Podcasts about European Commission

American officials reacted angrily to a decision by the European Commission to fine X, Elon Musk's social-media platform, €120m ($140m) Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On Dec. 5, the European Commission announced that they are fining X (formerlly Twitter) 120 million euros for impersonation scams with “verification,” broken advertising transpaency system, and blocking researchers from its platform. On a Lawfare Live, Lawfare Senior Editor Kate Klonick and Lawfare Contributing Editor Renee DiResta analyzed the decision, what happens next, and how this fits into the geopolitical struggle over free speech.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Chinese threat actors deploy Brickstorm malware. The critical React2Shell vulnerability is under active exploitation. Cloudflare's emergency patch triggered a brief global outage. Phishing kits pivot to fake e-commerce sites. The European Commission fines X(Twitter) €120 million for violating the Digital Services Act. Predator spyware has a new bag of tricks. A Russian physicist gets 21 years in prison for cybercrimes. Twin brothers are arrested for allegedly stealing and destroying government data. Our guest is Blair Canavan, Director of Alliances - PKI & PQC Portfolio from Thales, discussing post quantum cryptography. Smart toilet encryption claims don't hold water.  Remember to leave us a 5-star rating and review in your favorite podcast app. Miss an episode? Sign-up for our daily intelligence roundup, Daily Briefing, and you'll never miss a beat. And be sure to follow CyberWire Daily on LinkedIn. CyberWire Guest Today on our Industry Voices segment, we are joined by Blair Canavan, Director of Alliances - PKI & PQC Portfolio from Thales, discussing post quantum cryptography (PQC). Listen to Blair's full conversation here. Selected Reading Chinese hackers used Brickworm malware to breach critical US infrastructure (TechRadar) React2Shell critical flaw actively exploited in China-linked attacks (BleepingComputer) Cloudflare blames today's outage on emergency React2Shell patch (Bleeping Computer) SMS Phishers Pivot to Points, Taxes, Fake Retailers (Krebs on Security) Threat Spotlight: Introducing GhostFrame, a new super stealthy phishing kit (Barracuda) EU issues €120 million fine to Elon Musk's X under rules to tackle disinformation  (The Record) Predator spyware uses new infection vector for zero-click attacks (Bleeping Computer) Russian scientist sentenced to 21 years on treason, cyber sabotage charges (The Record) Twins with hacking history charged in insider data breach affecting multiple federal agencies (Cyberscoop) ‘End-to-end encrypted' smart toilet camera is not actually end-to-end encrypted (TechCrunch)- kicker Share your feedback. What do you think about CyberWire Daily? Please take a few minutes to share your thoughts with us by completing our brief listener survey. Thank you for helping us continue to improve our show. Want to hear your company in the show? N2K CyberWire helps you reach the industry's most influential leaders and operators, while building visibility, authority, and connectivity across the cybersecurity community. Learn more at sponsor.thecyberwire.com. The CyberWire is a production of N2K Networks, your source for strategic workforce intelligence. © N2K Networks, Inc. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The European Commission put forward a controversial plan to fund Ukraine by raising up to €210bn ($245bn) backed by frozen Russian state assets. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The European Commission is unveiling a plan to future-proof what it calls “quality jobs,” as many firms look to ramp up the role of AI in their businesses. Roxana Minzatu, Executive Vice-President of the European Commission with responsibility for social rights, skills and jobs, joined Stephen Carroll on Bloomberg Radio to discuss the plan and how to balance it with businesses’ desire to remain competitive.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The European Commission has unveiled plans to provide €90 billion to support Ukraine over the next two years, by either using frozen Russian assets or borrowing money on international markets. Although the EU has already been using interest earned on Russian central bank assets held up in Europe to help Ukraine, Belgium is firmly against tapping into the actual funds. But first, the EU has presented a new strategy to reduce its dependence on China for rare earths. 

The President of the European Commission, Ursula Von Der Leyen, has set out revised plans to use frozen Russian assets to loan money to Ukraine. Meanwhile, a German arms manufacturer invests in a drone manufacturing plant in Swindon to boost Europe's defence. Also on the programme, Somali Americans in Minnesota react to president Trump's attack on their community; and the chance discovery of one of the world's largest species of octopus in Aberdeenshire.

Adam Woods, Deputy Editor with the Irish Farmers Journal, discusses European Commission recall of frozen beef from Brazil due to presence of suspected banned hormones.

On my podcast, we talk a lot about coexistence with large carnivores and the challenges it poses. Some of those challenges might seem insurmountable to some. To shed some light on overcoming these hurdles, I contacted Helen Arusoo, an Estonian nature journalist and the leader of the National Animal Working Group. In this conversation, we talk about how Estonia overcame these hurdles and created something that I would consider the gold standard of coexistence with large carnivores.Unsurprisingly, the majority of our time was spent discussing wolves as they seem to be the most difficult carnivore species to coexist with, at least in the northern hemisphere. However, we did discuss other large carnivores like bears too. Our conversation focused mostly on social and cultural factors. We also touched on the European Commission's proposal to lower the protection status of wolves, something we've discussed extensively in one of the previous episodes.It was a wonderful conversation and I enjoyed speaking with Helen. Her profound understanding of the challenges of coexistence is impressive. She presented a deeply thought-out perspective and I can only wish that more people who care about wolves could learn from her experience and the Estonian model of coexistence with large carnivores.Subscribe to Tommy's Outdoors: Conservation and Science NewsletterSupport the Podcast and Buy Me a Coffee.Recommended Books: tommysoutdoors.com/booksMerch: tommysoutdoors.com/shopFollow Tommy's Outdoors on Bluesky, Twitter, Instagram, YouTube and FacebookMentioned in this episode:This is the Conservation and Science podcast Replay series, a curated collection of best episodes from last year. If you are new to the show, this is an excellent opportunity to catch up with the most popular episodes from the back catalogue. And if you're a regular listener, maybe you missed one of those or want to listen to one of them again. Don't worry! The new episodes are being published on the regular fortnightly schedule, so keep tuning in for the new content every other Tuesday.

