text:
- Africa and the Middle East
- Asia Pacific
- Europe
- Latin America
- North America
- Rating Enforcement
The European Antitrust Review 2015
IP and Antitrust
Squaring the Circle: The EU's Quest for Balance between Antitrust and Intellectual Property
Antitrust limits on intellectual property rights
Intellectual property rights (IPRs) generally give the creator an exclusive right over the use of his or her creation during a certain period of time, allowing the owner to prevent the unauthorised use of its IP and to exploit it by, inter alia, licensing it to third parties. The importance of the protection and enforcement of these rights has long been recognised by EU law and policy. The Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union specifically acknowledge the importance of IP protection.1 Numerous policy statements from the European Commission (the Commission) and other European institutions recognise the crucial importance of protecting and enforcing IP to 'the EU's ability to stimulate innovation and to compete in the global economy'.2
However, when the enforcement of IPRs appears to undermine or infringe other rights and laws, the challenge for the Commission and the EU Courts has been to strike the right balance between adequate IPR protection and those other rights and laws, including antitrust law. What is clear is that IPRs are not absolute rights. As far back as the 1960s, the European Court of Justice (ECJ), in facing this balancing exercise, drew a distinction between the 'grant' or existence of IPRs and the 'exercise' of those rights, and found that an IP owner could be prevented from exercising its IPRs to the extent necessary to give effect to the Treaty prohibition on anti-competitive agreements.3 While this balancing exercise is not unique to the interface between IP and antitrust law,4it is in the area of antitrust enforcement that we have seen most of the tension in how far IP owners can be legitimately limited in using their IPRs. Recent enforcement by the Commission in the fields of smartphones and pharmaceuticals reflect a bold approach and continues to raise new questions on the limits antitrust rules can place on IPRs.5 Statements from the Commission reflect a certain scepticism about the exercise and protection of IPRs:
[...] I think that companies should spend their time innovating and competing on the merits of the products they offer – not misusing their intellectual property rights to hold up competitors to the detriment of innovation and consumer choice [...]
European Commission press release, 6 May 2013
For EU competition enforcement and policy, this means that cases involving IP are also likely to remain on [the Commission]'s radar.6
Joaquín Almunia, 9 December 2013
Against this background, this article focuses on the following questions:
- when do antitrust rules force an IP owner to grant a licence to a third party; and
- what limits do antitrust rules place on litigation by IP owners, including the use of injunctions to protect their IP, and what limits do they impose on settlements of threatened or pending litigation?7
Unilateral conduct of IP owner and article 102 TFEU
The circumstances under which an IP owner may be compelled to license its technology or refrain from litigation to enforce its IPRs are generally governed by the antitrust rules regulating unilateral conduct, namely article 102 TFEU. Article 102 TFEU prohibits abuses of a dominant position. A company will infringe article 102 TFEU if:
- it is found to be dominant in the relevant market;
- it engages in conduct that constitutes an abuse of that dominant position; and
- there is no objective justification for its alleged abusive behaviour.
In looking at these questions, it is necessary to assess whether ownership of an IPR, in and of itself, is sufficient to render a company dominant or whether there are other factors that play in this assessment. In assessing market power, and therefore dominance, the Commission will examine:
- the constraints imposed by other companies and the market structure;
- the constraints imposed by the credible threat of future expansion by actual competitors or entry by potential competitors; and
- the existence of countervailing buyer power.8
These criteria are equally applicable when it comes to analysing the position of an IP holder in the market.
As a result, the mere ownership of an IPR does not make an IP holder dominant.9 It will depend, among other things, on whether there are substitutable technologies available in the market and on whether it is envisaged that actual or potential competitors would launch technologies that could substitute the protected technologies. Where a technology has become an indispensable input for competitors, a refusal to grant access to that technology, by refusing to license IPRs, may be potentially abusive;10 however, this does not equate ownership of IPRs to dominance. This approach has also been followed in the United States, where the Supreme Court has acknowledged that IPRs do not necessarily confer market power.11
The dominance assessment under EU law becomes more complex in cases where the market at issue is governed by a technical standard. Usually, licences for many patents are necessary to manufacture a product that complies with a standard, and the ownership of those patents is not generally concentrated in the same IP holder. This means that an IP holder who only owns one or several of the multiple standard essential patents (SEPs) that read upon the standard may impede the manufacturing of products. For example, it could refuse to license its SEPs on fair reasonable and non-discriminatory (FRAND) terms or hold up the patent until its patented technology has been incorporated in the standard with the view to charge excessive or discriminatory royalties.12
Standardisation creates a specific context at the intersection of IP and antitrust law. While the Commission considers that SEPs can confer 'significant market power on SEP holders',13 it also acknowledges that, despite the fact that a SEP holder could control the product or service market to which the standard relates and thus could behave in anti-competitive ways, 'there is no presumption that holding or exercising IPR essential to a standard equates to the possession or exercise of market power. The question of market power can only be assessed on a case-by-case basis'.14 This was confirmed recently by the Commission in its decision accepting Samsung's commitments not to seek injunctions in the EU for infringement of certain of its SEPs in specific circumstances.15 In that decision, the Commission took into account Samsung's 100 per cent market share in the licensing of certain technologies as just one of the elements in assessing dominance and looked at several other elements in the broader market conditions in coming to the preliminary conclusion that Samsung held a dominant position.16
Finally, even if an IP owner was deemed to be dominant, it is important to remember that being in a dominant position is not, in itself, illegal.17 On the contrary, while dominant companies have a special responsibility not to impair competition in the EU,18 dominant companies are entitled, and encouraged, to compete on the merits. Antitrust law only punishes the abuse of a dominant position.
Compulsory licensing
Compulsory licensing occurs when the owner of an IPR is compelled to grant a licence to a third party under article 102 TFEU. As a general rule, the owner of an IPR is entitled to determine whether it will license its IPRs and, if so, how and to whom. A mere refusal to license does not per se amount to an infringement of article 102 TFEU. Following a series of high-profile article 102 cases, starting back in the late 1980s with Magill and followed by IMS and Microsoft I,19 it has been established that an IP holder may be compelled to license its technology to a third party under 'exceptional circumstances'. In practice, the 'exceptional circumstances' test has proven to be difficult to apply. The 'exceptional circumstances' have not been exhaustively defined by either the Commission or the EU courts and thus a case-by-case analysis is required.
Compulsory licensing and EU case law
Magill is the landmark case in which the ECJ upheld a duty to license an IPR. Each of the BBC, RTE and ITP – broadcasters in the UK and Ireland – published weekly television guides containing detailed information of their TV programmes. Magill TV Guide Ltd wanted to publish the three TV broadcasters' listings in a single weekly publication. At the time there was no such publication, but there was an obvious demand for it. However, the TV broadcasters refused Magill's request for a licence to use the information. The case was eventually heard by the ECJ, who upheld the General Court's (GC) judgment that the broadcasters were under an obligation to provide Magill with the listings.
The ECJ concluded that the refusal to license an IPR was not, in itself, an abuse of a dominant position, but it could be regarded as such in 'exceptional circumstances'.20 According to the ECJ, the dispute concerned exceptional circumstances given that:
- the TV broadcasters were the only source of the indispensable 'raw material' (ie, basic information on programme scheduling);
- Magill wanted to put together a weekly listing magazine which sought to introduce a new product on the market where there was an increasing unsatisfied demand for such a product;
- there was no justification for the refusal based on copyright protection; and
- by denying access to the information, the TV broadcasters were reserving the downstream market of TV guides for themselves excluding all potential competitors.21
Shortly after Magill, the ECJ reiterated the 'exceptional circumstances' test in Oscar Bronner,22 although the object of the refusal was not an IP-protected product or service. In that case, the alleged dominant service provider was not considered to have abused its dominant position by refusing to supply the requested service, inter alia, because the ECJ considered that the requested service was not indispensable to the complainant's business.
The test was again applied in Ladbroke,23 although the IP owner in that case, Paris Mutuel International, was not required to license its copyright to its betting shop competitor Ladbroke. The GC pointed out that, whereas in Magill the refusal to license prevented Magill from entering the market, in this case, Ladbroke was not only already active in the market but had the higher market share; and whereas in Magill the licence of IP was essential and indispensable in order to access and compete in the market for TV guides, in Ladbroke the IPRs were not indispensable for betting shop operators to be active in the market.24 Moreover, the GC found that the refusal to license IPRs in Ladbroke did not impede the bringing to the market of a new product.
IMS Health
IMS was another major case on compulsory licensing that added further colour on how the test initially elaborated in Magill would be applied. The ECJ confirmed its long-established principle that a mere refusal to license an IPR does not constitute an abuse of dominant position in and of itself. However, in 'exceptional circumstances' where the actions of the IP holder go beyond the natural protection of the IPR, there might be an abuse of dominance in the form of refusing to license.25 The ECJ confirmed, again, the exceptional circumstances test established in Magill and clarified certain of its elements, in particular:
- regarding the likelihood of excluding all competition on a secondary market, the ECJ held that it is sufficient if a 'potential' or 'hypothetical' separate market could be identified;
- regarding the absence of objective justification, the ECJ highlighted that this assessment needs to be conducted on a case-by-case basis; and
- regarding the requirement of bringing a new product to the market, the ECJ emphasised that it would not be sufficient if the potential licensee intended to merely duplicate a product or service that a potential licensor already sold in the secondary market.
Microsoft I
The 2007 GC's decision in Microsoft I went a step further in elaborating the obligation to license under article 102 TFEU and broadened the scope for compulsory licensing beyond what the ECJ had envisaged in Magill. In 2004, the Commission fined Microsoft €497 million for abusing its dominant position in the PC operating system market. The Commission concluded that Microsoft had abused its dominant position by refusing to supply competitors with interoperability information impeding them from developing and distributing products competing with Microsoft in the work group server operating system market.26 The GC upheld the Commission's decision.
With respect to the indispensability and elimination of competition in a secondary market, the GC, in line with IMS Health, agreed with the Commission that Microsoft was able to impose a de facto standard for work group computing. Therefore, non-Microsoft work group server operating systems had to be capable of interoperating with Windows PC and server operating systems on a non-discriminatory basis in order to compete on the market.27
Microsoft I, apart from confirming the obligation to license,28 is particularly relevant because of the approach the GC took in relation to the 'new product' requirement. Indeed, the GC did not find it necessary to show that a specific new product (such as the TV guide in Magill) would have been introduced into the market if the interoperability information had been shared. The GC explained that the 'new product' criterion should be interpreted as including any restriction on technical development.29Accordingly, Microsoft's refusal to share information prevented competitors from effectively competing in the work group server operating system market. This interpretation significantly widened the strict approach originally adopted in Magill.
Compulsory licensing in the Commission's Guidance on Article 102
The Commission confirmed its approach to refusal to license IPRs in its Guidance on Article 102.30 The Commission will intervene if:
- the refusal relates to a product or service that is objectively necessary to compete effectively on a downstream market;
- the refusal is likely to lead to the elimination of effective competition on the downstream market;
- the refusal is likely to lead to consumer harm; and
- there is no objective justification for such refusal.31
The Commission refers to Microsoft I, Magill and Oscar Bronner in its Guidance on Article 102 when explaining how 'product or service that is objectively necessary' should be interpreted. It also explains that when deciding whether a refusal leads to consumer harm, it will analyse whether the refusal would prevent the introduction of an 'innovative product' to the market or whether it would stifle follow-on innovation.32
