text:
Home Interview Interview with SoCal Metal Act: Kaustik – Trees Dallas
InterviewVideos
Interview with SoCal Metal Act: Kaustik – Trees Dallas
posted by ROCKwell UnScene December 19, 2017
Kaustik is a band that brings their A-game to every stage, no matter how big or small. I would describe their style as an orgy of Rock, Metal, Classical, Jazz, Punk, and Classic Rock. Band members inlcude Robbo – Vocals & Bass, Ryan – Guitar, Elan – Guitar, and Chris – Drums.
Born in SoCal, Kaustik clawed their way to and through the top of the local scene quickly. In 2013, they were performing at big name venues like the Slidebar in Fullterton, The Observatory in Santa Ana, The San Manuel Ampitheater (home to Knotfest), the world famous Whisky A Go Go in West Hollywood, and many others. They escaped the L.A. scene on numerous occasions to tour with some of their musical icons, such as D.R.I.
Kaustik's rapid progress as a touring band can be credited to their heavy, hook-filled songs and explosive stage presence – a winning combination that keeps fans spreading the word and coming back for more.
We've seen the band tear it up on stages numerous times, first in L.A. and Orange County. Now, you can see them on stages across America. As a Kaustik fan I am beyond stoked to have seen their explosive growth over such a short period of time.
We had the rare chance to chat with the guys the night they performed at Trees Dallas during their tour with D.R.I.
Take a listen as Kaustik reveals what road life, tour life, music, and getting band tattoos.
Interview with SoCal Metal Act: Kaustik – Trees Dallas was last modified: December 19th, 2017 by ROCKwell UnScene
ROCKwell UnScene
ROCKwell Un(derground)Scene print magazine was created by Melissa "Mischievous Mel" and Wes "Rockwell" Anderson in 2013, primarily focusing on live coverage of Rock to Metal bands live shows and festivals. Melissa & Wes also own The Edge Rock Radio, EdgeRockRadio.com and Rockwell Anderson – THE Brick & Mortar Music Mecca, just an hour north of Dallas, TX. Since early 2016, Melissa & Wes have been working with Tattoo.com as media partners, sharing coverage of live shows and festivals around the U.S. and abroad.
Exclusive Music Video Premiere: Bad at Love...
Remark Release Official Music Video "Falling"
Exclusive Music Video Premiere: Julien-K "Photo Voltaire"
Vans Warped Tour '17 – Interview with...
Behind the Machine: Jared Preslar [Video]
SullenTV: Artist Spotlight with Oliver Peck
STATE OF MINE Release Official Music Video...
BLACKLIST UNION Pays Tribute to Legendary Hardcore...
Rev Theory: Exclusive Album Premiere"The Revelation"
Mike D of Killswitch Engage talks New...


text:
require 'shellwords'

module SimCtl
  class Command
    module Launch
      SUPPORTED_SCALE = [1.0, 0.75, 0.5, 0.25]

      # Launches a Simulator instance with the given device
      #
      # @param device [SimCtl::Device] the device to launch
      # @return [void]
      def launch_device(device, scale=1.0, opts={})
        raise "unsupported scale '#{scale}' (supported: #{SUPPORTED_SCALE.join(', ')})" unless SUPPORTED_SCALE.include?(scale)
        # Launching the same device twice does not work.
        # Simulator.app would just hang. Solution: Kill first.
        kill_device(device)
        args = {
          '-ConnectHardwareKeyboard' => 1,
          '-CurrentDeviceUDID' => device.udid,
          "-SimulatorWindowLastScale-#{device.devicetype.identifier}" => scale,
        }
        args.merge!({ '-DeviceSetPath' => Shellwords.shellescape(SimCtl.device_set_path) }) unless SimCtl.device_set_path.nil?
        args = args.merge(opts).zip.flatten.join(' ')
        command = "open -Fgn #{Xcode::Path.home}/Applications/Simulator.app --args #{args}"
        system command
      end

      # Launches a Simulator instance with the given device in a headless state
      #
      # @param device [SimCtl::Device] the device to launch
      # @return [void]
      def launch_device_headless(device)
        # Launching the same device twice does not work.
        # Simulator.app would just hang. Solution: Kill first.
        kill_device(device)
        Executor.execute(command_for('boot', device.udid))
      end

      # Launches an app in the given device
      #
      # @param device [SimCtl::Device] the device to launch
      # @param opts [Hash] options hash - `{ wait_for_debugger: true/false }`
      # @param identifier [String] the app identifier
      # @param args [Array] optional launch arguments
      # @return [void]
      def launch_app(device, identifier, args=[], opts={})
        launch_args = args.map {|arg| Shellwords.shellescape arg}
        launch_opts = opts[:wait_for_debugger] ? '-w' : ''
        Executor.execute(command_for('launch', launch_opts, device.udid, identifier, launch_args))
      end
    end
  end
end

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


text:
Q: Umbraco Template/Master Files Reappearing after Deletion in VS2010 I know that the integration between umbraco and VS2010 isn't perfect.  For example, things linger in umbraco because it stores things in flat files like umbraco.config.  In general, when I delete things like document types or make certain kinds of changes to document properties in them, in VS I delete the umbraco.config, clean the solution and rebuilt before running the CMS.  After that, I know the db keeps some things around, so I go into the Settings section and delete the approprite document properties, etc.
That said, I haven't yet figured out where umbraco is storing certain master pages/templates since, when I delete certain ones of those, when I clean and rebuild, the files will reappear (thought not included in the project).  Can anyone tell me where the reference to these deleted templates lives in the umbraco SiteBuilder code so that I can get rid of them permanently?

A: If you delete a template within the Umbraco CMS itself, then this will not only delete the record in the database but it will also delete the physical file itself.
If you only delete the physical file, Umbraco will recreate the template based on the template record it has in the database.

A: i found the best way to use VS 2010 with umbraco is to install this extension http://our.umbraco.org/projects/developer-tools/visual-studio-2010-project-template which allows you to create the umbraco site as a VS project. This ensures any change you do to umbraco are picked up in visual studio as well and the best way to delete/create templates is to do it via umbraco as it creates references and and id to these in the database (if you do it in vs the umbraco settings that do this wont pick it up).

