plans for what is to happen to their digital assets post mortem like they do for their tangible property. The obvious choice is to include digital assets in a will. However, there are certain particularities which have to be kept in mind when planning for digital inheritance. For example, wills are publicly pronounced after a person dies, so many people might be privy to sensitive and private information concerning deceased’s digital assets. When it comes to digital assets stored in internet service providers’ (ISP) accounts, making plans will not mean much, since ISP have rules prohibiting anyone, other than the original user, from accessing these accounts. This paper will deal with these challenges of digital inheritance and possible ways on how to best prepare for it.

1050

Key words: digital assets, digital inheritance, tangible, intangible, will, heir, ISP JEL Classification: E22, E24

1.

INTRODUCTION

Humans have accumulated more information in the past two years than in all prior human civilization (Shaw, 2014, p. 30) and a clear majority of that information is in a digital form. Also, utility providers, phone and internet companies, banks and credit cards have nowadays moved into a digital domain and most of them even offer incentives if their customers go paperless, both because it is cheaper and better for the environment. Most newspapers are now being published online, shopping is done on the Internet, people communicate through e-mails or social media. Today, photos, music, and videos are predominantly in a digital form. So, the majority of what was once tangible is now digitized (Arnold, 2013; Moncur/Waller, 2014). Digital assets are new, they constantly change, and nobody exactly knows what this term encompasses since there are a lot of different definitions of these assets (Beyer/Cahn, 2013). At a minimum, these assets are information stored in an intangible medium on computers and other computer related technology. They can be accessed in various ways – through a computer, hard drive, smart phone or third party (ISP) server (Hopkins, 2013; Sherry, 2012). They include e-mail accounts, blogs, social networking sites, personal webpages, documents, videos or photo storage sites and it is likely that this list will be expanded soon

1051

INTERDISCIPLINARY MANAGEMENT RESEARCH XIV

Death was always a legally significant fact – it signifies termination of a legal personality, ends the marriage, certain contractual obligations, some personal rights and it initiates property transfer post mortem (Klarić/Vedriš, 2014). Succession rules have always determined who will, in what way, inherit decedent’s property. When there are only tangible items to inherit, there are no significant problems and if there were any in the past, they were settled a long time ago. However, a new type of assets – digital assets – have emerged and neither their owners nor legislators know what to do with them in terms of succession. A lot of these assets are stored on on-line accounts, so, after one considers internet service providers (ISPs), who decide what rights a person has over his/her account and its content, the situation becomes even more complicated.

(Banta, 2014, p. 801; Beyer, 2015; Blachly, 2015 et al.). However, not many people think about what will happen to these items after they die, let alone make plans for it. These assets, their ownership, and succession should be legally regulated because today most of us cannot even imagine what other types of digital assets will be created soon. Nevertheless, the current law dealing with the inheritance of digital assets is sparse and this problem is aggravated if a person who owns digital assets dies intestate (Cahn, 2011). Likewise, since a lot of very important digital assets are controlled solely by various ISPs, their relationship with account holders also needs to be considered. (Banta, 2017). The first part of this paper will deal with advantages to digital inheritance – it will list various reasons that are supporting the need to pass those assets to heirs. The second part will deal with inheritability of digital assets and possible obstacles to it. The third part will concentrate on advantages of planning for digital inheritance and ways to do it.

Dubravka Klasiček: DIGITAL INHERITANCE

2.

ADVANTAGES OF DIGITAL INHERITANCE

It might seem that thinking about what happens to someone’s digital assets post mortem is a trivial matter, but, as this paper will try to show, it is becoming more important as time goes by. There are numerous reasons why digital assets should pass on to decedent’s heirs. First of all, many digital assets have real economic value. Contents on a blog may be valuable to heirs even after blog owner dies; manuscripts or musical compositions uploaded on social media sites may have real-world monetary value; characters for on-line computer games also might be worth a considerable amount of money (Borden, 2014a; Harbinja, 2014 a/b). Domain names have economic value too, eBay accounts generate money, photos, videos or messages shared on a celebrity’s social profile can be valuable after a celebrity dies (Edwards/Harbinja, 2016). If artists upload their art to various sites (Amazon, iTunes etc.), another problem arises if these accounts are un-inheritable – heirs will inherit copyright but will not be able to control account content distribution, because they would need to access the account to control its content. So, if heirs are not permitted to access manuscripts posted on Amazon or music posted on iTunes, they are unable to publish decedent’s unpublished work. (Borden, 2014a, p. 431). Digital

1052

inheritance is also promoting individuals’ creation and labor; encourages productiveness and exploration, but it also builds upon existing virtual economy (Truong, 2009) Furthermore, social media is often used as a coping mechanism for decedent’s family and friends. Nowadays it is common, after a person dies, for his/her family and friends to post their sentiments of Facebook which has become a central point for persons coping with the loss of loved ones (Borden, 2014a). Decedent’s friends and family sometimes even set up new online venues, like memorial Web sites or Facebook pages that serve as an emotional outlet (Brubaker/ Callison-Burch, 2016; Arnold, 2013). Likewise, after a sudden death of a loved one, family members might find answers and reach closure by having access to decedent’s e-mail and social media profiles. There are fewer and fewer tangible items, written or otherwise recorded, which contain information about our dayto-day lives. Today they are mostly in a digital form. (Banta, 2014; McCarthy, 2015).