Allen covers the debate over Chinese wind turbines in Europe, from data security concerns and unfair subsidies to the risk of trading one energy dependency for another. Sign up now for Uptime Tech News, our weekly email update on all things wind technology. This episode is sponsored by Weather Guard Lightning Tech. Learn more about Weather Guard’s StrikeTape Wind Turbine LPS retrofit. Follow the show on Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, Linkedin and visit Weather Guard on the web. And subscribe to Rosemary Barnes’ YouTube channel here. Have a question we can answer on the show? Email us! Wind energy is one of Europe’s great strengths. Providing twenty percent of European electricity today. Over half by 2050. That’s the plan. Competitive. Homegrown. Quick to build. Almost every wind turbine spinning in Europe today was made in Europe. By European companies. Assembled in European factories. Hundreds of factories across the continent make components for wind turbines. Over Four hundred thousand Europeans punch the clock in wind energy. Every new turbine generates sixteen million euros of economic activity. And this week, proof of that investment. In Germany, the He Dreiht offshore wind farm just sent its first power into the grid. Nine hundred sixty megawatts. Germany’s largest offshore wind farm. VESTAS turbines standing one hundred forty-two meters tall. Sixty-four turbines total. All commissioned by summer 2026. NILS DE BAAR of VESTAS said the fifteen megawatt turbine sets new standards in offshore wind power. European technology. European manufacturing. European energy. In Ireland, more European investment. SSE and FUTURENERGY IRELAND tapped NORDEX to build the Wind Farm in County Donegal. Twelve turbines. Sixty megawatts. One hundred thirty-eight million dollars. Forty thousand Irish homes powered when those blades turn in 2027. And in Scotland and Italy, floating wind is consolidating. NADARA is acquiring BLUEFLOAT ENERGY’s stake in ten floating offshore projects. BROADSHORE. BELLROCK. SINCLAIR. SCARABEN. Nearly three gigawatts of floating wind now under single European ownership. Today’s wind farms save Europe one hundred billion cubic meters of gas imports every year. In Britain alone, consumers saved one hundred four billion pounds between 2010 and 2023. That’s after factoring in the cost of building the wind farms. Wind means lower energy bills. Wind means independence. But here comes the temptation. Chinese turbines are cheaper. Much cheaper. And in times of strained budgets and rising costs… That’s hard to ignore. GILES DICKSON is the CEO of WINDEUROPE. He says… Think about what you’re buying. The European Commission launched an inquiry last year. They suspect Chinese manufacturers offer prices and payment terms backed by unfair government subsidies. European manufacturers can’t legally offer the same deferred payment deals. OECD rules won’t allow it. Then there’s energy security. Europe just weaned itself off Russian gas. Painfully. Expensively. Three years later, high energy prices still drag on the economy. Does Europe want another dangerous dependency? This time on imported equipment instead of imported fuel? And as Giles points out – a modern wind turbine has hundreds of sensors. Hundreds. Gathering performance data. Monitoring operations. European law prohibits exporting that data to China. But Chinese law allows Beijing to require Chinese companies to send data home from overseas operations. There’s a contradiction. Someone’s going to break the law. And those sensors? They don’t just collect data. They can control equipment. The European Union and NATO are voicing concerns. The wind industry has invested over fourteen billion euros in new and expanded European factories in just the last two years. That’s commitment. That’s confidence. And the rest of the world is taking notice. In Japan, FAIRWIND just signed a strategic partnership with WIND ENERGY PARTNERS in YOKOHAMA. MATT CROSSAN, FAIRWIND’s Asia Pacific Director, said Japan’s wind sector is still young compared to Europe. But government support and investment are driving expansion. They want European expertise. European experience. European standards. Wind energy is the last strategic clean tech sector with a truly European footprint. The last one. Solar panels. Batteries. Electric vehicles. Those have already migrated elsewhere. But Wind remains. For now. Four hundred forty thousand workers. Two hundred fifty factories. Fourteen billion euros in new investment. One hundred billion cubic meters of gas imports avoided every year. Germany’s largest offshore wind farm now feeding the grid. Ireland building new capacity. Scotland consolidating floating wind. Japan seeking European partners. Europe can buy cheaper today. Or build stronger tomorrow. GILES DICKSON is sounding the alarm. But, will Europe listen? That's the wind industry news on the 1st of December 2025.

What is the future of MDR?In this episode of the mnemonic security podcast, Robby is joined by Migjen Hakaj from mnemonic's Innovation & Emerging Technologies Department and Amine Besson, wearing many hats including Detection Engineering & Threat Hunting SIG Chair at FIRST, Detection Engineering Tech Lead at the European Commission, and Threat Detection & Response Expert at the EU CyberNet.They've joined forces by collecting their shared extensive experience with security monitoring, and published a popular three-part blog series on what Managed Detection and Response (MDR) really is on a deep level, where they examine the past, present, and future challenges within the field.In their conversation they talk about the evolution of the SOC space, what main forms of security operations they are seeing today, and why they believe the SOC needs to change.They also explain why it's hard to define what MDR really is today, the main value proposition of MDR providers, and what the next big differentiators for MDR providers will be. As well as in what ways they've seen that the industry has matured over the last few years, where the industry needs radical change, and where AI SOC has a place and where its main challenges lie.Interested in more? Visit their blog series:The Present and Future of Managed Detection and Response: https://detect.fyi/the-present-and-future-of-managed-detection-and-response-01a72088e6f6The missing link in MDR. Spoiler, it starts with a Detection Engineering framework: https://detect.fyi/the-missing-link-in-mdr-spoiler-it-starts-with-a-detection-engineering-framework-5f836347c92fBeyond Detections : Scaling Analysis & Response to keep MDR relevant: https://detect.fyi/beyond-detections-scaling-analysis-response-to-keep-mdr-relevant-592285d0fd25Send us a text

The European Commission's publication of their recommendation on “Increasing the Availability of Savings and Investment Accounts with Simplified and Advantageous Tax Treatment” on September 30th marks an important milestone on the EU Savings and Investment Union journey. As a leading European funds and asset management centre, Ireland has a key role to play in this significant development in the European asset management industry – but a roadmap will be necessary if the potential of this initiative is to be realised. This event discusses the practical steps – and challenges – in establishing Savings and Investment Accounts across the 27 member states of the EU and the important role of the Irish funds and asset management industry in this step-change in EU savings and investment culture. This event features a keynote address from John Berrigan, Director General of DG FISMA. The event also includes a panel discussion including John Berrigan as well as: Seán Páircéir, Partner and Global Head of Investor Services at Brown Brothers Harriman Jonathan Cleborne, Head of Europe at Vanguard Susan O'Reilly, Head of Funds, Markets and Securities, Financial Services Division - Department of Finance. Dr Orlaigh Quinn, (Moderator), Former Secretary General of the Department of Enterprise Trade and Employmen

