Hi everyone, I'm Joe for jazby'scasebrakes.com. Happy Saturday. Thanks for hanging out with us. We got 2020 Panini Contenders Football. Coming at you. Pick your team, number nine. Number nine, number nine, number nine. There it is, number nine. There you go. If you have a rooftop next to your name, that means you won those spots in that team random we did and it's in a separate video. Karen, last spot mojo. Patriots. And here is a fresh case of contenders ball. Half case break. Second half is in the store right now folks. Too many hits here, just packed full of hits. Two, three, four, five, six. One, two, three, four, five, six. One, two, three for the left side, four, five, six for the right side. And it's four, one, two, three, four, five, six. This side we will save for next time. All right, so these next ones will be for pick your team 10. Those are chicken scratch there, it's a bit, it's 10. That's right, Yanti, five autos per box on average. Yeah, Contenders Football traditionally has five per box. No veteran comments ship, but obviously all the inserts do, and the autos of course, and any numbered cards. There can be some points in here which will collect them as one lot and randomize them as one lot to one person in the break. Why can't NBA contenders be like this? Because NBA has far fewer players in the league. Remember, NBA rosters are only 15, like a roster. And NFL has like 52, 53 people on a team. So more opportunities for more autographs. So that's why you'll see like kicker autographs in here, offensive linemen autographs in here. But punctuated by like some of the bigger rookie names is obviously what you're looking for. Contenders is a pretty popular set. They've got some Hall of Fame coach autographs in here too. And some Hall of Famer, Hall of Fame player autographs, active player autographs, retired player autographs. Those are fewer and far between, but they are there. I think in one break last night, we pulled out of five like Jerry Rice autograph, pulled like a Tannehill cracked ice autograph for someone. So those names are out there, fewer and far between. It's mostly about the rookies and contenders, but they exist. And there's championship ticket, Nick Bosa, 41 out of 99. And that'll be for Matt Johnson and the Niners. We're looking for this guy's on. Here's our contenders football bingo card right here. We finally got two of today. We're looking for Justin Herbert and Joe Burrow autographs. We've got Dalton Keen. And if you notice that bounty on there, if we pull a Herbert and a Joe Burrow out of these six boxes, I'll randomize $25 to someone in this group. We'll randomize the names. Name on top, we'll get 25 bucks. Second name, we'll get any points, if any. Right, that was for you Travis, the Tannehill cracked ice. Yeah, so then there's stuff in here. That's stuff in here. All right, Justin Herbert going to Sean Maddock who got the Chargers straight up. Maybe we can find that somewhere. We've got rookie ticket autograph. That's Kari Willis for the blue horseshoes. Going to Mark and the Colts. We've got Steven Sims Jr. rookie ticket autograph. That's for Mark and the Washington football team.  I think these are really cool. There it is, Derek Brown. 27 out of his jersey number, 27 out of 95. Ticket sub-autograph for Carolina, Patrick Garcia on the board. With the team he won in that team random that we did. I'll upload that for you, I'm pretty sure I did, right? It's uploaded already, so if you wanna see the results of that. And we've got another ticket sub-autograph, this time on card, one out of 30. Usually one on-card autograph a box. These ticket sub-autographs are pretty fun. That goes to Nathaniel Smith and the Tampa Bay Buccaneers. We'll do a recap at the end. All right, another box, you can see the stack of boxes up on the top camera there. They're not going anywhere. Good luck. To fill my mild curiosity, let me know, I don't know when this is actually gonna happen, but let me know when, who wins that Connor McDavid. Connor McGregor fight. Connor McDavid's a hockey player. The McGregor fight. Anyone have any thoughts on the games tomorrow? We had a whole week to think about it. Who's winning it? Who's going to the Super Bowl tomorrow? I'm on Green Bay minus three, and I'm on to the Bills plus three. Yen says Chiefs and Packers, State Farm Bowl, Travis is with me, Packers and Bills. Yeah, I think the Bills plus, I think the Bills outright. I think they'll win outright, that's what I'm hoping. Out of 199, Russell Wilson, and we've got, speaking of the Chiefs, there's Damien Williams. Hey, what's Damien Wilson? Is he not, I think he's injured right now, right? And the Chiefs are counting on Daryl Williams? No, Damien Williams opted out of the 2020 season, that's what he did. That's right, so he chose to, he liked it to opt out of the season, paving the way for the other D. Williams, Daryl Williams, that goes to Keith and the Chiefs, by the way. So I think, let's see how D. Williams does tomorrow, the other D. Williams. There's Jared Pinkney for the Falcons, that's going to go to John and the Dirty Birds. By the way, we're going to do a left-right randomizer on these round numbers cards, unless they're serial number, then we'll do a separate randomizer for the serial numbered ones. And there's Rodrigo Blankenship, the kicker for the Blue Horseshoes, Mark. I heard some people saying, Big Ben, going to retire this year in this off season? A nice Jeff Acuda autograph, one, no, seven out of 22, cracked ice auto, going to Kevin Smith and the Lions, picked up the Lions straight up. There's Loviska Chanel Jr., playoff ticket autograph, playoffs, playoffs? 25 out of 49, Jaguars, that'll be for Mark. Next box, do I think the Lions will be able to trade Stafford? I think they should. I don't think, I don't think whether they can trade them or not, I don't think that's the issue. Can they get good value out of Matthew Stafford? They've already agreed to part ways. So now it's just a matter of trying to find a good home for Matthew Stafford. How much, I don't know. I don't know what kind of agreement they came up with. Does Stafford say, trade me anywhere? Or did he say, hey, can you trade me to a contender? I don't know what the deal is. Will that team want to give up the assets? Lions are asking for? Don't know. But they're gonna trade. I mean, they've already said they're gonna part ways, so that's already out there. Yeah, it'll be weird to see, yeah, it will be interesting to see where he goes. It'll be weird to see him not in a Lions uniform, so used to seeing him in a Lions uniform. But I think he's picked a good time. There's teams that need quarterbacks. You know, if Drew Brees does officially retire, there's Richard Lawrence, rookie ticket autograph for Keith. If Drew Brees really retires, which I think he will, people are suggesting that big Ben's gonna retire. I mean, Phil Rivers has already retired, so that's already three teams that are in need of quarterbacks. There is playoff ticket, Bryce Park is 89 out of 99, and I'm sure there are teams that are privately not happy with their quarterbacks. Maybe like this team, the Rams, Nicholas Casberg. So I don't know, maybe there'll be some crazy team there. There's points, so we'll randomize this to one person in the break. Winner take all on the points. Yeah, and you're saying Matt Ryan will also be with a new team? You think Falcons are gonna trade him? Patriots could use a quarterback. There's Chris Godwin. Nice Chris Godwin, 57 out of 99. Some people suggesting he might be good for your draft Kings lineups. Maybe Jaguar's trade for Stafford? Maybe, but I think they'd have to give up that number one pick, I don't think they're gonna do that. They could get away with getting Stafford and not give up that pick. They could have Stafford for a few more years and a couple more years maybe. Trevor Lawrence could marinate behind Stafford for at least a year. There's Jake from State Farm. On-card autograph for the Bills. Buffalo! Alex Donnelly with the Bills. There's to 149, so that'll be a randomizer between these two teams. All right, that replaces an auto, by the way. Next box, Texans might, I always saw a Deshaun Watson back there. Texans might need a new quarterback. Thing is, Deshaun Watson I think has a no-trade clause. And I don't know if he's gonna wanna go to Detroit to rebuild there, so maybe that's not an option. So how many teams, Saints, Steelers, Colts, Patriots are already four teams that need quarterback. I guess the Lions will need a quarterback after they move Stafford. Maybe that's through the draft. So I feel like a lot more quarterback turnover than usual. And then who knows how many teams in the woodwork may come out. Niners, someone said Niners too. Niners could say pass on Jimmy G. Nuggets are an OT, who are they playing? C'mon Murray, just hit a buzz, three to the center. Wow, c'mon Murray. Wait, what channel is that on? Because the Lakers are smoking the Bulls right now. Two, six, two. Cameron Johnson's leading in points. Cameron Johnson, dust off your Cam Johnson's. Wow, because Devin Booker is out. Ooh, step pump. Chains him. There's Cylor Murray right here to 1.99. For the Saints, Zach Vaughn, 58 out of 99. That'll be for Clay Franklin, who got the Saints in the team random. Rookie ticket autograph, Justin Meadow Buike for Aaron and the Purple Birds. Oh, that's our second autograph, right? The Zach Vaughn, we've got for the Panthers, championship ticket autograph, Jeremy Chin. 29 out of 49 for the Panthers. Patrick got Carolina in that team random. Rookie of the Year contenders, Tua Tungovalo. We've got Drew Locke, autograph. Sunday ticket auto. 18 out of 49, I saw a couple Denver fans suggest that maybe Matthew Stafford ends up in Denver in place of Drew Locke. We'll see. Walter, what's up? Do all players in the Rookie class sign the same amount of cards? No. Well, I don't know. In a set like this, I think the top names probably sign fewer cards. There's Anthony McFarlane Jr. Otherwise, we'd probably see Herbert as much as Zach Vaughn. Yeah, but in like NT, yeah, because you see all the out of 99 RPAs, you know, stuff like that, they'll sign the same amount. But then in NT, you won't have Zach Vaughn. But yeah, the contenders is like that. You know, you're gonna have to sift through a lot of like kind of lower tier rookies or like kickers or like offensive linemen and stuff like that, autographs.  