An additional benefit of digital inheritance is the fact that information stored on e-mail and social media may provide valuable estate and other information about decedent’s property, bank and utility accounts, social media accounts, subscriptions, business etc., both known and unknown. If heirs cannot inherit and access them, that might lead to serious obstacles to inheritance in general (Cahn, 2014; McCarthy, 2015). However, there are some (Cummings, 2014) that disagree, claiming that access to an account is not at all crucial for easing the burden of estate administration in most cases, since there is no concrete evidence to support claims that access to deceased’s online accounts (especially e-mail accounts) makes any significant difference in estate administration. Another reason for these accounts to be inheritable is if a decedent had an Internet business. Unless heirs can access these accounts post mortem, the busi-

1053

INTERDISCIPLINARY MANAGEMENT RESEARCH XIV

Most of these digital assets do not have monetary value, but they could be extremely emotionally valuable to heirs, especially family members. Otherwise, great parts of people’s lives might be lost forever after they die (Calem, 2010). This might be very hard for surviving family members, but in some cases, it might impact others as well – fans, historians, public in general, because, some digital assets that belong to ordinary people might be of no financial value, but when it comes to celebrities, scientists, presidents etc., even their mundane digital assets might be worth a lot of money (Beyer, 2015; Banta, 2014).

ness might suffer severely – heirs will not know who the customers are and how to contact them (Banta, 2014; Tarney, 2016). Digital assets also present archives for correspondence which has always offered an insight into various, sometimes historically important, events (Borden, 2014a; McCarthy, 2015). Since today correspondence is, often, carried out via e-mails, if nobody inherits those e-mails, some important facts could be lost forever. Many commentators agree that digital inheritance can help prevent identity theft, as well (Banta, 2016; Beyer/Griffin, 2011; Blachly, 2015; Cahn, 2014; Varnado, 2014; Wilkens, 2011). Until authorities’ databases are updated regarding someone’s death, his/her identity can be stolen. Unless heirs have access to decedent’s on-line accounts, they will have a hard time protecting his/ her identity (Todorova, 2009). Inheritance of digital assets is also important in order to prevent content theft, since, if heirs are unable to access decedent’s blog, for example, either because they are unaware of its existence or do not have instructions or ways to access it, they might be unable to prevent blog contents to be stolen (Beyer/Griffin, 2011). Another advantage of inheriting digital assets is the prevention of losses to the estate. Some digital assets may lose their value if they are not accessed and managed for too long. For example, a decedent might have had website generating income, but in case nobody knows about it or cannot access it, its value can diminish quickly. Also, electronic bills might keep coming and unless heirs know about them or have access to them, they will stay unpaid and penalties will accumulate (Beyer, 2015).

Dubravka Klasiček: DIGITAL INHERITANCE

3.

INHERITABILITY OF DIGITAL ASSETS

In Croatian legal system, there are no rules that explicitly regulate the inheritance of digital assets. However, upon analyzing general rules on inheritance laid down in Inheritance Act (IA), one cannot find reasons why digital assets should not be inheritable under the same conditions as tangible assets. In most countries, after a person dies, what is left is either inheritable property or property that does not pass on to decedent’s heirs for various reasons. For example, a specific item might not belong to the decedent at the time of death; it might have to cease to exist after decedent dies, because of its legal nature (like the right of personal easement according to the Law on property and other property rights, Art. 202) or it might have to be transferred to somebody other

1054

than decedent’s heirs (for example through donation mortis causa or contract on lifelong support, Gavella/Belaj, 2008). Under general rules of succession law, such items are not inheritable. Most commentators believe that the same rules should apply to digital assets (Banta, 2014, 2016, 2017; Borden, 2014a, Cahn, 2014; Darrow/Ferrera, 2007, Varnado, 2014; Watkins, 2014 et al.) However, most commentators agree there are a few issues that make digital assets inheritability distinct, when compared to other property: 1. digital assets are intangible; 2. some are password protected; 3. a lot is stored on ISPs’ servers that have varying rules concerning account transferability and 4. some digital content is in fact merely licensed from an ISP, with the license expiring at death (Banta, 2014, 2016, 2017; Cahn, 2014; Darrow/Ferrera, 2007; Lopez, 2016, Ronderos, 2017; Varnado, 2014; Watkins, 2014 et al.).