I am Rolf Claessen and together with my co-host Ken Suzan I am welcoming you to episode 169 of our podcast IP Fridays! Today's interview guest is Prof. Aloys Hüttermann, co-founder of my patent law firm Michalski Hüttermann & Partner and a true expert on the Unified Patent Court. He has written several books about the new system and we talk about all the things that plaintiffs and defendants can learn from the first decisions of the court and what they mean for strategic decisions of the parties involved. But before we jump into this very interesting interview, I have news for you! The US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is planning rule changes that would make it virtually impossible for third parties to challenge invalid patents before the patent office. Criticism has come from the EFF and other inventor rights advocates: the new rules would play into the hands of so-called non-practicing entities (NPEs), as those attacked would have few cost-effective ways to have questionable patents deleted. The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) reports a new record in international patent applications: in 2024, around 3.7 million patent applications were filed worldwide – an increase of 4.9% over the previous year. The main drivers were Asian countries (China alone accounted for 1.8 million), while demand for trademark protection has stabilized after the pandemic decline. US rapper Eminem is taking legal action in Australia against a company that sells swimwear under the name “Swim Shady.” He believes this infringes on his famous “Slim Shady” brand. The case illustrates that even humorous allusions to well-known brand names can lead to legal conflicts. A new ruling by the Unified Patent Court (UPC) demonstrates its cross-border impact. In “Fujifilm v. Kodak,” the local chamber in Mannheim issued an injunction that extends to the UK despite Brexit. The UPC confirmed its jurisdiction over the UK parts of a European patent, as the defendant Kodak is based in a UPC member state. A dispute over standard patents is looming at the EU level: the Legal Affairs Committee (JURI) of the European Parliament voted to take the European Commission to the European Court of Justice. The reason for this is the Commission’s controversial withdrawal of a draft regulation on the licensing of standard-essential patents (SEPs). Parliament President Roberta Metsola is to decide by mid-November whether to file the lawsuit. In trademark law, USPTO Director Squires reported on October 31, 2025, that a new unit (“Trademark Registration Protection Office”) had removed approximately 61,000 invalid trademark applications from the registries. This cleanup of the backlog relieved the examining authority and accelerated the processing of legitimate applications. Now let's jump into the interview with Aloys Hüttermann: The Unified Patent Court Comes of Age – Insights from Prof. Aloys Hüttermann The Unified Patent Court (UPC) has moved from a long-discussed project to a living, breathing court system that already shapes patent enforcement in Europe. In a recent IP Fridays interview, Prof. Aloys Hüttermann – founder and equity partner at Michalski · Hüttermann & Partner and one of the earliest commentators on the UPC – shared his experiences from the first years of practice, as well as his view on how the UPC fits into the global patent litigation landscape. This article summarises the key points of that conversation and is meant as an accessible overview for in-house counsel, patent attorneys and business leaders who want to understand what the UPC means for their strategy. How Prof. Hüttermann Became “Mr. UPC” Prof. Hüttermann has been closely involved with the UPC for more than a decade. When it became clear, around 13 years ago, that the European project of a unified patent court and a unitary patent was finally going to happen, he recognised that this would fundamentally change patent enforcement in Europe. He started to follow the legislative and political developments in detail and went beyond mere observation. As author and editor of several books and a major commentary on the UPC, he helped shape the discussion around the new system. His first book on the UPC appeared in 2016 – years before the court finally opened its doors in 2023. What fascinated him from the beginning was the unique opportunity to witness the creation of an entirely new court system, to analyse how it would be built and, where possible, to contribute to its understanding and development. It was clear to him that this system would be a “game changer” for European patent enforcement. UPC in the Global Triangle: Europe, the US and China In practice, most international patent disputes revolve around three major regions: the UPC territory in Europe, the United States and China. Each of these regions has its own procedural culture, cost structure and strategic impact. From a territorial perspective, the UPC is particularly attractive because it can, under the right conditions, grant pan-European injunctions that cover a broad range of EU Member States with a single decision. This consolidation of enforcement is something national courts in Europe simply cannot offer. From a cost perspective, the UPC is significantly cheaper than US litigation, especially if one compares the cost of one UPC action with a bundle of separate national cases in large European markets. When viewed against the territorial reach and procedural speed, the “bang for the buck” is very compelling. China is again a different story. The sheer volume of cases there is enormous, with tens of thousands of patent infringement cases per year. Chinese courts are known for their speed; first-instance decisions within about a year are common. In this respect they resemble the UPC more than the US does. The UPC also aims at a roughly 12 to 15 month time frame for first-instance cases where validity is at issue. The US, by contrast, features extensive discovery, occasionally jury trials and often longer timelines. The procedural culture is very different. The UPC, like Chinese courts, operates without discovery in the US sense, which makes proceedings more focused on the written record and expert evidence that the parties present, and less on pre-trial disclosure battles. Whether a company chooses to litigate in the US, the UPC, China, or some combination of these forums will depend on where the key markets and assets are. However, in Prof. Hüttermann's view, once Europe is an important market, it is hard to justify ignoring the UPC. He expects the court's caseload and influence to grow strongly over the coming years. A Landmark UPC Case: Syngenta v. Sumitomo A particularly important case in which Prof. Hüttermann was involved is the Syngenta v. Sumitomo matter, concerning a composition patent. This case has become a landmark in UPC practice for several reasons. First, the Court of Appeal clarified a central point about the reach of UPC injunctions. It made clear that once infringement is established in one Member State, this will usually be sufficient to justify a pan-European injunction covering all UPC countries designated by the patent. That confirmation gave patent owners confidence that the UPC can in fact deliver broad, cross-border relief in one go. Second, the facts of the case raised novel issues about evidence and territorial reach. The allegedly infringing product had been analysed based on a sample from the Czech Republic, which is not part of the UPC system. Later, the same product with the same name was marketed in Bulgaria, which is within UPC territory. The Court of Appeal held that the earlier analysis of the Czech sample could be relied on for enforcement in Bulgaria. This showed that evidence from outside the UPC territory can be sufficient, as long as it is properly linked to the products marketed within the UPC. Third, the Court of Appeal took the opportunity to state its view on inventive step. It confirmed that combining prior-art documents requires a “pointer”, in line with the EPO's problem-solution approach. The mere theoretical possibility of extracting a certain piece of information from a document does not suffice to justify an inventive-step attack. This is one of several decisions where the UPC has shown a strong alignment with EPO case law on substantive patentability. For Prof. Hüttermann personally, the case was also a lesson in oral advocacy before the UPC. During the two appeal hearings, the presiding judge asked unexpected questions that required quick and creative responses while the hearing continued. His practical takeaway is that parties should appear with a small, well-coordinated team: large enough to allow someone to work on a tricky question in the background, but small enough to remain agile. Two or three lawyers seem ideal; beyond that, coordination becomes difficult and “too many cooks spoil the broth”. A Game-Changing CJEU Decision: Bosch Siemens Hausgeräte v. Electrolux Surprisingly, one of the most important developments for European patent litigation in the past year did not come from the UPC at all, but from the Court of Justice of the European Union. In Bosch Siemens Hausgeräte v. Electrolux, the CJEU revisited the rules on cross-border jurisdiction under the Brussels I Recast Regulation (Brussels Ia). Previously, under what practitioners often referred to as the GAT/LuK regime, a court in one EU country was largely prevented from granting relief for alleged infringement in another country if the validity of the foreign patent was contested there. This significantly limited the possibilities for cross-border injunctions. In Bosch, the CJEU changed course. Without going into all procedural details, the essence is that courts in the EU now have broader powers to grant cross-border relief when certain conditions are met, particularly when at least one defendant is domiciled in the forum state. The concept of an “anchor defendant” plays a central role: if you sue one group company in its home forum, other group companies in other countries, including outside the EU, can be drawn into the case. This has already had practical consequences. German courts, for example, have issued pan-European injunctions covering around twenty countries in pharmaceutical cases. There are even attempts to sue European companies for infringement of US patents based on acts in the US, using the logic of Bosch as a starting point. How far courts will ultimately go remains to be seen, but the potential is enormous. For the UPC, this development is highly relevant. The UPC operates in the same jurisdictional environment as national courts, and many defendants in UPC cases will be domiciled in UPC countries. This increases the likelihood that the UPC, too, can leverage the broadened possibilities for cross-border relief. In addition, we have already seen UPC decisions that include non-EU countries such as the UK within the scope of injunctions, in certain constellations. The interaction between UPC practice and the Bosch jurisprudence of the CJEU is only beginning to unfold. Does the UPC Follow EPO Case Law? A key concern for many patent owners and practitioners is whether the UPC will follow the EPO's Boards of Appeal or develop its own, possibly divergent, case law on validity. On procedural matters, the UPC is naturally different from the EPO. It has its own rules of procedure, its own timelines and its own tools, such as “front-loaded” pleadings and tight limits on late-filed material. On substantive law, however, Prof. Hüttermann's conclusion is clear: there is “nothing new under the sun”. The UPC's approach to novelty, inventive step and added matter is very close to that of the EPO. The famous “gold standard” for added matter appears frequently in UPC decisions. Intermediate generalisations are treated with the same suspicion as at the EPO. In at least one case, the UPC revoked a patent for added matter even though the EPO had granted it in exactly that form. The alignment is not accidental. The UPC only deals with European patents granted by the EPO; it does not hear cases on purely national patents. If the UPC were more generous than the EPO, many patents would never reach it. If it were systematically stricter, patentees would be more tempted to opt out of the system. In practice, the UPC tends to apply the EPO's standards and, where anything differs, it is usually a matter of factual appreciation rather than a different legal test. For practitioners, this has a very practical implication: if you want to predict how the UPC will decide on validity, the best starting point is to ask how the EPO would analyse the case. The UPC may not always reach the same result in parallel EPO opposition proceedings, but the conceptual framework is largely the same. Trends in UPC Practice: PIs, Equivalents and Division-Specific Styles Even in its early years, certain trends and differences between UPC divisions can be observed. On preliminary injunctions, the local division in Düsseldorf has taken a particularly proactive role. It has been responsible for most of the ex parte PIs granted so far and applies a rather strict notion of urgency, often considering one month after knowledge of the infringement as still acceptable, but treating longer delays with scepticism. Other divisions tend to see two months as still compatible with urgency, and they are much more cautious with ex parte measures. Munich, by contrast, has indicated a strong preference for inter partes PI proceedings and appears reluctant to grant ex parte relief at all. A judge from Munich has even described the main action as the “fast” procedure and the inter partes PI as the “very fast” one, leaving little room for an even faster ex parte track. There are also differences in how divisions handle amendments and auxiliary requests in PI proceedings. Munich has suggested that if a patentee needs to rely on claim amendments or auxiliary requests in a PI, the request is unlikely to succeed. Other divisions have been more open to considering auxiliary requests. The doctrine of equivalents is another area where practice is not yet harmonised. The Hague division has explicitly applied a test taken from Dutch law in at least one case and found infringement by equivalence. However, the Court of Appeal has not yet endorsed a specific test, and in another recent Hague case the same division did not apply that Dutch-law test again. The Mannheim division has openly called for the development of an autonomous, pan-European equivalence test, but has not yet fixed such a test in a concrete decision. This is clearly an area to watch. Interim conferences are commonly used in most divisions to clarify issues early on, but Düsseldorf often dispenses with them to save time. In practice, interim conferences can be very helpful for narrowing down the issues, though parties should not expect to be able to predict the final decision from what is discussed there. Sometimes topics that dominate the interim conference play little or no role in the main oral hearing. A Front-Loaded System and Typical Strategic Mistakes UPC proceedings are highly front-loaded and very fast. A defendant usually has three months from service of the statement of claim to file a full statement of defence and any counterclaim for revocation. This is manageable, but only if the time is used wisely. One common strategic problem is that parties lose time at the beginning and only develop a clear strategy late in the three-month period. According to Prof. Hüttermann, it is crucial to have a firm strategy within the first two or three weeks and then execute it consistently. Constantly changing direction is a recipe for failure in such a compressed system. Another characteristic is the strict attitude towards late-filed material. It is difficult to introduce new documents or new inventive-step attacks later in the procedure. In some cases even alternative combinations of already-filed prior-art documents have been viewed as “new” attacks and rejected as late. At the appeal stage, the Court of Appeal has even considered new arguments based on different parts of a book already in the file as potentially late-filed. This does not mean that parties should flood the court with dozens of alternative attacks in the initial brief. In one revocation action, a plaintiff filed about fifty different inventive-step attacks, only to be told by the court that this was not acceptable and that the attacks had to be reduced and structured. The UPC is not a body conducting ex officio examination. It is entitled to manage the case actively and to ask parties to focus on the most relevant issues. Evidence Gathering, Protective Letters and the Defendant's Perspective The UPC provides powerful tools for both sides. Evidence inspection is becoming more common, not only at trade fairs but also at company premises. This can be a valuable tool for patentees, but it also poses a serious risk for defendants who may suddenly face court-ordered inspections. From the perspective of potential defendants, protective letters are an important instrument, especially in divisions like Düsseldorf where ex parte PIs are possible. A well-written protective letter, filed in advance, can significantly reduce the risk of a surprise injunction. The court fees are moderate, but the content of the protective letter must be carefully prepared; a poor submission can cause more harm than good. Despite the strong tools available to patentees, Prof. Hüttermann does not view the UPC as unfair to defendants. If a defendant files a solid revocation counterclaim, the pressure shifts to the patentee, who then has only two months to reply, prepare all auxiliary requests and adapt the enforcement strategy. This is even more demanding than at the EPO, because the patentee must not only respond to validity attacks but also ensure that any amended claims still capture the allegedly infringing product. It is entirely possible to secure the survival of a patent with an auxiliary request that no longer covers the defendant's product. In that scenario, the patentee has “won” on validity but lost the infringement case. Managing this tension under tight time limits is a key challenge of UPC practice. The Future Role of the UPC and How to Prepare Today the UPC hears a few hundred cases per year, compared with several thousand patent cases in the US and tens of thousands in China. Nevertheless, both the court itself and experienced practitioners see significant growth potential. Prof. Hüttermann expects case numbers to multiply in the medium term. Whether the UPC will become the first choice forum in global disputes or remain one pillar in parallel proceedings alongside the US and China will depend on the strategies of large patentees and the evolution of case law. However, the court is well equipped: it covers a large, economically important territory, is comparatively cost-effective and offers fast procedures with robust remedies. For companies that may end up before the UPC, preparation is essential. On the offensive side, that means building strong evidence and legal arguments before filing, being ready to proceed quickly and structured, and understanding the specific styles of the relevant divisions. On the defensive side, it may mean filing protective letters in risk-exposed markets, preparing internal processes for rapid reaction if a statement of claim arrives, and taking inspection requests seriously. Conclusion The Unified Patent Court has quickly moved from theory to practice. It offers pan-European relief, fast and front-loaded procedures, and a substantive approach that closely mirrors the EPO's case law. At the same time, national and EU-level developments like the Bosch Siemens Hausgeräte v. Electrolux decision are reshaping the jurisdictional framework in which the UPC operates, opening the door for far-reaching cross-border injunctions. For patent owners and potential defendants alike, the message is clear: the UPC is here to stay and will become more important year by year. Those who invest the time to understand its dynamics now – including its alignment with the EPO, the differences between divisions, and the strategic implications of its procedures – will be in a much better position when the first UPC dispute lands on their desk. Here is the full transcript of the interview: Rolf Claessen:Today's interview guest is Prof. Aloys Hüttermann. He is founder and equity partner of my firm, Michalski · Hüttermann & Partner. More importantly for today's interview, he has written several books about the Unified Patent Court. The first one already came out in 2016. He is co-editor and author of one of the leading commentaries on the UPC and has gained substantial experience in UPC cases so far – one of them even together with me. Thank you very much for being on IP Fridays again, Aloys. Aloys Hüttermann:Thank you for inviting me, it's an honour. How did you get so deeply involved in the UPC? Rolf Claessen:Before we dive into the details, how did you end up so deeply involved in the Unified Patent Court? And what personally fascinates you about this court? Aloys Hüttermann:This goes back quite a while – roughly 13 years. At that time it became clear that, after several failed attempts, Europe would really get a pan-European court and a pan-European patent, and that this time it was serious. I thought: this is going to be the future. That interested me a lot, both intellectually and practically. A completely new system was being built. You could watch how it evolved – and, if possible, even help shape it a bit. It was also obvious to me that this would be a complete game changer. Nobody expected that it would take until 2023 before the system actually started operating, but now it is here. I became heavily interested early on. As you mentioned, my first book on the UPC was published in 2016, in the expectation that the system would start soon. It took a bit longer, but now we finally have it. UPC vs. US and China – speed, cost and impact Rolf Claessen:Before we go deeper into the UPC, let's zoom out. If you compare litigation before the UPC with patent litigation in the US and in China – in terms of speed, cost and the impact of decisions – what are the key differences that a business leader should understand? Aloys Hüttermann:If you look at the three big regions – the UPC territory in Europe, the US and China – these are the major economic areas for many technology companies. One important point is territorial reach. In the UPC, if the conditions are met, you can get pan-European injunctions that cover many EU Member States in one go. We will talk about this later in more detail. On costs there is a huge difference between the US and the UPC. The UPC is much cheaper than US litigation, especially once you look at the number of countries you can cover with one case