So, but that's to be expected out of a contender from year to year. Gotta find the diamonds in the rough. I don't know, it might differ from year to year in player to player, but some of the top names probably have completely different contracts too in terms of signing and how much they're obligated to sign for what products. You know, while Zach Vaughn, sorry, Zach Vaughn, if you're listening, but while Zach Vaughn may be on like some sort of basic standardized rookie contract, you gotta do X amount of sets for X amount. You know, there's stuff like that. I think the top names though probably have individual separate contracts. Maybe not Herbert, Burrow maybe, just because of where he was picked. I know Zion probably has a separate contract, an exclusive contract with Panini, I think. So it's a wild world that I don't think there's a lot of light shed on how all that works. And then after their rookie year, you know, it'll be unlikely you'll see Zach Vaughn in any sets after this year. Again, apologies to Zach Vaughn. Watch he blows up next year. He's like the most amazing at his position, whatever you place. Next box, we've got Shaquille Quarterman, 41 out of 99. That's for Mark and the Jags. Yeah, Mark 26-43, we're saying that, yeah, some are super short printed as well. There's Darius Anderson. More points right here, so we'll pile that on top of the other points card, winner take all on the points. And we've got Rookie to get autographed, Tristan Worfs.  So even though like some of these lower tiered, random rookies maybe not aren't gonna be gangbusters on a secondary market, it's good for people who just wanna fill out their collections. Ooh, wow, nice. You don't see these too often. I think of all the breaks of this that I've done, this is only the second one I've seen. The clear Otto Antonio Gibson. 10 out of 10. That is awesome. Blank harder. That's pretty nice. Mark Basette with the Washington football team, nice. Last box coming up. Yeah, Zach Bond's watching right now, right Rex? He's gonna prove me wrong. When he's interviewed, be like, Zach, what was it that drove this performance, this football season in 2021? And he'll be like, well, this SOB group breaker, Joe Jaspy, was talking about how my autographs were gonna be worth nothing. I'm a lower tier rookie. And I took that personally. Will be the Michael Jordan meme. And I took that personal. A linebacker, right. He's gonna have like, he's gonna have the most sacks for a linebacker, lead the league in tackles. I'll be like, Zach, where did this, where did this ferocity come from? This ferocious season, where did, I was just extra motivated. I was extra motivated by what Joe Jaspy said in a group break on January 23rd, 2021. I was sitting at home relaxing, just trying to get my mindset for the next season. Right, he becomes a first ballot Hall of Famer. Right. And then in his Hall of Fame speech mark, he's like up there and going, I dedicate this to Joe Jaspy. 15 years ago, if he was doing a 2020 Panini contenders football break, pick your team number nine. And he was saying about how is a lower tier rookie, that I was no good, that that's probably why I signed a ton of cards. You won't see him in products after this anymore. And I took that personally. That's what's gonna happen. And then I'll be, I'll be the laughing stock of the group breaking world. They're like, Joe, you didn't think Zach Bonn was gonna be any good. And I'm gonna be trying to be like, you go back to January 23rd, 2021. You tell me if you thought Zach Bonn was gonna be any good, but by then it'll be too late because he'll be a Hall of Famer. And everyone will claim they knew it all along.  That's how that's how it'll happen. That's how it'll happen. Yeah, ZB will step into the chat next year. They're like, hey, remember me? Last five autographs, boys and girls. Hey, you know what? I hope Zach Bonn turns into a Hall of Famer. We've pulled enough of him. Saints will be happy. Clay Franklin will be happy. There's Jake Breeland. Ravens. Aaron. This guy's auto has still been elusive, but this will still go to Cincinnati. That's gonna go to Anthony. And we've got Albert Okwebanem, rookie ticket autograph for Denver. That'll be for Kevin Smith and my rivals, Denver. There's a redemption. Any guesses on that redemption for bragging rights? There's Trayvon Diggs, Stefan's brother. Going to Matt and the Dallas Cowboys. Yancy saying Jalen Hurts. I think his autos are live. Isaiah Simmons, definitely a redemption, Mark and Beasley are guessing. Travis saying Gladney or Simmons. Jamie D saying someone we've never heard of. Actually there have been some random, it's not been the usual suspects redemptions wise. TPS saying Burrow, that'd be nice. There's Gabriel Davis, that's not too shabby. Alex Dolly with the Bills. Gabriel Davis could raise his stock considerably with a good game this week. Tomorrow, in fact, it's already tomorrow. Kind of makes me sad. Football's almost gonna be over. There's Sonya Michelle to 199 for Karen and the Patriots. Riffles guessing AJ Dillon. Good luck. It's Tim Patrick. Jamie D, 83 gets it. Someone we've never heard of. He took the field. He was right. This is the first Tim Patrick that I've pulled. He sounds like a Bronco. He is. He's a Denver Bronco, played college football at Utah. That goes to my rivals, Denver, that's for Kevin Smith. You go, yeah, Broncos, Alex and Travis. You win, Jamie. You can brag to your friends now. Tell your friends. You can tell your friends, hey, I played Guest of the Redemption with Jaspies and I got it. I'd be like, what'd you win? Bragging, right? So what are you doing? Bragging. All right, let's randomize these two points cards to somebody. It's like, what did you win today? Did you win any Guest of the Redemption? It's like, they're like, no. I'm like, yeah, see. All right, so let's grab everyone's names from Keith down to Mark and the Washington football team, put them all into this list right here. Name on top after seven. Name on top after two and a five, seven times. We'll get those two points cards. One, two, three, four, five, six, and a seventh and final time. Jamie's saying, hey, he's actually pretty decent. Better than Zac Bonn. You're talking about future Hall of Famer Zac Bonn. After seven times, name on top, two points card, it's gonna be Mark. There you go, Mark, little consolation prize for you. Couple points cards right there. And here is the quick little recap. There's the Tim Patrick. Gabriel Davis is nice. And Antonio Gibson was really cool. I like that, I'm gonna save that for picture time. Maybe snap a picture of that. Trayvon Diggs kind of had a rough start to his career, but I think people still like his ceiling. There's Drew Locke, Tim Patrick's teammate, Jake from State Farm, some playoff ticket, some cracked ice, some kickin', some Damien Williams, not Darryl, Damien Williams. Damien opted out, Darryl is still in. We'll see him tomorrow. Couple numbered cards right there. And there, oh, there you go. I forgot to randomize these. Sorry, we'll use the same dice roll. Let me flip back to this list. So Mark, you'll still get the points obviously after seven times. I thought I did the recap. Let's do the left-right randomizer here, left-right, and then the serial-numbered card was the Intergrosmatos, Carolina, and KJ Hamler, Denver. Once again, we'll keep the same dice roll. That's what we usually do. One, two, three, four, five, six, and seven in the final time. After seven, left-side cards will get them. So all those left-side teams will get those. This one is serial-numbered, so we'll do that separately. Once again, seven times. Team on top will get it after seven. One, two, three, four, five, six, and seven in the final time. After seven, stays with Denver. All right, so there you go. Denver, you'll get this. Kevin Smith. Thanks everybody. I'm Joe for jaskiescasebreaks.com. Thanks for watching. Thanks for breaking with us. I'll see you next time. Bye-bye.


Hi everyone, I'm Joe for jaspyscasebreaks.com, coming at you with the final lure pack to give away the final spots in Hit Parade hockey, coming up in a separate video, that'll be our last break of the night. Big thanks to this group for making it happen, appreciate it. We're talking a lot of food off the recording, I guess that got people hungry for a break. Thank you. Let's do the break first, roll it, randomize it, five into five for the names and teams. We'll do the pack break first, two, three, seven, eight, nine, and ten. Ten times four of the teams, one, two, three, four, five, and a five, six, seven, eight, nine, and ten. And of course, different dice roll for the giveaway part at the end. All right, there's the first half of the list right there-ish, the second half-ish of the list right over here. All right, so that pack right here, giving away the final spots in there. All right, we're going to lead off with a Alexi Lafrenier, and Econor McDavid, and Econor McMichael. So here's an Alexi Lafrenier for the Rangers, Jack B, with this rookie card. Got Econor McDavid parallel for Edmonton, that's going to be four William. Jack Rainbow parallel, nice. All right now, that's in a separate video, we're going to give away spots there. Let's flip back to this list, gather everybody's names, new dice, new list, and it's going to be the top ten after five. Good luck, three into two, five times, one, two, three, four, and fifth and final time. After five, so from 11 on down, sorry, Ryan, sad times, but I appreciate you giving it a shot. Thanks to everybody for giving this a shot, I appreciate it. Top ten, you're happy times though, because you're in the break, Jernigan, Ryan, Stephen K, Ryan again, Joe, Stephen K, Rex, Ryan, Ryan, and Stephen, I guess Ryan, I don't feel so bad about Ryan just missing out. You got a lot of spots in there, one, two, three, four, four of the ten spots, hot pad. All right, there you go, Ryan. Thank you very much, everybody. Congrats again to the top ten. We'll see you in the next video for the break, jaspyscasebreaks.com.