Intangibility is probably the least of problems concerning the inheritance of digital assets, since over the years, in most legal systems, many intangible items have been equalized with the tangible ones in terms of ownership and succession (Cahn, 2014; Varnado, 2014). The same applies to Croatian legal system where, for example, dematerialized shares are considered property and are treated as such (Gavella, et al., 2007). This is also applied to proportional share of a co-owner and the right to build (Law on Property, Art. 37/3 and 280/2) and copyright, which is also intangible, but can be inherited, at least some of its components (Copyright and Related Rights Act, Art. 41, Art. 13 – 40). Therefore, commentators agree that digital assets should not be considered uninheritable just because they are intangible (Darrow/Ferrera, 2007)

.. Log-in information Lacking log-in information is especially troublesome when it comes to digital accounts opened with various ISP. Whoever wants to access those accounts, has to have log-in information. When it comes to e-mail accounts, some commentators explain that one of the main issues with their inheritability is the fact that they are in a possession of a third party, an ISP, who is neither the sender nor the recipient of an e-mail and without having log-in information heirs lack the proverbial key to unlock these accounts (Darrow/Ferrera, 2007).

1055

INTERDISCIPLINARY MANAGEMENT RESEARCH XIV

.. The intangibility of digital assets

One of the most cited explanations of why decedent’s e-mail accounts should be inheritable is a comparison of ISPs to warehouses (Darrow/Ferrera, 2007; Watkins, 2014). One of the most important obligations of a warehouse is the return of stored goods to the person that has the receipt. However, if a person died and did not leave the receipt, that would not mean that stored goods would not be inheritable, since heirs could prove in court that the decedent did indeed leave those items at the warehouse and, since they are his/her heirs, they should be able to inherit them. Similarly, if an owner of items stored in a safe deposit box or other storage facility died, his heirs would inherit those items, although they lack keys to a safe deposit box or storage facility. The same should apply to e-mails – just because heirs do not have log-in information, does not mean they should be banned from inheriting decedent’s e-mails (Darrow/Ferrera, 2007). Problems of not knowing passwords are not exclusive only to digital accounts. Some digital assets stored on decedent’s computer can also be password protected. However, unlike digital accounts which can be accessed even without log-in information, with ISP’s permission, password protected files on someone’s computer, flash drive or smartphone can never be accessed without a password, even if heirs inherited those devices unless someone manages to brake the encryption. One of the often-cited examples of this happening is a famous conductor Leonard Bernstein, who died in 1990. He left a manuscript for his memoir titled “Blue Ink” on his computer in a password protected file. To this day, nobody has been able to break the password and access the document. (McCarthy, 2015; Varnado, 2014; Blachly, 2015)

Dubravka Klasiček: DIGITAL INHERITANCE

.. ISPs’ terms of service agreement (ToSA) ISPs’ ToS is a much bigger and more complicated problem for inheritability of digital assets than their intangibility or not knowing log-in information. This is because, even if heirs knew log-in information while accessing an account they would probably be violating ISPs’ ToS (Eichler, 2016). Most of these agreements state that neither heirs nor anyone else is permitted to access decedent’s account, even if they had log-in information (Banta, 2014; Lopez, 2016). This is because most ToSA state that, while content remains owned by an account holder, the account itself cannot be transferred to or accessed by decedent’s heirs (or anyone else, for that matter) since most of them contain a non-transferability clause (Yahoo, 2018; Google, 2018; Microsoft, 2018).

1056

Account holders might have control over their account content during life. However, ToSA will later be the main authority in governing the transfer of digital assets at death. (Banta, 2014; Ronderos, 2017). So, regardless of the fact that it would make sense for heirs to inherit digital assets, because they were owned by the decedent and it was in accordance with his/her wishes, they will not be able to, since in order to get to those assets, they first have to access decedent’s account and ISPs will not let them because of their rules.

Because most ISP’s fear bad publicity and public backlash, this and many other cases, show that if family members try to gain access and try hard enough, especially if they obtain a court order, ISPs might give heirs some insight into account content, mostly without giving them account access. However, ISPs will not change their policies and next time other decedent’s heirs try to gain access to his/her account, they will have to go through the same ordeal. This seems like the worst way to deal with this since people have no idea how ISPs will react in a specific case (Banta, 2014). The influence ToSA have on succession law, according to most commentators (Banta, 2014, 2016, 2017; Borden, 2014a; Darrow/Ferrera, 2007; Ronderos, 2017; Truong, 2009; Watkins, 2014 et al), is unacceptable because these agreements severely limit freedom of testation. However, unlike some other contracts that might limit this freedom to a certain extent, but are, nevertheless, aimed at the transmission of property to someone, ToSA expressly forbid any