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


text:
Gibraltar: Fintech 2021
by Joey Garcia , Jonathan Garcia and Jake Collado
ISOLAS
1. What are the sources of payments law in your jurisdiction?
Payment services in Gibraltar are primarily regulated under the Financial Services (Payment Services) Regulations 2020 ("PSR"). The PSR transpose the Payment Services Directive EU 2015/2366 ("PSD 2") into Gibraltar law. See Question 14 for further information on the applicability of EU law insofar as Gibraltar law in concerned.
The PSD 2 makes provisions for the transparency of payment services and requirements for both users and providers in the provision of payment services. It replaced the first Payment Services Directive (2007/64/EC) and increased the scope and application capturing transactions in any currency and "one leg out" transactions. PSD 2 is able to capture new services and providers, these include the newly defined "payment initiation services providers" and "account information services providers".
Payment services under the PSR may consist of: enabling cash withdrawals; enabling cash to be placed in a payment account; credit transfers, including standing order; issuing payment instruments or acquiring payment transactions; or money remittance. Any firm wishing to provide these type of services must be authorised by the Gibraltar Financial Services Commission ("GFSC") as a Payment Services Provider and is required to comply with all legislative and regulatory requirements.
The other main source of payments law in Gibraltar is the Financial Services (Electronic Money) Regulations 2020 ("E-Money Regulations"), which governs the issue and distribution of electronic money. Types of electronic money include pre-paid cards and electronic pre-paid accounts for use online. Depending on the construct of a virtual currency, in certain circumstances, cryptocurrencies may also qualify as electronic money under Gibraltar law. For further detail on the E-Money Regulations see question 14 below.
2. Can payment services be provided by non-banks, and if so on what conditions?
Payment services can be provided by banks as well as non-banks. Authorised Credit Institutions or Electronic Money Issuers are not required to apply for a separate payment service permission. These institutions will however need to ensure that their Credit Institution or Electronic Money regulatory permission is extended to cover payment services and they will need to comply with the relevant payment services requirements.
In order for a non-bank or non-electronic money issuer to become authorised to provide payment services they must apply to the GFSC for a regulatory permission. In order to do so, they must submit an application pack consisting of: 3 year financial projections, GFSC regulated individual forms for each individual that will performing a regulated function, GFSC non-executive director forms for each non-executive director, GFSC controller forms for each controller, business plan, risk methodology and framework, supporting policies and procedures, details of source of wealth/source of funds business continuity plan and any other document the applicant considers the GFSC should take into consideration as part of the application as well as the application fee.
An applicant may apply for one of the following three classes of payment services permissions, depending on the services they will provide:
Class A – for providing the service of money remittance.
Class B – for payment initiation services and/or account information services.
Class C – for services enabling cash to be placed on a payment account as well as all the operations required for operating a payment account, services enabling cash withdrawals from a payment account as well as all the operations required for operating a payment account, execution of payment transactions including transfers of funds on a payment account with the user's payment services provider or with another payment service provider, execution of payment transactions where the funds are covered by a credit line for a payment service user and/or issuing and/or acquiring payment services.
If an applicant requests an authorisation for a range of services that falls within two different classes of permissions, the applicant should select the class of permissions with the highest capital requirement. This means that a firm is only able to hold one class of permissions.
Applicants will have an initial ongoing capital requirement depending on their Class. Class A is €20,000, Class B is €50,000 EUR and Class C is €125,000. Regulated firms may hold multiple permissions and may therefore be required to hold the aggregate of capital for each licence. These cases are dealt with by the GFSC by a case-by-case basis.
3. What are the most popular payment methods and payment instruments in your jurisdiction?
The most popular payment methods in Gibraltar are debit card payments, credit card payments and cash.
4. What is the status of open banking in your jurisdiction (i.e. access to banks' transaction data and push-payment functionality by third party service providers)? Is it mandated by law, if so to which entities, and what is state of implementation in practice?
In Gibraltar, the PSR provides for the authorisation of Account Information Service Providers ("AISPs") and Payment Initiation Service Providers ("PISPs"). AISPs are authorised to provide consolidated information on one or more payment accounts held by a payment service user with either another payment service provider or with more than one payment service provider. PISPs are authorised to initiate instructions by a payer or payee to its payment service provider requesting the execution of a payment transaction at the request of the payment service user with respect to a payment account held at another payment service provider.
5. How does the regulation of data in your jurisdiction impact on the provision of financial services to consumers and businesses?
In Gibraltar, the overarching national law on data protection is the Data Protection Act 2004 ("DPA 2004"). The DPA 2004 was amended on 25 May 2018 to:
implement the General Data Protection Regulation (Regulation (EU) 2016/679) ("EU GDPR");
transpose the Law Enforcement Directive (Directive (EU) 2016/680);
implement a data protection framework under the Convention for the Protection of Individuals with Regard to Automatic Processing of Personal Data of 1981 ("Convention 108"); and
implement Articles 126–130 of the Convention of 19 June 1990 applying the Schengen Agreement of 14 June 1985.
The changes made to the DPA 2004 took Brexit into account, as well as the Data Protection Act 2018 of England and Wales ("DPA 2018"). Both statutes share a similar structure, but with notable differences, such as the repeal of Part IV of the DPA 2004, which related to intelligence service processing and was similar in structure and content to Part 4 of the DPA 2018.
Following the end of the Brexit transition period, the DPA 2004 was further amended, and the EU GDPR now forms part of Gibraltar law by virtue of Section 6 of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2019, as read with (i) Section 2(1B)(a) of DPA 2004, and (ii) the Data Protection, Privacy and Electronic Communications (Amendments etc) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019. This is now referred to as the "Gibraltar GDPR", which is essentially the EU GDPR read with certain modifications. It is, therefore, important to read the Gibraltar GDPR and the DPA 2004 side-by-side.
The DPA 2004 and the Gibraltar GDPR are supplemented by the following:
the Communications (Personal Data and Privacy) Regulations 2006 ("CPDP Regs"); made under the Communications Act 2006; and
the Data Protection (Search and Seizure) Regulations 2006 ("DPSS Regs").
The Communications Act 2006, together with the CPDP Regulations, transpose the E-Privacy Directive (Directive 2002/58/EC), imposing obligations on publicly available electronic communications services providers and users when they process personal data.
The DPSS Regulations, among other things, authorise justices of the peace to issue warrants to the supervisory authority in certain circumstances, allowing them to enter premises, inspect and seize as required.
Both the EU GDPR and Gibraltar GDPR have what is referred to as "extra-territorial effect", in that, respectively, the EU GDPR can apply outside of the EU, and the Gibraltar GDPR can apply outside of Gibraltar. This is achieved in a similar manner in both pieces of legislation. Focusing on Gibraltar, the territorial scope of the Gibraltar GDPR can extend to any of the following situations:
Where a controller/processor has an "establishment" in Gibraltar and processing occurs "in the context of the activities" of that establishment. This applies regardless of whether the processing occurs in Gibraltar or not.
Where goods or services are offered to data subjects in Gibraltar, irrespective of whether payment is required by a non-Gibraltar controller/processor. There should be an element of targeting and other evidence will be considered, such as whether consumers are able to pay in their local currency, or whether a marketing campaign has taken place. This test is also not limited by citizenship or residency of the data subjects.
Where the monitoring of behaviour of data subjects in Gibraltar is carried out by a non-Gibraltar controller/processor. Examples of monitoring would be predicting trends, or use of geo-location.
Where a controller is not established in Gibraltar, but in a place where domestic law applies by virtue of public international law.
Under Article 27 of the Gibraltar GDPR, controllers and processors established outside of Gibraltar would need to consider the appointment of a local representative in Gibraltar, if they are offering goods or services or monitoring the behaviour of data subjects in Gibraltar.
Controllers and processors based in Gibraltar offering goods or services or monitoring the behaviour of data subjects in the EU are subject to the EU GDPR, and will need to consider their obligations in that context. In particular, until the issue of adequacy is decided by the European Commission in respect of Gibraltar, appropriate safeguards (e.g., such as standard contractual clauses) would need to be considered prior to a data transfer from Gibraltar to the EU or vice versa, given that, at the time of writing, Gibraltar is considered as a "third country" for the purposes of Chapter V of the EU GDPR.
The DPA 2004 designates the Gibraltar Regulatory Authority ("GRA") as the Information Commissioner.
The GRA is an independent statutory body responsible for the enforcement of the DPA 2004, as read with the Gibraltar GDPR, and its primary role as Information Commissioner is to uphold the privacy rights of individuals.
Under changes made to the DPA 2004, the GRA now has increased regulatory powers under that Act, as well as those granted under Article 58 of the Gibraltar GDPR. These powers are classed as "investigative", "corrective" and "authorisation and advisory", allowing the Information Commissioner to, among other things:
bring or defend legal actions in Gibraltar or other courts;
co-operate with and render assistance to supervisory authorities in other states of territories;
conduct data protection compliance audits;
issue information notices, requiring others to provide it with information to investigate compliance;
issue assessment notices to allow it to enter premises, obtain documents and equipment, and interview persons;
issue enforcement notices, including warnings and reprimands, which may impose temporary or definitive bans on processing, or order a controller/processor to take corrective action; and/or
issue monetary penalty notices.
Article 57 of the Gibraltar GDPR also prescribes the tasks and functions of the Information Commissioner. These include, but are not limited to, promoting of awareness of rights and obligations, handling of complaints, conducting of investigations and taking enforcement action against those controllers or processors failing to comply, and certifying and approving certain mechanisms and schemes such as contractual clauses or binding corporate rules.
6. What are regulators in your jurisdiction doing to encourage innovation in the financial sector? Are there any initiatives such as sandboxes, or special regulatory conditions for fintechs?
Gibraltar has always maintained itself at the forefront of novel technological developments. In fact, for most blue-chip online gambling businesses around the world, it is found that most are based in Gibraltar, which was also the fastest mover in developing regulation around that space.
Gibraltar is replicating that philosophy in the blockchain space and follow the success of online gaming, and is doing so by stepping out of the regulatory "sandbox", in the same way as it did back in the gaming days. Rather than creating a "safe space" for businesses to test innovative financial products, services, business models and delivery mechanisms in a live environment without immediately incurring all the normal regulatory consequences of engaging in the activity in question, Gibraltar has instead chosen to provide legal certainty and allow businesses to operate within a purpose-built legislative framework. In doing so, it considers that a flexible, adaptive approach is required in the case of novel business activities, products and business models and that whilst regulatory outcomes remain central, these are better achieved through the application of principles rather than rigid rules. This is because, for businesses based on rapidly evolving technology, such hard and fast rules can quickly become outdated and unfit for purpose. Accordingly, Gibraltar's principles-based framework is based on risk and proportionality, and is outcome-focused yet robust. This framework applies to firms carrying out by way of business, in or from Gibraltar, the use of distributed ledger technology (DLT) for storing or transmitting value belonging to others.
The Government of Gibraltar recognises that this is a nascent industry and whilst Gibraltar has shown leadership in this space, development is clearly an ongoing process and Gibraltar is aware of the importance, as a jurisdiction, for it to invest in supporting the development of knowledge and skills, in tandem with generating economic results as Gibraltar continues to strive for excellence.
7. Do you foresee any imminent risks to the growth of the fintech market in your jurisdiction?
The most prevalent concern for Gibraltar's financial services industry as a whole is Brexit, and the loss of passporting rights for financial services institutions that operated under traditional EU frameworks that enabled them to carry out regulated activities in other European Union Member States on the basis of a registration rather than having to go though a full authorisation process, and without having to have an establishment in those judications.