if the patent has been validated widely. China is different again. The number of patent infringement cases there is enormous. I have seen statistics of around 40,000 infringement cases per year in China. That is huge – compared with roughly 164 UPC infringement cases in the first year and maybe around 200 in the current year. On speed, Chinese courts are known to be very fast. You often get a first-instance decision in about a year. The UPC is comparable: if there is a counterclaim for revocation, you are looking at something like 12 to 15 months for a first-instance decision. The US can be slower, and the procedure is very different. You have full discovery, you may have juries. None of that exists at the UPC. From that perspective, Chinese and UPC proceedings are more similar to each other than either is to the US. The UPC is still a young court. We have to see how influential its case law will be worldwide in the long run. What we already see, at least in Germany, is a clear trend away from purely national patent litigation and towards the UPC. That is inside Europe. The global impact will develop over time. When is the UPC the most powerful tool? Rolf Claessen:Let's take the perspective of a global company. It has significant sales in Europe and in the US and production or key suppliers in China. In which situations would you say the UPC is your most powerful tool? And when might the US or China be the more strategic battleground? Aloys Hüttermann:To be honest, I would almost always consider bringing a case before the UPC. The “bang for the buck” is very good. The UPC is rather fast. That alone already gives you leverage in negotiations. The threat of a quick, wide-reaching injunction is a strong negotiation tool. Whether you litigate in the US instead of the UPC, or in addition, or whether you also go to China – that depends heavily on the individual case: where the products are sold, where the key markets are, where the defendant has assets, and so on. But in my view, once you have substantial sales in Europe, you should seriously consider the UPC. And for that reason alone I expect case numbers at the UPC to increase significantly in the coming years. A landmark UPC case: Syngenta vs. Sumitomo (composition patent) Rolf Claessen:You have already been involved in several UPC cases – and one of them together with me, which was great fun. Looking at the last 12 to 18 months, is there a case, decision or development that you find particularly noteworthy – something that really changed how you think about UPC litigation or how companies should prepare? Aloys Hüttermann:The most important UPC case I have been involved in so far is the Syngenta v. Sumitomo case on a composition patent. It has become a real landmark and was even mentioned in the UPC's annual report. It is important for several reasons. First, it was one of the first cases in which the Court of Appeal said very clearly: if you have established infringement in one Member State, that will usually be enough for a pan-European injunction covering all UPC countries designated by the patent. That is a powerful statement about the reach of UPC relief. Second, the facts were interesting. The patent concerned a composition. We had analysed a sample that had been obtained in the Czech Republic, which is not a UPC country. Later, the same product was marketed under the same name in Bulgaria, which is in the UPC. The question was whether the analysis of the Czech sample could be used as a basis for enforcement in Bulgaria. The Court of Appeal said yes, that was sufficient. Third, the Court of Appeal took the opportunity to say something about inventive step. It more or less confirmed that the UPC's approach is very close to the EPO's problem-solution approach. It emphasised that, if you want to combine prior-art documents, you need a “pointer” to do so. The mere theoretical possibility that a skilled person could dig a particular piece of information out of a document is not enough. For me personally, the most memorable aspect of this case was not the outcome – that was largely in line with what we had expected – but the oral hearings at the appeal stage. We had two hearings. In both, the presiding judge asked us a question that we had not anticipated at all. And then you have about 20 minutes to come up with a convincing answer while the hearing continues. We managed it, but it made me think a lot about how you should prepare for oral hearings at the UPC. My conclusion is: you should go in with a team, but not too big. In German we say, “Zu viele Köche verderben den Brei” – too many cooks spoil the broth. Two or three people seems ideal. One of them can work quietly on such a surprise question at the side, while the others continue arguing the case. In the end the case went very well for us, so I can speak about it quite calmly now. But in the moment your heart rate definitely goes up. The CJEU's Bosch Siemens Hausgeräte v. Electrolux decision – a real game changer Rolf Claessen:You also mentioned another development that is not even a UPC case, but still very important for European patent litigation. Aloys Hüttermann:Yes. In my view, the most important case of the last twelve months is not a UPC decision but a judgment of the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU): Bosch Siemens Hausgeräte v. Electrolux. This is going to be a real game changer for European IP law, and I am sure we have not seen the end of its effects yet. One example: someone has recently sued BMW before the Landgericht München I, a German court, for infringement of a US patent based on acts in the US. The argument is that this could be backed by the logic of Bosch Siemens Hausgeräte v. Electrolux. We do not know yet what the court will do with that, but the fact that people are trying this shows how far-reaching the decision might be. Within the UPC we have already seen injunctions being issued for countries outside the UPC territory and even outside the EU, for example including the UK. So you see how these developments start to interact. Rolf Claessen:For listeners who have not followed the case so closely: in very simple terms, the CJEU opened the door for courts in one EU country to rule on patent infringement that took place in other countries as well, right? Aloys Hüttermann:Exactly. Before Bosch Siemens Hausgeräte v. Electrolux we had what was often called the GAT/LuK regime. The basic idea was: if you sue someone in, say, Germany for infringement of a European patent, and you also ask for an injunction for France, and the defendant then challenges the validity of the patent in France, the German court cannot grant you an injunction covering France. The Bosch decision changed that. The legal basis is the Brussels I Recast Regulation (Brussels Ia), which deals with jurisdiction in civil and commercial matters in the EU. It is not specific to IP; it applies to civil cases generally, but it does have some provisions that are relevant for patents. In Bosch, a Swedish court asked the CJEU for guidance on cross-border injunctions. The CJEU more or less overturned its old GAT/LuK case law. Now, in principle, if the defendant is domiciled in a particular Member State, the courts of that state can also grant cross-border relief for other countries, under certain conditions. We will not go into all the details here – that could fill a whole separate IP Fridays episode – but one important concept is the “anchor defendant”. If you sue a group of companies and at least one defendant is domiciled in the forum state, then other group companies in other countries – even outside the EU, for example in Hong Kong – can be drawn into the case and affected by the decision. This is not limited to the UPC, but of course it is highly relevant for UPC litigation. Statistically it increases the chances that at least one defendant will be domiciled in a UPC country, simply because there are many of them. And we have already seen courts like the Landgericht München I grant pan-European injunctions for around 20 countries in a pharmaceutical case. Rolf Claessen:Just to clarify: does it have to be the headquarters of the defendant in that country, or is any registered office enough? Aloys Hüttermann:That is one of the open points. If the headquarters are in Europe, then it is clear that subsidiaries outside Europe can be affected as well. If the group's headquarters are outside Europe and only a subsidiary is here, the situation is less clear and we will have to see what the courts make of it. Does the UPC follow EPO case law? Rolf Claessen:Many patent owners and in-house counsel wonder: does the UPC largely follow the case law of the EPO Boards of Appeal, or is it starting to develop its own distinct line? What is your impression so far – both on substantive issues like novelty and inventive step, and on procedural questions? Aloys Hüttermann:On procedure the UPC is, of course, very different. It has its own procedural rules and they are not the same as at the EPO. If we look at patent validity, however, my impression is that there is “nothing new under the sun” – that was the title of a recent talk I gave and will give again in Hamburg. Substantively, the case law of the UPC and the EPO is very similar. For inventive step, people sometimes say the UPC does not use the classical problem-solution approach but a more “holistic” approach – whatever that is supposed to mean. In practice, in both systems you read and interpret prior-art documents and decide what they really disclose. In my view, the “error bar” that comes from two courts simply reading a document slightly differently is much larger than any systematic difference in legal approach. If you look at other grounds, such as novelty and added matter, the UPC even follows the EPO almost verbatim. The famous “gold standard” for added matter appears all over UPC decisions, even if the EPO case numbers are not always cited. The same is true for novelty. So the rule-based, almost “Hilbertian” EPO approach is very much present at the UPC. There is also a structural reason for that. All patents that the UPC currently deals with have been granted by the EPO. The UPC does not handle patents granted only by national offices. If the UPC wanted to deviate from EPO case law and be more generous, then many patents would never reach the UPC in the first place. The most generous approach you can have is the one used by the granting authority – the EPO. So if the UPC wants to be different, it can only be stricter, not more lenient. And there is little incentive to be systematically stricter, because that would reduce the number of patents that are attractive to enforce before the UPC. Patent owners might simply opt out. Rolf Claessen:We also talked about added matter and a recent case where the Court of Appeal was even stricter than the EPO. That probably gives US patent practitioners a massive headache. They already struggle with added-matter rules in Europe, and now the UPC might be even tougher. Aloys Hüttermann:Yes, especially on added matter. I once spoke with a US practitioner who said, “We hope the UPC will move away from intermediate generalisations.” There is no chance of that. We already have cases where the Court of Appeal confirmed that intermediate generalisations are not allowed, in full alignment with the EPO. You mentioned a recent case where a patent was revoked for added matter, even though it had been granted