The EU Courts' case law and the Commission's Guidance on Article 102 set out the general parameters for assessing when compulsory licensing is required. While it is true that the precise legal standard may be difficult to apply in practice and continues to give rise to a number of questions, it is clear that in 'specific circumstances' EU antitrust law requires dominant companies to license their IPRs and, as a result, a case-by-case analysis is required. Future cases should shed additional light on the scope and application of compulsory licensing. However, given the Commission's current preference for commitment decisions instead of prohibition decisions,33 it may take some time before clear guidance emerges.34
Vexatious litigation
The refusal to license IPRs to third parties has for a long time been the main focus of enforcement and debate in this area. The Commission's recent decisions and investigations in the smartphone and pharmaceutical industries have shifted the focus somewhat onto potential abusive litigation, including injunctions and patent settlements by IP owners.
There remains very little precedent in the area of abusive litigation. The few available EU Court cases set the bar very high in terms of what the Commission would need to show in order to successfully establish that by litigating or threatening to litigate against an alleged infringer, the IP owner is abusing a dominant position.
In ITT Promedia, both the Commission and the GC stated that entering into litigation, which is ultimately the expression of the fundamental right of access to justice, could not be considered an abuse of dominant position in itself.35 However, initiating litigation would be abusive if the dominant firm brings an action which is 'manifestly unfounded' (ie, only to harass the opposite party); and the claim is brought with the aim of eliminating competition. The GC has specified that these two criteria should be interpreted and applied restrictively as they constitute an exception to the fundamental right of access to courts.
In Protégé International Ltd, the GC upheld this two-step test.36 Protégé alleged that Pernod Ricard had abused its dominant position in the Irish whiskey market by filing legal proceedings against Protégé in relation to the latter's application for registration of the Wild Geese trademark. The GC rejected Protégé's claim that initiating litigation was abusive. The Court emphasised that access to justice is a fundamental right and therefore it is only in wholly exceptional circumstances that the bringing of litigation could amount to an abuse of a dominant position. The Court stated that the cumulative conditions set in ITT Promedia were not met in this case given that Pernod Ricard's trademark Wild Turkey contained the word 'wild' and that there thus existed a potential risk of confusion between the two brands. As a result, the GC found that initiating proceedings against the registration of Protégé's trademark could be justified.
In practice, the successful application by the Commission of the above-mentioned criteria in establishing an abuse of dominance will be very challenging, particularly in relation to the 'manifestly unfounded' criterion. Unfortunately, the Commission did not apply the ITT Promedia test in its recent Samsung decision and it remains to be seen to what extent, if at all, it relied on it in its recent decision finding that Motorola had abused its dominant position by seeking and enforcing an injunction against Apple on the basis of a smartphone SEP.
Injunctions and the threat of injunctions in the context of SEPS
There is a tendency on the part of the Commission to view the area of SEPs as fundamentally different to other areas where the Commission has tackled compulsory licensing and abusive litigation, mainly because in the context of a standard setting body, the IP owner will generally have given a commitment up front to license any technology incorporated in a standard on FRAND terms.
While the Commission considers recourse to injunctions a legitimate remedy for patent infringements, such conduct may be abusive in the context of SEPs where the potential licensee is willing to negotiate on FRAND terms. Since injunctions generally seek to prohibit the sale of the competing product allegedly infringing the patent, seeking (or threatening to seek) injunctions against potential licensees willing to negotiate on FRAND terms may exclude potential competitors and lead to other harmful effects (eg, higher royalties than would otherwise be charged). The recent decisions in Motorola and Samsung provide some insights into the Commission's thinking; although at the time of writing, the Motorola infringement decision has yet to be published and the Samsung decision was not a decision finding an infringement but rather a decision accepting voluntary commitments made by Samsung to terminate the Commission's investigation. As such, the precedential value of the Commission's decision in Samsung is limited.
When the GPRS standard was first adopted,37 Motorola declared some of its patents essential and committed to license them on FRAND terms.38Motorola subsequently sought and enforced an injunction against Apple in Germany on the basis of one of its SEPs. The Commission considered that this amounted to an abuse of Motorola's dominant position as it had committed to license on FRAND terms and Apple had been a willing licensee (Apple had agreed to take a licence and be bound by a determination of the FRAND royalties by the relevant German court). The enforcement of the injunction resulted in a temporary ban on Apple's online sales of iPhones and iPads to consumers in Germany.39 Furthermore, the Commission considered that Motorola abused its dominant position by insisting, under the threat of the enforcement of an injunction, that Apple gives up its rights to challenge the validity or infringement by Apple's mobile devices of Motorola's SEPs.40No fines were imposed due to the novelty of the case (and the abuse). However, as the first Commission decision finding an infringement for seeking and enforcing an injunction relating to SEPs, it will be interesting to see what legal standard the Commission applied in this case.
The Samsung decision also concerned the seeking of preliminary and permanent injunctions against Apple before courts in Germany, France, Italy, the Netherlands and the UK, on the basis of several of Samsung's UMTS SEPs.41 Samsung had committed to license these SEPs on FRAND terms within the framework of the European Telecommunications Standards Institute. In December 2012, the Commission informed Samsung of its preliminary view that it considered Apple to be a willing licensee and, on those grounds, Samsung's seeking of injunctions could infringe article 102 TFEU. The Commission subsequently accepted Samsung's commitments to no longer seek injunctions in the EEA on the basis of a broad range of its SEPs that relate to technologies implemented in smartphones and tablets against licensees who signed up to a licensing framework to determine the terms of the licence. Broadly, the licensing framework provides for a negotiation period of 12 months and, if no agreement is reached, a determination by a court or an arbitrator of what constitutes FRAND terms.
While the Commission's findings in Samsung are only preliminary, it is interesting to examine the Commission's reasoning. Basically, the Commission applied the legal standard developed in the context of compulsory licensing to the seeking of injunctions. It refers to a line of leading compulsory licensing cases including Magill, IMS and Microsoft I but no reference is made to cases on vexatious litigation and there is no reference to the 'manifestly unfounded' test developed in ITT Promedia. It considered that 'exceptional circumstances' existed because of the standard setting process and the commitment to license SEPs on FRAND terms. According to the Commission, there was no objective justification in the circumstances based on the need to protect IPR, commercial interests, public interest in the standardisation process or in terms of efficiencies that could benefit consumers. The Commission does consider that its preliminary finding of abuse through seeking injunctions fully respects the requirement that a fair balance is struck between the fundamental rights and freedoms at stake including the rights linked to IP and the right of access to a tribunal and the freedom to conduct a business, all of which are enshrined in the Charter or Fundamental Rights of the European Union. It also took the opportunity in Samsung to shed some light on what constitutes a 'willing licensee', although it is to be determined on a case-by-case basis: a company will be considered a 'willing licensee' if it is willing to have FRAND terms determined by a court or arbitrators and to be bound by such determination. Moreover, the Commission has confirmed its view that a potential licensee cannot be considered 'unwilling' merely because it is contesting the validity of the patent it is seeking to license.
The Commission does not provide further guidance as to what may constitute FRAND terms and believes national courts and arbitrators are better placed to carry out this exercise.42 The Commission may shed more light on this issue when it answers the questions it received from the German Regional Court of Mannheim relating to the setting of FRAND rates in an SEP dispute between Motorola and Apple.43
Finally, it will be interesting to see whether the ECJ chooses to endorse the Commission's position in the pending Huawei v ZTE case, where the German regional court of Düsseldorf sent the ECJ a number of preliminary questions regarding the meaning of 'willing licensee' in the context of SEPs.44The hearing is scheduled to take place on 11 September 2014 in Luxembourg. Interestingly, ZTE has recently filed an antitrust complaint before the Commission against Vringo in relation to Vringo's alleged refusal to license its essential technology on FRAND terms.
Settlement agreements
In the whole context of the limits of legitimate IP protection and related litigation, the Commission is continuing its surveillance and investigations of patent settlements and more broadly arrangements involving 'pay for delay'. The antitrust principles being developed in this area will be of general application, but given the apparent prevalence of settlement agreements in the pharmaceutical industry, the Commission has been focused on this sector. In contrast with compulsory licensing and vexatious litigation, which are generally based on unilateral conduct and therefore enforcement is based on article 102 TFEU, settlements are generally subject to article 101 TFEU as they involve agreements between the IP owner and the alleged infringing party.
The Commission's inquiry into the pharmaceutical sector, which was launched in 2008 and was the subject of a report in 2009,45 revealed a number of practices that could lead to anti-competitive effects in the EU market, including patent settlement agreements between originator companies and generic companies.46 The Commission's main concern relates to pay-for-delay patent settlements, whereby an originator company eliminates or delays entry of cheaper competing generics through significant payments or benefits to the generic company who agrees not to enter or to postpone entry.47 Although the Commission recognises that settlements can be a legitimate mechanism in the hands of companies to end patent-related disputes,48 the Commission appears increasingly sceptical that any settlement agreement that involves the transfer of value from an originating company to a generic company in return for delaying generic entry could comply with antitrust rules.49 Arguably, the Commission's concerns in this area should relate only to those agreements that may potentially infringe competition rules by including restrictions outside the scope of the patent; for example, where entry is delayed beyond the expiry of IP protection or extends to products or processes not covered by IP protection.
However, this requires the Commission ultimately assessing the strength of the licensor's technology, which may be better determined by a national court or a patent office. In the end, these views still have to be tested in the EU Courts, but in the meantime the Commission has reached a decision in three pay-for-delay cases50 while another investigation is ongoing.51
On 19 June 2013, the Commission issued its first decision in a pay-for-delay case. The Commission imposed a fine of €93.8 million on Lundbeck and fines amounting to €52.2 million on several generic companies.52 Lundbeck was found to have paid generic producers significant lump sums not to enter the market, purchased generic producer's stock for the sole purpose of destroying it, and offered generic producers guaranteed profits in its distribution agreements. The Commission concluded that the agreements between Lundbeck and its generic competitors infringed article 101 TFEU.53 It is important to note that the Commission considered this case different from other cases involving settlements of patent disputes where 'generic companies are not simply paid off to stay out of the market'. Commission Vice-President Almunia explained in his statement that: 'Lundbeck did not prevent market entry by successfully enforcing its patent rights; rather, it simply paid other companies so that they would not compete [...] they shared the monopoly rents among themselves'.
On 10 December 2013, the Commission fined Johnson & Johnson and Novartis €16 million for delaying market entry of generic painkiller fentanyl.54 Similar to Lundbeck, this case also did not involve the settlement of a patent dispute as such. The Commission found that the parties had entered into a 'co-promotion agreement' under which Sandoz, a subsidiary of Novartis, agreed not to enter the market for fentanyl, where Johnson & Johnson's protection had just expired, in exchange for monthly payments. According to the Commission, the agreement had the effect of prolonging Johnson & Johnson's protection beyond its natural scope and delaying generic entry and the parties' internal documents revealed that the parties wanted 'to keep the high current price' and that Novartis was willing to give Sandoz 'a part of [the] cake' in exchange for not entering the market.
In both cases, the Commission considered the agreement to restrict competition 'by object'. As a result, the Commission was not required to examine the effects of the agreement on the market. Another important consequence is that as restrictions by object, these pay-for-delay agreements are unlikely to be able to benefit from article 101(3) TFEU, which provides for the possibility of justifying an agreement that would otherwise be anti-competitive on the basis that the positive effects outweigh the restrictive effects. The Commission's position with regard to pay-for-delay agreements is arguably at odds with the United States' Supreme Court's findings in FTC v Actavis where the Supreme Court rejected the Federal Trade Commission's position that such agreements should be considered per se illegal and held that a rule of reason should be applied.55
