We all know this guy John Flaherty dude. Thank you so much for hopping on the feed We got some of your best social media posts. Are you ready to check them out? I'm ready to check it out There are many posts out there, so I'm interested to see what you have. Well, we found them. All right, cool First off we're going to throw back off the bat So this is 1990 Pawtucket Red Sox mad and I actually went from single a ball all the way to triple a and When I look at this I'm like holy cow. What how young I look but also I had no idea what I was doing, right? I went from a ball where I thought I had a good year and then I got promoted to triple a Which you know triple a is a bunch of men right the guys who have had big league experience. They come back down I was totally overwhelmed by that level. I actually had to go back to double a in the next year So when I see that I look at and say, you know that kid thought he knew what was going on but he had no idea how to how to be a pro and it brought you to such a great career and You've gotten a chance to collect so many cool things and be a part of so many great Experiences in Major League Baseball and this is one of them. Give the backstory behind this baseball. This is one of my favorites I'm glad that you bring this up. This was a baseball that I was warming up Jose Contreras with in the bullpen When Aaron Boone hit the home run to send us to a world series my only world series my first world series and This baseball was left in my locker the day after that night and Mike Borzello Who was our bullpen catcher at the time who's still a good friend of mine? He wrote the the inscription on there that said this was the ball that Jose Contreras was throwing when Boone he hit the home run I got me to a world series and you know I have signed baseballs by Hall of Famers and all these great players that is a moment I'm never gonna forget a moment. I'm still getting a little I know I was about to say look at my arm I've seen mine too. I'm remembering it right now. It was a great moment and that World Series and 03 didn't work out But I'll never forget that moment. All right, like I said before we all know who this guy is You could see him on yes the yes app pre game show post game show doing commentary play-by-play all this stuff for yes And this is a post from Troy Benjamin one of our producers This is a final game of the season, but here you are with the entire yes network game cast crew So, you know I'm at the best part about retiring or I should say the worst part about retiring as a player Is you miss the team aspect right and then I see this video the best part of working for yes You get to be part of that team aspect again I mean when I see that video of all the great people that we work with it Yes, most of them are behind the scenes That doesn't take away from what they do to make us look good every night either in the studio Doing the game on the road whatever it is I love the team aspect of everything that I've ever done I love being on the road with the guys that we travel with with yes And you do the game and then you get to enjoy it afterwards and you break down what went well What didn't go well? I've been lucky enough that at the yes network I still get to enjoy that part of it Yeah, and you even still get to enjoy being on the actual field at Yankee Stadium, too You got probably one of like the like a dream all-access pass that every Yankee fan Yankee player Which is that they have between doing the stuff a yes network and still being involved with the Yankees? You know again the yes network has been great to me mad and that they let me enjoy that day And I'm actually proud of myself at 55 years old soon to be gonna be 56 I actually had to wear with all like I'm gonna take a video of this, right? I'm gonna get Mariano I'm gonna get Derek when they're walking To the to the Yankee wives Thurman Munson's wife Diana down there and they were saying hello And I actually I'm usually not very good at recognizing the moment I let it go by and I'm like I should have taken a video or a picture So I was proud of myself for getting a couple of videos and got a great selfie with Jorge and Derek that day, too Dude, I was about to say it's like you knew the next one that was coming again And this is one of those I am not very good at this right and Jorge is one of my favorites, right? I would say out of everybody that I played with in my 14 years Jorge and I were close, right? And I think I I told him when I made that team in 03. I said dude, I don't want your job I know how good you are. I want to be your backup and I want to give you one day off a week where you can Have a great year. So we were pretty tight. So I wanted a selfie with him I had no idea that Derek was gonna be behind us photobombing it It turned out to be a great picture a great moment. And yeah, that one's not gonna be erased from the phone for a long time I'm gonna keep going back to that one amazing. All right. How about this one? You tweeted this out a long time ago, and you said that kids who came through the house I guess probably your son or your daughter's friends came over and said that they really liked this photo Yeah, because you know that my my kids Friends knew me as Kristen, Brian and Logan's dad, right? They don't know me and they couldn't care less about being a player But when they saw Sandler there and you know, he threw out the first pitch and we had a great moment there They thought that was really cool. Like all of a sudden my my my cred rose a little bit With that younger generation and we had a really nice time before that game started and the pitch wasn't so bad either Amazing so cool. All right, so we're talking a lot about your baseball career your broadcast career And yes, you also give back so much and you're a fan favorite, but you're also a favorite in your community You do a lot of work around especially in New Jersey, but just give them back to the community These are tough, you know We're just talking about the other pictures and how great they were and you know part of what I think is your responsibility as you know an athlete or Public figure if somebody asks you to help out you go do it and those days aren't easy You know you come away or you go into with some nerves and anxiety and you know I don't know if these kids want to see me, right?  So thanks for sharing that one and here you are I think the caption was something like top gun style Going to Nantucket. Yeah, this was actually a fun day and we bid on this. It was a make-a-wish foundation event You know our boss John Philippellian is lovely wife Jenna throw a great make-a-wish event and one of the items was Go in a plane fly to wherever you want to fly to for the day and you get kind of a lesson from the pilot I look a lot more confident going into that plane map than when I was in there and the pilot actually said, okay Here's the stick you can fly this thing. It lasted about two seconds. I'm like I want no part of this And he was telling us like oh if the engine goes out, we'll be able to glide for like six miles So we'll be fine. It was a fun experience, but I have no desire to be a pilot You also spend some time at the golf course. This is a hole in one, huh? Yeah, this was at Atlantic City Country Club and that was on the 17th hole, which is ironic My number was 17 with the Yankees Hit an eight iron up the hill and it was funny because the head pro at Rockland Country Club is with us a Guy by the name of Bobby Everett and it was uphill over a bunker So you couldn't see the ball where it landed or if it went in and Bobby right away said it's either long or it's in And as we drove up to the green we didn't see a ball on the green He's looked at me said it's in the hole and as we walked over there Buddy mind picked out the stick and it was in there So one of those once-in-a-lifetime moments, you know probably a lot more luck than skill although I did hit that shot pretty well It was a it was a good strike and you know something that you can enjoy it with your buddies Which was the greatest part about it I love the selfie that you took with them, too You made sure that you got the witnesses in the in a photo dude you you after your playing days Even after catching all those innings you're doing triathlons. It's amazing. All right So there's a backstory to this right and and we talked about giving back There was a local charity in Pearl River, New York and it was to raise money for Huntington's disease which Had a few acquaintances who unfortunately had some relatives who were suffering from that disease and right away. I said, yeah Absolutely, I would love to do it the running part wasn't going to be a problem I figured I could bike 18 miles right but I never swam in my life ever you have to swim a half a mile in a Lake out to a buoy and then all the way back now You don't get to grab on to the side of a pool right and rest for a little bit So I jump in the water and I start doing my swim and after about 50 yards I'm like I'm in trouble. So I literally went on my back and did like a back stroke for a half a mile got out of the water started the The bike portion then finished the run portion and as I got through the finish line I said I am never doing that again never again. It was it was Great for the the cause, but it was so physically challenging. I said I'm never going to do it again. All right, so here we go Here's the last set Here you are fishing. Yeah, so I'm in I'm in West Palm Beach here Out on a charter boat with my girlfriend Kristen and she got this for me for a Christmas present And I've always been into fishing as a kid. I would do a lot of freshwater fishing now that I have a place in Florida I wanted to get into the saltwater fishing and this was fishing for what they call snuck down there Which are big during the summer a great day a great experience and I do a lot of beach fishing now in Florida Trying to teach myself how to how to bring in some of these snuck It's not going to be as big as that but I get into it, you know something to get out there to relax a little bit Kind of get away from the daily grind and get get with your thoughts and try to figure out What I'm doing. So that was a great day. It was a great present from my girlfriend and we had a great time I love how you just try to conquer everything and we're showing on the screen right now this photo because you did take a Picture of the Fisher at least one of the 40 that you caught. Yeah, we caught 40 But they they get the pictures out right away and those things were over 40 inches long They were a great fight and look at my girlfriend Kristen right there If I would have told her five years ago when we met she'd be wrestling these guys in and not only that holding it up And smiling for a picture. She's a trooper. She's a gamer We had a great and then maybe even jumping into water and going for a swim with her too You know what then after the fact we went home cleaned up and had a nice night on our beach A nice dinner. It was a great day all the way around So we see all these social media posts to do a great job of putting them up on on X But what would you say is your favorite part about social media when it does come to sharing these photos and videos? Well, I'm not very good at it. I should mention that I told you I'm very conservative about what I put out there I don't want a lot of personal stuff to be out there But there are a few moments that I'm proud of and I say, you know what? This is something I'm gonna try to share But you know there there's a lot of things in the position that we're in Matt You know like if I'm doing a game in the booth then you had there's access there to Yankee fans who want to let you know What they're thinking about the job that you're doing a lot of positive responses and you know, there's a bunch of negatives too So I think I've learned over the years to kind of realize what it is. It's a way to interact with the fans It's a way to to give something about what's going on in your personal life But you know when that when the critics and the comments come back I've learned to be able to laugh at it now I wasn't so great when Twitter came out early on actually deleted my account after a game one night Because I got so upset about what somebody was saying about me you learn as you get older It's just all part of it and to be able to interact with the fans is fantastic. All right Well now's the time for the plug where should everybody go to follow you and watch as they follow you well flash 17 I guess is gonna be my ex-handle. I just started a newsletter. I do have a website John dash Flaherty Dot com where you know I do some speaking engagements and things like that and try to make myself available to see what's out there and engage with some Of the fans so there are a few ways to get in touch with it. Awesome. My man flash a lot more great stuff on the way Thank you so much