by the EPO in exactly that form. This shows quite nicely what to expect. If you want to predict how the UPC will handle a revocation action, the best starting point is to ask: “What would the EPO do?” Of course, there will still be cases where the UPC finds an invention to be inventive while the EPO, in parallel opposition proceedings, does not – or vice versa. But those are differences in the appreciation of the facts and the prior art, which you will always have. The underlying legal approach is essentially the same. Rolf Claessen:So you do not see a real example yet where the UPC has taken a totally different route from the EPO on validity? Aloys Hüttermann:No, not really. If I had to estimate how the UPC will decide, I would always start from what I think the EPO would have done. Trends in UPC practice: PIs, equivalents, interim conferences Rolf Claessen:If you look across the different UPC divisions and cases: what trends do you see in practice? For example regarding timelines, preliminary injunctions, how validity attacks are handled, and how UPC cases interact with EPO oppositions or national proceedings? Aloys Hüttermann:If you take the most active divisions – essentially the big four in Germany and the local division in The Hague – they all try to be very careful and diligent in their decisions. But you can already see some differences in practice. For preliminary injunctions there is a clear distinction between the local division in Düsseldorf and most other divisions. Düsseldorf considers one month after knowledge of the infringement as still sufficiently urgent. If you wait longer, it is usually considered too late. In many other divisions, two months is still viewed as fine. Düsseldorf has also been the division that issued most of the ex parte preliminary injunctions so far. Apart from one special outlier where a standing judge from Brussels was temporarily sitting in Milan, Düsseldorf is basically the only one. Other divisions have been much more reluctant. At a conference, Judge Pichlmaier from the Munich division once said that he could hardly imagine a situation where his division would grant an ex parte PI. In his words, the UPC has two types of procedure: one that is fast – the normal main action – and one that is very fast – the inter partes PI procedure. But you do not really have an “ultra-fast” ex parte track, at least not in his division. Another difference relates to amendments and auxiliary requests in PI proceedings. In one recent case in Munich the court said more or less that if you have to amend your patent or rely on auxiliary requests in a PI, you lose. Other divisions have been more flexible and have allowed auxiliary requests. Equivalence is another area where we do not have a unified line yet. So far, only the Hague division has clearly found infringement under the doctrine of equivalents and explicitly used a test taken from Dutch law. Whether that test will be approved by the Court of Appeal is completely open – the first case settled, so the Court of Appeal never ruled on it, and a second one is still very recent. Interestingly, there was another Hague decision a few weeks ago where equivalence was on the table, but the division did not apply that Dutch-law test. We do not know yet why. The Mannheim division has written in one decision that it would be desirable to develop an autonomous pan-European test for equivalence, instead of just importing the German, UK or Dutch criteria. But they did not formulate such a test in that case because it was not necessary for the decision. So we will have to see how that evolves. On timelines, one practical difference is that Düsseldorf usually does not hold an interim conference. That saves them some time. Most other divisions do hold interim conferences. Personally, I like the idea because it can help clarify issues. But you cannot safely read the final outcome from these conferences. I have also seen cases where questions raised at the interim conference did not play any role in the main oral hearing. So they are useful for clarification, but not as a crystal ball. Front-loaded proceedings and typical strategic mistakes Rolf Claessen:If you look at the behaviour of parties so far – both patentees and defendants – what are the most common strategic mistakes you see in UPC litigation? And what would a well-prepared company do differently before the first statement of claim is ever filed? Aloys Hüttermann:You know you do not really want me to answer that question… Rolf Claessen:I do! Aloys Hüttermann:All right. The biggest mistake, of course, is that they do not hire me. That is the main problem. Seriously, it is difficult to judge parties' behaviour from the outside. You rarely know the full picture. There may be national proceedings, licensing discussions, settlement talks, and so on in the background. That can limit what a party can do at the UPC. So instead of criticising, I prefer to say what is a good idea at the UPC. The system is very front-loaded and very fast. If you are sued, you have three months to file your statement of defence and your counterclaim for revocation. In my view, three months are manageable – but only if you use the time wisely and do not waste it on things that are not essential. If you receive a statement of claim, you have to act immediately. You should have a clear strategy within maybe two or three weeks and then implement it. If you change your strategy every few weeks, chances are high that you will fail. Another point is that everything is front-loaded. It is very hard to introduce new documents or new attacks later. Some divisions have been a bit generous in individual cases, but the general line is strict. We have seen, for example, that even if you filed a book in first instance, you may not be allowed to rely on a different chapter from the same book for a new inventive-step attack at the appeal stage. That can be regarded as late-filed, because you could have done it earlier. There is also case law saying that if you first argue inventive step as “D1 plus D2”, and later want to argue “D2 plus D1”, that can already be considered a new, late attack. On the other hand, we had a revocation action where the plaintiff filed about 50 different inventive-step attacks in the initial brief. The division then said: this does not work. Please cut them down or put them in a clear hierarchy. In the end, not all of them were considered. The UPC does not conduct an ex officio examination. It is entitled to manage the case and to tell the parties to limit themselves in the interest of a fair and efficient procedure. Rolf Claessen:I have the feeling that the EPO is also becoming more front-loaded – if you want to rely on documents later, you should file them early. But it sounds like the UPC is even more extreme in that regard. Aloys Hüttermann:Yes, that is true. Protective letters, inspections and the defendant's perspective Rolf Claessen:Suppose someone from a company is listening now and thinks: “We might be exposed at the UPC,” or, “We should maybe use the UPC offensively against competitors.” What would you consider sensible first steps before any concrete dispute arises? And looking three to five years ahead, how central do you expect the UPC to become in global patent litigation compared to the US and China? Aloys Hüttermann:Let me start with the second part. I expect the UPC to become significantly more important. If we have around 200 cases this year, that is a good start, but it is still very small compared to, say, 4,000 to 5,000 patent cases per year in the US and 40,000 or so in China. Even François Bürgin and Klaus Grabinski, in interviews, have said that they are happy with the case load, but the potential is much larger. In my view, it is almost inevitable that we will see four or five times as many UPC cases in the not-too-distant future. As numbers grow, the influence of the UPC will grow as well. Whether, in five or ten years, companies will treat the UPC as their first choice forum – or whether they will usually run it in parallel with US litigation in major disputes – remains to be seen. The UPC would be well equipped for that: the territory it covers is large, Europe is still an important economy, and the UPC procedure is very attractive from a company's perspective. On sensible first steps: if you are worried about being sued, a protective letter can make a lot of sense – especially in divisions like Düsseldorf, where ex parte PIs are possible in principle. A protective letter is not very expensive in terms of court fees. There is also an internal system that ensures the court reads it before deciding on urgent measures. Of course, the content must have a certain quality; a poor protective letter can even backfire. If you are planning to sue someone before the UPC, you should be extremely well prepared when you file. You should already have all important documents and evidence at hand. As we discussed, it is hard to introduce new material later. One tool that is becoming more and more popular is inspection – not just at trade fairs, where we already saw cases very early, but also at company premises. Our firm has already handled such an inspection case. That is something you should keep in mind on both sides: it is a powerful evidence-gathering tool, but also a serious risk if you are on the receiving end. From the defendant's perspective, I do not think the UPC is unfair. If you do your job properly and put a solid revocation counterclaim on the table, then the patentee has only two months to prepare a full reply and all auxiliary requests. And there is a twist that makes life even harder for the patentee than at the EPO. At the EPO the question is mainly: do my auxiliary requests overcome the objections and are they patentable? At the UPC there is an additional layer: do I still have infringement under the amended claims? You may save your patent with an auxiliary request that no longer reads on the defendant's product. That is great for validity, but you have just lost the infringement case. You have kept the patent but lost the battle. And all of this under very tight time limits. That creates considerable pressure on both sides. How to contact Prof. Hüttermann Rolf Claessen:Thank you very much for this really great interview, Aloys. Inside our firm you have a nickname: “the walking encyclopedia of the Unified Patent Court” – because you have written so many books about it and have dealt with the UPC for such a long time. What is the best way for listeners to get in touch with you? Aloys Hüttermann:The easiest way is by email. You can simply write to me, and that is usually the best way to contact me. As you may have noticed, I also like to speak. I am a frequent speaker at conferences. If you happen to be at one of the conferences where I am on the programme – for example, next week in Hamburg – feel free to come up to me and ask me anything in person. But email is probably the most reliable first step. Rolf Claessen:Perfect. Thank you very much, Aloys. Aloys Hüttermann:Thank you. It was a pleasure to be on IP Fridays again. Some of your long-time listeners may remember that a few years ago – when you were not yet part of our firm – we already did an episode on the UPC, back when everything was still very speculative. It is great to be back now that the system is actually in place and working. Rolf Claessen:I am very happy to have you back on the show.

