Do People Really Fall For This Junk?

 Received today from "Madam Colleen Karl":

Greetings to you & your Family,

I am glad that I can still write you today. I hope you are still at this e-mail address because I have selected you for a Charity Project. I need you to help me extend Charities to Widows, orphans and other less privileged ones in the society. I will be flying to Costa Rica anytime for urgent medical treatment which even if successful, I may not be strong in a long while. My doctor referred me to this Hospital three weeks ago after i relapsed into coma a number of times.

Due to the exigencies of this trip, I have asked the Bank to credit into ATM Card the Funds ( $1,800,000.00 ) that I intends to bequeath to you. This is why I am writing you today. The Bank has released the ATM card to my Doctor so that he will send it to you. Please this email is like my own 'WILL', since all that I wanted is to see this last wish actualized. Please respect it. And kindly respond so that I will introduce you to him before it is too late.

Thanks and God bless you,
Mrs. Colleen

Do people really fall for this junk? It is just so obviously something to be immediately parked in the trash bin.

Has the Tie had its Day?

 Someone suggested to me the other day that SARS-CoV-2 may have seen off that weird piece of male attire, the necktie. Certainly working from home, which may well become the norm for many, obviates any requirement for voluntarily strangling oneself. Also it would seem that the protocol for business meetings via Zoom does not require such adornment. 

Looking further afield from the home, although Prince Charles retains his starchy look the younger royals are not averse to appearing in public open-necked. However, is it premature to call time on that funny strip of cloth just yet? Male politicians, almost to a man, continue to sport such a frontispiece (but is this just a demonstration, yet again, of how out of touch they are?); newscasters, too, have not yet "bared the neck"; shows such as "the Apprentice" seem to retain an abundant supply of such garb. Countering this the trend, elsewhere on TV does seem to place the tie very much out of favour. And TV is a big influencer.

Maybe the writing is on the wall but there are still many out there who haven't read it. Conclusion - I shall not be investing my pension pot in neckwear manufacturers.

Batteries - A Slightly Different Viewpoint

 This, by Sam Mitchell at Powell Gilbert, is reproduced from the Mondaq newsletter. One wonders, what price Boris's 10 point plan?

UK: Charging Up: The Rapid Rise Of Battery Technology

17 November 2020

by Sam Mitchell

Powell Gilbert

First developed in 1799 by the Italian physicist Alessandro Volta, battery technology can hardly be said to be new. Fast-forward two centuries, however, and batteries are front-and-centre of the renewable energy revolution: in November 2019 UBS estimated that the global market for energy storage will reach US$462 billion by 2030.

This is hardly surprising when we consider the arsenal of modern battery-powered appliances at our fingertips and the ever-increasing demand for electric vehicles and renewable energy storage. Indeed, our increasing reliance on battery technology has seen this old invention continue to develop at rapid pace.

Innovation

Patent filings provide a key insight into future technologies and a recent review by the EPO presents three highlights concerning battery innovation.

1.  Rapid rise in patenting activity

More than 7,000 international patent families relating to electricity storage were published in 2018, up from 1,029 in 2000. Since 2005 this represents an annual growth rate of 14%, compared to just 3.5% on average across all technology areas. The vast majority of these have been in electrochemical inventions (i.e. batteries), accounting for 88% of all patenting activity in this area.

Leading the charge are lithium-ion ("Li-ion") batteries. Li-ion batteries possess a higher power capacity and charge density than batteries made of other materials. It is Li-ion batteries that have made the mass-manufacturing of electric vehicles possible, and led to their developers being awarded the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 2019.

2.  Japan and the Republic of Korea lead the charge

Japan and the Republic of Korea are, by far, the lead runners in the global battery technology race.  Of the top ten global applicants, seven are Japanese (spearheaded by Panasonic and Toyota) and two are Korean (Samsung and LG Electronics). The only non-Asian company to feature is the German company Bosch. From 2014 to 2018, Japan alone was home to 41% of all Li-ion patenting activity. Interestingly, Samsung's growth has targeted portable electronics, whereas the majority of other patent filings in this area have focused on automotive applications.

3.  Cathode Chemistry is key

Every battery, whether one developed today or the 1799 original, is composed of two electrodes - an anode and a cathode - dipped in electrolyte (a conductive solution) with a separator that controls the flow of electric charge. The first rechargeable Li-ion battery patent arose when Stanley Whittingham (Nobel prize winner, working at oil giant Exxon at the time) realised lithium metal could be used as an anode. It was later discovered that a graphite anode was more effective, but the name Li-ion remains due the movement of lithium ions.

Today, the most innovative breakthroughs are focused on Li-ion battery cathodes. The recent focus has been on NMC cathodes – one third nickel, one third manganese and one third cobalt. However, recent filings suggest that NCA (lithium nickel cobalt aluminium oxide) may displace NMC in the spotlight. The reason is the shift in desired criteria towards improving specific energy (energy per unit mass), durability, power output, charge / discharge speed and recyclability.

A note on disputes

The EPO statistics suggest that the patent landscape for batteries is set to become increasingly crowded. Moreover, the dividing line between car manufacturers and technology providers is becoming increasingly blurred. Examples include Elon Musk's famous battery bet to build South Australia the world's largest lithium-ion mega-battery capable of powering 30,000 homes for eight hours in 100 days (it required just 60) or Porsche and Audi forming Ionity, aiming to develop a pan-European vehicle charging network.

Similarities can therefore be made between the automotive sector and the smartphone sector, and it would not be surprising to see a substantial rise in licensing activity and disputes.  