Finally, in its most recent decision, the Commission fined Servier and five generic companies €427.7 million for delaying entry of cheaper versions of perindopril, a cardiovascular drug. In contrast to the previous two cases, Servier involves a series of settlements reached in the context of genuine patent disputes. It also involves Servier's purchase of a 'non-protected' technology, which as a result was not available to generic companies and which the Commission found delayed their entry. According to the Commission, between 2005 and 2007, almost every time a generic company challenged Servier's patents before the courts, Servier entered into a settlement agreement whereby the generic company would refrain from entering the market in exchange for a share of Servier's profits. In addition to finding an infringement under article 101 TFEU, interestingly, the Commission also chose to rely on article 102 TFEU. It found that Servier had abused its dominant position, although pending publication of the decision, it is not entirely clear what conduct was considered abusive.56
It now remains to be seen whether the Commission's findings in both Lundbeck and Servier will be upheld on appeal.
- See article 345 of the TFEU where it is stated that: 'The Treaties shall in no way prejudice the rules in Member States governing the system of property ownership.' Article 36 of the TFEU acknowledges that derogations to the Treaty-enshrined principles of free movement of goods between EU member states may be justified on grounds of 'the protection of industrial and commercial property'. Article 17 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union provides that 'Intellectual Property shall be protected'. ↑
- See, for example, European Commission Directorate-General for Trade website, Intellectual Property. ↑
- Guidelines on the application of article 101 of the TFEU to technology transfer agreements, OJ 2014.C083/03, paragraph 7. See also, for example, Joined Cases 56/64 and 58/64 Consten and Grundig [1966] ECR 429. ↑
- In its decision in C-70/10 Scarlet Extended SA v Société belge des auteurs, compositeurs et éditeurs SCRL (SABAM) [2011] ECR I-11959, the ECJ acknowledged the need to 'strike a fair balance between, on the one hand, the right to intellectual property, and, on the other, the freedom to conduct business, the right to protection of personal data and the freedom to receive or impart information'. ↑
- Case AT.39939 – Samsung-Enforcement of UMTS standard essential patents, 29 April 2014 (Samsung); and Case AT. 39985 Motorola – Enforcement of GPRS standard essential patents, 29 April 2014 (not yet published at time of writing) (Motorola). ↑
- European Commission press release, Commission sends Statement of Objections to Motorola Mobility on potential misuse of mobile phone standard-essential patents, 6 May 2013; Joaquín Almunia, European Commission, Speech, IP and competition policy, Paris, 9 December 2013. ↑
- Guidance on the Commission's enforcement priorities in applying article 82 of the EC Treaty to abusive exclusionary conduct by dominant undertakings, OJ 2009 C45/7 (Guidance on Article 102), paragraph 12. ↑
- See Guidance on Article 102, paragraph 12. ↑
- Guidelines on the applicability of article 101 TFEU to horizontal co-operation agreements, OJ 2011 C11/1 (Horizontal Guidelines), paragraph 269. See also Illinois Tool Works Inc v Independent Ink, Inc, 547 US 28 (2006). Interestingly, this approach was advocated years before in Jefferson Parish Hospital District No. 2 v Hyde, 466 US 2 (1984) by four concurring Justices. These Justices supported the idea that it is a 'common misconception' to presume that 'a patent or copyright, a high market share, or a unique product' by itself demonstrates market power. As Justice O'Connor explained then, '[w]hile each of these three factors might help to give market power to a seller, it is also possible that a seller in these situations will have no market power: for example, a patent holder has no market power in any relevant sense if there are close substitutes for the patented product' (cited in Ariel Katz, Making Sense of Nonsense: Intellectual Property, Antitrust, and Market Power, Arizona Law Review, Vol. 49:837, p849). ↑
- See, for example, Case COMP/M.6381 – Google/Motorola Mobility (2012), paragraph 59. ↑
- See Illinois Tool Works Inc v Independent Ink, Inc, 547 US 28 (2006). The Antitrust Guidelines for the Licensing of Intellectual Property issued by the US antitrust authorities in 1995 also take this approach. ↑
- Case COMP/38.636 – RAMBUS, 9 December 2009; Standard-essential patents, Competition policy brief, June 2014. ↑
- Antitrust decisions on SEPs – Motorola Mobility and Samsung Electronics – Frequently asked questions, Brussels, 29 April 2014; and Standard-essential patents, Competition policy brief, June 2014. ↑
- Horizontal Guidelines, paragraph 269. ↑
- Samsung decision. ↑
- It examined a number of other factors including the widespread adoption of the relevant standard; Samsung's commitment to license its SEPs on FRAND terms encouraged network operators and device manufacturers to adopt the relevant standard; the heavy investments made by industry players in the relevant infrastructure thus locking them into the relevant technology; the lack of substitute technologies; and the absence of effective countervailing power by licensees. Samsung decision, paragraphs 45–51. ↑
- See Guidance on Article 102. See also Case 322/81 Nederlansche Banden-Industrie-Michelin v Commission [1983] ECR 3461, paragraph 57 and Joined Cases C-395/96 P and C-396/96 P Compagnie maritime belge transports and others v Commission [2000] ECR I-365, paragraph 37. ↑
- As underlined in Case C-322/81 Nederlandsche Banden-Industrie-Michelin v Commission [1983] ECR 3461, paragraph 57. See also, for example, C-280/08 P Deutsche Telekom AG v Commission [2010] ECR I-9555. ↑
- Magill TV Guide/ITP, BBC and RTE, OJ 1989 L 78/43, confirmed on appeal in Case CT-69/89, Radio Telefis Eireann (RTE) v Commission [1991] ECRII-485, Case T-70/89, British Broadcasting Corporation and BBC Enterprises Ltd (BBC) v Commission [1991] ECR-II535, and Case T-76/89, Independent Television Publications Ltd (ITP) v Commission [1991] ECR II-575, and further confirmed in Joined Cases C-241/91 P and C-242/91 P, Radio Radio Telefis Eireann and Independent Television Television Publications Ltd (RTE & ITP) v Commission [1995] ECR I-743 (Magill); Case C-418/01, IMS Health GmbH & Co OHG v NDC Health GmbH & Co KG [2004] ECR I – 539 (IMS Health); Case T-201/04, Microsoft Corp v Commission [2007] ECR II-3601 (Microsoft I). ↑
- See Magill, paragraphs 49-50 citing Case C-238/87, AB Volvo v Erik Veng (UK) Ltd [1988] ECR 6211 (Volvo), paragraphs 8-9. ↑
- See Magill, paragraphs 53-56. ↑
- Case C-7/97, Oscar Bronner [1998] ECR I-7791, paragraph 40. ↑
- Case T-504/93, Tiercé Ladbroke SA v Commission [1997] ECR II-923 (Ladbroke). ↑
- See Ladbroke, paragraphs 130–131. ↑
- See IMS Health, paragraphs 34–35 citing Magill, paragraphs 49–50 and Volvo, paragraphs 8–9. ↑
- According to the Commission and the GC, Microsoft also abused its dominant position by tying its PC operating system to its Windows Media Player. ↑
- Competition Policy Newsletter, No. 3-2007, Thomas Kramler, Carl-Christian Buhr and Devi Wyns. ↑
- The Court noted that 'the following circumstances, in particular, must be considered to be exceptional: in the first place, the refusal related to a product or service indispensable to the exercise of a particular activity on a neighbouring market; in the second place, the refusal is of such a kind as to exclude any effective competition on that neighbouring market; in the third place, the refusal prevents the appearance of a new product for which there is potential consumer demand', Microsoft I, paragraph 332. ↑
- See Microsoft I, paragraph 643. ↑
- Guidance on Article 102, paragraphs 75–90. ↑
- Guidance on Article 102, paragraphs 28–31. ↑
- Guidance on Article 102, paragraph 87. ↑
- See, for instance, the Samsung decision. ↑
- Since Microsoft I, the Commission has only adopted seven prohibition decisions – excluding the Motorola decision – based on article 102 TFEU (COMP/38.096 – PO/Clearstream (2 June 2004); COMP/37.507 – Generics/Astra Zeneca (15 June 2005); COMP/38.113 – Prokent/Tomra (29 March 2006); COMP/38.784 – Telefonica SA (broadband) (4 July 2007); COMP/37.990 – Intel (13 May 2009); COMP/39.525 – Telekomunikacja Polska (22 June 2011); COMP/39.984 – OPCOM/Romanian Power Exchange (5 March 2014). Of these seven decisions, two concerned anti-competitive 'refusals to supply' (COMP/38.096 – PO/Clearstream (2004) and COMP/39.525 – Telekomunikacja Polska (2011); COMP/38.784 – Telefonica S (broadband) concerned margin squeeze) but neither concerned a refusal to license IPRs. By contrast, the Commission has adopted 28 commitment decisions since Microsoft I: COMP/37.214 – German Bundesliga (2005); COMP/39.116 – Coca-Cola (2005); COMP/38.381 – De Beers (2006); COMP/38.173 – The Football Association Premier League Limited (2006); COMP/38.348 – Repsol (2006); COMP/38.681 – Cannes Agreements (2006); COMP/37.966 – Distrigaz (2007); COMP/39.388 – E.ON/GermanElectricity Wholesale Market (2008); COMP/39.389 – E.ON/German Electricity Balancing Market (2008); COMP/39.402 – RWE (2009); COMP/39.416 – Ship Classification (2009); COMP/39.316 – GDF Foreclosure (2009); COMP/38.636 – Rambus (2009); COMP/39.530 – Microsoft (tying) (2009); COMP/39.386 – EDF/Long Term Electricity Contracts in France (2010); COMP/39.351 – Swedish Interconnectors (2010); COMP/39.317 – E.ON Gas Foreclosure (2010); COMP/39.596 – British Airlines/American Airlines/Iberia (2010); COMP/39.315 – ENI (2010); COMP/39.398 – Visa MIF (2010); COMP/39.592 – Standard & Poors' (2011); COMP/39.692 – IBM Maintenance Services (2011); COMP/39.736 – Siemens-Areva (2012); COMP/39.847 – Ebooks (2012); COMP/39.230 – Rio Tinto Alcan (2012); COMP/39.654 – Reuters Instrument Codes (2012); COMP/39.595 – Continental/United/Lufthansa/Air Canada (2013); COMP/39.939 – Samsung – Enforcement of UMTS SEPs (2014)). Of these 28, 18 concerned abusive practices under article 102 TFEU including 5 dealing with refusal to supply (COMP/39.402 – RWE (2009); COMP/39.316 – GDF Gas Foreclosure (2009); COMP/39.317 – E.ON Gas Foreclosure (2010); COMP/39.315 – ENI (2010); COMP/39.692 – IBM Maintenance Services (2011). ↑
- Case T-111/96 ITT Promedia v Commission [1998], ECR II-2937, paragraph 30. ↑
- Case T-119/09 Protégé International Ltd v Commission [2012] (not yet reported). ↑
- The GPRS standard, part of the GSM standard, is a key industry standard for mobile and wireless communications. ↑
- European Commission press release: Commission finds that Motorola Mobility infringed EU competition rules by misusing standard essential patents, 29 April 2014. ↑
- Standard-essential patents, Competition policy brief, June 2014. ↑
- European Commission press release: Commission finds that Motorola Mobility infringed EU competition rules by misusing standard-essential patents, 29 April 2014. ↑
- UMTS stands for Universal Mobile Telecommunications Service. It is a key standard for mobile and wireless communications. ↑
- See Horizontal Guidelines, paragraph 291. ↑
- Antitrust decision on SEPs – Motorola Mobility and Samsung Electronics – frequently asked questions, Brussels, 23 April 2014 and Standard-essential patents, Competition policy brief, June 2014. ↑
- Case 170/13 Huawei Technologies Co Ltd v ZTE Corp, ZTE Deutschland GmbH (Request for a preliminary ruling from the Landgericht Düsseldorf (Germany) lodged on 5 April 2013). ↑
- See http://ec.europa.eu/competition/sectors/pharmaceuticals/inquiry/. ↑
- See http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-09-1098_en.htm; http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-09-321_en.htm. ↑
- Such agreements are continuously monitored by the Commission since the closing of its sector inquiry and a yearly report is published on the outcome of this monitoring. ↑
- See 3rd Report on the Monitoring of Patent Settlements (January-December 2011), published on 25 July 2012, paragraph 3. The Report also notes that the Commission's focus on such settlements did not impose a general decrease in unproblematic agreements but had the positive effect of restraining competitively harming settlements. ↑
- Joaquin Almunia, 'Paying competitors to stay out of the market at the expense of European citizens has nothing to do with the legitimate protection of intellectual property: it is an illegal practice and the Commission will fight against it'. See http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-13-563_en.htm. ↑
- See http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-13-563_en.htm. ↑
- In 2011, the Commission opened an ex officio investigation in relation to an agreement between Cephalon, Inc and Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd that may have delayed the entry of Modafinil generics in the market (see http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-11-511_en.htm). ↑
- See http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-13-563_en.htm. ↑
- 'Lundbeck paid significant lump sums, purchased generics' stock for the sole purpose of destroying it, and offered guaranteed profits in a distribution agreement.' See http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-13-563_en.htm. ↑
- Case AT.39685, 10/12/2013, Fentanyl. Not yet published. ↑
- FTC v Actavis, Inc, 570 US (2013). ↑
- See http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-14-799_en.htm. ↑
Baker Botts
Square de Meeûs 23 – Box 11
1000 Brussels
Tel: +32 2 891 73 00
Fax: +32 2 891 74 00
Catriona Hatton
Elena Cortés
Adam Dawson
Baker Botts is an international law firm helping clients navigate through complex legal challenges. We assist organisations through our global network spanning four continents with more than 700 lawyers in 15 offices.
Our international antitrust practice comprises over 50 dedicated antitrust lawyers. Our antitrust and competition lawyers are globally recognised for taking on high-stakes competition challenges around the world. In addition to representing clients before the US and European competition authorities, our lawyers coordinate merger analyses and filings across Australia, Asia, Africa and South America, and provide counsel on complex antitrust and competition law issues. With a large team of competition lawyers practising in this area full-time, we are one of the few firms with the experience and resources to handle any antitrust-related matter on a transatlantic basis.
Baker Botts' Brussels office is dedicated to antitrust and competition-related matters. Our practice is led by Catriona Hatton, Georg M Berrisch and Paul Lugard, who between them have over 60 years' experience on European and international competition issues and have engaged at the highest levels in the development of European competition law and policy.
Our Brussels team offers authoritative and astute advice for our clients on a broad scope of complex antitrust and competition law matters before the European Union and member states, including: merger control; cartel investigations; abuse of dominance; state aid; antitrust litigation; and the intersection of intellectual property and antitrust.
Next Chapter: Merger Control