While the loss of passporting rights is a primary concern for traditional financial services institutions, it should be noted that with respect to distributed ledger technology providers ("DLT Providers") specifically, Gibraltar's distributed ledger technology framework does not derive from European law. There is presently no harmonised EU regime for passporting in this sector and therefore the loss of passporting rights is not as prevalent a concern for Gibraltar DLT providers as no passporting rights existed in this sector, even before Brexit.
For EU law purposes, Gibraltar was treated as part of the UK and, as a result, the EU passporting rights that existed between Gibraltar and EU member states never applied between Gibraltar and the UK. Instead, the rights of Gibraltar and UK financial services firms to access each other's respective markets was provided for separately, through deemed passporting rights set out in domestic legislation. While transitional arrangements had been put in place to ensure continued reciprocal passporting arrangements for financial services firms in Gibraltar and the United Kingdom following the end of the transition period, the Gibraltar Authorisation Regime ("GAR") which will be set out in the UK Financial Services Act 2021, will recognise the unique arrangements and special historic relationship between the UK and Gibraltar, allowing Gibraltar-based financial services firms continued market access to the UK, and continuing the align standards and supervisory practices with those of the UK.
Therefore not only will these passporting arrangement preserve the status-quo of the already established industries, it also presents opportunities and important areas for growth. Since the UK's departure from the EU, Gibraltar is currently the only jurisdiction in the world where authorised financial institutions not currently operating under the UK's Temporary Permission Regime can continue to access the UK market in the same manner as if they were in the UK.
While Gibraltar was not included in the Trade and Cooperation Agreement that was entered into between the EU and the UK on 24 December 2020, a separate agreement was reached in principle on 31 December 2021 paving the way for a treaty on Gibraltar's relationship with the EU to be established. The EU Council have recently approved the European Commission's mandate, and formal negotiations between the EU and the UK for a treaty on Gibraltar's future relationship with the EU have commenced. Although the negotiations that will determine the precise details of the expected treaty have commenced only recently, it is envisaged that Gibraltar's future relationship with the EU will be in the form of a bespoke Schengen-style arrangement which would allow for passport-free travel within the Schengen Area.
Therefore, while Brexit has certainly created risks in this sector, it has also created a number of opportunities for growth which will no doubt enable Gibraltar's robust financial services industry to continue growing.
8. What tax incentives exist in your jurisdiction to encourage fintech investment?
Gibraltar has no tax incentives that are specific to fintech investment. However, Gibraltar offers an extremely competitive overall tax package for companies and individuals wishing to conduct business from Gibraltar.
There are no capital gains tax, value-added tax, death duties, inheritance, wealth, capital transfer, gifts or withholding tax levied in Gibraltar at present. For companies, corporation tax is generally 12.5%, payable on profits that derive from income accrued in or derived from Gibraltar; that is to say, by reference to the location of the activities that give rise to the profits. Under tax legislation, the location of the activities that give rise to the profits of a business whose underlying activity results in income, and requires a licence and regulation under any law of Gibraltar, shall automatically be considered to derive from Gibraltar.
Favourable tax packages are also available for High-Net-Worth Individuals and High Executives Possessing Specialist Skills ("HEPSS") who want to establish residence in Gibraltar and can benefit from tax payable on income being resected to a capped amount, which encourages talent towards Gibraltar. See further details in the answer to question 11.
9. Which areas of fintech are attracting investment in your jurisdiction, and at what level (Series A, Series B etc)?
Gibraltar's fintech sector has experienced all levels of investments from Series A to Series C due to the success of Gibraltar DLT Framework.
Most recently, ISOLAS LLP's client Bitso, a leading Gibraltar authorised DLT Provider and the largest cryptocurrency platform in Latin America raised $250 million in a Series C round of funding that values the company at a $2.2 billion valuation. Tiger Global and Coatue co-led the round, which also included participation from Paradigm, BOND & Valor Capital Group and existing backers QED, Pantera Capital Kaszek. The Series C investment round follows its Series B in December 2020 where Bitso raised $62 million at an undisclosed valuation.
Furthermore, client of ISOLAS LLP and Gibraltar authorised DLT Provider LMAX Group, an institutional FX and crypto execution venue has also announced that it has signed a definitive agreement to sell a 30% stake in the company to J.C. Flowers & Co LLC, a leading private investment firm dedicated to investing globally in the financial services industry, for cash consideration of $300 million valuing LMAX Group at $1 billion.
Decentralized derivatives trading protocol and ISOLAS LLP client Vega has also announced that it has closed a $5 million funding round with contributions from a number of venture capital and trading firms such as Arrington capital and Coinbase Ventures.
Bullish Global has also been capitalized with over US$10 billion in cash and digital assets following an initial injection by Block.one of US$100 million, 164,000 BTC, and 20 million EOS, and through the completion of an additional US$300 million strategic investment round. Among the renowned investors leading the capital raise were Peter Thiel's Thiel Capital and Founders Fund, Alan Howard, Louis Bacon, Richard Li, Christian Angermayer, Galaxy Digital, and global investment bank Nomura.
10. If a fintech entrepreneur was looking for a jurisdiction in which to begin operations, why would it choose yours?
Gibraltar has already proven itself to be a leading jurisdiction in the fintech space. This can be seen from the calibre of the DLT Providers that have already become authorised as DLT Providers in Gibraltar – including XAPO, Bitso, Huobi and LMAX to name a few.
The Government of Gibraltar has approached the growing cryptocurrency and wider blockchain and distributed ledger technology related sector with a uniquely receptive and progressive attitude. Financial regulators and policy makers in Gibraltar have understood the need for regulation in this sector, responding rapidly to such demand as far back as 2014, with the creation of the Cryptocurrency Working Group. This private sector initiative led to the development of the Distributed Ledger Technology Framework ("DLT Framework"), which became effective on 1st January 2018, making Gibraltar the first jurisdiction in the world to deliver a framework of its kind that regulates businesses that use DLT for the defined purposes relating to a "storage" or "transfer" of "value", which is a wider concept that pure virtual assets. The DLT Framework currently includes nine principles that apply to DLT businesses operating in Gibraltar and these principles are substantiated by detailed guidelines constructed in a way that allows them to evolve at the same pace as the technology and its application, while always maintaining the core regulatory and legislative principles. The response to this approach has been global and truly significant. Those who know nothing about Gibraltar may be surprise, but those who know the history of the small jurisdiction, with a joined-up partnership between lawmakers, regulators and industry that is able to adapt and evolve to attract the right opportunities at the right level with the speed and flexibility needed to accomplish such goals, will not be surprised at all.
This success has also been seen in the crypto funds space: pursuant to a 2020 research report into the global crypto hedge fund landscape, commissioned by PwC and Elwood Asset Management, Gibraltar was shown to be the third-highest jurisdiction of choice for crypto hedge fund managers (with 10% of crypto hedge fund managers based in Gibraltar), only behind the UK (15%) and the US (52%). Gibraltar was also listed as having the fourth-highest number of domiciled crypto hedge funds (6%).
More recently, the third annual edition of the report, published in 2021, shows Gibraltar as having strengthened its position as a preferred domicile for crypto hedge funds, with the third-highest number of domiciled crypto hedge funds (9%), overtaking the BVI (8%) and Luxembourg (3%), and pushing down Lichtenstein to less than 5%. Furthermore, the two leading jurisdictions for crypto hedge funds have experienced an overall decline in their market share compared to the 2020 report (the US from 38% to 33% and the Cayman Islands from 42% to 34%), whereas Gibraltar has maintained steady growth (from 6% to 9%).
Since the coming into force of the DLT Framework, the Government of Gibraltar has been delivering on a detailed and strategically formulated activity schedule, created to proactively drive home Gibraltar's very strong DLT message, by researching and identifying key markets and audiences and focusing its marketing in these areas. The Government of Gibraltar also launched an advisory group that focuses on the creation of new technology-related educational courses, such as blockchain. The New Technologies in Education ("NTiE") group, which is a well-established initiative since its inauguration in 2018, is a joint initiative between the Government and the University of Gibraltar in collaboration with some of the leading new technology companies based in Gibraltar. The advisory group's aim is to address the growing demand for related skills as the sector continues to expand in Gibraltar. The University of Gibraltar has also successfully been delivering a professional course in this space titled "Professional Certificate of Competence in Blockchain and Smart Contracts".
Whilst Gibraltar has shown leadership in this space, development is clearly an ongoing process and Gibraltar is aware of the importance as a jurisdiction, for it to invest in supporting the development of knowledge and skills in tandem with generating economic results as it continues to strive for excellence. The Government of Gibraltar created the Gibraltar Association for New Technologies ("GANT") in 2018, an association formed together with the private sector, including Gibraltar's leading law firms, accounting firms and technology companies all forming part of its membership. GANT serves several purposes, primarily enhancing the development in Gibraltar of the use of blockchain and DLT and other future developments (collectively referred to as "New Technology"), with a view to enhancing the reputation, integrity and public trust in this sector.
GANT has also been tasked to raise the profile of "New Technology" in Gibraltar across a spectrum not necessarily limited to financial services. This includes encouraging respective organisations to emphasise the high value of their reputation and interest in contributing to enhanced client and investor protection and remaining committed to safeguarding customer and jurisdictional interests. GANT also provides a forum for discussion on "New Technology" issues within the membership and to assist other sectors of the wider Gibraltar Finance Centre, whilst also assisting and advising the Government of Gibraltar on all aspects of this sector.
October 2021 saw the launch of the Digital Skills Academy in Gibraltar. The academy aims to close the digital skills gap and provide opportunities to people in all sectors of society and will provide a platform for Gibraltar to have its own place for the training in digital skills of students and members of the private and public sectors. The Academy works closely with local companies. Currently, there are not sufficient amounts of skilled workers in order to keep up with the influx of technology companies all over the globe, therefore, these courses are structured to combat the skilled employee shortage in the technology industry. By Gibraltar addressing this problem locally at its core, it will allow Gibraltar to continue striving as a leading jurisdiction in the fintech space.
11. Access to talent is often cited as a key issue for fintechs – are there any immigration rules in your jurisdiction which would help or hinder that access, whether in force now or imminently? For instance, are quotas systems/immigration caps in place in your jurisdiction and how are they determined?
There are no fintech specific immigration schemes in Gibraltar. Gibraltar, as well established fintech hub, already has access to a large talent pool within its fintech sector as it has always been a leading jurisdiction in this field for a number of years. Furthermore, through the NTiE and GANT (see further details in the answer to question 10), the Government of Gibraltar has been equipping the local workforce with the necessary technical knowledge and skills for the fintech sector.
In addition, Gibraltar offers a special employment tax status (HEPSS status) for employees that meet certain criteria as a cost saving incentive for companies recruiting senior executives which has proven to be extremely successful in attracting highly skilled and talented individuals to Gibraltar. The HEPSS status is available to individuals who possess skills not available in Gibraltar and, in the Government's opinion, necessary to promote and sustain economic activity of particular economic value to Gibraltar, who will occupy a high executive or senior management position, and who will earn more than £160,000 per annum of income. Income tax liability is capped at the first £160,000 of taxable earnings. The cap primarily applies to income from the designated employment, but can extend to certain dividends, interest, pensions income and foreign income.
The Government has in place a Liaison Department which provides firms with an improved service in all their dealings with Government. The prime objective of this department is to assist and support the Financial Services and Gaming Sectors in their interaction with Government across the entire spectrum of the Public Service. The industries are offered a fast track process in relation to all matters touching the public service. The Liaison department is the problem-solving hub which boasts sound and effective results within a 24-hour turnaround period.
12. If there are gaps in access to talent, are regulators looking to fill these and if so how? How much impact does the fintech industry have on influencing immigration policy in your jurisdiction?