1057

INTERDISCIPLINARY MANAGEMENT RESEARCH XIV

It has to be emphasized that some heirs have been able to attain access to decedent’s account, but only after a legal battle. This happened in several cases; non-more recognized than the highly publicized Ellsworth case: After Yahoo! refused family members access to an e-mail account belonging to late U.S. marine Justin Ellsworth, his father sued Yahoo!. The reason for Yahoo!’s refusal was that their ToS prohibit third parties from accessing someone’s account, even if that someone is dead, and it is his/her family members demanding access. In the end, the judge ordered Yahoo! to enable access to the deceased’s account without ordering the transfer of log-in and password information. That way, Yahoo! could still abide by its privacy policy, but family members could and did gain access to deceased e-mails. It was done because the judge ordered Yahoo! to provide a family with a CD containing copies of the e-mails in the account (Edwards/Harbinja, 2016; Truong, 2009). However, they did not gain access to deceased’s e-mail account or log-in information.

type of transfer. ISPs will either destroy account and its content or leave it on their servers indefinitely. There are certain ISPs that have allowed their clients to choose what they would want concerning their accounts post mortem, like Google (Inactive Account Manager) and Facebook (Legacy Contact) (Google, 2018, Facebook, 2018, Amazon, 2018). According to some commentators, these types of solutions seem like the preferred option, since account holders themselves tell an ISP their wishes (Banta, 2014, 2016; Hopkins, 2013; Tarney, 2012)

.. Digital assets licensed from ISPs

Dubravka Klasiček: DIGITAL INHERITANCE

Many digital assets are in fact not owned by their users and users are, more often than not, unaware of this fact. For example, many ToSA drafted by ISPs that “sell” music, videos and books, state that the purchaser is, in fact, buying a non-transferable license to access and use digital content, with the license expiring upon user’s death (Borden, 2014b; Eichler, 2016). Therefore, items purchased on Amazon and iTunes are not owned by their user. Furthermore, they can usually only be accessed through a device by signing into an account and cannot be easily transferred and stored to an external storage device (Banta, 2017, p. 1125). Because they do not transfer ownership, these ISPs’ ToSA expressly forbid selling, leasing, distributing, renting, broadcasting, licensing, transferring or conveying the interest to a third party (Ronderos, 2017). When it comes to inheriting these assets, ToS is not clear, so like many other cases concerning digital assets, it appears that this content’s inheritability is decided on a case-by-case basis and if heirs are persistent enough, they will obtain favorable results from ISPs (Banta, 2017, p. 1130). However, commentators agree that by not giving users ownership over digital content, ISPs are certainly preventing and avoiding inheritability of digital assets (Sherry, 2012; Banta, 2014, 2017; Ronderos, 2017). Regardless of what rights account holders have over purchased digital content, it would be preferable for ISPs to clearly outline a policy that considers digital assets in their ToS (so the users would be aware of those rules). The policy should explicitly state what rights if any, heirs have in the account and its digital content (Borden, 2014b).

1058

4.

PLANNING FOR DIGITAL INHERITANCE

Under rules of succession, heirs can either be testate or intestate. If a decedent leaves a will, he/she will be inherited by persons named in a will (Inheritance Act, Art. 43). Otherwise, intestate heirs will be the ones to inherit his/her property (IA, Art. 8). While making a will, usually the first thing a person does is make an inventory of property (Blachly/Walker, 2011). This helps a lot with the distribution of the estate, but it is not crucial since even if the decedent did not leave a will or failed to specify what his inheritance consists of, there are simple ways of finding out.

When it comes to intangible property like digital assets, things can get a little more complicated. Since those assets are not tangible and many are stored on different decedent’s devices or accounts, it can be very hard to be aware of their existence, unless somebody explicitly points them out. Unquestionably, the existence of some digital assets is known to a large group of people (Facebook profiles, some e-mail accounts, blogs...). However, there are digital assets that might be unknown to decedent’s friends and family (financial records, profiles on certain sites, assets stored in a cloud, assets stored on decedent’s devices, online games characters). Because of this, it seems it is even more important to make plans for digital assets than for tangible property, since locating digital property can be much harder – people are less likely to stumble upon an unknown digital asset, than upon an undiscovered tangible property (Watkins, 2014).

1059

INTERDISCIPLINARY MANAGEMENT RESEARCH XIV

Tangible assets exist in the physical world, they can be comprehended, and they are usually not left undiscovered. They have been owned and inherited since the beginning of time, so there are rules, presumably in every legal system, which help establish who owns a certain item. For example, under Croatian law, it is presumed that movables are owned by the person who has possession of them until proven otherwise (Law on Property…, Art. 11). The ownership of immovable is even easier to prove: it is registered in land registry (Law on Land Registry, Art. 23). Therefore, when it comes to tangible property, it is usually not too hard to find out what the inheritance consists of. Of course, even with tangibles, there is a possibility that certain parts of estate remain unknown at the time of probate proceedings. However, there are rules that govern that situation, too (IA, Art. 234).