Top 5 Strongest Military in the World 2023 The strongest military in the world is a complex question to answer, as there are many factors to consider. However, according to most rankings, 5. United Kingdom Military Spending 42.2 Billion Pounds 4. India Military Spending 72.9 Billion Dollars 3. Russia Military Spending 61.7 Billion Dollars 2. China Military Spending 252 Billion Dollars 1. United States of America Military Spending 750 Billion Dollars


Good day, fellow investors. One of the most important things to understand in order to be a successful investor is the difference between risk and uncertainty. The investment community analyzes risk from a wrong perspective. They see risk as volatility. However, your heart is volatile, but if it stops, then things become risky. The same thing is with stocks. They are always volatile and will always be considered risky. However, risk is not volatility, risk is a function of price. The higher the price in relation to the fundamentals, in relation to the earnings, the higher is the risk. It doesn't matter if the stock is volatile or stable. The risk is a function of price, especially in the long term, not volatility. On the other hand, the market sees uncertainty equal to risk because if a stock, let's say, can have earnings of $2 next year or $1, analysts cannot decide between that and they describe the stock as extremely risky and usually a stock then has a price to earnings ratio of 10 because everybody expects earnings of 1 in the future and don't really see that too potential because it's uncertain. However, in the worst case scenario the stock will have earnings of 1 and in the best case scenario the stock will have earnings of 2. Earnings of 1 lead to price earnings ratio, let's say, of 10, earnings of 2, price earnings ratio of 5, but if a company grows to 2, then the price to earnings ratio usually goes to 20. So there is huge potential upside with low risk if you can differentiate between risk and uncertainty. So the key is to see, okay, what's the worst that can happen? That's the risk. And if there is a plethora of possibilities of better scenarios that can happen, that is uncertainty and that's something you have to take advantage when investing. I'll show you an example to clearly elaborate on what I mean. Now this is the stock chart from Apple for the last three years and you can see that the stock is up 56%. However, the stock has also almost doubled from April 2016. What was going on in April 2016? There was huge uncertainty related to Apple, but the price earnings ratio was below 10, Apple was paying a dividend, growing its dividend, revenues were stable, a little bit declining because of slower sales, but they still had a huge customer base, a good product, really a brand and everything. So the risk was really, really low. Plus they had a lot of cash which really gave protection to the stock price and the stock price was really, really crazy low. Of course, I bought at those prices. However, there was negative sentiment because there was high uncertainty. Carl Icahn was just selling his stake in Apple. He had made some money on that. Nobody knew what will the next iPhone 7 look like, what will be sales and there were also negative sentiment surrounding the capabilities of Apple's CEO. So on one hand, you had a company that didn't grow for a year. Everybody was panicking about sales, about the new Samsung destroying Apple sales. However, Apple had a really strong brand, a lot of money. Everything was good from a fundamental perspective. However, there was future uncertainty. Nobody knew if revenues would stay flat for the next three years or if revenues were about to double or triple. You never know. So there was practically no risk when investing in Apple at 90 with a lot of upside. And that's why you have seen Buffett investing heavily in the stock in the past year and a half. So the market perceives that as risk, uncertainty, risk, volatility, lower stock price, sell, sell, sell in panic because they don't understand between uncertainty, which was high with Apple, but the risk was very, very low. And Apple has been one of the best investments in the last year and a half from a risk reward perspective. What's the current risk, reward, uncertainty and risk in the market? As I have said, there is a big difference between risk and uncertainty risk. The higher the stock prices are. And we have seen very, very high stock prices in the market now, which means that the risk is high. However, the uncertainty, is it high or low? The market doesn't see it. The market doesn't see the risk and everybody's complacent and happy. I see high prices. I see high risk. Nevertheless, the market doesn't see that. Here is the smoothed US recession probability that there will be a recession. As you can see, it's usually close to zero. And only when a recession happens, it goes higher, the probability of a recession. This shows that it's impossible to time a recession. And nobody usually sees a recession coming until it actually happens. So that's a big surprise for everybody then. So uncertainty for the market is low, and therefore prices are very, very high. The VIX index, low uncertainty, everything is going on. Everybody expects the economy to continue to grow. And things look really good on a global perspective. The VIX index is very, very low. However, only when there is trouble, like it was the case in August 2015, when there was a supposed alleged crisis in China, then it quickly shoots up. But that's usually after something happens. A look at prices, valuations, the cyclically adjusted price to earnings ratio is double the historical average as 33.67 now, which is higher than Black Tuesday in 2029, is not yet higher than the dot com craze. But you can see what are the long term returns when the cyclically adjusted price to earnings ratio is this high. So I'm practically saying that there is huge certainty that long term returns will be negative. And the risk of investing now in stocks is extremely high. So what do you have to do? You have to look, okay, what's the risk and what's the uncertainty and invest in stocks that have high uncertainty levels. Nobody knew in 2009, when there will be a reversal, when the economy will pick up again, and things will do fine. However, it was practically certain that things will improve, the governments will intervene. We are human, we always get our way, we always grow after something happens. So there was practically no risk in investing. However, everybody was selling because there was high uncertainty. So investors hate uncertainty, because they're equalized with risk. And that's something we should not do. I will continue to look at high uncertainty investments like the food industry, seafood industry that we have been talking about low risk due to strong fundamentals. Thank you for watching. Give us more example in the comments of high uncertainty, low risk investments, we'll take a look at them. So leave your comments, then click like, subscribe, and I'll see you in the next video.


That's the sound of a whiff. A whiff lashing the bare back of an African slave. I, Jane Swism, heard the whistle and crack of that punishing whiff and saw for the first time a human being in torment, much as I wanted to or couldn't stop that legal flogging. But then in there I took a note I was never to forget that I would raise my voice against all cruelty with all my strength and with all my heart's devotion and that no one should ever steal my voice nor force me to silence in the presence of this evil thing. Out of Jane's resolution came a famous anti-slavery newspaper under her own editorship. A journal edited and published not in Ladylike Gentile protest but in hot, glamorous anger. With the paper came trouble of course and with the anger long maintained at white heat came illness, illness and at last an enforced rest at the house of Jane's sister in St. Cloud, Minnesota. Last year really? It can't be Big Sister, Jane. Now Henry, who else could it be? I'm very glad to meet you Henry. Big Sister, literary Amazon, female abolitionist. Well you can't be up to the five foot march. Henry, he's my sister, not a sand of timber. All right, you girls get in the bucket at them. I'll put you down in the case right here, Jane. Golly, Lucy's down right pretty. Henry? All right, all right. Just that I was good and scared. After all we've heard about you, Jane, well I sure am relieved to lay eyes on you. That's all we might be in for trouble.  Well, Jane, this is St. Cloud, all of it. That's an Indian over there isn't it? He's a soup and they still go on the war pass sometimes. Oh, Liz, this is thrilling. I can't tell you how much I've been looking forward to your cabin at the lake. Oh, you wait till you see it, Jane. Just the thing for tired lady editors. Especially Eastern lady editors. No trouble. What's that over there? Henry, stop the carriage. Sure, oh, oh boy. Jane, what's the matter? I don't see anything. There, that Negro man sweeping up in front of the saloon. I thought I saw it. It is. That's a slave chain on his leg. Aren't there any hacksaws in Minnesota? We can't rightly take it off. He don't belong to us. Human beings can't belong to anybody. Now, Jane, you see, well, Captain Sealy, he owns that saloon and sort of runs the politics here about. That's his slave. But this is a free territory. This is the norm. Well, of course, Jane, but the Captain has a form, a plantation, down river in Missouri. Pretty hard to get any hard help out here these days, Jane. Real hard. So Sealy brings a few of his boys up with him. Well, some of us don't like it much, but, well, nobody wants to make trouble. So, get up.  Nobody wants to make trouble. Nobody has gumption enough to speak up against it. Now, now, Janey, Captain Sealy's not such a bad sort. Runs things sort of high-wide and handsome, but things do get run.  You've never met anyone like him back in. I wouldn't be too sure about that, Liz. Henry, are you sure nobody cares about such things? Here, here in this pretty town to see a man in chains. Well, I'll take it. Lots of folks are getting more and a little tired of Captain Sealy, but not tired enough. You see, he sort of lends those slaves of his around for free, too. Useful to have on the place when you're shorthanded like. Easy, Prince. Easy there. Oh, look. He sort of lends the slaves around. Sure. And there's no charge for the labor? Well, it ain't written down in front of no-notary public, but, uh, you don't use the captain's slaves and then vote against the captain's candidates, uh, gum-election. I see, uh. Henry, what this town needs is a good newspaper, a voice. Had one. Wouldn't call it good, exactly, as a voice that was, uh, well, sort of a force. Who ran it? Cap Sealy's brother-in-law. As an editor, he couldn't even spell C-A-T. But he got plenty ads thanks to the captain. Drank up all the profits, though. Hey. Oh, hold on. Henry, why are you stopping here? Jane. Jane, you see that shack over there all boarded up? Inside the printing press. You still looking for trouble, Jane? I-I-I don't know. Why? No one's that press? I do. Me. Henry Mitchell. Took it over for bad debts when Sealy got tired paying up for his drunken relation. Press still works, Jane. Want to be a voice in the wilderness? No. No, I-I won't do it. I-I came out here for rest. I need a rest. I'm not going to start another newspaper. I'm not going to do it. That's the boy, Josie.  