text:
|Newegg Daily Deals
|Thread Tools
Registered User
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 182
GPU Scaling Method - Autostart
Hey guys,
I recently bought a new Monitor. It's my very first 16:9 display - from LG. Before I had a 5:4.
The thing is that I play a lot of MS-DOS games over DOSBox. My old 5:4 ALWAYS kept the right aspect ratio for these games: If the game demanded 4:3 - it switched to 4:3 (black borders at top/bottom). Of course NVidia driver helped with it: I needed "Aspect ratio scaled" in nvidia-settings so the Samsung displayed the correct ratio automatically. But after setting this option once, it always worked.
Now my new LG comes with an "awesome" internal switch to stuff the image to 4:3. At first I asked why it does even provide such a function while my old Samsung did all this by it's own with the help of nvidia-settings.
Then I know: Basically the LG will stretch EVERYTHING to 16:9. Everytime I restart X (or at least the whole system - not exactly sure), I need to re-open nvidia-settings so the imge scaling will work properly.
I really have no idea how this difference is produced from a technical side. However it's a little annoying always opening nvidia-settings.
Yes, I said the monitor provides a 4:3 option. Howeve rit doe snot provide a "custom aspect" setting. And like MANY OSD menus I saw in my days.. it's AWFUL complicated to even activate it...
Still I know I can set a lot of stuff via shell over "nvidia-settings -q ..." which I could use after X start automatically.
However I am not sure how to set the option "Aspect Ratio Scaled" ... I think I am too stupid to understand the correct syntax.
So can anyone help me with that? Just a small hin would be sufficient - I am willing to learn.
Oh, and if someone KNOWS why one display will constantly accept the nvidia-settings while the other one overrides it constantly, I would be interested.
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Between the keyboard and the chair.
Posts: 490
Re: GPU Scaling Method - Autostart
*set it to aspect scaled then make an autostart entry with: nvidia-settings -l
*edit /etc/X11/xorg.conf ( if your distro still uses one ) and add
Option "FlatPanelProperties" "Scaling=aspect-scaled"
|Thread Tools