The aim of the presentation will be focused on the outcomes of this resolution adopted by the UN General Assembly in 2015. This resolution instructed the development of an international legally binding instrument under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, UN clause, on the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity of areas beyond national jurisdiction. So it's very important to pay attention to all the elements in the title of this declaration. It is in the first place the outcome which is expected an international legally binding instrument. It's not a resolution, non-binding or soft law. It is a new instrument of binding nature which is AMAT. Secondly, this instrument is to be negotiated under the under the Convention on the Law of the Sea. So it is in the framework of this Convention that this negotiation takes place. And the purpose is the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity of areas beyond national jurisdiction. So this does not deal with the management of biodiversity in areas under national jurisdiction. But the main issue is what to do with biodiversity which is in the high seas, which is in areas which are not subject to sovereign rights by the coastal states. Well, as everybody knows that oceans are very important. Most of the planet are covered by waters, by oceans. So they are important for many reasons. I don't need to tell you for what reasons the oceans are important. Transportation, food security, sports. Very nice to go to the beach also for tourists. So they are very important. But the oceans are also a very rich source of biodiversity. And this is sometimes ignored and there is not sufficient effort to conserve to protect such biodiversity. And then the end of this resolution is to look into means to protect biodiversity, which is not subject to national sovereign rights. And also, and in particular, to look at how get access to that biodiversity and share the benefits. So let me just then present what are the issues I'm going to refer to. In the first place, I will make a brief reference to why marine genetic resources are important from an economic point of view in terms of new technologies, new products, etc. Secondly, I will refer to the possible gaps in the UN Convention on the Law of the Seas that these binding instruments aims to address. Secondly, I will explain briefly why this process is on, which are the concerns that are behind the countries, in particular developing countries, that are pursuing the adoption of these new instruments. Then I will refer to the precedents for these exercises in the international regime, what is there in the international regime that can be used in order to develop this new international regime. And then I will present a few of the main issues and the discussion if we still have time. And I also like to have a dialogue with you and to see how you see the different positions that are present now in these negotiations. So why marine genetic resources are important? Of course, there are many reasons for this, but there is a lot of literature about these resources and this literature agrees on one particular point, that the ratio of potentially useful natural compounds is higher in marine than terrestrial organisms. So marine resources are richer than terrestrial resources. And there are many examples of this. For instance, one study that was produced by the Center for International Law, this is a center in Singapore, indicated that there is a strong difference between the yields of marine biodiversity versus terrestrial biodiversity. If a marine species is isolated, there is a greater chance to derive a biotechnological application from it than if it was a terrestrial species. So the potential is greater than the potential in case of terrestrial biodiversity. Which are the possible uses of marine genetic resources? They can be used and they have been used in practice to develop new modalities of food, pharmaceuticals, there are many examples of pharmaceuticals for bioenergy, for cosmetics, fertilizers, pesticides, and the least may go on. One report, for instance, indicates that 18,000 natural products were developed from about 4,800 marine organisms with a significant growth, estimated 4% a year. And then the global market for the last year was estimated at about 5 billion US dollars. So marine genetic resources are very important because they allow to develop new products, new treatments, and they are also important from an economic point of view. In pharmaceutical, for instance, between 2010 and 2015, 52 active compounds from marine bacteria with specific clinical actions were identified. So this is quite a significant number. And these are some of the resources that provide this genetic information, more frequently. Sponses, for instance, are very important. Some products against cancer, for instance, have been developed on the basis of molecules containing particles, particular soft quarrels are also important as a source of genetic information, moles, worms, algae, vertebrates. This is just one example. One strong analgesic, the commercial name of which is Pryalt, was derived from the venom of the conus magus, which you can see there in the picture. This is a marine snail. So it has not the appearance of the snail, but this is a marine snail. And then this has led to the development of one very powerful medicine against pain. So this is one example, there are many others. Interestingly, about 95% of all marine life is microscopic. So many of the genetic resources that may be used for the production of the different products or technology I've mentioned are microscopic. And I will make a reference to these later on. Microbial organs, for instance, have already been used for the production of some industrial processes, such as enzymes. Several patents exist, and at least three enzymes from hydrothermal vent bacteria are now on the market. So bacteria, microbes, indices are very important source for products in many different areas. So this is important. So it's very clear for all countries, both developed and developing countries that marine genetic resources have a major potential to address different health needs in terms of food security, and they have also a major economic potential. So this is one of the premises on which this resolution has been adopted. But then why was it necessary to do something in addition to what is already in the Convention on the Law of the Sea? Are there gaps in the Convention? Well, this needs to be taken with some caution, because as you have seen the title of the resolution, the purpose of the resolution is to develop an instrument within the context of the Convention. So many people say that this is a new instrument that will implement some provisions of the Convention, develop and implement. Meaning that this will not add to the rights and obligations which are contained in the Convention. In fact, there are already two agreements for implementation of the Convention on the Law of the Sea. But which are the problems that are faced in relation to marine genetic resources? One of the problems is the definition of resources in the Convention. In accordance to Article 133, part of A, for the purposes of Part 11 of the Convention, resources means all solid, liquid or gaseous mineral resources in situ in the area at or beneath the seabed, including polymetallic nodules. So this is the definition of resources. Do you see this definition genetic resources? Does the definition cover organisms, living organisms? It doesn't seem to. So this is the first problem. The first problem is that the Convention on the Law of the Seas deals with the management of resources, including in areas beyond national jurisdiction. But the resources are defined in this very narrow way. And the reason for this is very interesting, because at the time this Convention was negotiated. It was thought that it was not possible to find living organisms without light in the very deep sea. So the idea was that there was not need to talk about resources as living materials, because the hypothesis was that there was no living beings in the deep sea. But now scientists have discovered, there is of course huge evidence, that there are many organisms that live in the deep sea without light. And many of them contain very interesting genetic information for the development of new treatments and new products. So this is the first problem that the Convention on the Law of the Seas did not foresee the situation. This Convention took a long time to negotiate. Negotiate started in the 1950s. And the Convention was adopted in 1982. And it still took many years for the Convention to enter into force in 1994, if I recall correctly. So it was a long process, and during this long process science changed a lot. And now all countries, scientists, industries realize that this definition may not be the appropriate one. So this is one issue. And then it is important when you look at this definition that it refers to resources in situ, that means that are found in the area. So what's the area? That's also an important element to take into account the definition of the area. The area is the seabed and ocean floor and subsolidary off beyond the limits of national jurisdiction. So the area is defined under the Convention as the seabed and ocean floor. So it's not the water column. The area is what is in the floor. And then the Convention developed an important concept in relation to the resources as defined, which are in the seabed. This was clarified by a resolution in the 1970, resolution 25, 2749, which clarified that the seabed and ocean floor, seabed and ocean floor, and the subsolidary off beyond the limits of national jurisdiction, as well the resources of the area, as defined, are the common heritage of mankind. And this is a concept contained in Article 136 of the Convention. So these resources, which are in the seabed, in the floor, are common heritage of mankind. So this means that these are resources which we may consider public goods. So they belong to the humanity of large. And then the consequence of this is that the exploration of the area and the exploitation of the resources shall be carried out for the benefit of mankind as a whole. This is a principle which is contained in the Convention on the Law of the Sea. But then take into account which is the definition of resources, mineral resources, which are in the seabed, which are in the floor. So this is one problem. The second problem with the Convention is that there is a part of the Convention, Part 13, that actually regulates scientific research in relation to the oceans. But scientific research is considered as a research without commercial objectives. And therefore there are certain obligations for those that undertake scientific research in the oceans to share the information, to disseminate, to publish. The basic concept is that the outcomes of that research is public knowledge, is scientific knowledge, not subject to appropriation, and possibly not subject to the use on a commercial basis. But then the further question is, is bioprospecting with commercial intent covered by the Convention or not? Because the definition is about scientific research. What the companies do, what the industry does for instance, is to collect specimens, it could be microbes, it could be other specimens from the ocean. This is called bioprospecting with a commercial intent, with intent of finding some biochemical compounds which may be useful for a certain purpose. But then the question is, is this actually covered or not under the Convention, which does refer to scientific research with the very idea of public access to the outcomes of this research. So these are two main issues that are in the basis of discussion that are taking place today. A third issue are asymmetries, asymmetries in terms of developed and developing countries, or the North House if you wish, for the capacity to exploit the resources in the oceans. This is largely recognized under the Convention on the Love of the Sea. So there are many provisions that make it clear that the capacity of developed and developing countries to exploit the resources in the seas are not the same. For instance, this is just an example, in this article 244 part of 2, it is said states, both individually and in cooperation with other states and with competent transfigurations, shall actively promote the strengthening of the autonomous marine scientific research capabilities of developing states, through interrelia programs to provide adequate education and training of their technical and scientific personnel. So it is very clear that there is this major asymmetry. And one of the reasons for these asymmetries is the cost of doing bioprospecting. For that you need this, this is just one example, there are many of these vessels that are specialized in bioprospecting. They have a very expensive equipment. The cost of operating one of the vessels per day on average is 50,000 euros. It is between 50,000 