Ink on your thumbs, boy. Ink on my thumbs, ma'am. Ink on your nose. All over my nose, ma'am. Ink in your hair. All over. Good. It's the finest smudge and the finest smell in the world, Josie. The smell of print as ink. It's the smell of truth if you make it so. You know what we're turning out here? No. It's a handbill, Josie, saying our first issue will be out tomorrow. I'll see who it is. Good morning. Good morning indeed, Mrs. Switham. Rare morning. An effulgent, I may say, sparkling, positively delightful morning. Cilly's the name. Captain Marcus Herolius, Fortunata Cilly, at your service. A pleasure, I'm sure, Captain. Mrs. Switham, I am truly and deeply sorry that I was not among those present here in some cloud upon the day of your arrival, so that I might have extended to you an official welcome on behalf of our town and on behalf of our state. Your fame has preceded you, ma'am, but I've been down the river on business. Your business, up and down the river, doesn't appeal to me, Captain, and I intend to say as much in my paper tomorrow. Ma'am, my friend's calling me Cap. Captain sounds sort of formal. Yes, doesn't it, Captain? Oh, no, no, ma'am. That's no way to talk. You and me, we've got to get along. I run this part of the state. You seem to be sat on running the only newspaper in my neck of the wood. Well, you and me, we've got interests in common. Lots of them. What you might call a community of interest. Captain Sealy, you own slaves, do you not? Well, in Missouri, yes. With the full consent of the law, ma'am. And in Minnesota, with the cowardly connivance of the people who don't want any trouble. What you're aiming at is to make this a slave state. That's true, isn't it? Mind if I smoke, Janey? Captain Sealy, I think you'd better get out of here. Well, I guess you don't care if I burn. That's an old joke, ma'am. It's an old Missouri joke. Look here, you female martyr. There's work to be done in this new state.  So I aim to import a few strong backs to bear the burdens that have to be born if we're going to reach anywhere here in Minnesota. That's my business. Your newspaper is my business, too. Look at it this way, Mrs. Martyr. This is a spread out town, mainly farms and scattered homesteads all over the county. You've got to distribute your paper through the post office, correct? And of course, you are postmaster or some such thing. Some such thing. I manage things in general around here. I license your paper to go through the mail, or I don't. Captain Sealy, do you seriously expect me to submit the censorship from you? Oh, great heavens, no, Janey. No, I'm an easy-going man. I like everything smooth. Smooth and understood in advance. We settle it now.  Oh, I either agree, year and now, to support slavery or no paper. Is that it? Well, ma'am, you're famous as an abolitionist. I wouldn't expect you to come right out and support slavery in Minnesota. Just don't mention it. All you have to do is support me. It's almost, but not quite the same thing. You see, I want to make it easy as I can for you. Yes, yes, of course that does make it easier. I knew it. I figured you for a woman of sense. I said to myself, a woman who got to be as famous as that, she's had to learn the ways of the world. It's a deal then. I have no other course, Captain, have I? I'll have to rewrite my editorial for tomorrow, but it's a deal. Everything under control? Everything hunky-dory? Morning, Cap. Oh, yeah. Business is fine. Yeah. Hey, Pilly. Hey, Captain. What is it, Perkins? I thought you said you'd bought out that Mrs. ... what's her name? Is that her paper? It sure is. Listen to this. Editorial, it says. In order to publish the same cloud visitor at all, this editors had to agree to support Captain Marcus Sealy, which is the same as supporting slavery. Thus, this is the first of a series of editorials which will explain why we should have slavery in the north as well as in the south. Well, she did tell us. Quiet. It is a marvelously efficient social institution slavery, the only one ever thought of, in which we can at one and the same time, offend both the majesty of God and the dignity of man. Go on. Yeah. Dignity of man. Anyway. Oh, in conclusion, let us say that no one could give slavery more honest support than we will hear in these columns. All the others merely pretend to be supporting it while giving forth fake arguments. We shall tell the true reasons why all wicked men should support Captain Sealy and his hopes of making Minnesota a slave state. Hey, you ain't going to turn out to be a good loser, are you? A good loser? Kirk, I'm going to be even better than that. A winner? Well, Cap, viewed from here, you ain't no top man as of now. No.  You two. You got a date tonight, at midnight. All right, keep it quiet now. Cap, this press here belongs to Henry Mitchell. We can't break it up. Break it up? Why, that'd be against the law, Emory, to get people mad. Do you ever know me to go around and get people mad? Well, then, what are we doing here? I'll show you, Kirk. Just bring a light. Now, where's all the sticks of type? Now, there's, uh, let me see, uh, this row here and this one. And this one. Yeah. All right, let's go to work. And here, too, mustn't forget the small type. What do you mean, Cap? Go to work.  Always will be dumb. These are all the S's. If she don't have any S's, she ain't gonna write about slavery, is she? Or see Lita, for that matter?  I gotta hand it to you, Cap. All right, come on, fill your pockets. And then we'll go down and throw every blurted S that she's got into the Mississippi. Into the Millerlithy, you mean? I think that should do it. Jane, you look so tired.  Oh, fine, Liz, thank you. I just never realized how many S's there are in the simplest sentence. Well, let's hear it. All right. We'll distribute it by itself on a single sheet. I simply can't write a whole S-less newspaper. It's headed Captain Ely. Captain Ely. Now, this is serious, isn't it, Emory? Now, listen. You all know of Captain Ely and the plan to import legal slavery into your territory. Okay, go, Navery. Can we be quiet? The time has come for truth. The good Captain worketh and Toileth mightily, but with one motive and no other, to make Ely money for Ely, by trading in negro people, men and women of good will. You named your territory with an Indian word for the clear blue water of a mountain lake, water far too clean and pure for the lowly lippery, liming, mud-loving eel. For the lowly lippery, limey, mud-loving eel. Hey, ain't you perky? Hey, hey, come on. Captain, stop, stop, stop.  In this town, by all its holy, I keep the score. The word, John Taper, stinking printer's ink, it don't mean a thing. What it words, if it get anybody, it's action that counts. It's yours, my name's Marcus Ely. That Swism woman is gonna be out of action for good and all. This time tomorrow. You're listening to the Cavalcade of America. Tonight's play, Troublesome Jane, starring Ruth Hudley with Kenny Delmar. In St. Cloud, Minnesota, almost a century ago, a woman editor, Jane Swism, noted as an abolitionist, started a newspaper. It was a thorn in the side of Captain Marcus Ely, the town's pro-slavery boss. And he's sworn to stop Jane from publishing it. And he's taken desperate action, action which results in... Ely, done? Yep, I heard. Might have burned down the whole town, that's included. Burned us in our beds. Yep. Well, ain't you men gonna do something, Boblet? I expect we are. At the moment, woman, I don't rightly know. Ask me that Miss Swism has been coming to her, showing at him all the time, ain't womanly, make anybody mad. I don't like newspapers. Can't read, anyway, much. Like fires, though, and I swear to give us. Guess you're against the talk about lynching him then, huh? Lynching, huh? Well, now that's something else again. Always did like a good lynching, better than a fire. It's close enough, Jane, and by heaven's sake, stay back against the wall where they can't see you. Henry, we can't let them mention we can't. All right, neighbors. This looks for me like it's past stop and zainlessness. All right, well, what we've got to decide tonight, we've been patient for a long time. But you know and I know what we've been patient against. Yeah! There was Ely just making sure he don't go anywhere. They've been there, would be no need for them guns. I see some of you brought. I got a... There's one thing we've got to think about. They've got to be stopped. They've got to. Jane, where are you going? Jane, come back here! Wait a minute. I don't like Steely.   That's what Steely has enjoyed in this town up till now.  Go back where you came from and let us run our own town. Yeah! Wait a minute. It was Henry Mitchell and myself who were hurt by the fire. It was his building that was burned up and my paper that was put out of publication. But I say this to you. You can't lynch Steely. Please, please, you can't do that. Let's show her what we can do, boys. Come on, let's do it. Let's do it! Let me finish. Please, let me finish. But what Steely hated and tried to stop when he burned down our shop was something called freedom of the press. Yes, I know. I know. Words, words, words. You're all tired of words. But words are important. Steely doesn't believe in words. He doesn't believe in reason. He doesn't believe in anything. But he's a man and you are men. And you must hear him before you do this terrible thing to him and to yourselves. If you judge Steely without hearing him, you'll be doing just exactly what he tried to do to me and to my paper. Gentlemen, gentlemen, you have no proof that Steely set the fire. I think he did it. You think he did. But we have no proof. Listen now. She's right. Let's hear Steely. Let's hear what he has to say. The potter. Hey, potter. Bring Steely over here. Hand back to us. Hand back. Let him through. All right. Help him up, boys. Everybody. Fire down. Fire down. What the... I didn't set fire to anything. You know what I mean, right? Listen to me. Hear my side. Hear my side. Men, this time yesterday you were all my friends. I ain't a violent man. You ought to know it. Now, here's the truth. Maybe you'll want to lynch me for this, too, for all I know. This is what happened. See, I was mad at Mr. Swizzom. Couldn't mad. Some of the boys in me, we got crowbars in early just about dawn. It was three of us went down there. We got... We broke up that press. Yeah, we broke up the press and some of the pieces we threw in the river. But there wasn't any fire. No fire, no set of fire for. My own saloon's only a half a block away. You think I want... I want it burned down? I broke up a press. I admit it. And I promised here now to buy a new one. But that... That ain't no lynching offense. That's for the fire. No, I... Could you come up here? Help him up, Henry. Now, what is this? Quietly. Quietly. What happened? Her ambulance. We better kick ourselves once in a while. You're going at a great rate. This is our real... At the door, I'll go. Quite... Quite good morning. Morning, ma'am. You wish to see me? Yes, ma'am. My name's Moeve. I belong down the river. Down under Captain Sealy's plantation. Oh, what there? Yes, of course. I saw you the day I got here. You may not know it, Moses. But it was because of you that I started this newspaper. Yes, ma'am. And Captain Sealy, he says to give you these. What? Legions. The legions you were wearing that day. Yes, ma'am. You see the captain, he's free in this. Free in all of us. And I'm going to get paid a weed in money. You thought maybe these irons would make sort of a membrane for you. For all you've done here. Good day, ma'am. Good day to you. Thank you, Moses. Thank you. On your thumb, Josie. Someday you will, Josie. Someday you will. We're worried about next week's show. We're very happy to announce we'll have with us one of America's best-known storytellers, John Nesson. All of us have enjoyed seeing his MGM series, The Passing Parade, for many years. Well, he's with us tonight. Here is John Nesson. Thank you very much. And when I visit the Cavalcade next Tuesday, it will be my privilege to play the host in the story of two human beings. The first of them will be a blacksmith named Tom Davenport, and the second, a tiny little woman who is his wife, Emily. But of all the true stories I've ever found, this one is unique, as it is the case of a man and woman who loved each other very much, and yet somehow found the time to work together upon an invention that has changed our world. So Tom, the blacksmith, his wife, Emily, in story, and myself in the flesh, will all be with you on Cavalcade next Tuesday night. Until then, good evening. Tonight's original Cavalcade play, Troublesome Jane, was written by Luther Davis, and adapted from a section in the book, Female Persuasion by Margaret Saren Thorpe, published by the Yale University Press. The music for the DuPont Cavalcade is composed by Arden Cornwell, conducted by Donald Borey. Cavalcade star tonight, Ruth Hudley, is currently starring in the Broadway hit Goodbye My Fancy. Kenny Del Mar will soon be seen in the new Broadway production, Texas Little Doll. Your narrator, Ted Pearson. Cavalcade of America, directed by John Zoller, came to you this evening from the stage of the Velasco Theater in New York, and is presented by the DuPont Company of Wilmington, Delaware, makers of better things for better living through chemistry. Join the fun on People Are Funny tonight on NBC.