Most people still do not think about the fact that these days, after most of us die, not only physical assets are left behind, but a lot of digital ones as well. This was understandable in the recent past because not many of us had digital assets. And, maybe, that is the reason why most people do not think about digital assets in the terms of inheritance: digital assets have existed for only a short period of time and it probably has not yet sunken into our collective consciousness that they too are our property, albeit intangible one, and that they too will be left behind after we die.

.. Why are plans important? If a person dies intestate, as is the case with most decedents in Croatia, he/ she will be inherited by intestate heirs. Rules on intestate succession in Croatia, like in all other legal systems, try to reflect what most people would want and what a typical decedent usually puts in a will (McCarthy, 2015).

Dubravka Klasiček: DIGITAL INHERITANCE

However, nobody knows what the decedent wanted concerning his/her property if he/she died intestate. The same applies to digital assets: nobody knows whether the decedent wanted digital assets treated as any other property and distributed among heirs as such or if he/she never intended for heirs (or anybody else) to have access to those sets (Lopez, 2016). When it comes to this type of assets, commentators disagree whether the lack of explicitly expressed wishes in a will should be replaced with the presumed ones. Most commentators agree that it cannot be denied that digital assets, especially those that are password protected, are somewhat different from other types of property. Log-ins and passwords exist for a reason – they are there to stop anybody, other than those who know them, from accessing digital assets. So, what does the fact that the decedent did not share that information really mean: Did he/she want those assets to remain where they were, undiscovered by heirs, forgotten and possibly deleted by service providers? Did the decedent mean to share log-in information with heirs, but death beat him/her to it? Does the fact that log-in information was not shared mean anything at all? Some commentators (Horton, 2017) mention that digital accounts should probably not be treated like other property and should especially not be transmissible by intestacy, because most account holders may not want their digital assets to be inherited, and inheriting digital assets might harm third parties

1060

(i.e. recipients or senders of e-mails). Therefore, according to Horton, if the decedent did not leave clear instructions in a will, intestate heirs should not inherit their digital assets. Lopez (2016) agrees and states that the most important thing to do, when it comes to digital inheritance, is to establish decedent’s intent regarding the distribution of his/her digital assets. Cummings (2014) also stresses that it is of the utmost importance to concentrate on decedent’s intentions rather than heirs’ interests and wishes concerning decedent’s digital assets. Unlike Darrow/Ferrera (2007), who agree that heirs must not have access to an account only in case an account holder gave such explicit instructions, Cummings (2014) proposes that in absence of account holder’s explicit instructions that permit access to his/her heirs, access to an account must be prohibited to anyone and its content must be destroyed after its holder dies. These authors believe that, without explicit instructions stating otherwise, it must be presumed that an account holder did not want anyone accessing his/ her account, which is completely opposite from what today applies to the rest of decedent’s property if he/she dies intestate.

Other commentators disagree and state that people have always had various private items that they did not want anybody to see – letters, diaries, and photos. If they did not want their heirs to inherit them, they needed to take appropriate steps to dispose of them. The same should apply to digital assets – if their owner does not want anybody to have access to them, he/she needs to destroy them while he/she is still alive, as was always done with such items. There is no reason that digital assets should receive greater protection in this, in comparison to tangible assets (Banta, 2014, p. 839; 2016). Some even state that in case a decedent died without leaving instructions concerning digital assets, a legal system should consider the interests of heirs (Darrow/Ferrera, 2007; Banta, 2014). Although succession law usually does not look to heirs’ wishes and desires, heirs will definitely benefit more from inheriting digital assets of their loved ones, than ISPs will benefit from keeping

1061

INTERDISCIPLINARY MANAGEMENT RESEARCH XIV

As an example, Cummings (2014) also mentioned late Justin Ellsworth and stressed that, since he opened an account with Yahoo!, agreed to their ToS knowing they state that an account is terminated upon its holder’s death and kept his passwords a secret – it must be presumed that he did not want anybody, including his father, to access his account, both during his live and after death.

or deleting them. Therefore, heirs desire to preserve should trump ISPs’ desire to destroy (Banta, 2014, p. 843; 2016, p. 848-853). However, when it comes to intestate inheritance, it has to be emphasized that there are no set rules on how digital assets will be inherited for testate decedents, let alone for intestate ones (McCarthy, 2015). Nonetheless, a person can at least try to alleviate some of these problems by making plans and stating his/her intentions concerning digital assets (Truong, 2009). That way, heirs will at least have a clear picture about what the decedent wanted, regardless of the fact that, when it comes to digital accounts, under today’s ISPs rules, most wills would not have much effect concerning access and inheritability. Likewise, wills will also not influence what happens post mortem to digital content that was licensed from an ISP. So why do most people ignore planning for digital inheritance, even if there are so many advantages to it? Apparently, some people do not want to share their log-in information, others do not think their digital assets are worth planning for, some might be overwhelmed by the magnitude of their digital assets and some just do not want to think about their death (Varnado, 2014).