See answers to questions 11 and 12. Gibraltar, as well established fintech hub, already has access to a large talent pool within its fintech sector as it has always been a leading jurisdiction in this field for a number of years. Furthermore, through the NTiE and GANT (see further details in the answer to question 10), the Government of Gibraltar has been equipping the local workforce with the necessary technical knowledge and skills for the fintech sector.
13. What protections can a fintech use in your jurisdiction to protect its intellectual property?
Gibraltar primarily follows UK law in relation to the registration of intellectual property rights and the protection of registered and unregistered intellectual property.
A patent is a form of intellectual property which grants the inventor the right to exclude others from making or selling his or her invention for a period of time, thus being able to take legal action against anyone who makes, uses, sells or imports the invention without his or her permission. The invention must not be specifically excluded from protection.
Original applications to register a trade mark or patent in Gibraltar cannot be made, the Gibraltar Registry will only replicate successful registrations made in the Intellectual Property UK Patent Office.
The grantee of a UK patent may apply within three years from the date of issue of the patent, to have such patent registered in Gibraltar in accordance with Section 2 of the Patents Act 1924.
As part of the registration process the following documents must be submitted to the Gibraltar Registry in accordance with Section 3 of the Patents Act 1924:
application for registration of a patent (Form 1);
certified copies of the specification(s) (including drawings if any) of the UK patent;
certificate of the comptroller-general of the UK Patent Office giving full particulars of the issue of the specification/s and, in the case of a patent treated as being granted in the UK by virtue of the provisions of Section 2 of the Patents Act 1924, a certificate by an officer duly authorised under the Patents Act designating the UK has accepted the European Patent (UK) designating the UK as being effective in the UK and that the particulars of the application are true; and
a filing fee of GBP30.
Upon such application being received, together with the documents mentioned in Section 3, the Registrar of Patents shall issue a certificate of registration in accordance with Section 4 of the Patents Act 1924. The protection of a patent will remain valid for as long as the UK patent is valid; the time period is 20 years from the date of issue of the UK patent, provided that the applicable renewal fees have been paid accordingly.
Patent rights are able to be enforced against a party through the UK or Gibraltar courts. The remedies for patent infringement include the seizure/destruction of the infringing goods, monetary damages and injunctive relief. Section 7 of the Patents Act 1924 outlines the powers of the Gibraltar Supreme Court and states that:
"The Supreme Court shall have power upon the application of any person who alleges that his interests have been prejudicially affected by the issue of a certificate of registration, to declare that the exclusive privileges and rights conferred by such certificate of registration have not been acquired on any of the grounds upon which the United Kingdom patent might be revoked under the law for the time being in force in the United Kingdom: Provided that such grounds shall be deemed to include the manufacture, use or sale of the invention in Gibraltar before the priority date applicable to the patent in the United Kingdom, but not to include the manufacture, use or sale of the invention in Gibraltar by some person or persons after the priority date applicable to the patent in the United Kingdom and before the date of the issue of the certificate of registration under section 4. For the purposes of this proviso the expression "priority date" in its application to a patent in the United Kingdom has the meaning assigned to it in section 5 of the Patents Act, 1949, or any other Patents Act for the time being in force."
A trade mark is a sign which can distinguish the trade origin of goods and/or services from those of competitors. A trade mark must be considered to be distinctive, which means if it can be recognised as a sign that differentiates the origin of goods and/or services from those of other sources. A trade mark may include words, sounds, logos, colours, shape or any combination thereof.
The Registrar of Trade Marks deals with the registration of trade marks under the Trade Marks Act 1948 and the Trade Marks Rules 1948. It is not possible for originating applications to be made in Gibraltar. Therefore, a trade mark must first be registered in either the UK Intellectual Property Office, the European Union Intellectual Property Office, or the World Intellectual Property Office under the Madrid Protocol (with an EU or UK Designation).
The European Union Intellectual Property website confirms that a European Union Trade Mark extends to all member states inclusive of the UK and therefore Gibraltar. However, the position following Brexit remains unclear and it is advisable that those who wish to ensure protection both in the UK and Gibraltar post-Brexit should seek to register trade marks in both the EU and the UK separately – in other words, to err on the side of caution.
Trade marks registered in other EU national trade mark registries may not be registered in Gibraltar, unless it is an EU-registered trade mark or is registered under the Madrid Protocol at the World Intellectual Property Office with an EU or UK designation.
Under Council Regulation (EU) No 40/94 European Union Trade Marks, it is possible to obtain a single trade mark registration which is effective throughout the EU and such protection can be extended to Gibraltar.
The following documents are required in order to register a UK trade mark, a Madrid Protocol trade mark or a European Union trade mark:
application for registration of a trade mark (Form 1);
certified representation of the trade mark – certificate of the Comptroller of the UK Patent Office (under their title of Registrar of Trade Marks) giving full particulars of the registration of the trade mark in the UK and such other documents as may from time to time be prescribed (Section 4, Trade Marks Act 1948);
two prints of the trade mark; and
the applicable filing fee of GBP30.
Once all the relevant documents have been submitted to the Gibraltar Registry, the Registrar will then enter the prescribed particulars in the register and shall issue a certificate of registration to the applicant who shall then be the registered proprietor in Gibraltar of the trade mark in respect of the goods entered in the register.
The registration of UK and EU trade marks are renewable every ten years and valid in Gibraltar while they are valid in the UK or the EU.
Industrial design is an intellectual property right that legally protects the visual design of objects or part of an object in the territories that it is registered in and it constitutes the ornamental aspect of an object. In Gibraltar, there are two forms of industrial design, these being registered and unregistered designs.
Designs registered in the UK are automatically protected in Gibraltar by virtue of Section 2 of the Gibraltar Designs Act 1928. Registered Community Designs are also automatically protected in Gibraltar by virtue of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. UK-registered design right applications are made and obtained through the UK Intellectual Property Office.
A design is legally defined as being the appearance of the whole or part of an object resulting from the features of, shape, colours or materials of the object or ornamentation. Both 3D and 2D designs are protected by registered designs. The design must not have been publicly disclosed or published within the EEA prior to being registered. There is, however, a 12-month grace period following the disclosure which allows the designer to make its application.
An unregistered design right in the UK arises automatically on the creation of an original object and it has been recorded in an article or design document, subject to the provisions of Part 3 of the UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.
Designs registered in the UK have their rights are extended and protected in Gibraltar and there is no need for any applications to be made in Gibraltar. Designs produced in Gibraltar enjoy reciprocal protection in the UK under Part 3 of the UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.
A registered design can be renewed every five years up to 25 years, subject to the payment of fees. The length of protection afforded to an unregistered design according to Section 216 of the UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 will be 15 years from the earlier of the end of the calendar year in which the design was first recorded in a design document or an article was first made to the design or if articles made to the design are made available for sale or hire within five years from the end of that calendar year, ten years from the end of the calendar year in which that first occurred.
Owners of both registered and unregistered designs are able to enforce action through the UK or Gibraltar courts. For unregistered designs, remedies can include injunctive relief, damages or accounting for profit made. For registered designs, remedies can include injunctive relief, damages, accounting for profit made, delivery or destruction of the infringed product.
Copyright is a property right which subsists in sound recordings, films or broadcasts, original literary works – which includes databases, computer programs and preparatory design – dramatic, musical or artistic works and in the typographical arrangement of published editions. Copyright protects the author's work in several ways and prevents others from replicating this work, making an adaptation of this work, putting it on the internet and performing or playing this work in public.
Copyright protection is automatic upon the creation of the said qualifying work, and so no registration process is required. The length of the copyright is dependent on the type of work – for example, works such as written, sound, films and artistic work will last for 70 years after the author's death.
A copyright holder is able to enforce court proceedings where he or she believes that there has been an infringement on the copyright and remedies include damages, injunctions and accounts. It is a criminal offence to infringe copyright.
Other intellectual property rights in Gibraltar also extend to trade secrets. This is a common law right in which the information contained within has commercial value because it is secret and the use or disclosure is likely to harm the interests of the trade secret holder in several ways – for example, scientific and technical potential, business or financial interests, strategic positions or the ability to compete.
In accordance with Section 4 of the Protection of Trade Secrets Regulations 2018 it is possible the acquisition of trade secrets in Gibraltar shall be considered lawful if obtained by any of the following means:
independent discovery or creation;
observation, study, disassembly or testing of a product or object that has been made available to the public or that is lawfully in the possession of the acquirer of the information who is free from any legally valid duty to limit the acquisition of the trade secret;
exercise of the right of workers or workers' representatives to information and consultation in accordance with any rules of law applicable in Gibraltar; or
any other practice which, under the circumstances, is in conformity with honest commercial practices.
In accordance with Section 8 of the Protection of Trade Secrets Regulations 2018, the limitation period for bringing a claim for the unlawful acquisition, use or disclosure of a trade secret is six years. The start date for reckoning the limitation period for a claim for the unlawful acquisition, use or disclosure of a trade secret against an infringer begins with whichever is the later of:
the day on which the unlawful acquisition, use or disclosure that is the subject of the claim ceases; or
the day of knowledge of the trade secret holder.
Where damages are awarded in relation to unlawful acquisition, Section 16 of the Protection of Trade Secrets Regulations 2018 states that all appropriate aspects shall be considered, including:
any negative economic consequences, including any lost profits, which the trade secret holder has suffered, and any unfair profits made by the infringer;
elements other than economic factors, including the moral prejudice caused to the trade secret holder by the unlawful acquisition, use or disclosure of the trade secret; and
where appropriate, damages may be awarded on the basis of the royalties or fees which would have been due had the infringer obtained a licence to use the trade secret in question.
14. How are cryptocurrencies treated under the regulatory framework in your jurisdiction?
In terms of the activity of the business in the DLT space, Gibraltar has developed the first DLT-specific regulatory and principles-based legislative framework for these operators. This detailed framework goes well beyond the basic compliance requirements or registration processes that exist in many jurisdictions. Cryptocurrencies are not considered legal tender in Gibraltar and, accordingly, are not issued or guaranteed by the Gibraltar Government.
While the United Kingdom and Gibraltar are no longer members of the European Union, subject to certain exceptions, all direct EU legislation and all EU-derived domestic legislation so far as operative immediately before midnight on 31 December 2020, continue to form part of Gibraltar's domestic legislation pursuant to sections 5(1) and 6(1) of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2019. Accordingly, the provisions of all EU-derived financial services frameworks, as they stood at midnight on 31 December 2020, continue in force and effect in Gibraltar.
