It is reported that passive sharing is mandated in the Netherlands, and it is practiced in the mobile and fixed sectors based on commercial agreements. In addition, Directive 2014/61/EU (Art. 3.2) establishes that Member States shall ensure that, upon written request of an undertaking providing or authorised to provide public communications networks, any network operator has the obligation to meet all reasonable requests for access to its physical infrastructure under fair and reasonable terms and conditions, including price, with a view to deploying elements of high-speed electronic communications networks. Such written request shall specify the elements of the project for which the access is requested, including a specific time frame.

The Netherlands has ratified the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Copyright Treaty.

The Netherlands has ratified the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Performances and Phonograms Treaty.

The Netherlands is a party to the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT).

There is no general principle for the use of copyright protected material comparable to the fair use/fair dealing principles. Directive 2001/29/EC defines an optional, but exhaustive set of limitations from the author´s exclusive rights under the control of the “three-step test” in line with the Berne Convention that establishes three cumulative conditions to the limitations and exceptions of a copyright holder’s rights. The Directive has been transposed by Member States with significant freedom.
Directive 2001/29/EC was implemented in the Netherlands through the Copyright Act with a closed system of carefully-defined copyright limitations.

According to the Dutch Copyright Act (1912), rightsholders may prohibit further sale and distribution of their work and/or seek compensation through the courts, after a copyrights violation. However, prior to a ruling by the European Court of Justice on 10 April 2014, free downloading of copyrighted material by private citizens was not illegal. This has become unlawful after the court's decision, but it is reported that the Dutch copyright policy approach continues to be based on a legal framework within which private parties (rather than public authorities) operate to protect their copyright. Enforcement efforts focus on content providers, not consumers. It is reported that the Dutch government lacks effective enforcement. Nevertheless, the rate of unlicensed software installation in the country was reportedly 22% in 2017 (below the 26% rate of Western European countries), for an estimated commercial value of unlicensed software of USD 448 million.

Art. 23b of the Patents Act 1995 stipulates that a patent application can only be accepted if it has been submitted by a registered patent attorney or lawyer who is registered with a court of law. The patent attorney must be registered in the official Register of Patent Attorneys. Patent attorneys from a different European Union or European Economic Area (EEA) country are allowed to submit a limited number of patent applications in the Netherlands during a specific period only after gaining permission from the director of the Netherlands Patent Office.

Under the Regulation 2019/452, Member States may maintain their existing investments screening mechanisms (21 Member States currently do), adopt new ones or remain without such national mechanisms. The Commission keeps an up-to-date list of screening laws in the EU. Member States must notify the Commission who may issue an opinion when an investment threatens the security or public order of more than one Member State, or when an investment could undermine a strategic project or programme of interest to the whole EU, such as Horizon 2020 or Galileo. The final decision remains with the Member State.
In 2020, the Act on Unwanted control of Telecommunication Companies was passed. Parties that intend to acquire a controlling interest through an investment in a Dutch telecommunications company are obliged to notify the Minister of Economic Affairs and Climate. A transaction can lead to a controlling interest when: 1) the investing party obtains a 30% share of the stakeholders’ voting rights, 2) the investing party can appoint/dismiss more than 50% of the company's board, 3) the investing party obtains at least one share with special statutory rights regarding the control of the company, 4) the assets become part of the telecom branch of the buyer.
If the minister finds that the predominant control of the party may lead to a threat to the public interest (for instance when there is a strong presumption that the party aims to cause intentional failure of the telecommunications system), they can prohibit the investment. If the investor is able to take measures that remove the minister’s objections, the investment can continue. The notification requirement applies regardless of the nationality of the acquirer or acquirers.

Art. 85 of the Utilities Directive (2014/25/EU) contains provisions allowing contracting public entities to reject foreign goods not covered by any EU international commitments from its tender procedures. In these cases, a tender submitted for the award of a supply contract may be rejected where the proportion of the products originating in third countries exceeds 50% of the total value of the products constituting the tender (Art. 85.2). Additionally, in cases of equivalent offers, the provisions provide for a preference for European tenders and tenders covered by EU's international obligations. In practice, this possibility has rarely been used.
The Public Procurement Act transposes the restriction on foreign goods as established by the Utilities Directive (2014/25/EU) into law. A contracting authority or a “special sector company”, i.e. legal persons or institutions that provide privatized public services, may reject any tender submitted for the purpose of awarding a supply contract if the proportion of goods originating in third countries (with which the EU does not have international commitments) exceeds 50% of the total value of the goods to which such tender relates (Public Procurement Act, Art. 3.76).

It has been reported that local representation is a de facto requirement in public procurement procedures.

Since the Cabinet's Decision of 2007, public authorities are required to give preference to open source software in procurements in cases of equal suitability between a project with open source software and a project with closed source software. Additionally, in 2020 the state secretary for digital affairs encouraged all (decentral) governments to open the source code of the software they are using, unless there are specific reasons not to, for example in the interest of public security.

According to Art. 4 of the Public Procurement Act, tenderers may be asked to submit a 'declaration of conduct' , which provides evidence that there are no legal objections to an entrepreneur bidding for a tender (for instance because of criminal proceedings). Foreign firms are ineligible to apply for a Dutch declaration of conduct, but an equivalent declaration from the country in which the tenderer is based is sufficient. In the absence of this document, it may be replaced by a sworn statement. It is reported that the process to gain a type of 'declaration of conduct' can be burdensome for both domestic and foreign firms.

Malta has adopted national legislation based on or influenced by the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) Model Law on Electronic Commerce.

Malta has not adopted national legislation based on or influenced by the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) Model Law on Electronic Signatures.

Malta has not signed the United Nations (UN) Convention on the Use of Electronic Communications in International Contracts.