.. How to plan for digital assets?

Dubravka Klasiček: DIGITAL INHERITANCE

Planning for digital inheritance should, at least, include an inventory of digital assets; information on how to access them (log-ins, passwords, PINs) and instructions on what is to be done with those assets etc. (Borden, 2014b; Wilkens, 2011). By doing an inventory of existing digital assets, a person might be faced with thousands of accumulated items he/she was not even aware existed. While making an inventory, a person will likely delete a lot of digital assets that have no emotional, monetary or any other value (Watkins, 2014). Furthermore, some assets might surface that their holder does not want anyone (or some persons) to find out about. Therefore, he/she can delete them or take appropriate measures to hide them. After an inventory is made, digital assets’ holder has to make sure his/ her heirs can access those assets. As the late Leonard Bernstein’s manuscript showed, it is important for owners of encrypted digital assets stored on various devices, to leave heirs their passwords. Otherwise, it is possible that even the

1062

best experts will not be able to break encryptions and those assets will be lost forever. Of course, when it comes to digital accounts, this is where the issue with ISPs’ ToS comes to haunt anybody who ever opened such an account and would want it inherited by his/her heirs. These ToSA forbid any type of account transfer and therefore severely affect freedom of testation and ownership. One of the ways to tackle this issue is for ISPs to let account holders choose what will happen to their account and its content, as was done by Google and Facebook who both provided their clients with such possibilities (Inactive Account Manager for Gmail and Legacy Contact for Facebook – Brubaker/Callison-Burch, 2016; Cummings, 2014). After heirs have been notified about the existence of digital assets, passwords provided (if needed), there is one more thing left to do: make one’s instructions about digital assets clear, just like one would do with tangible assets.

Drafting a will seems like the most obvious choice when planning for what is to happen to one’s property post mortem. However, many commentators claim that when it comes to digital assets, wills might not be the most suitable way (Beyer, 2015; Beyer/Griffin, 2011; Cahn/Beyer, 2013; Eichler, 2016; Hopkins, 2013; Watkins, 2014). The biggest obstacle to wills being convenient for administering digital assets is the fact that digital assets constantly change – in a matter of a couple of days, a person can open and close numerous accounts. Each time this happened, a will would have to be changed. Our log-in information also changes often – we are constantly reminded and encouraged to regularly change our passwords. On the other hand, wills are strictly formal legal documents, not suitable to be frequently changed. They have to be composed in a certain form in order to have legal consequences. Only if a document is made in a proscribed way, can it be considered a will (Gavella/Belaj, 2008; IA, Art. 30-40). Therefore, since a lot of formalities need to be respected, it is not always easy and convenient to change a will (Cummings, 2014). Also, there is another inconvenience when it comes to digital assets and information pertaining to it put in a will: after a person dies, his/her will is pronounced publicly during probate proceeding (IA, Art. 204). Therefore, everything, including log-in information, types of digital assets and instructions on what is to be done with them, become known to everybody present at the

1063

INTERDISCIPLINARY MANAGEMENT RESEARCH XIV

.. Making plans in a will

reading of a will (heirs, judge or public notary, court clerks etc.). For obvious reasons, most people would not want that. Regardless, wills are still probably the simplest of ways to manage any property, including digital one. This is especially the case if a person is making a will anyway, in order to administer his/her tangibles. Maybe the best solution to bypass above mentioned shortcomings is, as some commentators suggest, to reference in a will a separate document, stored elsewhere, containing a list of digital assets, testators wishes on what is to happen to them with log-in and password information (Bayer/Griffin, 2011; Watkins, 2014).

Dubravka Klasiček: DIGITAL INHERITANCE

The most important reason why a testator would want to plan for his/her digital inheritance in a separate document is the fact that said document does not have to meet all of the formalities necessary for a will to be valid. Therefore, it is much easier to change it. This document would not have to be attached to a will, it would only need to be referenced in it. It could be stored in a person’s house, safe deposit box, on a computer, flash drive or given to an attorney (Bayer/Griffin, 2011; Watkins, 2014). Wherever it is stored, it is important for a person to have constant access to it, in order to update it regularly (Eichler, 2016). While it might be a hindrance to update it on a regular basis, a document containing a list of digital assets and instructions is easily done and requires no assistance or special knowledge. Another possible solution, as some commentators mention, is using an online company. These services list every account, password, security question and a person can specify what is to happen with each digital asset (Beyer, 2015; Calem, 2010; Watkins, 2014). However, they are costly and information stored on their servers are not 100% safe since they could get hacked any time (they must very tempting to hackers looking for valuable information to sell). One other problem with these companies is that there are no guarantees on how long they would exist – they could go bankrupt at any time or be sold to new owners and as a consequence, information stored there could be lost. They could also become subject to different terms of services that no longer suit their clients (Watkins, 2014).