One company that has already been particularly active asserting its patent portfolio is Varta AG, renowned for its manufacture of automotive batteries.

However, it is not this IP that the Germany company is so fiercely protecting. At the end of last year, Varta sued Samsung and a number of its retailers in Germany, asserting patent infringement relating to its patented 'button batteries' – EP 2 394 324 – a rechargeable lithium-ion battery used in Galaxy Buds earphones.  Further proceedings were issued in the US earlier this year.

The actions resulted in a global settlement in August. Varta now apparently wish to refine and further develop their relationship with Samsung and other manufacturers, particularly those that manufacture smart watches and fitness trackers.

These matters exemplified the rather unusual case of a vendor commencing proceedings against one of its own customers, so it will be interesting to see how this impacts future business relations, and whether we see other innovative companies take the same approach.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

Anglo American Sued On Behalf Of Children And Women Poisoned By The World's Most Toxic Lead Mine

This article from Leigh Day has been reposted from the Mondaq Newsletter:  

https://www.mondaq.com/uk/class-actions/997152/anglo-american-sued-on-behalf-of-children-and-women-poisoned-by-the-world39s-most-toxic-lead-mine?email_access=on

LONDON AND JOHANNESBURG – 21 October 2020 – Lawyers from Mbuyisa Moleele and Leigh Day today announced that a class action lawsuit has been filed against Anglo American South Africa Limited ("AASA"), a subsidiary of London-headquartered multinational mining company Anglo American Plc (LSE: AAL, JSE: AGL), in the Gauteng Division of the High Court of South Africa.

The action has been filed on behalf of a class estimated to comprise more than 100,000 individuals in the Kabwe District of Zambia who are believed to have been poisoned by lead. The application is brought by 13 representative plaintiffs on behalf of children under 18, and girls and women who have been or may become pregnant in the future.

• Mbuyisa Moleele Attorneys, with the Assistance of Leigh Day, Files Class Action Lawsuit Against Anglo American South Africa Limited
• Serious Corporate Human Rights Abuse Resulting in Multi-Generational Lead Poisoning of Children and Women in Kabwe, Zambia
• Seeks Financial Compensation for Claimants in Addition to Medical Screening of Children and Pregnant Women and Clean-Up of Polluted Land
• More Information and Visual Media Available at www.childrenofkabwe.com

The claimants – principally young children – are suffering from alarming levels of lead poisoning which, depending on various factors including the blood lead level ("BLL"), causes a range of significant conditions, from psychological, intellectual and behavioural damage to serious and permanent physical damage to their bodily organs, neurological systems and fertility. In extreme cases, serious brain damage and deaths occur. In pregnant women, lead they ingested as children is absorbed into their bones and released during pregnancy. Women are also exposed to lead during pregnancy from the surrounding environment. Lead is known to cross the placenta, resulting in the unborn child being subjected to the same concentration of lead as the mother. Not only can the baby's health be damaged, lead causes pregnant women to have a higher risk of pre-eclampsia; gestational hypertension and miscarriage.

Generations of children have been poisoned by the operations of the Kabwe mine, originally known as Broken Hill, which caused widespread contamination of the soil, dust, water, and vegetation. The main sources of this poisonous lead were from the smelter, ore processing and tailings dumps. The BLLs of the vast majority of children in Kabwe exceed the BLL limit of 5 micrograms per decilitre set by the U.S. Center for Disease Control. A substantial proportion of the children have BLLs in excess of 45 ug/dl, the limit at which medical treatment is required. There are numerous cases of young children (including among the representative plaintiffs) with BLLs in excess of 100 ug/dl, at which serious brain damage and death may occur.

The Kabwe mine was part of AASA group from 1925 until 1974 and was one of the world's most productive lead mines during this time. It is alleged in the class action that AASA is liable, including for the following, because of AASA's role in controlling, managing, supervising and advising on the technical, medical and safety aspects of the mine's operations:

1. Substantial emissions of lead into the local environment were due to deficiencies in the design and systems of operation and control of lead, which AASA failed to ensure were rectified;
2. AASA failed to ensure the clean-up of the communities' contaminated land; and
3. According to experts[1], around two thirds of the lead currently in the local environment is likely to have been deposited there between 1925 and 1974 when the mining operation was transferred to ZCCM, a Zambian state-owned company, in 1974.

The class action seeks to pursue remedies in the form of compensation for these children, as well as girls and women with lead poisoning who have or may become pregnant in the future. Also sought is (a) blood lead screening for children and pregnant women in Kabwe, and (b) clean up and remediation of the area to ensure the health of future generations of children and pregnant women is not jeopardised.

Richard Meeran, Partner & Head of the International Department at Leigh Day, said:  "From the 1950s, Anglo American publicly committed to making a lasting contribution to communities in which it operated. Its current human rights policy is to contribute to remediation when its business has contributed to adverse human rights impacts. This ongoing public health disaster is the result of a flagrant disregard for the health of the local community, which is totally at odds with those grand public pronouncements."

Zanele Mbuyisa, Partner at Mbuyisa Moleele, added: "AASA is considered a mining giant that has been instrumental in building the economies of various countries, but it also has to be acknowledged that their operations have caused the decimation of communities and long-lasting damage to the health of those communities."

Mbuyisa Moleele is a Johannesburg-based law firm led by Zanele Mbuyisa, and Leigh Day is a leading international law firm specialising in human rights and mass environmental tort claims. Both firms have a proven track record of litigating complex international class actions on behalf of victims from disadvantaged backgrounds. The case is being funded by Augusta Ventures, the UK's largest litigation fund by volume of claims.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.