and 100 euros per day. So it's quite clear that developing countries have not got the resources to do this. This is shown, for instance, in the number of patents which are claimed, which are filed in relation to marine genetic resources. According to one study, 90% of the patents filed in relation to marine genetic resources have been filed by entities from developed countries, which shows the asymmetry in the capacity to get this investigation made. So in addition to this asymmetry, there is a further problem that is very much behind the initiative by developing countries to pursue the adoption of this new binding instrument. And this is the appropriation of marine genetic resources. How? Through patents in particular, as you probably know, today a patent may be obtained on a living organism after an important decision by the Supreme Court of the United States in the Chacrabarty case. In the United States and in other jurisdictions, it has become possible to get patents on bacteria, modified, for instance, on an animal who has been genetically modified, on plants. So there is no limitation for the patentability of living organisms. So on the basis of this doctrine that after this case Chacrabarty became very popular in other jurisdictions too, today is possible to get patents on organisms. For instance, in the case of krill, which is often called the pin gold, more than 400 patents have been identified. So on these little things, more than 400 patents. So because there are different aspects of this little krill that may be subject to patent protection. I'll show you some examples. So here you will find a couple of examples of a patent on microbe, which is in one case useful for polymerase. Another case is useful for proteins and nucleic acid encoding. So here you have the names of the corporation that file for the patent. These are other examples, the thermococcus barophilus. And these are organisms which have been accessed beyond national jurisdiction. Of course, in many cases, you find marine species, which are both in jurisdictions which are under the control of states and in jurisdictions beyond their control. So there are no possible frontiers, you cannot just put frontiers to nature. So it is, in many cases, you may find the same species in both national jurisdictions and beyond the national jurisdiction. In many cases, you find some specific specimens beyond national jurisdiction. And the patents I'm showing right now as examples are examples of patents on organisms which have been accessed beyond national jurisdiction. Then the question is, and this has been one of the issues raised, is there a right to appropriate this organism and the patent, which as you know grants a monopoly, which lasts at least for 20 years, is there a right to appropriate something which should belong to mankind, which should be a common, as it is indicated by the convention, should be part of the common heritage of humanity. So is this acceptable? In Europe, for instance, this is possible because of the European Directive on Biotechnological Inventions, which in Article III states that biological material which is isolated from its natural environment or produced by means of a technical process may be the subject of an invention, even if it previously occurred in nature. So clearly in the case of the European law, it is possible to just get patents on living organisms or other biological material with the only condition that they must be claimed as isolated. So this is one of the problems that have raised these concerns about the situation of managing the resources. And then fourth and finally is the issue of dematerialization of genetic resources. In general, in the past, when you wanted to extract some biochemical compounds from some biological source, you needed to get a sample of that. So you need to get access, physical access to a specimen, and then on the basis of that sample you could, through different procedures, get the biochemical compounds which are active, for instance, as pharmaceutical, cosmetic, etc. But this is changing. This is one statement by Craig Venter Institute, which is very well known in this field, which indicated that sequencing genomes has now become routine, giving rise to thousands of genomes in the public databases. In essence, scientists are digitizing biology by converting the ACT and G's of the chemical makeup of DNA into ones and zeros in a computer. So this is a trend that is taking place in plant biodiversity, in animal biodiversity, and also, of course, in marine biodiversity. This is just one example of a patent which makes a reference to a genome sequence which is available in a public database. So an invention can be developed without getting access to a physical sample, without actually doing the collection of the specimen, but just looking at what is available in databases in a digital form, and then, as this example shows, then some developments can be done through the basis of this information. Another statement by the report I mentioned before, for instance, in the case that gene information is everywhere. Everybody deposits genes online very quickly, and a marine genetic resource or genetic information can be readily obtained and redesigned. The DNA can be redesigned so thoroughly that it would be very difficult to trace it back to its roots. So this is another problem which is faced by countries that are interested in sharing the outcomes of investigation and research on managing the resources, the fact that once the information is available on a digital databases, it's impossible to know which is the origin of these resources, as it is stated in this statement. This is something taken from an article from the New York Times where this is indicated in quite a remarkable manner. It is said before the introduction of gene synthesis, this referring to a particular case, Mr. Kuhn had to isolate the genes from the virus itself, so there was a need to get access to the virus, then put them into bacteria to have them produce the proteins. Now he ordered the genes from the DNA A20, a foundry. So there are companies that are able to provide these, so there is no need to do research to identify a particular gene to get access to, in this case, a virus. If we were starting this today, I wouldn't even bother trying to get any of these from the natural source, Mr. Kuhn said, I would just order everything. So this is a very important transformation that is taking place in data generative sources, discussions are going on in the context of the conventional biological diversity, et cetera, that has changed significantly the scenario in relation to access and use of these resources. So these are the main reasons why developing countries have pushed for a negotiation on these new binding instruments. The fact that these asymmetries exist, the fact that these resources have a major potential, the fact that today only some countries have the capacity to exploit and get the benefits of these resources, which should be considered part of the mankind, and the fact that this visitation also allows to use information without even getting recognition to which the source of the materials is. Okay, then let's look at the precedence for this new instrument which is being negotiated. Of course, this is not the first instrument that deals with genetic resources. This is a specific or minor genetic resources, but there are important precedents that are actually taking into account these discussions. The first one is the FAO resolution adopted in 1883. This is called International Undertaking on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture. The second one is the Convention on Biological Diversity. Again, this is a binding instrument. The third one is the FAO Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture. The fourth one is the Nagoya Protocol, and another interesting scheme. I will just refer to this very briefly is the World Health Organization, Pandemic Influence Preparedness Framework. So the first one, the undertaking adopted by FAO in 1883 is in relation to plant genetic resources. This undertaking stated that plant genetic resources were a heritage of mankind. So the concept was that there was no possibility, no right to appropriate these genetic resources because they were the heritage of mankind. But this also led to some controversy in particular developing countries so that most of biodiversity is actually located in developing countries that often companies from developed countries get this access to this biodiversity. They produce new compounds, they sell them, cosmetic pharmaceuticals, without any recognition of rights or compensation to the countries from which these resources have been taken. So this led to negotiation on genetic resources and to adoption of the Convention on Biological Diversity. And in fact, developing countries had a lot of expectations about the income that could be generated on the basis of resources identified in their territories for which a commercial application could be developed. But the Convention on Biological Diversity introduced a major shift in the concept. So this Convention is not recognizing anymore plant genetic resources as a common heritage of mankind. On the contrary, this Convention is on the principles of sovereign rights of the states on the resources that reside in their territories. So this is contained in Article 3 of the Convention which is very clear stated that plant genetic resources are subject to sovereign rights of the states where they reside. This Convention has three main objectives, conservation, sustainable use of genetic resources, in general, not only plant. This applies to all type of genetic resources, including aquatic resources, or marine resources in national jurisdictions. And the third objective is very important in the context of what I'm just trying to explain here. This is a fair and equitable sharing of the benefits deriving from the use of genetic resources. So one basic aim of the Convention was to make it possible for the states from which resources were taken to participate in the benefits generated by the commercial exploitation of the resources in this territory or elsewhere. This was one of the main objectives in the negotiation of this Convention, adopted in 1982. So this Convention included a definition of genetic material, which means any material of plant, animal, microbial or other origin containing functional units of heredity. So it's very important to understand this question about the new instrument, which is negotiated to look at this definition, what is meant by genetic material and then genetic resources, which means genetic material of actual or potential value. That means that it's material that contains the functional units of heredity. The CBD, the Convention on biological diversity, then is based on what we call a bilateral model. In the sense that if there is a company interested in getting some biological resources from a particular country to develop whatever product may be obtained, there is a need for this company to apply for access. So there is a need of a prior informed consent by the state where the resources exist in order for this company to do bioprospecting to get access and eventually to exploit these resources. And then this prior informed consent is subject to mutually agreed terms. That means that the state may impose conditions for this access and in general this is based on a contract in which it establishes what kind of benefits will be given in case that there is a commercial exploitation of the resources. This can be monetary benefits in terms of compensation, royalties for instance, or this could be non-monetary benefits, for instance capacity building, training, transfer of technology, but in any case these contracts in general aim at getting some benefits from the use, commercial exploitation of the resources which are obtained in a particular country. So this is the concept and the Convention on biological diversity. But now this Convention, as I'm saying, was based on this idea of bilateral deals getting particular permits to get access to the resources. In the field of agriculture, this model is dysfunctional because most countries are interdependent in relation to planetary resources of food agriculture. So immediately after conclusion of this Convention on biological diversity those working in their agriculture made the point that this Convention was not suitable to allow the exchange of planetary resources which is vital for food security. So this is a very special field in which there is a need to ensure a flow of planetary resources. In many cases when there is a problem with the crop for instance there is a need to get new genes from a crop which exists in another part of the world. So this has been essential and there is a lot of exchanges in terms of planetary resources. So a new treaty was negotiated under the general framework of the Convention on biological diversity but on the understanding that exchange of planetary