Hi everyone, Shawn with jasperyscasebrakes.com here on release day doing 2020 Panini Obsidian football four box break random team number one where we're giving away a early bird spot as well So the way this works as far as being qualified for the early bird spot All you have to do is buy one of the first 16 spots in the break get entered to win a free spot in this break So 32 spots overall all card ship some details about the break itself in the case There's one black color blast per case. So this is a four box break Random team number two sold out. I believe the random team three is sold out as well random team two is coming up next but Very nice these black color blasts one per case super exciting, so let's find something nice 32 spots all card ship here is the Customer list So we're gonna open up a second sheet Here's the full list of customers from David down to our early bird spot and Spencer with last spot mojo I'm gonna highlight the top 16 so we know who were the first 16 to buy in since that was our cutoff so By one of the first 16 spots in this break get entered to win remember this is random team one So first 16 highlighted here. We go ahead and copy that list and paste it into random.org here and dice roll name on top after Five to one six times gets that early bird spot. So good luck six in final time front Michael Diaz Congratulations, you got your early bird spot all by just buying into the break in the first place. So Go ahead and add your name Right here, and we're gonna copy this list Delete this paste the new one with the early bird spot there So there's our randomizer for the random teams and Arizona Cardinals down to Washington football team dice roll to randomize both lists and combine them a six and a one seven times one two Seventh and final time From Christopher freeze down to Tony break it too. So hey was the gate mostly closed when it when you came in Okay Yeah, but I mean sort of people not paying attention to the sign on there Maybe move the sign that says closed on the door the one door onto the door that opens No, no, like, you know the sticky sign that's on the inside of the door I'll do it after you're good. Yes One Two three four five six and Seven no, I was saying do it put it on the door that opens Yes, so you know how it's on the door that doesn't open right now Nobody's paying attention to that so put it on the door that they're opening so that they're looking down at it while they're opening it Seven times on that for the teams as well. There's the sheet That's the teams here are the names There you go, so let's go through the list So Christopher freeze with the Steelers Josh Melton with the Panthers Kelly Williams the Broncos Walter Lutz with the Bangles Spencer Barclay with the Chargers and the Cowboys Congrats Spencer Steve Wright with the Raiders Christopher freeze with the Bills Kelly Williams the Lions Cruz Guerrero with the Cardinals Aaron Meacham with the Bears Benjamin Johnson with the Colts Michael Diaz with the Eagles Daniel Graham with the Packers Corey Conaseco with the Buccaneers Kelly Williams the Rams Benjamin Johnson with the Seahawks Michael Diaz with the Titans David Ivers with the 49ers Michael Diaz early bird spot with the Saints Marcus Young with the Ravens David Austin Sozer with the Falcons Daniel Graham with the Jaguars Tim Kraft with the Texans Kelly Williams with the Giants Michael Diaz with the Chiefs Tony Regatusa with the Jets Victor Zamora with the Washington Tom Judge with the Dolphins Congrats Tom Brian Haulding with the Browns Oliver Soria with the Patriots and Tony Regatusa with the Vikings So there you go Let's sort this by team and Open up a trade window so Steve it looks like Is Trying to trade out of the Raiders spot Specifically potentially for the Bears. So if Aaron Meacham is here listening Somebody would like your Bears spot. I think Yeah Can you talk to Kevin about what I talked I called him about earlier today and everything Yeah, can you talk to him? Cool, so while you guys are doing that I'm gonna open up this case and figure out Which boxes we're doing So fresh case four boxes 12 in a box so or 12 per case. We got to figure out which four we're doing I usually use one three zero point one thirty point dot-com the word point So we got eight on each side These over it's six. So actually sorry one case is 12 boxes so let's go for Eight, there we go So we have three stacks of four Kick over here dice roll to see which one we're doing for random team one One tooth one two for the boxes on the left three four for the boxes in the middle five six for the boxes on the right Good luck. It's a four. So we're going with the boxes in the middle These here I'll be will be for the next random teams which are already sold out Random team two is actually coming up next So long should just put X on those Okay, so these are our four boxes for this case No talks of trades. It looks like Steve's gonna keep his team. Let's print rip Cool our first look at obsidian for the year finalists Spencer Barclay last-bought mojo cowboys you go See if my Chargers mojo Can come through today for people And let's just find some really nice stuff for everybody. So how is this set up? Relic auto auto Relic auto So first up James Robinson stud rookie for the year Jacksonville Jaguars Daniel Graham. That's number 28 out of 75 Jack. I'm pretty sure that's I mean I don't think there's really any debate on that. Is there CD lamb for the Dallas Cowboys last-bought mojo Spencer Barclay Another nice rookie there 19 out of 100 van Jefferson for the Rams and Kelly Williams Non-numbered rookie on that one. Well, I think Vegas has him as minus 1000 so I Think we all know the answer Nice atomic material relic for the Chargers Spencer Barclay 36 out of 50 ladenian Tomlinson LT our first auto Dante Culpepper Minnesota Vikings Tony Regatuso 10 out of 25 on that one off the jersey number Nice yellow Aurora auto there for you Garrison Hurst For the 49ers and David Ivers 15 out of 100 Pachanato Zach Moss rookie Buffalo Vils Going to Christopher freeze That's pretty much locked up to Jeremy Chin is doing pretty good job of trying to catch up. But yeah, it's chase young That is 70 out of 150 for the Vils and Christopher freeze I'm I Pretty sure it is Igor you can always check the checklist on that on Group break checklist or cardboard connection either or both will give you that information box to Got a die cut in this one Jalen Hurts, there we go Philadelphia Eagles Michael Diaz No, Michael is in the chat. He was happy with the early bird spot 41 out of 50 Speaking of Patrick Mahomes tunnel vision die cut four out of 25 Kansas City cheese Michael Diaz There you go, Michael Devin DuVernay For the Baltimore Ravens and Marcus young non-numbered Terry McClaren galaxy gear For Washington and Victor Zamora 11 out of 100 on that Another three-color patch for Washington Antonio Gibson Victor Zamora good rookie running back there Tanner Muse auto for the Raiders and Steve Wright rookie auto 122 out of 150 Two-color patch and auto Joe Burroughs Cincinnati Bengals Walter Lutz There you go, Walter Nice Joey B. That's pretty Box three Good luck Lamar Jackson to start for the Ravens Marcus young 92 out of 100 on that one Phillip Lindsay Denver Broncos Kelly Williams eight out of 25 Rob Gronkowski Tampa Bay Buccaneers Corey Conaseco No numbering on that rookie relic Brandon Ayute volcanic For the 49ers David Ivers 70 out of 100 Darnell Mooney rookie auto Chicago Bears Aaron Meacham and Aurora auto Antonio Gates for the Chargers and Spencer Barclay. I hear he used to play basketball 77 out of 100 dual relic auto Anthony McFarland, Jr For the Steelers and Christopher freeze 149 out of 150 I thought he would have had a bigger role It looks like they were using Benny Snell pretty much Whatever they're doing. It's not working Maybe they need to switch it over to him And box for second four box break of this coming up next random team to Adam Thielen Minnesota Vikings Tony Riga to so two out of ten on that one another die cut Tunnel vision Jared got going to the Rams and Kelly Williams Six out of ten gold You go Kelly Ben Danucci For the Dallas Cowboys Spencer Barclay last spot mojo Galaxy gear Cooper Cup Rams Kelly Williams again 26 out of 50 on that Brian Edwards trifecta materials Going to the Raiders and Steve Wright 25 out of 75 rookie auto James pro Sh Baltimore Ravens Marcus young 39 out of 75 What a first four boxes Justin Herbert dual relic and auto for my Chargers Spencer Barclay There you go Spencer Congrats guys nice burrow nice Herbert in the first four boxes Random team two coming up next That was 2020 punitive city and football four box break random team number one from jasper's case breaks calm I'm Sean jasper's case breaks calm random team two coming up next See you next time


Number five, practical investment insight. Proper allocation of capital is an investor's number one job. So we have capital and we have to allocate in the best way possible with the highest return at the lowest risk. That's what we have to learn to do. It's obvious that if a company generates high returns on capital and reinvests at high returns, it will do well. But this wouldn't sell books. So there's a lot of twaddle and fuzzy concepts that have been introduced that don't add much. So return on capital, businesses that do good and that's it. Everything else, costed weight of capital, blah, blah, blah, according to Munger, that's all Lula Palooza.  Really make comparative excel table of all your investments and then you'll see which one are the best ones and which are not so good. And then invest in the top five of those. We are guessing at our future opportunity cost, Warren is guessing that he'll have the opportunity to put capital out at high rates of return. So he's not willing to put it out at less than 10% now. But if we knew interest rates would stay at 1%, we'd change. So Warren Buffett has 100 billion in cash, which means that he expects interest rates to be much higher. And he's looking at investments at 10%. We've discussed synchrony financial, store capital, airlines, all Buffett investments that yield more than 10%. So we should really stick to having higher returns than 10%. There are two kinds of businesses. The first earns 12% and you can take it out at the end of the year. The second earns 12%, but all the excess cash must be reinvested. There's never any cash. It reminds me of the guy who looks at all of his equipment and says, there's all my profit. We hate that kind of business. So really look at businesses that make you rich, not that constantly invest in their business. Because sooner or later their business will go bust and you want the cash.