As in most jurisdictions that operate under European law principles, depending on the construct of the virtual currency, cryptocurrencies may still qualify as electronic money ("E-Money"), as a form of asset-backed security, financial instrument or even unit of a collective investment scheme ("CIS") arrangement. Without being able to go into each of these for the purposes of this chapter, in the context of the recent focus on stablecoins and central bank-issued digital currencies, on a European level, the regulation of E-Money is based on the E-Money Directive, which defines E-Money as an electronically, including magnetically, stored monetary value as represented by a claim on the issuer, which is issued on receipt of funds for the purpose of making payment transactions, and accepted by a natural or legal person other than the E-Money-issuer. This definition is in line with the definition contained in the Financial Services (Electronic Money) Regulations 2020. E-Money requires an issuer. Therefore, a cryptocurrency that comes into existence by way of mining (e.g. Bitcoin) without an issuer, or representing any form of claim on any issuer, should not qualify as E-Money. Conversely, a cryptocurrency that is issued by an issuer at par value against fiat and furnished with the promise of the issuer to be redeemed in exchange for fiat against the issuer of that currency, and therefore being accepted as means of payment by third parties, would qualify as E-Money and trigger a number of considerations around this from a payments services perspective also.
Owing largely to the difficulty of regulating cryptocurrencies themselves, the DLT Framework has attempted not to enforce the regulation of cryptocurrencies, but instead to impose a regulatory regime for firms that carry on by way of business, in or from Gibraltar, the use of DLT for storing or transmitting value belonging to others. Accordingly, regulation will depend on what services a firm is providing customers in respect to their cryptocurrencies and whether this falls under the scope of regulation.
Because cryptocurrencies vary widely in design and purpose, it should be kept in mind that these may represent transferable securities or financial instruments, and their promotion and sale would already be covered by existing securities legislation in Gibraltar such as the FSA. Its classification as a security triggers various consequences; in particular, regulatory consequences. The requirement to issue a prospectus when offering securities publicly is only one example of such a requirement. A distinction must be drawn between the concept of a security on the one hand and a financial instrument on the other, with the latter being the broader term.
"Securities" are one of several sub-categories of financial instruments. Regulatory requirements may therefore also arise for non-securities that are classified as financial instruments. This includes the requirements arising under MiFID II, which, in addition to applying to businesses providing certain investment services or engagement in certain activities with clients in relation to financial instruments, also defines "financial instruments" in a wide form, including forms of commodity derivative contracts and arrangements that may apply to any asset or right of a fungible nature (under certain conditions).
If a cryptocurrency meets the MiFID II definition of a financial instrument, then a number of crypto-asset-related activities carried out by an exchange are likely to qualify as investment services/activities for which a licence is required outside of the DLT Framework. This includes multilateral trading facilities ("MTF"), organised trading facilities ("OTF") and other exchange-related activities.
Gibraltar is further looking to expand and extend the obligations to which DLT firms must adhere and is subsequently looking towards adding a 10th principle to the DLT Regulations with an aim to regulate and develop market integrity standards for crypto exchanges. The International Organization of Securities Commissions ("IOSCO") has identified several issues that merit consideration relating to transparency, custody, clearing and settlement trading, security and systems integrity. Implementing market integrity standards for these exchanges is one of the most pressing issues in the market, with organisations such as Bitwise and BTI estimating that 70–95% of all trading volume on exchanges is potentially manipulative. The effect of which is a reduction in market confidence in this sphere.
It should of course be borne in mind that foreign exchange markets, stock markets and commodity brokers face or have faced market risks in the past, but now fall squarely within developed rules and frameworks that prevent or restrict such manipulation taking place. This is not to say that there is no manipulation taking place in the more mainstream markets, but rather that it is less prevalent due to such regulation. Thus, the introduction of these standards in the regulatory sphere in Gibraltar would serve to restrict manipulation in the same way that this is restricted in traditional markets.
15. How are initial coin offerings treated in your jurisdiction? Do you foresee any change in this over the next 12-24 months?
Other than in respect of AML/CFT (see below), there is no specific legal or regulatory framework which governs the sale, promotion or distribution of tokens. However, there may be instances where, depending on what the token will be used for and how the token issue is structured, the token may fall within existing financial services legislation. Accordingly, securities law or the EU Prospectus Regulation requirements are not altered in any way as a result. That is to say, the public offering of tokens that constitute securities continue to fall under current frameworks governing the issuance of securities.
The operation of the actual business relating to such a token could also be captured within the DLT Framework, despite the issuance potentially not being captured, if for example, the firm will also be operating a secondary market relating to those tokens.
However, from a compliance and risk perspective, any creation and issuance of tokens will generally always be caught by the Proceeds of Crime Act ("POCA") in Gibraltar, which was specifically amended to capture this activity.
More recently, Gibraltar has o introduced the Proceeds of Crime Act 2015 (Relevant Financial Business) (Registration) Regulations 2021 ("RFBR Regs"), which impose an obligation on four classes of relevant financial businesses to register with the GFSC for the purpose of AML/CFT and counter proliferation financing supervision, to the extent they are not already supervised. In particular, these requirements apply to: (a) undertakings that receive, whether on their own account or on behalf of another person, proceeds in any form from the sale of tokenised digital assets involving the use of DLT or a similar means of recording a digital representation of an asset; and (b) money for virtual business, exchange or arrange to make arrangements with a view to the exchange of (i) virtual assets for money, (ii) money for virtual assets, or (ii) one virtual asset for another. Failure to register is a criminal offence punishable with up to two years' imprisonment and/or a fine. The registration regime should not be confused with any application for regulatory permissions required under the FSA, in respect of regulated activity defined under that Act. Such permissions would need to be sought if the relevant financial business intends to carry out a regulated activity. Additionally, the registration requirements are not applicable where a person is already subject to supervision by a supervisory authority. The RFBR Regs provide fitness and proprietary criteria that the GFSC will need to consider when accepting or refusing registration (including the withdrawal of registration after it is granted).
It should also be noted that entities issuing tokens may separately have to comply with classic consumer protection law, depending on the design of the digital token.
16. Are you aware of any live blockchain projects (beyond proof of concept) in your jurisdiction and if so in what areas?
Given the advantages that Gibraltar offers as a proof-of-concept jurisdiction in financial services, it will come as no surprise that a number of blockchain projects have moved beyond the proof-of-concept, by formalising actual use cases for distributed ledger technology. Some of these resulted from using tokens as a means of raising finance and developing innovative business models. Areas vary from decentralised platforms using fully automated processes for creating markets on and trading margined derivatives, to smart contract platforms secured by the Bitcoin network, to automated trading of crypto tokens and derivative products.
17. To what extent are you aware of artificial intelligence already being used in the financial sector in your jurisdiction, and do you think regulation will impede or encourage its further use?
Artificial Intelligence is already used in the financial sector. The GFSC has a neutral approach regarding technology in the financial sector so that regulation should not impede its use but rather encourage it.
18. Insurtech is generally thought to be developing but some way behind other areas of fintech such as payments. Is there much insurtech business in your jurisdiction and if so what form does it generally take?
There are a number of Insurtech firms established in Gibraltar as part of Gibraltar's evolving fintech community. Two of the most successful Insurtech start-ups in the UK, Zego and Marshmallow have established their own insurance companies in Gibraltar – Zego in 2019 and Marshmallow in 2020.
19. Are there any areas of fintech that are particularly strong in your jurisdiction?
Gibraltar's DLT Framework is the world's first purpose built regulatory framework for businesses using blockchain or DLT and is based on the application of principles rather than rigid rules. This is because, for businesses based on rapidly evolving technology, such hard and fast rules quickly become outdated and unfit for purpose. Accordingly, Gibraltar's principles-based framework is based on risks and proportionality, and is outcome-focused yet robust. This approach has enabled Gibraltar to position itself as a leading jurisdiction for fintech businesses to set up in. Consequently, Gibraltar maintains a strong presence in all areas of fintech business with no area specifically outperforming others. Gibraltar's DLT Framework has been particularly successful in attracting some of the largest global crypto-trading platforms exchange platforms.
20. What is the status of collaboration vs disruption in your jurisdiction as between fintechs and incumbent financial institutions?
Financial institutions were initially rather reluctant and reserved towards fintechs, which came to disrupt this specific sector and position themselves as direct competitors of incumbent financial institutions with their individual and corporate customers, whom they seek to capture by offering them new types of relationships based on a renewed customer experience.
Over the past years, however, fintech has become more mainstream and this reluctance has given way to a relationship of increased cooperation, incrementally blurring the boundaries between incumbents financial institutions and fintechs. Various trends are noticeable:
Fintechs are taking something that incumbent financial institutions already do, and do it faster, cheaper or in some way better – and steal market share by doing so e.g. challenger banks.
Fintechs are acquired by incumbent financial institutions through M&A, which allows to benefit from the widest possible opportunities, as well as internal incubators and innovation labs by many prominent incumbent financial institutions.
Fintech companies supply services to incumbent financial institutions order to help those institutions do something that they do already. Many examples exist but this could include blockchain analytics and onboarding / ID verification technology.
In relation to the first category, collaboration is naturally less likely. However, the second and to a large extent the third categories lend themselves to collaboration.
21. To what extent are the banks and other incumbent financial institutions in your jurisdiction carrying out their own fintech development / innovation programmes?
Generally, large financial institutions have their own fintech development / innovation teams and aim at developing fintech innovation in view of their own vision and needs. However, their strategy regarding fintech innovations can vary considerably. Incumbent financial institutions in Gibraltar are progressively moving away from in-person transactions and toward digital transactions and the use of fintech to service the needs of clients. The global pandemic has expedited the need for such fintech services. Banks in Gibraltar have been quick to support the industry and developed the relevant skillset to ensure they can provide banking services to crypto businesses.
22. Are there any strong examples of disruption through fintech in your jurisdiction?
There are many examples of disruptive fintech innovators in Gibraltar. Most notably, however, is Xapo – the digital wallet and crypto custodian which has recently become authorised as a credit institution in Gibraltar. This is the first bank of its type in Europe combing banking services and bitcoin custodian services allowing Gibraltar to be at the forefront of an upcoming industry once again.
Originally published by Legal 500 Fintech Country Comparative Guide 2021.
Joey Garcia
Jonathan Garcia
Jake Collado
Gibraltar Finance and Banking Financial Services Intellectual Property Patent Trademark Technology Fin Tech
POPULAR ARTICLES ON: Technology from Gibraltar
Mauritius Passes Virtual Asset & Initial Token Offering Services Act
The Sovereign Group
The Virtual Asset & Initial Token Offering Services Act 2021 was passed into law by the National Assembly on 10 December and will come into force when Presidential assent is received.
New Updates On Cybercrime Law In The UAE - Taking Photos Without Consent
Hassan Elhais
A recent reminder was issued by the UAE Federal Public Prosecution reminding citizens, residents and visitors in the United Arab Emirates on the country's strict privacy laws.
Bermuda Blockchain And Cryptocurrency Regulation 2022
Partner Steven Rees Davies and associate Alexandra Fox have authored the Bermuda chapter of Global Legal Insight's fourth edition guide to blockchain and cryptocurrency regulation.
Cayman Islands Blockchain And Cryptocurrency Regulation 2022
Alistair Russell, Chris Duncan and Jenna Willis have authored the Cayman Islands chapter of Global Legal Insight's fourth edition guide to blockchain and cryptocurrency regulation.
Law In The Metaverse
Antoniou McCollum & Co.
Code is one of few forces to have challenged the dominance of law in regulating human behaviour.
Tokenization Of Real Estate Assets: Explained
BSA Ahmad Bin Hezeem & Associates LLP
As blockchain and cryptocurrency regulations in the region begin to grow, numerous start-ups are showing interest, along with major financial institutions seeking to develop this innovation across the
Gibraltar Finance and Banking Financial Services Intellectual Property Patent
Trademark Technology Fin Tech
FinTech Comparative Guide Hassans
Blockchain & Cryptocurrency Regulation 2022 ISOLAS
The 10 Most Influential Trends In The Private Wealth Space Hassans
Gibraltar Extends Regulatory Guidelines For Digital Asset Exchanges ISOLAS
The Evolution Of Assets ISOLAS
Upcoming Webinar: Diverse Liquidity Options for Complex Cayman Islands Fund Structures Register Now