resources for food agriculture could not be subject to the same kind of permits, which may be applied to other genetic resources. Then this treaty developed what is called a multilateral system. A multilateral system is a system that allows for facilitated access to resources in relation to crops which are listed in an annex to the treaty. So this does not comprises all planetary resources but a number of crops which are listed more than 60 crops are listed. Then for these crops the exchange of planetary resources is free so there are no conditions for access. And if there are benefits these benefits do not go to a particular country these benefits are of a multilateral nature so these benefits should for instance contribute to a multilateral fund to contribute to support farmers in developing countries that conserve biodiversity but this treaty has a very different approach as compared to the Convention on biological diversity which is based on you take resources from here then you need to bring back some benefits to this state. Under this treaty and for the multilateral system the idea is you get resources from here but the benefits should be shared globally is that there is a need of global pool of resources because of the need of full security. So this is the concept of the FAO treaty which seems to be most adequate perhaps to the situation that we are going to discuss in the case of the modern gender resources beyond national jurisdiction. In this treaty there is an interesting provision that addresses the issue of appropriation because given that the idea is that these resources are part of a pool, global pool that should be accessible to everybody without limits then the treaty contains a provision which says recipients shall not claim any intellectual property or other rights that limit the facilitated access to the planned genetic resources for agriculture or the genetic parts or components in the fund received from the multilateral system so this is a clause against appropriation under patents in particular. So this is the concept of the FAO treaty on planned genetic resources it's a global pool, access should be free. But then after this treaty was adopted it took seven years of negotiations a new legal instrument international legal instrument was developed and this is the Nagoya protocol this is a protocol to the Convention on Biological Diversity this protocol was promoted by developing countries which are very supportive of the Convention of Biological Diversity but the problem that developing countries identified were several but I will just mention two of them the first one is that very often the commercial exploitation is done not on the genetic resource as such so remember the definition of genetic resource is a material which contains the functional units of heredity so this is a living organism but often the commercial benefits are obtained on the basis of a derivative of such resources the biochemical compounds for instance so it's not on a grain in particular it's not an alimony living organism it's not a bacteria such that the benefits are obtained but they are obtained from a biochemical compound which is found in that resource and therefore there was some discomfort on the side of developing countries because the Convention on Biological Diversity had not generated the income that they expected and one of the reasons for this was thought the fact that the definition of Convention on Biological Diversity is too narrow in terms of how the share of benefits should take place then one important element that this Nagoya Protocol introduced is the concept of derivatives Benefit sharing should take place not only when the genetic resources as such are subject to commercial exploitation but also when derivatives from those resources are exploited and then the definition is derivative means naturally occurring biochemical compounds resulting from the genetic expression or metabolism of biological or genetic resources even if it does not contain functional units of heredity so as you can see it has expanded the scope for beneficiary another issue that was raised for the negotiation of this protocol but I'm not going to refer to this in particular is the problem of compliance the lack of compliance on the part of the members to the Convention was a second major concern that led to the adoption of this protocol ok then the last precedent for the negotiation of this new binding instrument is this framework that was developed in the context of the World Organization again here the main issue has been about beneficiary in this case the situation is one in which a virus is identified a pathogen in this case that may generate a pandemic and then this virus is identified in a particular country very often in a developing country then a company that produces vaccines in a developed country just identifies the virus and then produces a vaccine in order to fight this particular virus then the question raised by the countries that originated pathogen is what are we getting out of this what kind of benefits sharing is taking place are we getting even the vaccines because in some cases because of limitation of supply the countries in which this virus was identified were not able or could not be able to get the vaccines or to get any benefit from this so a framework was developed in the context of the World Organization to deal with the sharing of H5N1 you may recall this another influenza virus is with human pandemic potential so this is not a binding instrument interestingly is a voluntary instrument but which has worked quite well on the basis of which when there is access to a virus to a pathogen in order to develop a vaccine then a particular agreement is signed and on the basis of this agreement there are some obligations and in this case since 2012 the system has been able to generate benefits to the system that amounted to $170 million based on this scheme of sharing some of the benefits that arise from identification of particular viruses so it is considered in general to be quite a successful experiment in the sense that it has addressed the issue of benefit sharing in a way that has led to some compensation ok so last the new binding instrument on marine generative sources which is being negotiated so now I will show you some of the options that are being submitted for negotiation so let me just tell you that a conference has already been convened in order to negotiate this instrument the second session of the conference has taken place in March, April this year so there is in accordance to the resolution these binding instruments should be finalized at the fourth conference so there is still some time to finalize and the process has been based on a document prepared by the chair of the conference which is called President's 8th for negotiation so generally when you start negotiation like this of course you need what is called a zero draft you need a draft in order to start to discuss what kind of rights of obligation will be developed very often the first draft is presented by the chair in this case this is the President's 8th document that has suggested a number of options so if you look at this document which is available on the website you will see that the President has presented many different options and these options actually reflect very different positions in particular positions from developed countries on the one side and developing countries on the other side so I'll show you some examples in relation to the scope of the instrument so you can you have here one of the options in accordance to option A the scope will be any material of marine plants, animal, microbial or other origin found in or originating from areas beyond national jurisdiction and containing functional units of heredity as well as any material derivatives and or data derivative with actual or potential value of their genetic and biochemical properties so if you look at this definition you will find that of course referring to areas beyond national jurisdiction the Convention on Biological Diversity as I did mention before it only applies in national jurisdiction so it does not apply beyond these jurisdictions but it refers to resources containing functional units of heredity this is the definition of genetic resources that we have seen before but it also refers to derivatives so this means that in accordance to this proposed option the new binding instrument will deal with benefit sharing in relation to genetic resources as such but also in relation to derivatives which may be for instance identification of biochemical compound and in addition to this if you see at this proposed option it refers to data derivative so it's also including this issue of dematerialization of genetic resources so it's also referring to the possibility of claiming benefit sharing in cases where there has been no access to a physical sample but access to information in database so this definition is as you could appreciate quite well but there are other options option B is any material of marine plant, animal, microbial origin containing functional units of heredity of actual or potential value do you see any difference with the previous one well these options aligned different countries so if you look at the document produced for this second conference you will see that there have been support for option A for option B and you can certainly know which countries have supported option A which is broad which covers genetic resources such covers derivatives covers also data or digitized information and option B as you can see is much narrower it only refers to material which contains functional units of heredity so it does exclude beneficiary in relation to derivatives which is of course of major importance in terms of option C is any marine genetic material of plant, animal, or microbial origin on these there is agreement of actual or potential value collected from the area so what does it mean collected from the area, collected where it's collected in the water in the column water collected in the area means that it's only refers only to those materials which are collected at the seabed the floor to materials which are collected in the high water so this option is also very narrow so this is the kind of debates that are taking place which is a scope is just genetic resources is genetic resources as derivatives is genetic resources only found in the area as defined by the convention which is the seabed the floor or will it cover also genetic resources which are found in the water column principles this is a very, very important debate in accordance to this president aid there are options on this the following general principles and approaches apply to marine genetic resources of areas beyond national jurisdiction including questions on the share of benefits one option is common heritage of my kind option, another option is no text so in many cases you will find that one option suggested by the president is no text don't discuss this and the second option is freedom of the high seas and this is a major dividing point among developing and developed countries developing countries hold the view that marine genetic resources and their derivatives should be dealt with as part of the common heritage of my kind meaning that benefits should be shared with everybody developed countries however have the position that marine genetic resources should be dealt with under the principle of the freedom of the high seas which is one of the principles in the convention on the law of the sea and it's interesting because you have another option which is a compromise diplomats are very often they make compromises and if you look at the compromise it reads the freedom of the high seas shall govern the provisions for access to marine genetic resources of areas beyond national jurisdiction while the common heritage of my kind shall govern their exploitation so there is a differentiation between access and exploitation but let me explain why the difference is there in the freedom of the high seas as we have seen in the convention on the law of the seas the resources which are not only defined which are the mineral resources in the sea bed are subject to the principle of common heritage of my kind but the convention defines the high seas as all part of the sea that are not included in the territorial sea so the high seas concept is about the water the water which is not under national jurisdiction and for the water column which is not under national jurisdiction the principle that is contained in the convention on the law of the sea is the principle of the freedom of the high seas so here we have part of the relevant provision which says the high seas open to all states whether coastal or landlocked freedom of the high seas is exercised under the conditions laid down by this convention and by other rules of international law it comprises inter alia both for coastal and low local states freedom of scientific research subject to part 6 and 