The dialogue is a unique process that gathers all of the world's regional police organization under Interpol's global umbrella. The objective really is to maintain regular, high-level discussions about coordinating our efforts against the global threat that we all face. This meeting is the third edition of its kind since Interpol launched the process, the dialogue process, back in 2016.


Hi everyone, Joe for jazbeascasebrakes.com coming at you with a fun one here. Jaspy's eight box out of the park baseball mixer. Pick your team, number one, and it's a wax party break. Check out the details of our wax party promo. It's our biggest yet on jazbeascasebrakes.com. I posted a pick your team too. So if you missed out on this one the first time, we can run it back if you'd like. Probably get this done tonight if you wanted to. Now this break also has those fanatics under wraps, autographed baseballs. They'll go to the team they're currently on if they're an active player, or the team they played for the longest if they're retired. If they're multi-signed autographed baseballs, they'll be randomized at the breaker's discretion, at my discretion. So most of the time any dual autos are probably gonna be part of the same team. Most of the time they're gonna be part of the same team. But we'll cross that bridge if we get there. All right, so with that being said, good luck everybody.  Zach with last spot, Mojo, Marlins. Thanks everyone for getting in. Let's start off with the five star, let's start off with the triple threads that is. That one has the most carbs. Now we'll do five star, then we'll do the baseballs, then we'll close with dynasty baseball. We got a little NBA action on the background. The IME Heat, we're up 3-0 on the series. Lost a game last time, and now they're in danger of losing this game. Celtics might close down the series to three-two. Certainly making some heat fans very nervous, I would imagine. Making some Celtics fans cautiously optimistic, I would imagine. All right, all cards ship. Let's see we'll be getting all this. Here's satchel page 259, Buster Posey to 199. We got Mark McGuire for the A's to one, check that to 99. And then we've got Jaren Duran Duran, rookie card to 59. All right, and your hits. There's one behind Mookie, it's Christian Yellich. Five out of nine, running and walking. Christian Yellich, don't look now, but his numbers have been looking, well you could look now. The numbers this past month and past few weeks have been back to being more Christian Yellich-y. That goes to Eric M. and the Milwaukee Brewers. And then behind Mookie for my Dodgers is a Zac Gallon, 44 out of 99. Jersey an autograph for Carl and the Snakes. We got a triple relic an autograph, Joey Bart. 54 out of 75. Future Phenoms, triple relic an autograph. I'll go to my rivals, the Giants, Zachary with that one. And behind Hammer and Hank is Chris Sale, piece of his Jersey 31 out of 49 for the Red Sox. Ed P. has Boston. All right, another triple threads box. If you like the look of this mixer ladies and gentlemen, I think this is a nice one here. Be sure to grab your teams in the next one. We've posted another one, same exact box configuration. There's Otani to 259 for the Halos. There is Altuve to 299 for the Stroves. Got to chip off the old block to 299. And we got Satchel Page to 125. Wait, Satchel Page, we've got two of those now. Corbell, what's going on? Let's see. The checklist has him for the base cards for the Orioles. So that's gonna go to Baltimore, that's for Jeremy Port. Mark those, all right. Onwards to the hits. Behind Willie Mays, we've got 11 out of 18. Laser show, Dustin Padreuya. Two strike success. That'll be for Ed P. in Boston. Logan, what's going on? How are you man? And then we got Peter Lanzo, 26 out of 48. Metz, Kenneth, for the Metropolitan's. Got a triple relic for the Braves. Tipper Jones, Freddie Freeman, Ronald Acuna Jr. It's five out of 27. And we've got Joe Ryan, rookie autograph, five out of 50. I think he's been playing pretty well this season. That's gonna go to Walter and the Twins.  All right, let's get into some baseballs. Put your thinking caps on. We'll do a quick round of, quick few rounds of who am I? I'll give you some clues. You can guess who the signer is. It's a Hall of Famer. Hall of Fame, third baseman. He's still with us. He's 86 years old, born in Little Rock, Arkansas. A righty, born on my birthday. Not the same year though. Finished with a lifetime, 267 average. 2,848 hits. 268 home runs. 1,300 runs bad at it. Oh, was that too easy? What gave it away? Did Little Rock give it away? Oliver Nexline got it right away. Maybe the age? Played for one team my entire career. 18 time All-Star, two time World Series champion. AL MVP, a World Series MVP, a 16 time Gold Glover. It is Brooks Robinson. There you go, nice. And that's gonna go to Jeremy and the Orioles. Oh, just good old deduction. Age, third baseman, Hall of Famer, a live guy. Carl says it had to be the camera. That gave it away. Did I accidentally show it? I don't think I did. So that's gonna go to Jeremy Port and the Orioles. Next one. Wait, did I show it? Logan sings the camera as well. Maybe I'll try to hide it a little bit better. I thought I hit it pretty well. All right, oh, this is a multi-sign auto, but it's going to one team. It's pretty obvious. Wow, this is really nice. Oh, I didn't show anything. Okay, so Carl's just trolling. All right, Jeter, Rivera, Pettit and Posada. Wow, all Yankees on this World Series ball. Good guess, Oliver. This is gonna... There's the Jeter autograph, Mariano Rivera, there's Pettit, and there's Posada on an official 1998 World Series ball. There should be, yeah, there should be authentication stickers on this side. Making sure I'm just touching the stitching right here. Don't worry. So that's pretty easy, right? That is indeed the Yankees Core 4. And that's gonna go to Eugene and the Yankees. Bought the Yankees straight up. I agree, Oliver. That's the second best ball we've seen. World Series related. Nice, congrats, Eugene. Wow, Celtics knocked out another win. Now they're rolling down three-two. All right, the third ball. That's right, Eric, hip, hip, Jorge. He's on there too. The best autograph ball we've seen, J. Shep, is the Dodgers autograph World Series ball from 2020. I think that had like maybe a dozen autographs on there. We got a black baseball gold stitching, 14 autographs. All right, Celtics are happy, look at them. All right, 25 years old, played for one team my entire career, a former first overall pick, first round, first pick, a Golden Spikes Award winner, and a College World Series Most Outstanding Player Award winner. This season, I'm hitting 270, seven home runs, 48 hits, 25 RBIs, and OPS of 827, playing really well. My first year, which was last year, not so good. Not so good, people weren't thrilled. I only hit 254, across almost an entire season, 254, 13 home run, 42 RBIs. I may eclipse those numbers within the next couple months. Still finished second in Rookie of the Year voting though. Sport Ports got it, it's Adley Rushman. That's another Oriole for you, Jeremy. You got an Oriole from the past and an Oriole from the present. I think it's that way. You got all the stickers and stuff right there too, that's really cool. Another one for Jeremy, congrats to you, man. All right, five star and then dynasty. And we've got another, we've got another eight box break in the store right now, jaspyscasebreaks.com, check it out. You can run this back tonight and give away a wax party spot. That'd be nice. All right, we got a Royal, we got a manual Rivera, Rookie Auto for Kansas City. That'll be for the X-Line. And we've got an Astro, we've got a Chas McCormick, 13 out of 50. Rookie Auto for the Stroes, that's gonna be for Kenneth. Next box, Gilo saying Emmanuel, we're very good player and they just trade in for no reason. Lane, wait, where is he now then? What was the deal? All right, we got the big dumper, Cal Raleigh, Rookie Auto for the Slugger, going to Carl in Seattle. And we've got a Rhino, 19 out of 25. That is for Rex and his Cubs. Oh, for Luke Weaver. All right, final one, 2022 Tops Dynasty. And of course, all cards ship. So we did the three Fanatics baseballs, the two Five Star, the two Triple Threads, and yeah, the last one, the eighth and final box, 2022 Tops Dynasty Baseball. Cause we're the Royal, this is Gilo. All right, final hit. Oh, what is that?  Ooh, do I know that autograph? That looks familiar. Yeah, it's Cody Bellinger, seven out of 10. Two color patch and autograph with his lofty swing. And maybe he's getting back to his lofty swing ways. This is for the Dodgers, Aaron, with my Dodgers. Dodgers edition of Cody Bellinger. There you go, gang. I'm Joe for Jaspy's Case Breaks.com. Thanks for watching, thanks for breaking with us. If you wanna do another one of these, if you wanna run these back, there's another one in the store, pick your teams. All right, now, Wax Party. Who's gonna get an invite to the Wax Party? Chance to win a bunch of Wax. So let's gather all the names, put them into this list. Let's randomize it, roll and randomize it, three and a six, nine times. Name on top after nine gets the invite. One, two, just for the baseballs, Rex. Three, four, gotta read the description, buddy. Six, seven, eight, and ninth and final time. After nine, it's just the name on top, getting the invite to the Wax Party. Check out the list of Wax that you can win. Go to the website, Jaspy's Case Breaks.com. Check out all the details. I mean, it's a monster list. It's pretty awesome stuff. All right, Tristan, very close, but just not quite. But congrats to, congrats to Carl. I don't think I called your name very often in this break, but you do get the invite to the Wax Party potential for some monsters. I'm Joe for Jaspy's Case Breaks.com. Thanks for watching. Thanks for breaking with us. I'll see you next time for the next Mixer Break. Bye-bye.