subset: commoncrawl


text:
(KTVI) – No one was hurt in a fire in O'Fallon, MO early Wednesday morning, but the mobile home is being called a total loss.
It happened in Glengate Estates Mobile Home Park off Highway K. The fire started around 3:00 a.m. Authorities believe it may have been caused by an electrical problem. There was only one person in the home, but she was able to escape.
The fire is under investigation.


text:
American Idol
Source Confirms: Jennifer Lopez and Bradley Cooper Are "Casually Dating"
Rumors have been flying for weeks that American Idol judge and all-around superstar Jennifer Lopez is hooking up with actor Bradley Cooper, but now another source is chiming in — to confirm that the two stars are "casually dating."
As TMZ reports, Bradley was photographed yesterday behind the wheel of an SUV alongside a woman who was covering her face, but bore a striking resemblance to Jennifer. A source close to the couple has now confirmed to TMZ that the mystery woman was indeed J.Lo — and that the two are definitely seeing each other.
Jennifer separated from longtime husband Marc Anthony in July, while Bradley has been linked to everyone from Scarlett Johansson to Olivia Wilde following his high-profile split from Renee Zellweger in March. Fellow Idol judge Steven Tyler recently said that Jennifer seemed "as fine as can be" after the separation, mentioning that she's got all kinds of "new ventures... be that her clothing line or the next [Idol] contestant, or a boyfriend or her babies." We'd thought that the "boyfriend" bit was just speculation — but now it appears that there's something more substantial to back up Steven's quote!
Whether things get more serious with Bradley, or Jennifer decides to pursue another guy (perhaps one of the gents we suggested for her?), it looks like the superstar is very much back on the market post-Marc!
Source: TMZ


text:
A Nightmare On Elm Street grossed $15.8
million on Friday, which gave it a Twitter ratio of 1,003. This was
pretty much bang on with my prediction of $16 million. The film received
17,428 tweets on Friday, 3,575 of which were positive (20.51%) and
2,188 negative (12.55%). In general a good yardstick for reviews for a
film is 25% so this really wasn't an overly positive showing, and
certainly nothing to think it that it might outperform the usual horror
multiplier of ~2.2 - 2.4. As such expect a weekend of $37 million.
Furry Vengeance opened to $1.7 million on Friday, which gave it a Twitter ratio of 929. This was even lower than my prediction of $2.4 million. The film received 1,370 tweets on Friday, 173 of which were positive (12.63%) and 196 of which were negative (14.31%). This is a pretty pitiful showing, especially for a film catering to families. Expect a full weekend of $6.5 million.
Check back tomorrow for a preview of Iron Man 2 and what will no doubt be the biggest week on Twitter since New Moon came out last November. Follow @AlexBOXOFFICE on Twitter for additional updates.
Twitter tracking history. (For 2009's ratio history please check here.)
The ratio is the number of tweets per $1 million of Friday Box Office gross. A film with 1,000 tweets and a $10 million Friday would therefore have a ratio of 100. In general, films that appeal to very young or older audiences have lower ratios since those audiences are not big users of Twitter. By comparison, films that appeal to younger audiences (18-35) have much higher ratios since those audiences are much more active users of Twitter.


text:
Life is made up of experiences...some good, some not so good, some absolutely beyond imagination....
2010 has provided a great amount of inspiration for ideas, innovations and experiences.
I'm curious: what's been your BEST experiences of 2010? Don't be shy - go ahead and share....inquiring minds want to know!
Happy New Year - wishing you all best for 2011.


text:
Young Guns: James Stinson
by Ashley Houghton
U18 forward looking to build on hat-trick v Wolves.
Since breaking into Sunderland's U18 side against Stoke City at the start of February, James Stinson has started the following five games for the young Black Cats.
And, after his hat-trick in Saturday's 5-3 victory over Wolverhampton Wanderers, the young striker says he's happy with his progress at the Academy of Light.
He explained: "I think my pace and movement off the ball are my strong points, I like to make runs in behind and work the channels, I scored one of my goals on Saturday like that.
The coaches try and help you every step of the way, they want what's best for you and your career - you and the coach are striving for the same thing
- James Stinson
"I'm always working on my game and I want to improve my hold-up play.
"I'm trying to get physically stronger because if you want to play the number nine you've got to be a physical presence and I thought I did that quite well on Saturday."
He continued: "It's a good feeling when you sit down and think about the game, I really enjoyed it.
"When you get your first game, confidence builds, and once you get a run in the team you just want to stay there and keep playing games."
Stinson was picked up as an under-14 from his local team Stokesley FC, where he was watched by a number of clubs, but, he chose Sunderland citing the facilities and quality of coaching as the reasoning behind his choice.
"I just played locally at the boys clubs in Middlesbrough, including Stokesley. That's where I got picked up by quite a few clubs.
"I used to play as a right winger and my boys club coach changed me into a striker which helped me on the goals side. I was scoring a lot more and goals are always going to get you attention.
"I went to train with a few different clubs but when I came here the facilities were first-class; I enjoyed the training and the coaches.
"The coaches try and help you every step of the way, they want what's best for you and your career - you and the coach are striving for the same thing, they want to get you into the first team and that's where you want to be as well."
Stinson's treble against Wolves was his first league goals this season, and the Middlesbrough-born man is hoping to add more goals to his tally for the campaign.
"I scored in pre-season and didn't play much after that so I just want to keep playing games and scoring goals," he said. "Goals bring confidence."


text:
|Newegg Daily Deals
|Thread Tools
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 56,600
GPUs Propel Underdog South Africa to Victory in Student Supercomputing Competition
The odds were stacked against the Center for High Performance Computing (CHPC) team from South Africa.
By all accounts, they had little chance of being competitive in, let alone winning, the 2013 Student Cluster Challenge held last week at the International Supercomputing Conference (ISC) in Leipzig, Germany.
Representing Africa for the first time in an international computing challenge, they lacked competition-tested experience. They also were the youngest of the eight teams, made up only of undergrads.
And worse, they couldn't access their cluster until a day after they arrived at ISC, while the other seven teams had been practicing on their systems well ahead of time.
But once the dust settled and scores were tallied, CHPC stood alone at the top, earning the coveted 'Overall Championship Award' in the competition.
Their secret sauce:NVIDIA GPU accelerators.
The Edge Goes to GPU Accelerators
Dan Olds, principal analyst with Gabriel Consulting and creator of the new Student Cluster Competition website, said that NVIDIA GPU accelerators made quite a difference:
'Like all the other teams, South Africa used accelerators to give their cluster a turbocharged punch. While some teams used Intel Phi co-processors, team South Africa went with eight NVIDIA K20 cards, which seemed to do the trick.'
Using an eight-node Dell PowerEdge system with eight NVIDIA Tesla K20 GPUs ' the highest performance, most efficient accelerators ever built ' Team South Africa achieved a runaway victory for the overall competition.
In the competition, teams were scored on how well their cluster performed on a number of real-world applications including GROMACS, a molecular dynamics package, MILC, a quantum chromodynamics app, and WRF, a widely used weather research and forecasting application. There were also two 'mystery' applications that were disclosed on the day of the competition: the AMG numerical analysis application and the CP2K molecular simulation package.
Center for High Performance Computing (CHPC) team from South Africa.
Together, these performance marks accounted for 60 percent of South Africa's overall score, with the rest coming from interviews with event judges.
Team South Africa entered the competition as big underdogs, and emerged as the big victors.
But they weren't the only ones to benefit from GPUs.
All Accelerators are not Created Equal
Olds, in a recent blog post, discussed the dramatic increase in the use of accelerators by the winning student cluster teams:
'Everyone is using accelerators this year, either NVIDIA GPUs or Intel Phi co-processors. We've seen accelerator use increase steadily since they made their first appearance in 2010.'
In addition to South Africa, GPUs powered the top four systems earning the highest Linpack scores, soundly beating off other teams that used Xeon CPUs or Xeon Phi accelerators:
Fifth-Straight Win for GPUs
This is the fifth straight time that GPU-accelerated systems have won the 'Overall Award' in the Challenge, as well as achieved the top Linpack scores. In addition to ISC 13, GPU-equipped teams came out on top at ISC 2012 and Supercomputing Conference 2011 and 2012, and the top three Linpack-winning systems in the first-annual Asia Student Cluster Challenge April 2013 used Tesla GPUs as well.
Next up: the student competition at the SC13 conference in Denver this November. Will teams using GPU accelerators reign supreme again? Place your bets, and let us know what you think.
|Thread Tools
|Similar Threads
|Thread Starter
|Last Post
|Students Use GPUs to Sweep Asian Supercomputing Competition, Top Green500
|Archived News Items
|Place Your Bets: ISC'12 Student Cluster Competition
|Archived News Items
|Student Cluster Competition Comes to ISC'12
|Archived News Items


text:
Tags psychedelic rock, ethereal, eclectic, alternative, experimental
Artists Chelsea Wolfe, Celebration, Liars
April 01, 2012
my fifth mix created for your listening ears, enjoy.
five. by corsairvn
psychedelic rock, ethereal, eclectic, alternative, experimental
my fourth by corsairvn
eclectic, different, alternative
a bit of 90s by corsairvn
a small portion of various tunes from my 90s, enjoy.
90s, alternative rock, emo
and so it moves... by corsairvn
my second here, a little punk with 50's rock swagger, kinda gritty in presentation and resonance, enjoy.
psychobilly / punk / rockabilly, goth, countryish