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Debby Banning
City Room – Government & Politics, Crime & Public Safety, Transportation, Schools, Housing & Economy, People & Neighborhoods
Emerging Answers For Solutions In Consumer Confidence
Find out how to profit. But the tabor Department reported earlier this month that job growth slowed in August and shares have trended downward in recent weeks because of global economic troubles, particularly in China and other emerging markets. Trademarks "THE CONFERENCE BOARD," the TORCH LOGO, "CONSUMER CONFIDENCE SURVEY", "CONSUMER CONFIDENCE INDEX", and other logos, indicia and trademarks featured on Our Sites are trademarks owned by The Conference Board, Inc. in the United States and other countries "Our Trademarks". Please visit the Consumer Measures page to learn more about detailed consumer http://www.democracynow.org/2016/9/6/whos_investing_in_the_dakota_access confidence data and CEO confidence data. Thus, while consumers view current economic conditions more favourably, they do not foresee growth accelerating in the months ahead." People can grab onto a small situation that garners a lot of mainstream press, such as petrol prices, and use that as their basis for overall economic conditions, fair or not. See which sectors employ the most people and which industries are expected to grow the fastest. You may not use Our Trademarks in connection with any product or service that does not belong to us nor in any manner that is likely to cause confusion among users about whether The Conference Board is the source, sponsor, or endorser of the product or service, nor in any manner that disparages or discredits us. Here is the chart from that post. Thus, while consumers view current economic conditions more favourably, they do not foresee growth accelerating in the months ahead."
They know more about shares than the average person, but analysts are still affected by biases. Whether you want to assess labour trends, invest in innovation or understand shifts in global economies, we filter through complexity and tell you only what you need to know. It can come out as early as 9:55am EST. A closely watched index of Americans' outlook rose to 103 from 101.3 in August, driven by a brighter view of current conditions.
( http://bit.ly/2bXAFpo ) Dixons Carphone's CEO Seb James has suggested that the vote to leave the European Union has had "no detectable impact" on consumer confidence. ( http://bit.ly/2bXziXv ) The Guardian A Labour party-commissioned report into reforming tax collection has proposed that big companies should publish their tax returns and whistleblowers who expose financial wrongdoing must have protection under the law. ( http://bit.ly/2bXyMZR ) The number of UK workers on zero-hours contracts has leapt 20 percent in a year to more than 900,000. The Office for National Statistics said 903,000, or 2.9 over here percent, of the employed workforce were on zero-hours contracts - which do not offer guaranteed hours or sick pay. ( http://bit.ly/2bXA7Qq ) The Telegraph Economic forecasts should be taken with "a pinch of salt", according to Sir Charlie Bean, the incoming board member of the Office for Budget Responsibility - the body which analyses the state of the economy and public finances. ( http://bit.ly/2c1YTx6 ) Tullett Prebon has passed a crucial hurdle in its plan to take over arch-rival Icap's telephone-based broking business, after the competition regulator gave its blessing to the 1.1 billion ($1.46 billion) deal. ( http://bit.ly/2cmxXKu ) Sky News British Chancellor Philip Hammond has set 23 November for his first setpiece statement on economic and fiscal policy. The Autumn Statement will be Hammond's first chance to reveal his plans for keeping the economy on track. ( http://bit.ly/2bXAKZW ) HSBC is poised to become the third of Britain's five biggest high street banks to enter an increasingly competitive bidding war for MBNA, the credit card issuer.
Economists expected a drop to 97. Statisticians may assign little significance to a regression through this sort of data. You must abide by all copyright notices and restrictions contained in Our Sites. The index, which has been volatile in recent months, rebounded in August amid steady employment gains in prior months. "Consumers' more positive assessment of current conditions fuelled this month's increase, and drove the Present Situation Index to an 8-year high Sept. 2007, Index=121.2. Consumers' appraisal of current conditions was more positive in September. The level of consumer sentiment is related to the strength of consumer spending. Still, It is the lowest figure in eleven months. Economy & Business Environment As you face information overload and fast-changing business conditions, we help you make sense of the most relevant economic data to support your decision-making. For further information contact: COPYRIGHT TERMS OF USE All material on Our Sites are protected by United States and international copyright laws.
Thus, while consumers view current economic conditions more favourably, they do not foresee growth accelerating in the months ahead." The Index now stands at 103.0 1985=100, up from 101.3 in August. On a percentile basis, the latest reading is at the 66% level of all the monthly data points since June 1977. We go over how you can spot the bottom so that you can reap the rewards. The index, which has been volatile in recent months, rebounded in August amid steady employment gains in prior months. Thus, while consumers view current economic conditions more favourably, they do not foresee growth accelerating in the months ahead." Consumer Confidence Increased Moderately in September The Conference Board Consumer Confidence index, which had increased in August, improved moderately in September. It's a universal truth that is painfully apparent in the investing world.
Michael Zimmerman fund hedge fund prentice prentice capital prentice capital management website Zimmerman
Previous Post The Latest Guidance On Crucial Issues In Michael Zimmerman Next Post Some Updated Tips On Crucial Factors In Michael Zimmerman Hedge Fund
A Look At Selecting Primary Elements In Investing
Basic Insights On Speedy Solutions For Business Finance
Selecting Quick Tactics In Stocks
Plain Talking On Uncomplicated Michael Zimmerman Prentice Capital Methods
Most Display Screens For Notebook Computers Have A Vga Resolution Which Is 640x480 Pixels With 16 Or 256 Colors.
Michael Zimmerman
prentice capital
prentice capital management
© 2016 Debby Banning