Hello everybody, and welcome to this evening CIPL webinar. I am delighted to welcome here today Dr. Joao Pedrakoom-Thayesh, who will be talking to us about Article 17 of the new directive on copyright individual single market, the DSM directive, and the EU rules on online content sharing platform that this provision sets up. Joao is a postdoctoral researcher and a lecturer at EVIA, the Institute for Information Law of the University of Amsterdam. And in fact it is at EVIA that I first met Joao. We both wrote our PhDs at EVIA more or less in parallel. It feels like that was yesterday, but I realized today Joao that it was over half a decade ago now. Joao's doctoral research was an alternative compensation systems in EU copyright law, but since then Joao has expanded his areas of research. So among his other research interests, Joao has in recent years been working on questions related to the role and the responsibilities of online intermediaries, including those issues that are raised by Article 17 of the DSM directive. Last year I had the pleasure of working with Joao on a co-authored article putting forward an alternative solution to the one that is set up by Article 17 to copyright infringement that occurs on online platforms. More recently Joao has collaborated with Dr Martin Husavec on the licensing mechanisms applicable in relation to Article 17. This indicates not only the breadth of the topics to which this provision gives rise, but also the depth of Joao's knowledge of the area. So Joao, it is wonderful to have you here today. The floor is yours. Thank you so much, Cristina. What a kind introduction, you know, it's really, really nice to be here. Although I am in my living room, it is quite nice to be here. We miss you in Amsterdam, but now it feels like everyone is working from home. So just a general remark to I hope everyone is doing well and healthy. I'll try to over the next 35 minutes or so discuss this very interesting and complex topic of Article 17 and the new content sharing platforms. But what I am trying here to, okay, but first I have to just a few preliminary remarks while one important personal remark is that I am working from home and this is about the bedtime of my daughter so I always feel necessary when I have this evening webinar to say that she is the queen of the apartment and so you might, you might hear her speaking very loudly or screaming daddy or papa or version of that. So I apologize for that but there is really nothing I can do this is her space and I'm just living in it. On a more serious and substantive topic I think this is such a political discussion that I feel the need to say, what's my perspective on it, where I come from and what I'll try to do in this presentation, because there are a lot of heated discussions on this topic so I do come from academia, I am involved in a number of projects that are publicly funded through the European Union and Horizon 2020 project on Recreating Europe. I'm also with Christina co-managing editor of the Clover copyright blog, and I'm also editor of this wonderful resource created by Martin Kretschmer and Louis Fourwell and their team at Create that tracks the requirements of the CDSM directive the copyright and digital digital single market directive, but I have not done particular studies or legal advices for any of the stakeholders interested in this debate and I think this is important. Because what I'm going to try to do is I'm going to be very clear about what I think is descriptive analysis what I think the law tells us, and where I think there are reasonable doubts, and try to really make clear where I have some policy preferences. This obviously apart from my general normative preferences that are pervasive in my analysis but I'll try to identify those so that we're not in a situation where people think I'm making certain claims just because I'm on this or that side of the debate and I'm happy to discuss this then in the Q&A afterwards. So having said this on the menu for today, I'll go quite quickly through a bunch of topics but the idea is to give you a broad general vision of what this provision means where how do we got here the broader context how we got here, and then I'll dig into the context of Article 17 and then discuss three issues with varying that's the definition of online content sharing service providers, the authorization mechanisms in the nature of the right and then this fundamental discussion between what are preventive measures and versus user rights or freedoms. So on to the broader context I think we have to understand the reality here is that Article 17 is just the tip of a broader iceberg, which we're discussing now which is the Digital Services Act which is going to be a refit of the Commerce Directive. So a lot of the solutions that you see coming up in Article 17 are part of a broader discussion initiated by the Commission in 2016-17 on tackling illegal content online and one of those categories there was copyrights, in particularly copyright as usual takes the lead, but the major instrument in this area that we're currently negotiating is the Digital Services Act. So it is, I know this is very small on your screen, and I don't want you to squirt your eyes too much but the idea is to put the CDSM Directive, the Copyright in the Digital Cinemarket Directive, which is a south of the line of the timeline here, into some sort of context and for you to understand this doesn't appear out of nowhere. It is almost in parallel to this commission efforts, a communication on illegal content online, a recommendation both of them pushing for proactive measures by platforms, vis-à-vis illegal content that then finds a link in the draft of the CDSM Directive, but at the same time the CDSM Directive comes in, there is at the lower of the graphic below this green box you see that there's a very important challenge to the validity of certain provisions in Article 17 which is this Act by Poland, against certain of these provisions based on freedom of expression. And as the process progresses, what you'll see is other instruments starting to take shape, so the terrorist content regulation is one of them, and in June and September of this year you have the public consultation for the Digital Services Act. At the same time you have that consultation, you have a particular aspect of Article 17 that's being discussed by the commission with a number of stakeholders. So Article 17 towards the end says, in order to better define certain of the mechanisms in this provision, we are going to carry out this stakeholder dialogues, this is the acronym SHD on the south in green in the graphic, and those are still ongoing. But in September of this year, so very recently, the European Commission after the sixth stakeholder dialogue that took place actually came out with a, let's call it a preliminary guidance, which they call the targeted consultation, which comes out with some ideas of how this should look and has now been commented very aggressively by different stakeholders and very passionately also, and right now we're in a whole pattern to see where the commission is going to come down on. But as this is happening, other things are taking place that shape the discussion. So you see there in July 2020 there's a very important ethical channel opinion on the joint cases of YouTube and Cilando, I mentioned them as YouTube and Google. This week already on Tuesday, we had the CJU hearing on the Poland versus Parliament case, where this same ethical channel was actually there and he's going to issue an opinion on April 2021. This is important because it might indicate where it's going. So we'll discuss this a little bit later but I want to mention to you already flagged this that this ruling is going to come out at about the same time that member states have to have their decisions done as per the deadline of the implementation of the directive. So it's very much a topic but also quite important decisions to be made by member states in this respect. Now, in light of this broader context, which I hope is clear and we can come back to it, how do we actually get here in the particular lane that is copyright? Well, there's a short story that is lobbying and politics and here you can see the U.D. Committee, the Legal Services Committee of the European Parliament Rapporteur Axel Wost had pushed most of this provision forward, but I think there's a longer story that we need to look at. And the longer story, I think it's always nice to tell this in a certain narrative. So it's a fight between two different competing narratives. On the right-solder side, pushing for stricter measures in this provision, there's a value gap narrative. And on the other side, there's the user-right association, the upload filters narrative. And clearly at the end of the day, there's a prevalence of this value gap nature. You can see a meme here and part of the discussion on the upload for the defenders of those that said that this provision is unacceptable because it imposes upload filters is that this would be a danger on the free and open internet. But on the other side, what you have is this very powerful narrative, and I have here an example of the record industry's representative body, the FBI, that basically what they do is they say, look, we have a problem here. We have a value gap between what the platforms are, the user-upload platforms or so-called also user-generated content platforms are paying versus what other online service providers are paying. And the example has always been YouTube has this terrible player that pays nothing for the content on their websites versus Spotify one. And I'm not here going to have economic discussions about whether or not there is a value gap. In my view, this has not been proven economically speaking, but I do think from the legal perspective, we really should look at this with a bit more attention. So what does this mean, this kind of narrative in this parallel between YouTube's and Spotify's? So I use this, my narrative device is whether we're comparing oranges and oranges and apples. And I've used this before, so those of you that have some presentations from you before will recognize a lot of this. Yeah, so I would say that it's called the YouTube, the orange and the Spotify, the Apple because there's a nice color scheme there. Let's start with Spotify. Spotify is actually an online music service provider. All of this pre-DSM directive framework, talking about the legal framework that basically intermediates in a way between the public and copyright holders. From the perspective of copyright holders, what they have to license to Spotify are author's rights, a lot of them aggregated through collective management organizations, and then related rights, record producers and performers rights, a lot of them aggregated in record producers. Now, obviously, the regimes that apply here are quite clear. On the collective rights management part, we have a specific directive that they enable as a regime of multi-territorial licensing. That's the MTL acronym there, and the CRM is Collective Rights Management Directive. Apologies for all the acronyms. But on the side of the actually exclusive rights being licensed, these are a clear case of direct liability. It's reproduction and communication to the public, and there are articles two and three of the infos of directive. There is not a great doubt about the legal regime applying here. So this is a clear situation of an online music service provider, which would be directly liable unless it obtains licenses to exploit these exclusive rights, either individual licenses or collective licenses. Now, the case of YouTube is obviously different. YouTube is a user-generated content platform that intermediates between the public and the end user, but we have to understand what's the legal regime applying to it. Now, of course, the end user is here the one uploading. The copyright relevant act is the upload of the end user. This would be mostly, it can be also reproduction, but it's mostly about communication to the public. And in this particular case, it's very clear that the act of the end user is subject to primary liability, which is harmonized under the infosack directive. Articles two and three and four, but online two and three talk about the rights of reproduction and communication to the public. Article five talks about exceptions and limitations, and then there's rules and enforcement. For us, they're relevant for copyright also in article eight. This is the setup for the user. But from the perspective of the platform is quite different, right? What we have is mostly harmonized regimes of secondary liability with partial harmonization in the e-commerce directive because they are considered hosting service providers and the benefit from a liability exemption, so-called