text:
Register now for free, or sign in with any of these services:
Want to set your local edition?
Select an edition for more focused local news coverage when you visit NOLA.com.
Don't worry. You can change this setting at any time to another local edition.
As one successful (smart) attorney once said to me, with respect to the pay of state appellate court judges, "that's not enough money to live on." Established attorneys have the opportunity to make so much more money in the private sector, the current pay scale for state judges prohibits many of the smartest and most capable legal professionals from desiring the bench. Add to that the fact that you have to get elected (which means the papers will dig up anything they can to embarrass you and your family, and you will have to spend significant time begging for money to run a campaign with) and you can see why judicial pay raises are probably appropriate at this time.
Also, remember that the lower a judge's pay, the more susceptible he is to bribes.
Why don't we pay our legislators 150k a year? That way, we could attract competent professionals with the state's best interest in mind. We can afford 300k a year for Jindal's economic development appointees, but we can't afford to pay 75k a year to democratically elected legislative representatives?
Also, being a legislator has become less of a part-time job ober the years (consider the numerous special sessions called by the governor), so that argument against higher pay doesn't hold water.
Bobby just wants to make sure that he will have an opportunity to run for the Republican nomination in 2016. Endorsing the candidate capable of beating Obama (i.e., Romney) would jeopardize this.
If these tea-tards ever bothered research any issue beyond the 12-15 minutes of listening to Glenn Beck bloviate on it, they would know that the problem with American public education is not the teachers' unions, but the Burger King wages we pay to teachers.
Was the mention of Tulane in the headline at all necessary? Do you normally put a person's former employer in the headline, and then attach a picture of the former employer, when the employer and the employment had nothing to do with the fraud?
Fake indeed. Did you notice that he was trying to get Goldman to handle the deal? Looks like one of Bobby's real motivations in this deal was getting access to more wall street campaign contributors by funneling some business to them.
Dear Diaper Dave,
Your ONE job as a member of Congress is to funnel federal dollars back to your home state.
No mention of defense spending, which is one of the most wasteful ares of federal government spending.
Also, why won't anyone in the media challenge Republicans on the "spending cuts create jobs" b.s. That's just not how things work.
Did you even read the story? It is Vitter that is the clown. His staffer obviously didn't bother to look into the cases before attaching them to an inflammatory letter to Mr. Feinberg.
In what way is Feinberg a "stooge" for Obama. If Obama is such a "spread-the-wealth" commie that you teabaggers think he is, wouldn't his stooge just be giving away as much money as possible to every frivolous claim that came across his desk?
This editorial simplistic and idiotic. It basically says that "the economy" is a good excuse for forcing people to do uncompensated work. It also assumes that all public employees are incompetents who should just be thankful they have a job (see the part about it not being "reasonable to try to compete with the private sector" as far as compensation goes).
Anyone who believes that public employee wages are the driving force behind state and federal budget problems has simply drunk to liberally of the teabagger kool-aid. Why don't you look to the effective corporate tax rates and see if you can't ascertain a real cause for budget the deficits.
Yeah, we definitely need to make the lives poor children worse in order to fix this budget problem. I mean, everyone knows that giveaways to the fat-cat impoverished children (the strongest of special interest groups) are the real driving behind our nation's deficit.
Also, the current budget problems have nothing to do with a giant redistribution of wealth from the tax payers (and future tax payers) to the defense industry via the expansive and bottomless money pit that is the DOD. So, concentrate on cutting HeadStart and we will get this ship righted.
Wasn't the Public Belt operating at a profit before all this "scandal" came to light?
That the cars won't sell for $3 million right now does not mean they were a bad investment. The Public Belt wasn't trying to "flip" these old rail cars. The purpose of the fancy rail cars was to woo potential clients, which was an apparently successful strategy.
Yeah, exploiting the earmark boogey-man is great for campaigns, but when you get down to it, most of them fund important programs. Earmarks are the way legislators who know their state and their district get funds to projects that need funding. If there is an actual ban on congressional earmarks, then it is actually the President (remember teabaggers, he is a secret muslim communist) who will have the final say on where the money goes.
Plus, if you really want to cut government waste, take a machete to the Defense budget. Even Alan Simpson agrees.
Sounds like Diaper Dave is throwing stones in his glass house of incompetence.
In case you didn't know, most students at Tulane are on at least half tuition scholarship (and yes, 25k is a reasonable tuition compared to other schools in other states, even if it seems unreasonable compared to the state subsidized tuition levels at LSU, etc.). Nobody pays sticker price except the super rich new york kids whose parents won't miss it.
As long as the democrats don't have a spin machine like the Right does (fox news, right-wing radio, WSJ, etc.) then the populace will never be apprised of how B.S. republicans and teabaggers are.
No. What he is saying is that people who don't know what they are talking about shouldn't be given a platform from which to confuse other people. Not having any education is one thing. Not having any knowledge of something and then bloviating as if you do is another.
I agree with you. The post was originally in response to someone who basically posted "I refuse to pay for other people's health care." Not intended to support the system of private health insurance.
Your comment highlights how little the right-wing electorate understands these issues, and also highlights how poor of a job the media does in explaining health care policies.
The fact is, you can't buy insurance without "paying for someone else's insurance." That is how insurance works - spreading the risk. If each person had to pay for his insurance personally, such that only his risks were contemplated, then health insurance would be rendered either unaffordable or not worthwhile, depending on how healthy of a person you are. In the same way, other people in your private insurance pool will be paying for "your insurance" as well. The exact same principle would apply to a "public option." The cost of health care is "socialized" through both a system of private insurers and also through single-payer or government run health plan.
David Y,
Your comment begs the question, why are we providing such an expensive resource as a university to a student population that, by your exacting standards, largely (not including the 8% that do graduate) does not deserve a college diploma? Why not try to funnel the 8% that do graduate to another institution and try to find a better educational avenue for the other 92%.


text:
The Louisville Institute's First Book Grant Program for Minority Scholars assists junior, non-tenured religion scholars of color to complete a major research project on an issue in North American Christianity related to the priorities of the Louisville Institute. All too often such scholars are asked to assume a heavy set of institutional responsibilities that can make it more difficult to complete the scholarly work necessary to secure tenure. The First Book Grant program enables scholars to spend an entire academic year devoted to that research project while free of other professional responsibilities.
In keeping with its fundamental mission, the Louisville Institute is especially interested in identifying and supporting scholars of color who seek through their academic work to be in conversation with church leaders and to strengthen their faith communities.
View Previously Awarded Grants
Applicants must:
If the institution does not award tenure, the school must provide some form of continuing, full-time employment, such as renewable term contracts. For purposes of this grant program, the term "racial/ethnic minority group" includes African Americans, Hispanics, Native Americans, Asian Americans, Arab Americans, and Pacific Islanders.
Previous Louisville Institute grant recipients are eligible and encouraged to apply; however, all program
and financial reports for any previous grants must be submitted prior to January 15th. Applicants may not submit applications to more than one Louisville Institute grant program within the same grant year (June 1-May 31).
Questions about eligibility may be sent to email@example.com
The Louisville Institute is glad to provide brief initial consultation to help you determine
if your project ideas fit our funding criteria. Because of the large number of First Book applicants,
consultation does not automatically guarantee funding. However, staff feedback can help you
discern whether to develop your ideas into a full grant proposal.
Beginning with the Applicant Information link below, please upload your application materials in *.pdf format (preferred). Assemble all required documents and recommender email addresses and upload your application materials in one session. All digital documents must be submitted by the annual January 15 deadline. Recommenders must submit their letters by January 22nd. If you encounter problems with online submission contact Keri Liechty at email@example.com.
Applications should include:
Every year the Louisville Institute Board appoints a selection committee to review
proposals and award First Book for Minority Scholars grants. Committee membership and
deliberations remain confidential.
The grant amount requested should not exceed $40,000. Awards for sabbatical leaves of less than a full academic year will not be made. Normally the Louisville Institute will pay the grant directly to the institutions of those selected. Applicants for the First Book for Minority Scholars may request indirect costs up to 5%. Awards will be announced on or before March 15, 2016.
Grantees must be released from all teaching and committee responsibilities during the award year, and applications should include a letter from the appropriate dean or chairperson confirming that the applicant will be released from those responsibilities if receiving an award. (If the institution does not award tenure, this letter should also briefly describe the faculty review process that provides faculty members with continuing, full-time employment, such as renewable term contracts.) Grantees may not accept other awards that provide a major stipend during the tenure of this grant except insofar as necessary to bring the sabbatical year salary up to the grantee's full salary level. Although the Louisville Institute First Book Grant Program for Minority Scholars has no residence requirement, However, all grantees selected in 2016 are expected to participate in the Institute's annual Winter Seminar scheduled for February 2017 (exact dates TBA). The Louisville Institute will pay travel and lodging expenses for this gathering.
No recipient of a Louisville Institute grant or fellowship may also be awarded a Henry Luce III Fellowship during the same selection year. Applicants to both programs may only accept one award.
Please note that Louisville Institute grantees may not simultaneously hold two grants from Lilly Endowment-funded organizations that total more than $45,000.


text:
inline check valves Equipment in New Brunswick
CheckMate Inline Check Valveby Tideflex Technologies based in Carnegie, PENNSYLVANIA (USA)
Patented by Red Valve Company, the CheckMate Inline Check Valve is ideal for backflow prevention and odor mitigation. In outfalls, stormwater, CSO and SSO applications, the CheckMate's custom-engineered, all-rubber unibody design eliminates costly backflow from oceans, rivers and interceptors. CheckMate Valves are readily available in 4' to 72' ...
WaStop - Inline Check Valvesby J&S Valve, Inc based in Baltimore, MARYLAND (USA)
WaStop Inline Check Valves Stainless Steel Body Sizes 4"-70".WaStop inline check valves are designed to operate in several installation alternatives. The check valve can be attached with flanges, angle irons, slide muffs or joint couplings. Installation can be at inlet or outlet, inside existing pipe, between existing pipes, or in a ...
Bio-Chek - Model Series C - Inline Check Valvesby Diba Industries Ltd based in Cambridge, UNITED KINGDOM
Inert Flow Path, no metal parts Choice of EPDM, Viton, or Perfluoroelastomer check element PEEK or PPS housing materials Check against backflow pressure to 100 psi Small Internal Volume Low Cracking Pressure Gravity Independent installation The Bio-Chek self-sealing in-line check valves feature an inert flow path, no metal components and zero ...
WaStop - Inline Check Valvesby Wapro AB based in Karlshamn, SWEDEN
The patented Wastop inline check valve has been the innovator and industry leader since its inception in 2002.Wastop excels at preventing backflow, flooding, and sewage odor spread in pipe networks. It can be inserted into almost any existing pipe. Unlike any other check valve available today, Wastop can be mounted horizontally, vertically, on an ...
WaStop - Inline Check Valvesby EcoSense International based in Merritt Island, FLORIDA (USA)
WaStops unique patented construction stops back flow in drains. It can be installed either in existing drains or manholes, and gives a reliable protection against high water levels, flotsam, gases, salt water, insects and small animals.
WaStop - Inline Check Valveby CPI Water based in Gaithersburg, MARYLAND (USA)
WaStop is the revolutionary inline check valve that prevents backflow in wastewater or stormwater applications. In can be installed in minutes in a pipeline or chamber. Forward flow causes a slight pressure to buildup against the membrane to allow the flow to pass under the membrane. When backflow occurs, the membrane fills with water or gas and ...
Inline Check Valvesby Argus Machine Co. Ltd based in Edmonton, ALBERTA (CANADA)
Inline Check Valves that Handle the Toughest Service Conditions Argus inline check valves are designed to handle the toughest service conditions in oil and gas production. As with all Argus products, our ball check valves are ruggedly constructed to provide years of trouble-free service.
Inline Check Valvesby Argus Machine Co. Ltd based in Edmonton, ALBERTA (CANADA)
Inline Check Valves that Handle the Toughest Service Conditions Argus inline check valves are designed to handle the toughest service conditions in oil and gas production. As with all Argus products, our ball check valves are ruggedly constructed to provide years of trouble-free service.
Model Series DBCP - Flanged Inline Duckbill Check Valveby Onyx Valve Company based in Cinnaminson, NEW JERSEY (USA)
The series DBCP in-line check valve is a simple, reliable, cost effective method of backflow prevention. The series DBCP check valve is designed to be installed between two mating flanges. The simple maintenance-free elastomer with a flanged connection eliminates the mechanical parts which can wear and jam in conventional check valves. For ...
ProFlex Proco - Model Style 720 - Rubber Check Valveby Proco Products, Inc. based in Stockton, CALIFORNIA (USA)
The PROCO Series 700 "ProFlex" Rubber Check Valve is a cost effective way to control back pressures from sewage treatment plants, outfalls and tidal operations. They are a fully passive flow device requiring neither maintenance nor any outside sources of power or manual assistance to operate.
Need help finding the right suppliers?
Let the XPRTs do the work for you