text:
SIU Medicine in the news
7.10.19. Taylorville Daily News. Dr. Janet Albers, Family Medicine. SIU Center for Family Medicine will open free-standing location in Taylorville.
Medical Students Training with Local Physicians
Family physicians in six Illinois communities are hosting students from Southern Illinois University School of Medicine July 8–August 2. The students are participating in the school's Family Medicine Preceptorship Program.
Cancer survivors: You're invited to become a 2019 Face of Hope
Each October, Simmons Cancer Institute (SCI) at SIU, features a presentation called "Faces of Hope" at the Annual Denim & Diamonds Gala, the institute's primary fundraising event. Photos of approximately 30 cancer survivors flash across the screen to music to raise funds for
10 fireworks safety tips from an emergency medicine physician
Warm weather, barbeques and celebrating our independence is all a part of summer. One of the best parts of the 4th of July is watching the sky light up with a beautiful array of colors, sparkles and shapes.
The 411 about back-to-school physicals
District 186 parents, remember to schedule your kids' back-to-school physicals!
SIU School of Medicine elects new alumni board members
Two new board members have been named to the Alumni Society Board of Governors at Southern Illinois University School of Medicine.
Dr. Susan Hingle's 4 takeaways for new doctors
Written by Susan Hingle, MD, FRCP Associate Dean, Center for Human and Organizational Potential
ENT surgeon named fellow of Triological Society
The American Laryngological, Rhinological and Otological Society, Inc., better known as the Triological Society, has named SIU Medicine surgeon Sandra Ettema, MD, PhD, CCC/SLP, a fellow of its 124-year-old organization.
June Employee of the Month | Melissa Nicol, RD
The June 2019 Employee of the Month is Melissa Nicol, registered detitian in the Department of Clinical Affairs (Maternal Fetal Medicine). Her nominator said