30 so the point made by developed countries is that managing the resources should be dealt with under the principle of the high seas under this principle there is freedom of scientific research and this means that whoever does the research appropriates the result of the research so the concept is this is not the common good the concept is that you have the capacity to do bioprospecting you have the right to do it because this is part of the freedom of the high seas and if you find something you may own it and you have done the effort to get it so this is a measure dividing point between developed and developing countries developed countries in particular the United States are you for this principle the principle of the freedom to do research and therefore freedom to do with the research whatever the personal company wants to and the concept of common heritage of mankind which means that this is the common good and therefore there is an obligation to share the results of their exploitation there are also differences in relation to what we might call the material scope here you can see different differences this instrument applies another suggested provision to the use of fish and other biological resources for research into the genetic properties no text it applies to many genetic resources collected in situ access in ex situ and ex silico and digital sequence data and another option is it applies to many genetic resources collected in situ and accessed in situ and a further option is modern genetic resources collected in situ so this is also very important I don't know whether you are familiar with this concept of in situ and ex situ collection of genetic resources in situ means that you find the specimen as it is in nature so you go to a field you find a plant you go to the ocean and then you identify a specimen this is in situ it is conserved in a natural environment ex situ is when such a material is collected already and is deposited in a particular bank for instance a gene bank for instance there are many gene banks for plant genetic resources as seeds are conserved under low temperature so these banks have these resources ex situ because they have already been taken, collected this is another dividing issue between developed and developing countries because for developing countries it doesn't matter whether access to the material has taken place in situ this directly from nature or it has taken place from an ex situ collection from somebody who has already collected and made the deposit in all cases for developing countries there should be beneficiary independently of these circumstances and also in accordance to this broadest definition even if there is a digital sequence that is used in order to develop a product even in that case there should be beneficiary so developing countries are aiming at the regime that will cover genetic resources exploitation as such will cover exploitation of derivatives which generate the most important thing but also taking into account whether materials are taken from nature in situ are taken from a collection ex situ or even on the basis of data which are in a public in a public database but then if you look for instance at option 3 many genetic resources collected in situ so this is the very narrow scope some countries are pushing for this as saying if there is beneficiary it should be limited only to situations where there is a collection of the material from nature and not in the other situations that are covered by the previous definition and as you can see then later in part of C one option is derivatives and the other option is no text so another issue for discussion is whether beneficiary will cover or not derivatives and not just the genetic resources as such well there is an interesting exception and this is fish as commodity and here you will also see the differences so the main aim of this provision is to say we are working about beneficiary for genetic resources but we are not dealing with fish as a commodity so this is not about fishing this is not about the operation of companies that fish this is not part of the beneficiary concept beneficiary should take place where the genetic information of fish is used then one option suggested by the president is that this instrument does not apply to the use of fish and other biological resources as a commodity fish is captured as a commodity there is nothing then that this new instrument will be dealing with but there is an option one which says fish and other biological resources that are collected beyond a threshold amount shall be considered as a commodity the threshold amount shall be determined by the body set forth in part X so this is suggesting that if a small quantity of fish is captured should be considered genetic resources or used for genetic resources and subject to beneficiary when bioprospecting is done you need to take specimens but you take them in a small quantity so this definition is also a dividing point between develop and developing countries saying ok let's talk about which is the limit under which you will consider that what you are doing is just working with fish as a commodity and there is also another option which says if a species of fish is found to have value for its genetic material that species of fish shall be treated as a marine genetic resource regardless of the volume of the catch so what do you think will this be a proposal supported by develop or by developing countries developing countries if you want to be sure that if there is a value in genetic resources it doesn't matter whether you are getting a big quantity or not of the fish one of the important issues that these binding instruments should deal with is relates to the rule of axis so how axis will take place in the case of the convention biological diversity as I explained before there is a prior reform consent so in many countries we see a ministry that is charged with granting of permits for bioprospecting and negotiating these mutually agreed contracts with the bioprospector so something like this needs to be developed in the case of the new instrument so the question is how this axis will be regulated will there be an international authority this is part of the discussion but there is just to give you a sense of what is going on one of the proposed options says the following terms and conditions will apply in the case of axis there will be an indication of the geographical coordinates of the location where marriage entity resources were collected capacity building so this is what is called non-monetary beneficiary the bioprospector should offer capacity building there is the transfer of marine technology there is another non-monetary benefit there is the deposit of samples data and related information in open source platforms such as databases biorepositories or biobanks so another obligation for the bioprospector would be to make the samples available or the information available and finally a contribution to an axis and beneficiary fund so it means that some monetary contribution of course this is also a very dispute provision on this what kind of benefit should be granted and in particular there is a lot of discussion about monetary and non-monetary benefits under the convention biological diversity you can have both types of benefits in the discussion of this instrument some countries you can imagine which these countries are are saying only non-monetary benefit benefit should be discussed other group of countries is saying also monetary benefits should be discussed you can imagine which countries are on one side or the other another issue is in relation to rule for access is this provision which is suggested exceed to access to manage energy resources within the scope of this part shall be free and open access to in silico information and data shall be facilitated so these are the issues that I refer to so whether it covers only in situ or also exceed to collections and then some of the proponents are saying access to what is already collected should be free and open and also access to in silico information should be facilitated well this is an example of this monetary and non-monetary benefit that I refer to in accordance to one option option A these include but are not limited to those listed in annex so this option is suggesting that would be a list of benefits that the bioprospector should provide and the option 2 for the purposes of this part the term benefits shall mean non-monetary benefits non-monetary benefits so some of the participating countries looking at the possibility of allowing for non-monetary benefits which will not include of course compensation it includes but is not limited to capacity building the exchange of public availability of information and scientific knowledge access to samples and sample collection access to technology and technology and transfer of technology but all of these are non-monetary and then finally what about the appropriation which is one of the concerns that have been raised by developing countries one of the very reasons why these negotiations are taking place well on these there are also different provisions which are suggested and you again you can see here the major division of views between developed and developing countries one option which is suggested by the precedence A the document is managed entity resources accessed in accordance with this instrument shall not be subject to patents except where such resources are modified by human intervention resulting in a product capable of industrial application so this provision is just say patents should not be granted in relation to materials which are obtained exceto inceto whatever shall not be subject to patents then the second part state the state parties shall take appropriate and effective legislative administrative or policy measures to ensure that users of marine genetic resources shall disclose the origin of the marine genetic resources they utilize this is another very very controversial suggestion currently and since the last 15 years or so developing countries are trying to get in the world intellectual property organization and also in the world trade organization provisions that will oblige patent applications to inform the origin of biological resources which are claimed in patent applications so this has been a demand from developing countries for a long time even to amend the TRIPS agreement that's part of the WTO in order to include a new provision that will oblige patent applicants to say where they are obtaining the resources from and this is seen as a condition in order to be able to enforce the beneficiary obligation because if a patent is granted but there is no information of the origin of the genetic resources which are claiming a patent it's very difficult for a particular country to enforce the rights in terms of beneficiary so this is very controversial then as you can imagine this option would be favored by developing countries or developing countries clearly developing countries but there is another option which is with respect to intellectual property rights state parties shall implement this instrument in a manner consistent with the rights and obligations of states and the relevant agreements concluded under the auspices of the world intellectual property organization and the world trade organization so what do you think? this is an alternative to the previous one developed or developing countries we support this as an alternative so it's not saying that patents cannot be obtained it is not saying that information will be provided regarding the origin where the genetic resources are being taken just saying whatever is done in this instrument should be compatible with the TRIPS agreement which is in WTO and with other agreements and the World Intellectual Property Organization this is clear the position of developed countries I imagine you are tired already it is quite late but this is just to give you some sense what is going on so this is quite clearly a North-South discussion to a great extent the demanders in the case of these new binding instruments are developing countries so they want to address the possible gaps in the convention on the love of the sea they want to ensure that they have access to the outcomes of research which is done in relation to marine genetic resources beyond national jurisdiction so they have been accepted as a principle because the resolution actually has mandated to start the negotiation so this process is going on but as you can see the differences are very strong between developed and developing countries so it's very unclear today what the outcome will be on the table it will depend very much on the negotiating capacity also the political and economic power to impose some solutions in the end very often many of these provisions will end up in compromises often the compromises are based on ambiguity so then you have to interpret what is meant by a particular provision but this is the kind of the issues that are going on from our view from the point of view of the South Center government organization composed only of developing countries this is an important initiative because this is one of the few initiatives which is actually promoted by developing countries in order to address one important asymmetry in relation to the capacity to get access and get the results of research in the area of marine genetic resources well thank you very much for your attention so I hope it was clear enough for you to follow and understand what is what is going on thank you very much