text:
Advanced Search
Storage | News
The School District of Palm Beach County has deployed a new system for storing copy data and reduced costs by $700,000 over five years. In addition to the savings, the district has "reduced its total storage footprint, slowed its data growth, and enhanced its overall backup and recovery capabilities," according to a news release.
Serving 180,000 students and 23,000 employees, the district includes 187 remote sites and manages a petabyte of storage, 60 percent of which is copy data such as backup, analytics, or disaster recovery information.
"A petabyte of storage represents between $250,000 to a million dollars — for a school district with limited resources, the expense of maintaining a data set of this size and the time consuming process of backing it up was a drain of valuable resources that could be better allocated," said Henry Martin, infrastructure manager at Palm Beach County School District, in a prepared statement.
"Managing it all required three separate applications for backup management, data check-in, and data restore, adding to the complexity and growing price tag of the district's IT infrastructure," according to a news release, and slowing the district's ability to deliver new services and applications.
The district also had to shut down its primary production facility for three to four hours each week so that a trained IT staff member could perform backup and maintenance processes.
The district decided to deploy Actifio's Copy Data Storage platform, which "is optimized for managing copies of data, eliminating redundant silos of infrastructure and data management applications," according to information released by the company.
Now the district can perform its backup and maintenance processes in minutes through an interface useable by any member of the department.
"IT leadership should feel comfortable investing in Actifio for a long term partnership," Martin said. "Managing copy data — one of the biggest pains that IT data centers have, is revolutionary. We are no longer adding storage as a 'band aid' solution and ignoring the underlying problem. Actifio came in and solved this issue at a critical time when department funds have been cut."
More information about Actifio's Copy Data Storage platform is available at actifio.com.
About the Author
Joshua Bolkan is the multimedia editor for Campus Technology and THE Journal. He can be reached at firstname.lastname@example.com.
All Webcasts
Paul VI Catholic School wanted to develop a laptop program that would equip its students and teachers with the right tools to increase classroom learning, prepare their students for college, and to develop the 21st Century skill sets required by today's employers. Download this White Paper to learn about their comprehensive selection process and how they are using their new laptops to revolutionize the learning process.
Read more...
All Whitepapers


text:
Hotels in 97002 - Aurora OR
Only hotels in 97002 zip code are listed below. Search for cheap and discount hotel rates in Aurora, OR for your upcoming leisure or conference / group travel. We list the best 97002 hotels and motels so you can review the Aurora hotel list below to find the perfect lodging. Hotels in Marion county and area code 503 are also listed.
97002 Hotels/Accommodations
Next: Show All Available 97002 Hotels with Pricing >


text:
Newsletter Archive
Issue 18 : Autumn 2004
News from CAFS and the Development Office
The Michael Kitson Scholarship Fund
Donors to the Michael Kitson Scholarship Fund gave a total of £10,500 last year, which will fund three scholarships for students taking MA courses in 2004/05 and is again an increase of the previous years total of £9,000.
We hope to increase again the total raised this year so that we can offer four scholarships for the year 2005/06 — please complete the enclosed gift form or contact the Development Office about how to make a regular contribution on 020 7845 4690 or email@example.com.
Thank you to everyone who has given during the last year to the Michael Kitson Scholarship Fund, particularly those who are and have been giving a regular gift:
Ms Marjorie Allthorpe-Guyton FRSA, Mrs Marion Ball, Dr Emma Barker, Dr J G Bohler, Professor Sir Alan Bowness, Miss Hilary Brown, Ms Heather Caven, Dr Nicola I Coldstream, Professor Judith Colton, Dr Rosalys Coope, Ms Tessa Craib- Cox, Lady Craufurd, Mrs Georgina Dennis, Dr Sally E Dormer, Miss Elizabeth Edmonds, Dr Dennis L A Farr CBE, Mr Richard Gibson, Miss Mohara K Gill, Mrs Briony Gimson, Dr J Martin Greenwood, Dr Laurie B Harwood, Ms Karen E Hearn, Miss Jennifer Hock, Mr Mark Jones, Mr Martin Kauffmann, Mr Francis P M P G Kelly, Mr David Kitson, Dr Stuart R I Knox, Mrs Marcy Leavitt Bourne, Sir Michael Levey, Mr Oliver Lloyd, Mr Gilbert Lloyd, Mrs Lucinda A Lubbock, Mr David Markwick, Mr H Morton Neal CBE, Mr John Newman, F H Pearce, Mr David Phillips, Mr Leslie Powell, Mrs Anne Purchas, Mrs Gillian Rathouse, Mrs Margaret Richardson FSA, Mrs Pauline Rohatgi, Lady Anne Scott, Mr Robin J H Simon FSA, Miss Susan Smith, The Hon. Anna Somers Cocks, Mrs Gay Stanning, Professor John Steer, Mr G Sujo, Dr John Sweetman, Mrs Penny Treadwell, Ms Marjorie Trusted, Mrs M H Whiteley, Dr Niamh Whitfield FSA, Mrs Sarah Whitfield, The Hon. Mrs Elizabeth Wills.
CAFS summer party
The CAFS 2004 summer party was held on July 5, with a huge attendance. Admission was free owing to the great generosity of our sponsors Simon Elwes, Sam Fogg, William Hathem, James Hyman, Paul Mitchell and Anthony Mould.
Changes in the Development Office
Jim Cuno recognised the importance of the Alumni community and employed Ursula Rimbotti to help within the current team involved in Alumni projects, including Virginia Morck and Oliver Davey, Database Manager. Virginia Morck has been volunteering with the Courtauld for a number of years now and has recently helped us with the Alumni community projects. We thank both of them for their great efforts, as they embark on different projects of their own, Ursula now working at the Natural History Museum in its Development Department and Virginia Morck studying for a Post Graduate Diploma at the Courtauld. We congratulate Caroline Archer, who handled Corporate Affairs with effectiveness and style, on her appointment as Manager of Corporate Partnerships at the V&A.
With regret we also say good-bye to Sophie Hussey, who has now set out on a four-month tour of India. Sophies commitment over the past three years to the Courtauld in her role as Head of Charitable Giving in the Development Office has been of the highest order and she will be much missed.
Judy Digney — Head of Development


text:
Item(s) added to your Shopping Bag
Style #: 20554006
This cotton button-down is tailored for a slim fit and features an end-on-end construction.
Sign me up to receive emails on new product arrivals, special offers and exclusive events.
Club Monaco is a subsidiary of theRalph Lauren Corporation. You will now bedirected to the Ralph Lauren career site.
You are about to enter our US website, which allows shipping and delivery to addresses in the US only
Check out our Canadian site to shop for Club Monaco items that are available for shipping to Canada only
Are you sure you want to change regions?
You are currently shopping on our US website, which ships to the US only.
Please click on Shop Canada if you'd like to find delivery times and shipping information for Canada.
Please note: You will lose the contents of your shopping bag when you change regions.


text:
Been 7 years so I imagine things may have changed. We are staying at the Clarion (a block or so south of Katella) and have a 3 year old and will be using a mid-size stroller as well.
Walk or ride? Does the time of day factor into your decision?
Thanks for your input!


text:
Recently we sponsored two concerts, by Catrin Finch and Paige Su, at the fifth Australian Harp Festival, which took place in Adelaide last month. The fabulous stateside-based technician Liza Jensen also went. As well as regulating harps on site, she gave a workshop on pedal harp maintenance - how to regulate pedal cables, mend broken pedal rods, and so on.
We were only sorry not to be able to attend in person, and it's brilliant to have been sent this report by Jill Atkinson, so we can at least imagine we were there! Many thanks to Jill and our partner Stephen Carter for keeping us in the loop.
Australian Harp Festival, Adelaide 2012
Yes we went! Norah and I were the only Qld reps—and it was WOW! WOW! WOW!!!
People came from Singapore, USA, NZ (14!) and all the Australian states. I was impressed by the turnout of professional harpists from every state and the friendliness and spirit of celebration and co-operation amongst us all. I had a fab time connecting with old friends and new, amazed at how many people wanted to talk to me and proving the strength of the bond between those of us who are enraptured by this amazing instrument. I was also totally impressed by the professionalism and the smoothness with which the SA organisers ran the whole thing, how it seemed to run effortlessly and with total relaxation (when I knew that under the surface they had many last-minute challenges.) Congratulations to Gillian and her team of quiet achievers for a very successful and happy festival.
So what were the highlights?
For me, No 1 by a country mile was Welsh harpist Catrin Finch, whom I nominated as the Paganini of the Harp – and I am sure someone else has already called her that. She was incredible and oh so entertaining. Spectacular and indescribable really. A well-deserved standing ovation and a real character. You have not seen harp playing like this ever—she seems set on dispelling all the old notions of what a harp is, and I love it!
So much else was terrific— lots of hands-on workshops of all sorts, lectures, private lessons with both Catrin and the other international soloist, Argentinian –born harpist Maria-Luisa Rayan-Forero, masterclasses with same, lectures and concerts of all sorts. I got involved in adjudicating one of the 2 solo harp competitions and learnt some new music along the way, which I was then able to go and purchase at one of the harp businesses represented there. Also lots of shining new pedal harps to try out and many different types of lever harp. A great place to go and try before you buy, which many people did. One young aspiring harpist from Tasmania scored the jackpot—she managed to buy the lovely Camac harp that Catrin Finch so ably warmed up for her!!! WOW!!!!!
And even after it was all over, while Norah and I were having breakfast at the airport while awaiting our flights home, who should sit next to us but Liza Jensen, a harp player from USA who was out here to promote herself regulating both pedal harps of all sorts (she gave 2 workshops on regulating the Camac harp, which is a totally different system to all pedal harps before, and oh so simple) and also LEVER harps!!!! As I hadn't had the opportunity to attend her lectures or talk to her over the weekend it was most opportune that we should meet up in this way, as she is keen to come to Australia next year to regulate all harps and is very affordable. She also has the advantage over some regulators in that she plays harp at a high level herself and will understand players' particular concerns. Stay tuned!
And now with my first student since the festival I realise I have picked up more than I knew at the time— a very necessary confirmation of proper sitting and arm position at the harp—things we think we know but have to be reminded of visually every now and then in order to keep our own playing and teaching correct. Who better to emulate than these terrific players from the other side of the world!
Sydney 2014—here we come—it is going to be SENSATIONAL—check out the website from now on. I will be harping on this forever until you all join me there! It will change the state of harping in Australia for ever—so many wonderful experiences for every level and interest in harp—all in a week of harp saturation in many wonderful venues in the very heart of fabulous Sydney! I am in love!!!
Jill Atkinson, Editor, Harpbeat, (The official newsletter of the Harp Society of Queensland Incorporated) Principal Harpist Queensland Symphony Orchestra