Comments: Lincoln just received the highest score for long-term durability among all vehicle brands in the annual J.D. Power and Associates 2011 Vehicle Dependability Study (VDS). The best part is that it was the Lincoln MKZ that had the second-highest performing model in long-term durability in the entire study. The study asks owners about problems they have experienced in the past 12 months with their three-year-old vehicles, (i.e., for the 2011 study, 2008 model-year cars and trucks were surveyed). Survey respondents were asked to indicate any problems they experienced with their vehicle in the past 12 months, choosing from a list of more than 200 issues in eight diverse categories!!! Please call today for more information about the VDS and to schedule a test drive on a new Lincoln!


Buy Painkiller Complete Pack as a Steam Key.
Problems with Painkiller Complete Pack?
To install and launch Painkiller Complete Pack Demo, you need to have the Steam application installed. Is Steam installed on this computer?


text:
Swiss people to have final say on joining United Nations
The Swiss people are to vote on joining the United Nations. Supporters of a people's initiative have collected well over the necessary 100,000 signatures to force a nationwide vote. UN membership was rejected in a previous vote in 1986.
This content was published on March 6, 2000 - 15:49 March 6, 2000 - 15:49
The head of the initiative committee, Remo Gysin, said the aim of the vote was to end Switzerland's isolation and get it to accept its global responsibilities.
"If Switzerland wants to be effective in development, humanitarian and economic activities, it needs partners," Gysin, a Social Democrat member of parliament told Swiss radio International. "There are 188 partners waiting to welcome us."
Along with the Vatican, Switzerland is the only country not to be a member of the UN.
At a news conference in Berne, the initiative's organisers said fears that they would fail to meet Wednesday's deadline had led to an intensive final spurt, resulting in a total of 125,800 valid signatures. They said they had gathered 70,000 signatures since the New Year. They had 18 months for the campaign.
The organisers added that the effort made to collect the signatures had helped the development of a popular movement for membership of the UN.
But they also noted that the Swiss people's knowledge about the UN was limited, and that a lot of effort would have to be put into informing the public before the referendum is held. The government now has to call a nationwide vote on joining the UN within 39 months.
In 1986, the Swiss overwhelmingly rejected joining the UN in a similar vote. Over 75 per cent of the electorate turned down the proposal. Supporters of the latest initiative are hoping that changes in the world brought about by the end of the Cold War will make the Swiss more sympathetic to UN membership.
"The world has changed," said Patrick Loeb, who managed the initiative campaign. "The Berlin Wall no longer exists. People are increasingly feeling the effects of globalisation and are realising that problems affecting Switzerland can't be solved unilaterally."
Switzerland's non-governmental aid groups have been prominent in the campaign. They say the country doesn't wield the kind of clout its contribution to the UN deseserves.
"We want to have Switzerland participating actively in world politics and in the UN system," said Peter Niggli, head of the Swiss Coalition of Development Groups.
"Already Switzerland is contributing financially as much as if it were a member of the system, but it's not deciding as a member of the system. That's absurd," Niggli told SRI.
Switzerland is home to the European headquarters of the UN, in Geneva, and is also a member of many of the world body's specialised agencies, such as the World Health Organisation and the UN's Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation, Unesco.
From staff and wire reports


text:
Dermanka (în ) este un sat în comuna Ustea din raionul Koreț, regiunea Rivne, Ucraina.

Demografie

Conform recensământului din 2001, majoritatea populației localității Dermanka era vorbitoare de ucraineană (%), existând în minoritate și vorbitori de alte limbi.

Note

Dermanka, Ustea, Koreț, Rivne
Dermanka, Ustea, Koreț, Rivne
Dermanka, Ustea, Koreț, Rivne

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


Met Gala 2017 // Comme des Garçons's Rei Kawakubo // Who Wore What.
There's a lot to be excited about in May – Two bank holidays, pleasant weather (heres hoping), spring/summer wardrobes, my birthday (slipping that one in) and the first Monday of May which sees the annual fundraiser – the Met Gala!
Each year we get to see industry talents from fashion, movies, music and more dress up for the Oscar's of the fashion world. This year's theme was Comme des Garçons's Rei Kawakubo and Vogue editor-in-chief Anna Wintour hosted the event with Pharrell Williams, Gisele Bündchen, Tom Brady and Katy Perry alongside her.
My previous posts have touched on pairing Red with Pink – Many disagree as they think it is too much of a colour clash but I have always believed its a great pairing and stay true to this so whether it is Fashion or Beauty, take a cue from this year's Met Gala – There were more than a handful of celebrities and guests wearing the two colours together!
Zoe Kravitz // Oscar de la Renta – One of my favourite looks of the night, Zoe bought back old-skool glamour with her Blush Pink Gown. The crop bleach-blonde hair levelled out the look giving it a modern touch and showing off her stunning jawline and cheekbones.
Lily Aldridge // Ralph Lauren Gown x Balenciaga Boots – LILY. Oh Lily. Maybe I love this because anyone that pairs Pink with White or Red has my attention. Its striking, vibrant and there's an element of Comme des Garçons with her play on colour and accessories. Then there's the boot of the season and the sass levels that are not overkill. Winner.
Gwyneth Paltrow // Calvin Klein – Apparently Gwyneth gives her team just 45 minutes to get her ready. Thats stylist, make-up, hair and final touches. Gwyneth does minimal best and she proves it here. Zero fuss, this season's Pale Pink, a hint of sheen to fit the occasion and classic Black pointed pump to keep it chic and sharp. Perfect.
Love this post! My favourite was Joan Smalls, wearing bespoke Topshop. Need it in my life!
What a great post, hun! Very well written and presented. Snaps for you! I love Gwyneth Paltrow and Lily Rose Depp's dresses the most! But especially Lily's dress. I love that shade of pink and I adore the fliwer details on it. I also love Taylor Hill and Emma Roberts dresses, too!
It is just as glam and as fab as the Met gala itself! Strike a pose!!
← Most Memorable Met Gala Looks // What you need to know.


Gov. Greg Abbott on Dec. 21 released a statement applauding the U.S. House of Representatives' preliminary passage of $81 billion in disaster aid to Texas, several other states and Puerto Rico.
The U.S. Senate went into recess on Dec. 22 without voting on disaster funding. The recess came after senators passed a continuing resolution to avoid a federal government shutdown for lack of a budget agreement.
Abbott on Dec. 21 announced that the Texas Health and Human Services Commission and the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services reached a hospital funding agreement for the next five years.
"The new 1115 (Demonstration) Waiver ensures that funding will remain available for hospitals to treat and serve people across our state who are in need of top-quality healthcare," Abbott said.
Safety-net hospital administrators cheered the extension.
Section 1115 of the Social Security Act gives the U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services the authority to approve state experimental, pilot or demonstration projects that better serve Medicaid populations.
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, in an opinion released Dec. 21, said licensed handgun owners could carry loaded weapons into Texas churches that do not have posted signs banning weapons.
Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick requested the opinion on Dec. 1, asking Paxton to expedite his response "so that churches may know what legal options they have to improve security" in the aftermath of the Sutherland Springs tragedy, in which a lone gunman entered a church, killing 26 people and injuring 20 others on Nov. 5.
"If a church decides to exclude the concealed or open carrying of handguns on the premises of church property, it may provide the requisite notice, thereby making it an offense for a license holder to carry a handgun on those premises," wrote Paxton.
"However, churches may instead decide not to provide notice and to allow the carrying of handguns on their premises. Unless a church provides effective oral or written notice prohibiting the carrying of handguns on its property, a license holder may carry a handgun onto the premises of church property as the law allows," Paxton added.
The Texas Workforce Commission on Dec. 22 announced the Lone Star State's seasonally adjusted unemployment rate fell to 3.8 percent, the lowest unemployment rate recorded in four decades.
Also, the Texas economy added 54,500 seasonally adjusted nonfarm jobs in November and annual statewide employment growth increased to 2.7 percent in the month of November, marking 91 consecutive months of annual growth.
"The addition of 330,600 jobs over the year demonstrates the consistency with which employers in our state create job opportunities for the highly skilled Texas workforce," said Texas Workforce Commission Chair Andres Alcantar.
Some state agencies are running on archaic programming language dating back to the 1950s, Texas Comptroller Glenn Hegar said.
"Each year, the state spends hundreds of millions of dollars on maintaining these outdated systems, and updating or replacing them would cost even more," he added.
The state spends more than $300 million annually on maintaining older hardware and software that no longer are supported by their makers, according to an estimate made by the Texas Department of Information Resources.
"Fiscal Notes" is available online at comptroller.texas.gov.