A top European Commission official has accused the United States of attempting to blackmail the European Union into concessions on tech rules.

In this episode of the MadTech podcast, Anna Bager, CEO of the Out of Home Advertising Association of America (OAAA), joins ExchangeWire head of marketing Grainne Reid and COO Lindsay Rowntree to discuss key shifts in programmatic out-of-home and industry consolidation. They look at the OAAA's Programmatic OOH Transparency Pledge, the growth of the global out-of-home advertising market, and the European Commission's unconditional approval of the Omnicon-IPG acquisition.

Michael McGrath has said the European Commission has recommended to extend the nitrates derogation for Ireland. The Nitrates Directive is an EU law for farms that puts limits on the amount of fertiliser including slurry that farmers can use on their land, and effectively the number of livestock that they can have, to protect water from pollution by agriculture.ie.We debate this with Elaine McGoff, Head of Advocacy at An Taisce and also Ciaran Mullooly, Independent Ireland MEP.

It hasn't been a Good Week for the climate since, er, 1820-something? And it wasn't last week, either. But it is a good week for The Europeans, because we're joined by Luisa Neubauer, one of Germany's best-known climate activists. Luisa recently wrote a terrific piece for The Economist about Europe's climate “vibe shift”. We got her insights on what has caused the greenlash and what we ought to be doing about it. It's a thoughtful, self-reflective, heartening conversation we think you'll enjoy.    We're also talking about Brussels' proposed “military Schengen” agreement, which would allow EU member states to move troops and equipment across borders relatively swiftly. (You don't want to know how sluggish things are now.) And we're taking a look at Slovenia's troubling new “Šutar Law”, a security bill that is widely understood to target the Roma minority.   In other news… The Europeans are launching a newsletter! If you want to hear more about what happened in Europe over the past week and find out what we left on the podcast-cutting-room floor, subscribe to GOOD WEEK BAD WEEK over on Substack. New issues hit inboxes on Friday mornings.   And someone else has a new newsletter, too. Our very own Katy Lee has just published the first issue of Millefeuille, an English-language newsletter “for Parisians who are bad at local news”. If you fall in the middle of the Europeans podcast–Francophile Venn diagram, subscribe here.   This week's Inspiration Station recommendations are two newly resurfaced works by Johann Sebastian Bach (here and here) and Carlo Rovelli's book about the physics of time, The Order of Time.  And if you, too, are in the market for a novella to help you knock out your 2025 reading goals, Dominic likes Claire Keegan's Small Things Like These.    Other resources for this episode:   “The surreal 45-day trek at the heart of Nato's defence” - Financial Times, 17 November, 2025  “Commission moves towards ‘Military Schengen' and transformation of defence industry” - European Commission press release, 19 November, 2025  “Why you probably should not re-gauge railways in Europe” - Jon Worth, 30 September, 2025 “Slovenia's ‘Šutar Law' Sets a Dangerous Precedent for Europe” - Roma Foundation for Europe, 18 November, 2025 “Romani Activists Fear Collective Punishment & Discrimination as Slovenia Passes New Security Bill" - European Roma Rights Centre, 7 November, 2025   This podcast was brought to you in cooperation with Euranet Plus, the leading radio network for EU news. But it's contributions from listeners that truly make it all possible—we could not continue to make the show without you! If you like what we do, you can chip in to help us cover our production costs at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠patreon.com/europeanspodcast⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ (in many different currencies), or you can gift a donation to a superfan. We'd also love it if you could tell two friends about this podcast. We think two feels like a reasonable number. Produced by Morgan Childs  Editorial support from Katz Laszlo Mixing and mastering by Wojciech Oleksiak Music by Jim Barne and Mariska Martina   YouTube | Bluesky | Instagram⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ | Mastodon⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ | Substack | hello@europeanspodcast.com