Hey Psych2Goers, we'd like to say that we're here for you during this difficult time of COVID-19. Stay safe everyone. The coronavirus pandemic is affecting all of us right now. It's caused a lot of changes in the world. While your mental health should be taken seriously all the time, it's particularly important during this pandemic. So here are 10 ways that coronavirus affects you mentally, and we're here to validate those experiences in case you feel like you're alone in them. 1. Mob mentality and panic buying. There's a lot of panic going around and it's worsened by mob mentality, which is when people are influenced to behave in an overly emotional way by those around them. Even though stalking up sounds like a good idea, hoarding too much will lead to a shortage for others who really need it. Some people might hoard because of their belief that there isn't enough for everybody, but there is. 2. Feelings of emotional isolation. Social distancing means we have to keep physical distance between ourselves and other people. It's the responsible thing to do to flatten the curve, but being physically isolated can leave to feeling emotionally isolated. Loneliness is the last thing anyone wants to feel in times of crisis, so be sure to reach out to friends and family. Take advantage of technology that allows you to feel connected to loved ones across great distances. 3. Boredom. Even when you're working from home, being quarantined inside your house for a long period of time can make anyone feel uneasy. This is especially true for people who are extroverted and aren't used to staying in. It's important to know you're able to conquer boredom. Make a list of things you've been meaning to do, like hobbies to start, books to read, home projects, games to play, and so on. 4. Overconsumption of news and media. People have constant access to the news all the time, and sometimes it can be filled with inaccurate information that only intensifies your fears. So make sure your sources are credible and factual, especially when you share it online. While it's good to stay informed, too much can also negatively impact your mental health. Be mindful of how much time you spend consuming the news, especially during this pandemic. 5. Added stress to your life. Life was stressful enough with work, school, and relationships, but with the pandemic, it could make it much more difficult and stressful to manage everything. Approaching stress with a calm and practical perspective is essential. In fact, the Center for Disease Control's coronavirus web page includes a section on managing stress. It's important to remember that this situation is temporary, and that we'll make it through this together. 6. Worry about loved ones. Although it's good to be concerned about other people and how they're doing during this time of crisis, too much worry can increase the stress hormone in your body and suppress the effectiveness of your immune system. The best way to keep yourself and others healthy, especially the elderly and immunocompromised people, is to stay home. Use texts or video chat to stay emotionally connected with them and make plans for when the quarantine is over. 7. Stress about finances. Since all non-essential employees have been told to stay home, many are now out of work. Going without a paycheck is stressful and can bring up other financial troubles. The American Institute of Stress found that 76% of Americans cite money and work as their leading causes of stress, which speaks to how extreme the issue is, but being stressed all the time can lead to other health problems. 8. Normal schedules and routine is interrupted. The new coronavirus preventative measures have caused a lot of interruptions in people's schedules and routines, such as going to work, school, the gym, going to your favorite restaurant, and so on. While it can be hard to adjust to all the new changes, have faith that this is going to be temporary and we'll soon be able to get back to our normal routine when the outbreak dies down. Perhaps this is a great time to binge watch your favorite TV show on Netflix that you didn't have time to watch before the lockdown. 9. Concern about your physical health Of course, we're all worried about our physical health during this outbreak, but being excessively anxious all the time can also affect your mental health. In this time of difficulty, make your health a priority by taking the necessary precautions against the spread of the virus. Make sure to eat healthy and move your body. Practice self-care as often as you can. 10. Concern about the world It's natural to feel anxious during this pandemic, but too much anxiety can be detrimental to your health. Remember that we can only control our own actions, so wash your hands frequently, don't touch your face, stay home, and remind yourself that by following these rules, you are doing your part to help everyone else. We all have to do our part to weather through this crisis. So stay safe, practice social distancing, be kind to other people, and take care of yourself both physically and mentally. If you found this video helpful, be sure to like it and share it with those who might benefit from it. Thanks for watching, and we'll see you in our next video.


So, let us get started. So, in the previous lecture and previous to that lecture, we started talking about exponential family of distributions, then talked about random sampling. We talked about sample means, sample variance, sample deviations, we talked about their properties and then started looking into sampling from normal distributions. So, that lead us to two special distributions called as student t distribution and student f distributions. And we also discussed about some relation between various distributions, right, like how I can obtain like f distributions reciprocal, what is the relation between t distribution, f distribution and this mapping of f distribution to beta distribution. So, you also saw the last one in quiz. We have been talking about basically statistics which is about, we said simply is some function of the bunch of random variables we have observed. And as a special case, we observed sample mean, sample variance and sample standard deviation. That time we discussed about one notion called unbiased. Like sample mean, we called it as a estimator for the mean value of the distribution. Sample variance is an estimator for the variance of the distribution. So, that time we talked about something called unbiased. So, we have this, like we had this, if you have i samples we had by x and if all of this x i's are such that their mean value is mu, ok. Then we said if you average them, what we said is we are going to get an estimator for this mean value which we called as mu hat, ok. And this mu hat was a random quantity because it depends on the random variables. Then we said that if expectation of mu hat is equals to mu, this is, this estimator is mu hat is an unbiased estimator of mu. And similarly we also saw a square, this was an estimator for variance and we said that this is also unbiased. Now, we will look into another property of this estimator called consistency, ok. But before we define that notion of consistency, we need some more definition because that consistency notion is an asymptotic notion. You notice that here this unbiasedness you can define for any n. You just take it for n equals to 10 or n equals to 15 whatever. If you take n equals to 10 you are taking average of those 10 sample and its mean should be equals to mu and it happens to be mu if this x i samples are iid. And if you take n equals to 15 and you take maybe I should make it n subscript n just to indicate that it depends on n samples and here I should take n mu n. So, here irrespective of what is the n samples you are going to use, expectation of mu n hat is going to be mu and this is, if it is an unbiased estimator this is true for every n. But now I am going to introduce another notion called consistency which holds for n tending to infinity, ok. So, for that we are going to look into convergence of this random variables as we have infinitely many of them, ok. Our first notion of convergence is called convergence in probability. Did you hear about convergence in probability in i is 6 to 1? No, ok. We are going to say that a sequence of random variable x 1, x 2 convergence in probability to a random variable, ok. If you look into the difference of absolute difference of random variable x n with x that being larger than epsilon that goes to 0 as n goes to infinity, ok. So, just to contrast this what we are trying to say with the standard limit. So, in the what does in the in the standard limits what we talk about? Sequence of random variables sorry sequence of numbers tending to a. This what does this mean? Or we simply write a goes to a, a n goes to a and you know the definition of this limit, right? It is a standard definition. But now what I am facing with is sequence of random numbers. What does this mean? So, the sequence of random numbers converging to something we need to appropriately define some notions and the first notion is what we call it as convergence in probability. And I just defined what is that definition is. If you look into, now once you take this probability this is some number and now that sequence converging to 0 we are talking about that sequence converging to 0, ok. And the complement of definition is if I am going to look into less than or equals to epsilon this limit goes to 1, right? This is just a complement of this. And at this point I did not say that this x 1, x 2 there has to be IID. Now, neither they need to be identically distributed or independent. This is just a definition if, if the sequence of random variables such that this holds then we are going to call they converging probability. And the shorthand notation like the way we use it for the deterministic case like this in the stochastic ways use this notion that x n goes to x with the superscript p written on the arrow mark. So, we will not just go into that I am just introducing this definition just to tell you what is consistency, ok. Now, let us say you people have already encountered sequence of random numbers earlier, right? Where did you encounter sequence of random variables when you dealt with law of large numbers and central limit theorems, ok? So, now let us see, ok. Now, suppose let us assume that my sequence are IID with a common mean mu and variance sigma and there is a type where this should have been less than infinity, it cannot be greater than infinity. And now law of large numbers said that if you take the average of these samples this value went to mu, maybe I will not write p here at this point. This is what law of large number told me, right? If you take the average of these numbers and if you continue to take average of these numbers as n tends to infinity that value is going to mu. Now, let us see is there any connection between this statement and the con and the statement and the definition of convergence in probability. So, the claim is that this is this is simply says that x n converges to mu in probability, ok. Now, let us see how is that? So, I am now going to go and apply this definition here, choose any epsilon positive. Now, I am interested in knowing this, now these are my sequence of random variables, x n bar minus mu I will be interested in their difference being greater than epsilon. I know this has to be greater than or equals to epsilon 0 that is by definition. Now, can somebody tell me how did I get this upper bound? Markov inequality, right? So, I obtained a Markov inequality. Markov or Chebyshev? This is already in a say in a way that because of this difference we have written it is fine, you can say any of this. But actually what I have done is basically I have take the square on both sides, ok. If I do like this, what you are saying? If I have taken square on both sides, now this is Markov, right?  Now, when I actually got this, this is actually I could have directly written this and called it as Chebyshev inequality, right? But I first, we also derived Chebyshev equality using Markov inequality only, right? And this is exactly the way we derived Chebyshev equality from, but I am just repeating those steps. Now, what is this quantity? Variance of x n bar. We computed this, right? We computed when we calculated the sample. The sample means variance when you computed, we calculated as sigma square by n, right? Now, I am interested in n going to infinity. When n goes to infinity, this quantity vanishes and goes to 0. Irrespective of what is the epsilon you choose, ok? So, now notice that this is lower bounded by 0 and now also upper bounded by 0 as n goes to infinity. So, this value is converging to what? This probability is converging to? 0. 