text:
Be the Boss of Your Stress is a resource on stress management for kids that speaks to kids ages 8 and up with this message: When your body, mind, and spirit are balanced—working together—they help you stay healthy and positive, even when you have stress. Stress is your body's reaction to things that worry you or make you feel unsure. When you are upset or anxious about something, your body produces energy boosting chemicals that may cause a rapid heartbeat, tense muscles, sweaty hands, poor digestion, and the inability to think clearly. When you start to have stress problems, talk to someone you love and trust, stay positive, have a laugh, stay active, stick with daily routines, and take care of yourself. You can take care of yourself with these body boss skills:• Belly breathing• Changing what you are thinking about• Relaxing with positive self-talk• Letting go and getting loose• Aromatherapy• AcupressureKids will be happier and healthier when they are the boss of their bodies and can take care of most of their stress on their own. The self-care skills in this book do not replace health care professionals, but they do help kids learn what they can do to take care of themselves. They will learn to deal with being stressed out, whether related to school, friends, or stuff happening at home. As they learn to be less stressed, they will feel better and more in charge of their health.
Be the Boss of Your Stress correlates with the National Health Education Standards (NHES). Click here to see detailed alignment information.
Be the Boss of Your Body® books are written by a pediatrician and a nurse practitioner and are based on proven medical science.
Click on the icon below to view all of the items in Free Spirit's Be the Boss of Your Body® series
View where you can purchase the eBook.
Awards for the Be the Boss of Your Body Series:
Awards for Be the Boss of Your Stress:
"These books are fabulous and I can't wait to use them with clients. You really did a great job of capturing the strategies for managing stress, sleep, and pain in a very kid-friendly way. Thanks for the great resource."
—Gloria Guinee, MSW, LICSW
"Clear, practical...excellent series on self-care for kids.
I recommend it highly."—Andrew Weil, M.D., Director, Program in Integrative Medicine, University of Arizona, and author of 8 Weeks to Optimum Health


text:
Tuesday, November 6, 2012
Finally! The elections are over and once again we are delivered from the barrage of television and radio advertising blather from all sides. We can finally answer our ringing telephone and not be plagued with a Robo-call for a candidate or cause. Or, go to the mailbox and not unload a host of messages from candidates. Our ears, eyes and minds are once again left in peace with nothing to contemplate except how we are going to get out of this mess that run-away government spending has created.
The cacophony of political talk and opinions that has battered our minds of late reminded me of the days of my youth when solitude was possible. I am not certain that temporary seclusion is available in today's wired world.
Once upon a time it was possible for an individual to retreat from the world for a few moments or hours and just be alone with personal thoughts. Not so today!
Most folks, it seems, just cannot be content with silence away from the noises of civilization and electronic intrusion. I wonder sometimes if kids and young adults are even aware of what personal solitude is all about.
Radio and television were the first constant culprits robbing us of private moments alone with just our thoughts and aspirations. Today, however, we are constantly tethered to computers and cell phones. All of which take various forms: Smart phones, iPads, Kindles, etc. I don't even know what some of them are and I intend to keep it that way.
I remember the days of yore when I was a kid growing up with huge areas of forest surrounding our house. It was a place where I could escape from humanity for a few moments or hours and just be alone with the natural world and my own thoughts. These moments remain the highlights of my maturing years. I miss them.
Today, however, it's even hard from an aging person like me to escape the technical universe. The one or two television stations that were available in my younger years have grown to literally hundreds of channels available for the waste of one's time. I know folks who come in from a day of real life experiences and immediately turn on the television set (or sets) just for the feeling of connection to the world. They then retreat to the computer to slate their hunger of connectiveness. If that is not enough there is always the cell phone and the wonders of creation that it provides. There they can find the old-fashioned voice communication but we now have texting, twitter, tweet and who knows what else at their disposal. It seems that cell phones can do just about anything today except give birth. And if all of this were not enough it is now possible to take and transmit photos and videos in real time. There is no privacy anymore!
As a last resort to escape reality, kids (of all ages) can plug into video games instead of tasting the actual world. They live in a make-believe universe. I am reminded of the cartoon in which a young boy is taking in the expansive views on the rim of the Grand Canyon. He turns to his father and says, Wouldn't this look great in 3-D, High Definition video? Today, there are many avenues to rob us of our once cherished solitude in the realm of reality. How sad.
I am so sorry that young folks cannot know the joy of just being alone while enjoying the actual world. It was life-changing for me as a lad to walk into the forest with just my old dog for company. It was exhilarating to sit quietly beneath an old tree and inhale the fragrance of God's wonderful world. After a few moments of inhaling the sights and smells of the woods, the whole environment came alive with the sounds of the natural world: birds twittering (in the prehistoric connotation of the term,) the squirrels squalling, the bugs and beetles humming. I could calmly contemplate my own life and aspirations. I was content and happy. It was always an inspiring experience.
After an hour or so of sitting and walking, my old dog and I would be ready to rejoin what was the real world back then a life with family, community and communicating in real conversation and not via some electronic connection.
Those times without constant and immediate communications fostered a kinder, gentler life. I cannot help but believe that the universal electronic connection of today's society is responsible for much of the baser elements of life. We didn't shoot our teachers or classmates if they offended us, we didn't massacre other folks because they didn't belong to our gang; we thought marijuana was a Mexican singer. And we didn't expose our private lives through world-wide electronic media in such practices as Sexting. And very importantly, we weren't moment by moment exposed to what was considered illicit sex in a day not too long ago. No wonder teen pregnancy continues to be rampant.
Where will it all lead? Heavens, I don't know but I just remain thankful for my youthful opportunities to live in the real world and not have my life dominated by a make-believe electronic existence.
John Brock is a retired college professor and newspaper editor/publisher who lives in Georgetown County and can be reached by mail at this newspaper or via Email at: email@example.com.
Opinions that appear on this page in Letters to the Editor or in columns do not necessarily reflect the opinions of this newspaper.
South Strand News is pleased to offer readers the enhanced ability to comment on stories. We expect our readers to engage in lively, yet civil discourse. We do not edit user submitted statements and we cannot promise that readers will not occasionally find offensive or inaccurate comments posted in the comments area. Responsibility for the statements posted lies with the person submitting the comment, not South Strand News.
If you find a comment that is objectionable, please click "report abuse" and we will review it for possible removal. Please be reminded, however, that in accordance with our Terms of Use and federal law, we are under no obligation to remove any third party comments posted on our website. Read our full terms and conditions.
© 2015 South Strand News an Evening Post Industries company. All Rights Reserved.
Registration on or use of this site constitutes acceptance of our Terms of Service, Privacy Policy and Parental Consent Form.


text:
An electrocardiogram (EKG or ECG) is one way for physicians to measure heartbeat and heart rate. Small, adhesive electrodes are placed on your arms, legs and chest to measure the energy levels in your body. As your heart beats, the electrodes record the electrical activity of your heart on graph paper, and the results are either printed out or displayed on the monitor for your physician or nurse to study. EKGs are among the most common diagnostic tests performed on patients with heart concerns. The simple and painless procedure allows medical staff to keep a close eye on the status and progress of the heartbeat and the patient.What to expect during your test or treatment
What to expect after your test or treatment
Returning HomeIf you have any questions about your care after you return home, call your physician's office. This test or treatment is offered at these facilities:
Want to know more about this condition? Read more about electrocardiogram in our Health Information Center.Print this patient care guide.
To find a physician visit our Find a Doc or call (502) 629-1234 for a physician referral.
Heart Disease PreventionHeart Diagnostics and ImagingHeart Disease TreatmentsHeart Emergency ServicesWomens Heart CareCongenital Heart CenterSupport and Ongoing CareVascular ScreeningsVascular DiagnosticsVascular Treatments
Heart Rhythm CenterNorton Cardiothoracic SurgeryNorton Heart SpecialistsNorton Vascular Surgery
Norton Heart and Vascular Center at Harrison County Hospital in Indiana
MyChartPay Your BillRequest an AppointmentNewbornsClasses and EventsSend an eCardPatient StoriesPlaces to Stay
Circle of HeartsRisk Assessment
Quality ReportCareersWays to HelpCommunity OutreachContact Us(502) 629-1234


text:
Group Name:
anywhere 00000
PEERtrainer members who are also a member of MYSPACE.
Last posted:
Wednesday, September 06, 2006, 6:36 PM
Other Info:
Members profiles:
I'm about average person. Last year got infected by a bodybuilding bug. Lost a lot of weight but did not finished yet. There is a lot of work ahead of me.
I'm a 34 yr old, single mother of 2. I have alrady lost 65 lbs in the last year but seem to have stalled in my weight loss. I work as a waitress and I also work at a gym. I do some personal training and would really like to lose another 20 to 25 pounds so that I feel better about myself. I know how to lose the weight and how to do the exercises it is just a matter of making myself stick to it now. That's why I'm here!
- our sponsor -


text:
Margaret R. Fisher
Margaret R. Fisher, 76, of Cadiz, formerly of Magnolia, died Monday, Feb. 17, 2014, in Sunnyslope Retirement Center, Bowerston.
Born June 10, 1937, in Canton, she was a daughter of the late Paul C. and Josephine Kahler Janson.
She was a homemaker and attended Magnolia Catholic Church.
She is survived by two daughters, Cookie (Darwin) Rose of Cadiz and Kathleen (Charles) Powell of Sunbury; grandchildren, Amber Davis of Savannah, GA, Jennifer Brown and great granddaughter, Hailey of Cadiz, Ryan Rose of Cadiz, Bryan and Chelsea and great grandson, Jax of Wesley Chapel, FL, Elizabeth and Phillip Voyd of Virginia Beach, VA, Anne Powell of Charlottesville, VA and Charlie Powell of Buchhannon, WV; and one brother, Arthur Janson of Canton.
In addition to her parents, she was preceded in death, by her husband, Edward Fisher, in 1997; a sister, JoAnn Snyder; and two brothers, Thomas and Paul Janson.
At her request there will be no services. Memorial contributions may be made to the Activity Fund at Sunnyslope Retirement Center or to Crossroads Hospice. The memorial guestbook may be signed at www.clark-kirkland.com.
©2014 The Free Press Standard
Carrollton Free Press Standard, P. O. Box 37, Carrollton, OH 44615