5.

CONCLUSION

As this paper has tried to show, types of digital assets vary greatly and most of their owners and ISPs that control many of them, are not sure where to go

1064

next in terms of their devisability. Owners, at best, want to treat them as tangible property and apply the same rules to them that are applied to the rest of their assets. At worst, their owners do not even think about them as assets holding any value that should be passed on to their heirs. First of all, it seems like the most important thing to do is to make people aware of the fact that most of us have a lot of these assets and a lot of them have great emotional and monetary value.

When it comes to digital assets purchased from an ISP, their “owners” must be aware that a lot of times they have not purchased digital content, but a license to access and use it, which expires upon death. Digital assets stored on ISPs’ servers are an altogether different story: they are subject to their ToS and most of them do not let account holders transfer their accounts, inter vivios or mortis causa. ISPs state that their ToSA has to prohibit transferability in order for them to abide by the law governing the relationship between an ISP and an account holder. Also, those ISPs are private companies and they have the right to operate under any rules the law lets them operate under. So, until the law changes, some other solutions have to be made. Stating directly to an ISP what an account holder wants to be done with his/her account post mortem is, as some commentators agree, the best way to resolve this issue. Google and Facebook have already offered their clients that possibility with much success.

REFERENCES Arnold, C., Managing Your Digital Afterlife, Scientific American, 9-1-2013; http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-to-manage-your-digital-afterlife/ Banta, N.: Death and Privacy in the Digital Age; North Carolina Law Review, Vol. 94/ 2016

1065

INTERDISCIPLINARY MANAGEMENT RESEARCH XIV

Secondly, is very hard to presume the wishes of the decedent about his/her digital assets, if he/she died intestate. In that sense, it seems password protected digital assets should maybe be treated differently than, say, decedent’s clothes, car or real estate. Therefore, it is crucial to try to awaken the public to how important stating their intentions on what is to happen to their digital assets is. The easiest way to plan for any type of inheritance is in a will. However, because of certain peculiarities of digital assets, it is advisable not to put all the information about them in a will, but rather in a separate document that is only referenced in a will.

Dubravka Klasiček: DIGITAL INHERITANCE

Banta, N., Inherit the Cloud: The Role of Private Contracts in Distributing or Deleting Digital Assets at Death; Fordham Law Review, Vol. 83/2014 Banta, N.: Property Interests in Digital Assets: The Rise of Digital Feudalism; Cardozo Law Review, Vol. 38/2017 Beyer, G.W.: Estate planning for digital assets; Estate Planning Studies, January 2015, https://static.montecito.bank/PDFs/201501051633_Montecito%20Bank%20%20 Trust%20Estate%20Planning%20Studies%20-%20Jan%202015.pdf Beyer, G.W., Cahn, N.R.: When You Pass on, Don’t Leave the Passwords Behind: Planning for Digital Assets; Probate & Property, Vol. 26, No. 1/2012 Beyer, G.W.; Griffin, K.M.: Estate Planning for Digital Assets; Estate Planning Developments For Texas Professionals, April 2011 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228143280_Estate_Planning_for_Digital_Assets Blachly, V.D.: Uniform Fiduciary Access to Digital Assets Act: What UFADAA Know; Probate & Property Magazine: Vol. 29, No. 04, 2015 Borden, M.: Covering Your Digital Assets: Why Stored Communications Act Stands in the Way of Digital Inheritance; Ohio State Law Journal, Vol. 75/2014(a) Borden, M.: The Day the Music Died: Digital Inheritance and the Music Industry; Entertainment and Sports Lawyer, Vol. 31, No. 2/2014(b) Brubaker, J.R; Callison-Burch, V: Legacy Contact: Designing and Implementing Post-Mortem Stewardship at Facebook; http://www.jedbrubaker.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/05/Brubaker-Callison-BurchLegacy-CHI2016.pdf Cahn, N.: Postmortem Life On-line; Probate & Property, Vol. 25, No. 4/2011 Cahn, N.: Probate Law Meets the Digital Age; Vanderbilt Law Review, Vol. 67/2014 Calem, R.E.: What Happens to Your Online Accounts When You Die, Techlicious, 6-29-2010 https://www.techlicious.com/how-to/what-happens-to-your-online-accounts-when-youdie/ Cummings, R.G.: The Case Against Access to Decedent’ E-mail: Password Protection as an Exercise of the Right to Destroy; Minnesota Journal of Law, Science and Technology, Vol. 15, no.2/2014 Darrow J.J.; Ferrera, G.R.: Who Owns a Decedent’s E-mails: Inheritable Probate Assets or Property of the Network?; Legislation and Public Policy, Vol. 10/2007 Edwards, L., Harbinja, E., Protecting Post-mortem Privacy: Reconsidering the Privacy Interests of the Deceased in a Digital World; Cardozo Arts and Entertainment, Vol. 32, No. 1/2013 Eichler, A.C.: Owning What You Buy: How iTunes Uses Federal Copyright Law to Limit Inheritability of Content, and the Need to Expand the First Sale Doctrine to Include Digital Assets; Houston Business and Tax Law Journal, Vol. 16/2016 Gavella, N., Belaj, V., Nasljedno pravo, Narodne novine, Zagreb, 2008