0. By definition that means, your x n bar is converging to mu. So, that is why this statement. Law of large numbers if you interpret in other way, it is just or the formal way of interpreting law of large numbers is the sample mean converges to that population mean in probability, ok. So, when we said law of large number we did not mention the notion of convergence. We just said if you take the average it will go to some number, but that time we did not formally define what is the limiting convergence mean, ok. But now we are just formalizing that saying that that that convergence was convergence in probability. So, sample mean converges to the population mean and we already know this. Sample mean is unbiased for any n. Now, I think I missed to write it here. Now, whenever it so happens that if expectation of x n equals to mu and x n bar also converges to the same parameter that I am interested in here, that expectation of sample mean equals to this mu and it converges to the same value mu then I am going to call x n bar is consistent is a consistent estimator of of what mean, ok. What is the difference between this and this? Agreed let us say limiting property, but is there anything more than that? Yes, this guy is that is asymptotic as n goes to infinity, but is there anything more? You see the expectation here and no expectation here. So, what is this quantity? This is x n bar we denoted it as a mu mu n bar mu n hat, right. This is basically average of n samples and we said this is still a random quantity.  So, let us say I will do this, ok. Let us say one of you give me one sample one set of samples x 1, x 2, x 3 like this x n and I am going to call it as set 1 and to denote that I am superscripting them with 1. Another one of you give me another set of samples and I am going to superscript with 2, right and each one of you can give me n samples, but let us take 2. If I have to go and take the samples from x first guy, this is like i equals to 1 to n 1 by n and he is whatever the value he gets me let us call this 1 and similarly whatever the second guy gives me the average of the second guy values give me let us call that, ok. And all this this is and this all samples are coming from the same underlying population, ok. Now, is mu n hat 1 and mu n hat 2 are going to be the same? Not necessary. But are they same in expectation? Yes, they are same in expectation because we know that sample mean n is an unbiased estimator, but suppose you give me lot of samples like you keep on giving me many samples and both of you give me lot of samples, ok. And now this mu n hat I you are giving me more and more samples, right I am going to average and this is where it is going to converge? Mu and where is this mu n hat is going to converge? Mu. Even though they need not be equal, but when you let n goes to infinity both the samples they are going to converge to the same mu, ok. So, that is why like if one of you just give me n tending to infinity sample I will just average and I know this is already mu I do not care about another guy now as I have already enough samples. So, this is what this is why it is called consistent whether I use this, this as long as n tending to infinity it is consistently giving me the same estimated value, ok same value of mu, ok. So, this is what we are going to say consistency as sample quantity is consistent its sequence converges to a constant. And in case of sample mean we know that that constant is simply the population mean and that has come from law of large numbers law of large numbers say to what constant it converges to. Now, let us see we now just to talk about sample mean as a estimator for your population mean. Now, let us look into sample variance and see whether this is a consistent estimator for my population variance. How you are going to do that? This is my definition of sample variance when you have n samples and we know that this right we actually discuss this right we know that sample variance is unbiased. Now, again I want to check whether if I take S n bar and see that how much it is away from the sigma square I want to compute this probability. So, I know how to compute this probability, right or at least get an upper bound of that. This one is nothing, but by again applying your Markov inequality you will get this value. Now, what is this quantity? This is nothing, but the variance of your sample variance. So, S n square your sample variance, Uska variance. So, whether it did we compute variance of sample variance? If not, you can verify that even that value as n goes to infinity goes to 0. So, variance of sample variance also goes to 0 as n tends to infinity. Now, because of that by definition S n square converges to sigma square in probability right and hence it is consistent. Let us revisit this definition of consistency. So, a sample quantity is consistent if it sequence converges to a constant whatever it is. Let us say I am just going to say y n if it going to converge to constant then you are just saying definition of consistencies are sample quantities consistent if it sequence converges to a constant. Let us say y n is a sequence of random variable which goes to some constant value we are calling it as consistent. Now, what I am now trying to ask is whether x n bar is consistent? Does x n bar converges to a constant? Yes. How? Law of large numbers. Law of large numbers already told us that x n bar converges to the mu value that is why it is consistent and that convergence is actually in convergence in probability. And similarly, we just said that if you are interested in S n bar we just computed this that it also goes to a constant sigma square in probability. We just computed this right S n square and that is why this sample deviation is also consistent. And similarly, you can compute that sample standard deviation is also going to be consistent. And what is that? That sample standard deviation is simply square root of your S n bar. Any question about this convergence in probability and consistency? You people are in sync with me or lost or anything is not consistent here? That is our notation right because we said these are like estimators. Sample mean is an estimator and we obtained it by average of n samples. So, we said that was our kind of informal we are going to whenever mu is the parameter basically we are trying to estimate. So, we will write it as mu n bar mu n hat and whenever it is an average of certain number of samples we will put a bar on it. X n bar is nothing but summation of X i 1 by n. So, that is why bar S n square this is same reason right. This is also we obtain as an average of n samples right. What was S n square? Even it is 1 minus n even though there is some kind of centralization here, but it is still average of certain number of right. I think when you are getting confused like sometimes I have put it bar and sometimes I have not put it bar. The S n square also you can use. No issues. I just like to be consistent with this X n bar I put bar because just to indicate it is an average of certain number S n is also S n bar R is also average of certain number quantities that is why I put bar on it. So, I think we first to be clear with this definition of convergence in probability ok. Now, one more exercise. I say X n bar goes to X in probability what this X has to be X n bar by our definition is a sample mean that mu has to be population mean it cannot be anything that is a constant that X is not a random variable it is a constant that is why the definition here that is why we are also calling it consistent because it is converging to a constant and that constant happens to be sample mean here ok. Now, one more simple example I will take. I will give you X n is uniform in the interval 0 1 ok. Notice that open interval it is an open interval and 0 1 are not included. And now, I define another random variable X n equals to X n square. Does Y n converges to anything? If Y n converges to Y in probability what that Y has to be 1 by 4 sorry this should not X n square this should be X n n ok. I am just refining it X n n X n what you understand what is X n right? X n is a uniform random variable between 0 1.  See X n's are all going to be between 0 1 yeah everything is between 0 1 and if I start exponenting with n which is tending to infinity what will happen to that value? It is going to be 0 right. Does this Y is 0 then yes or no? Then this Y is 0 this Y is the limiting value is no more a random variable it is a constant. Then the definition of this convergence in probability applies right. So, then we should say yeah Y n converges to 0 in probability ok next ok this definition will quickly go through not spend much time these are just definitions. What are the other notions of convergence in probability? Or what are the other notions of convergence? There are two three other notions of convergence called almost sure convergence and convergence in distribution ok. You do not need to know much, but it is just better to know these definitions. We say that a sequence of random variables converges to X almost surely if probability that limit n tends to infinity X n is X with probability 1. So, anyone understand what does this mean? So, let us try to understand what is this may be this is a compact definition but let us say what is this means limit n tends to infinity X n equals to X equals to 1 what does this mean? This basically saying that this is probability of all samples on which this X n of omega is. So, you take a omega and at that omega that sample point you can compute the X n values and see whether that limit this is like a X n omega if you fix omega X n omega is a deterministic sequence right agree or no? Once you pick a sample omega you just compute your X n on on that particular sample value. This is like a standard limit whatever the X you have chosen if this holds then that omega lies here and if for some omega this condition does not hold then it does not belongs to this set. What it is saying that if collection of all those omegas will be such that their probability is 1 then I am going to say that X n converges to X almost surely ok. So, this is a different from almost sorry convergence in probability you can always consider random variables which convergence in probability, but not in almost sure, but it is the case that if it converges in almost sure it always converges in probability. So, if let us say limit of X n converges to p and I have limit of X n converges to no X here and X and this is p and almost sure is written like this. So, this implies this, but this need not imply this. So, which one of them is a stronger notion of convergence almost sure is stronger notion or almost convergence probability is stronger notion almost sure right fine. The other notion is convergence in distribution. Suppose you have a sequence of distributions and it so happens that their CDF converges point wise ok. You take some point X and computes the CDF of all the random variables at that point X and if that value converges to the CDF of your limiting random variable X at that point X and this should happen for all continuity points of f of X. Notice that f of your CDF can have jumps right only at those points it is where it is continue if this happens then we are going to call it as convergence in distribution and we are going to denote it as equals to X in distribution. And now if you little bit think carefully did we come across convergence in distribution before CLT. So, what did the CLT said normal distribution right. So, what CLT said is let us say if you are sequence X 1, X 2 have any these are IIDs and if you look into that X n bar minus mu and let us call this Y n ok. Now, Y n converges to in what sense? In distribution sense. Now, actually what I can say is instead of this I can say Y n converges to Y where Y is normal 0 1 ok. So, Y n converges to Y in distribution ok I think this is good enough. So, that is what the relation between them is if you have almost sure convergence you know it converges in probability and further if you know it converges in probability you can know that it convergence in distribution also. And when all these convergence happening to the same limiting X ok. So, if X n converges to X almost surely then X n converges to the same X in probability and that X n converges to the same X in distribution also ok fine. Yeah we do not need to go much more details than this I think you will study all this converges in distribution in a much more elaborate way when you take probability 2. You are doing IE 6 to 1 now right there is a second part of that course I do not know what is the label yeah. So, if you take the next version of that you will study all of this distributions.