immunity or safe harbor, coupled with a general ban on general monitoring obligations. So they are not subject to direct liability. They are subject to a regime that ends up being a notice and takedown regime that's the NTD there. They're also subject to injunctive relief for content uploaded by the users and member states are allowed to impose certain other obligations or duties under the guise of duties of care. This has led to a lot of these platforms implementing variations of content recognition technologies. That's the CRT there, but that's not the same as what's happening for primary liability. It's a totally different regime. So there's more or less a clear line between those regimes as far as the law in the books is designed, of course, there's a lot of interpretation. The question has been, how do you monetize from the perspective of the rights holders, these uploads on platforms, and because the platforms operate under the shadow of illegal immunity or safe harbor, there's been a number of mechanisms to monetize. There's some licensing, some monetization through ad revenues and some other types of deals, and usually big rights holders have privileged access to the platform and they act as what's called or usually known as trusted flaggers. Now this kind of setup is obviously tenuous, right, because the line is not always clear. It has become less clear in the relationship between platforms and rights holders as the court of justice of the European Union, in interpreting the exclusive right of article three of the InfoSoC Directive of Communication to the public, as slowly eroded what is traditionally a strict liability tour to introduce some mental elements and this starts, well, it starts way back a little bit with SNAPSET but the main cases where this is explicit are GS Media, film spaler and then the pirate pay. And there are a number of pending cases. The first two there in red are now joint cases that involve Google in YouTube, and also in case the Pulse for TV I think also involves you two that are actually flat out asking the question that is present that gave rise to the creation of article 17 being, are these platforms directly liable for communicating to the public? So far the answer has been no, but the line has been eroding so they're close to the line, but the answer has been no. And there has been an AG, a very lengthy AG opinion I'll come back to from that Africa General I just mentioned, that actually says no, they are not liable. As far as the law stands today, there is still that division despite the introduction of these mental elements. This is important to know because we already see that there's a difference here, a clear difference between what's the apple is in the orange or in my analogy. Now, where are we specifically today? Well, we are today in a very complicated situation because, as I showed you in the timeline before, we have the Court of Justice of the European Union trying to answer the question that gave rise to a legislative change, and so far the answer has been mostly no. We have the Polish challenge to article 17 based on freedom of expression. Actually, that could invalidate key parts of the new regime. There was a hearing as I mentioned this Tuesday and the ruling is going to come out at the same time as the deadline for implementation of the directive. In the stakeholder dialogues and their article 1710 where there's a targeted consultation. That's already gives more or less the idea of what the Commission wants to do about it but we're still most member states are in a whole pattern to this to decide how to implement this provision to see what the guidelines are. I think there are national transpositions that are starting to take shape, but in some cases, countries are it's a sort of regulatory competition to try to set up their, their position in there you see, especially France pushing for a stricter implementation of the provision more strongly on the preventive measures in other countries like the Netherlands trying to, well, now the Netherlands not in the first version, taking a different approach. In the academic area there's also a boom in scholarship and I think I've been involved in a lot of it actually pushing for a more user rights friendly and freedoms approach Christina also, I would say on that side. And there's the European Copyright Society and then there's a number, a number of stakeholders, where I would put, not just CMOs right so there's that organizations also be ally to to its mixed nature with with stakeholders and academics that push in different countries here. So this is where we are today, but probably will change next week. Now, with that set up in mind so I gave you the broader context and also gave you a little bit of how we got here from legal perspective and copyright. I will now explain the very very complex mechanics of Article 17, and then go to the number of issues that I had mentioned before. I'd like to start with this citation from Severine Dussoli as a recent article on the Common Market Law Review, which calls Article 17 the monster provision, both by its size and hazardousness as always a very nice figurative thing, and basically focusing that well if you want to discuss legislative intent here it's quite difficult in this area if it was highly contested, but it is such a broad and complex provision that it actually opens up to a lot of interpretations and that's both a blessing, and the curse as we'll see. Now, going through it, who does it apply to? Well, let me just push the dialogue box a little bit to the side. Well, it applies to online content sharing service providers. So whoever came up with this acronym really hates academics because we have to write it all the time. And what provision does is go for positive definition says this has to be a user upload content platform that has large amount of works, organizes and promotes them, and has to have a certain commercial competitive effect. So clearly covering cases like YouTube and video sharing platforms are clearly covered. I'm going to come back to this because I think other so so so considered or so called obvious cases are not so obvious at all. There's a number of exclusions. And these are electronic communication service business to business cloud service online marketplaces and so on and so forth. This is a combination of examples that would fit in the positive definition and examples of entities that love it specifically to be specifically excluded and then the legislative abstracted the category from a particular example and obviously nonprofit online encyclopedias is Wikipedia. And the last one is clearly github because they were quite involved in the discussion of the directive. I think they're rightfully excluded but this is a bad way of doing law. I would suggest if you do not fit under the definition of OCS SP or you're excluded from it, you are considered a non OCS SP platform. And that means that you're outside the scope of the directive, and you are inside the scope of the previous regime I mentioned. The definition of legal regimes here that means that we're going to have a lot of platforms that are going to fall under this definition this regime and platforms that are going to fall outside of it and they're going to coexist. And the question is, how does the previous case law and whatever case law continues from the court on that side, the prior prior existing framework is going to affect the case law and article 17 so already see potential for trouble. Okay, what is the what and how we are well, if you do the phone and the definition of OCS SP, you are now communicating to the public, you are no longer an in an hosting service provider benefitting from. So if I were communicating to the public independently of knowledge of the illegality of the upload so there's a clear differentiation of legal regimes. This easily means that there's direct liability primary liability. The OCS SP becomes in a certain way, a copyright user explicitly not benefiting from those things say for an article 14 of the Commerce Directive meaning that it is this is clearly like specialist to be commerce directive. It will be, or the platform will be directly liable, except if the following happens and now please bear with me because this is quite complicated I tried to make drawings so it's a bit easier. So it will not be directly liable if option one, it obtains authorization and I put this in quotation because of recession as you will see might mean many things from the right soldiers. Now that authorization must cover the non commercial uploads by its end users so there's an extension effect. Actually, in my view there's a joint nature of the two of the two acts so there's a shared sort of legal construct there. And I mentioned non commercial as a sort and because of the law says, or can be commercial but without generating significant revenues are sort of priced into the license so that's option one.  And that's an article 17 for B and C. What we see there in this option to is first that you have to have best efforts to obtain an authorization so the regime says if you obtain authorization, you're okay. But if you don't obtain authorization, the first cumulative condition is that you can add best efforts to obtain such an authorization. Now there's obviously a link between these two concepts and I think San Flavin and Metzger have really in the European Copyright Society, actually very nicely put as expressions of the same duty of the platform in this case. And they say it's very difficult to know what is best efforts, but if there is proactive search of publicly known copyright holders. It's almost a sort of system of notice and action to license for others. So if it's publicly known. I have to go meet them. If it's not publicly known then basically they have to notify me and I provide a license and then these authors actually going to some sort of pre contractual obligation system there but I think the essence here is. It's a fuzzy concept that's difficult to pin down and direct if doesn't say much about it, but you must comply with it because it's a cumulative condition. Now there are two more right. So you didn't obtain authorization you prove best efforts. In addition, you have to carry out best efforts to ensure unavailability of specific works for which copyrights others provided relevant and necessary information. So this is what's colloquially known as an obligation to implement upload filters and and act expeditiously subsequent to a notice from copyright orders to take down so it's basically back to the notice and take down regime infringing content, and in addition, make best efforts presented for upload so that's basically what could be said a notice and stay down regime, right, you receive the notice you took down in forever then you have to filter, or include an automatic recognition system that doesn't allow that to be uploaded again. And this notice and stay down is what's colloquially known as re upload filters so just we're clear on how these terms are usually used now. To all of this, this is one side so this is the licensing and preventive measures side of the provision but then the provision as a whole second part to it. In the second part, we can call them mitigation measures or they're quite more than that. And you have proportionality assessment and factors for all the stuff that's most of the stuff that's above. There's also regime for small and new platforms, which is mostly window dressing because one of the requirements is that the platform is not more than three years old so if you're a new platform trying to get venture capital after one year and a half. You probably already have to start complying with the stuff so no one's going to give you money for it. You have a number of other more relevant stuff which is provisional mandatory exceptions and limitations that makes them similar to user rights in 17 seven and couple with 79. There's a ban on general monitoring in 17 eight, and there's a number of what I would call procedural safeguards about complaint and redress mechanisms. Now this is all very complicated. There's none of them, but if you want to know more about the part on the ban on general monitoring. You really should read Christina's and Martin same flippants, very, very recent study where mainly the main conclusion Christina forgive me I went there and I put a tweet of yours is that, well, basically you have to be consistent between the ban on general monitoring in the commerce directive article 15 and this new ban and you have to prospectively be consistent in a new digital services act so here you also see the importance of the copyright directed as a sort of trojan or trojan or so precursor for what's to come depending on your perspective, and also what Christina and Martin says that other preventive measures