1066

1067

INTERDISCIPLINARY MANAGEMENT RESEARCH XIV

Gavella, N. et al., Stvarno pravo (vol. I), Narodne novine, Zagreb, 2007 Harbinja, E.: Virtual Worlds – a Legal Post-Mortem Account; A Journal of Law; Technology & Society, Vol. 11, No. 3/2014(a) Harbinja, E.: Virtual Worlds Players – Consumers or Citizens; Internet Policy Review, Vol. 3, No. 4/2014(b) Horton; D.: Tomorrow’s Inheritance: The Frontiers of Estate Planning Formalism; Boston College Law Review, Vol. 58/2017 Hopkins, J.P.: Afterlife in the Cloud: Managing a Digital Estate; Hastings Science and Technology Law Journal, Vol. 5, No. 2, 2013 Lopez, A.B.: Death and the Digital Age: The Disposition of Digital Assets; Savannah Law Review, Vol. 3, No. 1/2016 Klarić, P.; Vedriš, M.: Građansko pravo, Narodne novine, 2014 McCarthy, L.: Digital Assets and Intestacy; Boston University Journal of Science & Technology Law, Vol. 21, No. 2/2015 Moncur, W; Waller, A.: Digital Inheritance, 2014, (https://www.researchgate.net/ publication/260301931) Ronderos, J.: Is Access Enough: Addressing Inheritability of Digital Assets Using the ThreeTier System Under the Revised Uniform Fiduciary Access to Digital Assets Act; Transactions: The Tennessee Journal of Business Law, 18/2017 Shaw, J.: Why Big Data is a Big Deal; Harvard Magazine, March-April. 2014 Sherry, K.: What Happens to Our Facebook Accounts When We Die?: Probate Versus Policy and the Fate of Social-Media Assets Postmortem; Pepperdine Law Review, Vol. 40, No. 1/2012 Tarney, T.G.: A Call for Legislation to Permit the Transfer of Digital Assets at Death; Capital University Law Review, Vol. 40/2012 Todorova, A.: Identity Theft Can Happen After You Die Too; Fair Credit Reporting Act, 8-6-2009 http://fcralawyer.blogspot.hr/2009/08/identity-theft-can-happen-after-you-die.html Truong, O.Y.: Virtual Inheritance: Assigning More Virtual Property Rights; Syracuse Science & Technology Law Reporter, Vol. 21/2009 Varnado, S.S.: Your Digital Footprint Left Behind at Death: An Illustration of Technology Leaving the Law Behind; Louisiana Law Review, Vol. 74. No. 3/2014 Walker, M.; Blachly, V.D.: Virtual Assets, 2011; http://www.nwpgrt.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/BlachlyWalker_Article.pdf Watkins, A.F.: Digital Properties and Death: What Will Your Heirs Have Access to After You Die?; Buffalo Law Review, Vol. 62/2014 Wilkens, M.: Privacy and Security During Life, Access After Death: Are They Mutually Exclusive?; Hastings Law Journal, Vol. 62/2011

Legislation Copyright and Related Rights Act, National Gazette 167/03, 79/07, 80/11, 141/13, 127/14, 62/17 Inheritance Act, National Gazette 48/03, 163/03, 35/05, 127/13, 33/15. Law on Land registry, National gazette, 91/96, 68/98, 137/99, 114/01, 107/07,52/08, 126/10, 55/13, 60/13. Law on Property and Other Property Rights, National Gazette 91/96, 68/98, 22/00, 73/00, 129/00, 114/01, 79/06, 141/06, 146/08, 38/09, 153/09, 152/14

125/11,

100/04, 137/99, 143/12,

Internet sources

Dubravka Klasiček: DIGITAL INHERITANCE

https://www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/display.html?nodeId=201380010 &pop-up=1 https://www.apple.com/legal/internet-services/itunes/us/terms.html https://www.facebook.com/help/1568013990080948 https://support.google.com/accounts/answer/3036546?hl=en http://www.google.com/intl/en/policies/terms/ https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/servicesagreement/ https://policies.yahoo.com/us/en/yahoo/terms/utos/index.htm

1068