may be required by entering the areas, but certainly not type of filtering provisions and systems that we've been talking about so far so I think in the Q&A we can get into that, but I would highly recommend that you read this study. What I will talk about a bit later is about the user rights part of the safeguards, namely in one of the issues that I address. So but hopefully by now, I know this is quite complex and hopefully it's clear different mechanisms of the of the provision. In sum, this is I think what article 17 years is a mixed a mix between the apple and the and the orange in my analogy sort of legal hybrid, and I think this legal ebriety of it comes with some serious consequences for how it has to be interpreted and implemented down the line. What I think it's pretty clear is that there's a normative hierarchy in the provision that puts at a higher level licensing and on the other hand user rights for freedoms as the main goals and obligations of the directive and preventive measures at the lower level. And this is what Martin St. Fleven has in a different article this Bermuda triangle between licensing for authors, the liability exemption mechanism preventive measures for platforms and the user rights of freedoms for users. But it's also comes out very clear in the alley in the arguments in the hearing last Tuesday in the by the European Commission, the Parliament and the Council, and also targeted consultation that just said a very simple thing we've been saying for a while which is, if you read the provision on its face, there is an obligation of best efforts for the preventive measures, there's an obligation of results for the provisions on mandatory exceptions and limitations. This is clearly stronger than the other from a perspective of normative hierarchy, and from that perspective when you're implementing the provision you can't ignore that reality. Now, moving forward to the different issues that are that are here important now very quickly. First is an elephant in the room. What is an online content sharing service provider. I want to go very deeply these are my top provocations for the discussion but I think it's very clear that YouTube and Vimeo are there but some authors have argued that Facebook wouldn't be there, and other social networking websites wouldn't be there, because they're not necessarily fulfilling the same requirements of the positive definition and that with the assistance of the recitals that would lead you to the conclusion that their main function is to organize and promote copyrighted protected materials. Their main function would lie elsewhere, their main competitive in fact would also lie elsewhere. Now I'm not saying this is correct or not, but I am saying that because of this open definition. I leave the citation here for those who want to then read the slides I'll make them available, but I think the point here is quite a serious point if you do a case by case assessment. It is possible that depending on our implement these factors that some of platforms that we would think that would fit this definition because they do post even large amounts of copyright protected content might not fit the definition. Certainly as you go down the line from the bigger platforms doubts start to creep in about some of this sharing website so that's one point that's important. Now something I will dig a little bit deeper into is about authorization and I think the question here is, what's actually the nature of the writing article 17. Well I have a very lengthy and quite boring article written with Martin simply that should come out of peer review very soon. But I think it's an important point, because what we do is we actually look at the different options of interpretation, and we see four possible options. This is a set type of communication to the public within the minimum standards of international law. This is a set type of copier communication to the public outside those minimum standards. It's a special right of communication to the public or a new sweet generous right of communication to the public. So this first option you just, it would look something like this it's everything fits neatly in the international minimum standards. Article three of the infosop directive is basically an implementation in Sweden that scope and optical 17 would be a subtype of that communication to the public. Well this is clearly not the case because a lot of things that fit currently after the case law of the court since Benson in linking and film spaler and others would not fit in the definition or the concept of communication to the public in my view and I think most commentators that have looked at this seriously have said the same. So I'll move up from that. The second option which is option B is actually a little bit different it's it posits that the European standard has gone beyond the international minimum standard. This is what this image and tries to show, but actually article 17 is squarely or fully inside the scope of article three of the infosop directive. Our argument here is, there's a lot of arguments here but that is actually not the case because the current interpretation of article three of the infosop directive in all those cases I mentioned, does not go as far as to cover clearly the hosting platforms that we're talking about but more than that, the own construction of the right in article 17 is such that it puts it outside the requirements that have been, let's say, creatively invented by the court to interpret article three. So it just really doesn't fit even if you think it overlaps partially which I grant it's really doesn't fit. So our actual preferred interpretations are then. Sorry, I have lost control of my presentation. So I have to share screen again. Okay, let's see if this works. Do you see Christina apologies my whole presentation or the cool. Thank you. So I was going with this option bees really not convincing so what we think is this is either a special right or a new generation is right. The special right will be just basically qualification of like specialist saying well it actually would fit into the type of activities that are already covered by article three, but the specificity in the regime means that it is its own regime so it doesn't follow it's carved out from the infosop directive, and it has its own rules which has some serious implications also the arguments there we don't need to go through those. But the last part is that it's actually new switch and is right so something completely different, created a new outside the regime of article three these are different activities they were covered by the safe harbor and other fully outside with their own regime. My main point here sorry to go through this my our view is that this is something between option C and options be in actually it's also sort of what's endorsed by the general opinion on Google YouTube, although obviously not exactly what we're saying, but also it's endorsed by the AC targeted constant consultation which calls it elect specialist, and you would say okay john that's really really nice I like all those nice designs and think but why does it actually matter all of this well. This is because if you accept that it is an exclusive right within the scope of article three so the first two options. What you have here is only certain number of possibilities of implementation of direct licensing voluntary collective management or collective licensing with extended effect. And those are the different options that are accessible to member states and they're not really very satisfying in terms of making it operational. If you accept the other option that you see below, which is not faded but I'll go back a little bit and follow our interpretation because we can potentially even talk about having exceptions and limitations to part of these activities in this idea that one size does not fit all enforcement sectors, it will give you more possibilities of implementation. So that's a broad strokes the argument. Now, very quickly to preventive measures versus user rights or freedoms which is very very hot topic. One of our schematics is you didn't get authorization, you have best efforts to obtain authorization so you comply with 17 for a, and then you apply preventive measures. Now, the idea is that you, how do you apply this preventive measures, the only thing we've seen so far is that the, the offers out there are filtering mechanisms of content recognition technologies that would apply the so called upload filters or re upload filters. They're not suited for the types of uses that are permitted by or that are aimed by article 177 those user rights and freedoms that I told you are at a higher level. So, not only before all these reasons that I list here but practically this there is a contextual nature to a lot of these users that admittedly by all these companies this, this type of technology is not attuned to. One of the great things about this step and is that if you do implement this type of measures, you will encroach upon article 177 those user rights or freedoms. So how do you deal with this situation well, there is one approach which is basically say, well, you know, we just put the filters on this is the first version of the Dutch stress. We put the filters and all that is sufficient is to have a complaint and redress mechanism, and then users can actually complain and if they complain and the stuff is actually covered by an exception then we're all good. Well, this is really not satisfactory because what that means is the fact though these uses will be blocked. And that will put actually the preventive measures as more more important and more relevant in the Sierra Post structure than the user rights so it's actually inconsistent and not proportional. And it would end up I think that's also Christians and Martin's conclusion they're studying to imply sort of ban on general monitoring that's actually prohibited by the provision itself. Now, the one way, one possibility, what we have to explore is how do we make sure that these user rights of freedoms prevail in the schematics of the implementation over the preventive measures. So how do we do this while one approach, don't get scared you don't have to read all of this is what we proposed in a recommendation signed by about 60 European academics is how do we construct a system based on the case law that we have at the last instance. So the important part is really here right building on the case law and also the recent Facebook case on defamation what we try to find is a solution that says well, what can you actually filter well you can filter either total matches of files, or equivalent because it's something that actually unfortunately the court has recognized for these cases. And those you would actually have a blocking rule implemented but if it's not one of those cases actually during the complaint and redress mechanism that applies that content would have to be left up. So there's a number of mechanisms to do that one is flagging lawful uses and if you do that, perhaps there's a chance that provision is valid, but that would mean actually a change in the types of systems that platforms are using now it's not a complicated but it is a different type of approach now this has been opposed very very strongly by right soldiers organizations on arguments that the harm that comes from this is much greater for right soldiers than applying the fact of filtering system would pose a harm for users. Coming back and I promise this is my last slide Christina to the current discussion. This same mechanism that I mentioned now is actually a variation of it is what the targeted consultation from the Commission is proposing. They just call it something else they call it either manifestly infringing I believe or partially infringing in manifesting fringe and you can filter partially infringing not but we have a problem here and the problem is the following. This is precisely what was discussed discussed in the hearing on Tuesday with a court on the Polish challenge to article 17, and it's the focus of the challenge the focus of the challenge is the fundamental freedom of expression concerns with the preventive measures that I just explained. So member states are in a bit of a complicated situation. The AG opinion comes out in April 2021, and the decision will come out in the summer. In the meantime, they will get to consult the guidelines from the Commission, and they have to implement the provision What do they do then if they do an implementation that in the court later on comes to say oh actually that's invalid and you have to change the law immediately again. So I would say we have a lot of fun times ahead for this but I hope at least I managed to provide some sort of some clarity on the topic. So thank you very much for your attention.