Michael McGrath, European Commissioner for Democracy, Justice, the Rule of Law and Consumer Protection, outlines his key targets ahead of his appearance before the Oireachtas EU Affairs Committee later today.

This week we are talking to Adela Buliman from Vially here in Ireland. Adela is the Chief Accessibility Officer and what she doesn't know about the European Accessibility Act, isn't worth knowing about! So, roll up your sleeves, Mohammed, and get ready to rumble! Disclaimer: this chat is more of a girlie pillow fight than a "pistols at dawn" kinda thing, but we enjoyed it! Jan was home alone at Sight Village, London recently, and he has all the juicy tech news to share, including a new Braille note-taker from HumanWare.  The biggest news this episode is that the guys have been working hard on a new email jingle for Clodagh – what do you think? Is it down with the kids? Send us your reviews to BlindGuysChat@gmail.com. Clodagh has an email from Nina in Canada, who wants to know about independent travel. Mohammed can answer this one as he is an expert solo traveller.  So, pull out that list of all your inaccessible gadgets and settle in for the number 1 podcast this side of a 365-day-old Christmas tree: Blind Guys Chat. 16 out of 20 European Commission lawyers prefer it to laying down the law!  Links mentioned in this show: HumanWare, Braille note Evolve: humanware.com/en-ireland/braillenote-evolve/ WeWalk cane: wewalk.io Vially: vially.io/ Competition and Consumer Protection Commission: ccpc.ie ICT regulation document EN 301 549: https://tinyurl.com/ITregDoc National Transport Authority: nationaltransport.ie Irish Aviation Authority: www.iaa.ie Support Blind Guys Chat by contributing to their tip jar: https://tips.pinecast.com/jar/blind-guys-chatRead transcript

This episode of 'The New Abnormal' podcast features Jonathan Barth: Founder, Think-Tanker, Brussels Expert and Author of the forthcoming book #EscapingCollapse. His passion is to illuminate how Europe needs to respond to the geopolitical turn and make our institutions ready for a security and climate-disrupted world, with particular focus on financial, fiscal, industrial and energy policy.As a think tanker with various affiliations Jonathan maintains and works with a comprehensive network of high-level public officials and policy stakeholders in Brussels and Berlin; including the European Commission, the German government, governmental agencies, and international organisations such as the UN and the OECD.He's a Senior Fellow at the Jacques Delors Institute, Exec Chair of the Board at Geostrategic Europe, Co-founder and Senior Fellow at the ZOE Institute for Future-fit Economies, and Senior Strategic Advisor at the We Mean Business Coalition.Jonathan is a deeply informed individual, and I found the discussion (which also included an overview of his book, which blends the psychology of grief and economics) to be fascinating. I hope you do too!

On this Ropes & Gray podcast, Michael Littenberg, corporate partner and global head of the firm's ESG, CSR & Business and Human Rights compliance practice, and asset management partner Eve Ellis break down the European Commission's proposed SFDR 2.0 revisions. They discuss new product labels, streamlined disclosure requirements, and the removal of certain compliance pain points. The episode explores operational implications for asset managers, cross-border challenges, and the impact on fund strategies, offering practical advice for navigating the evolving EU ESG regulatory landscape and preparing for upcoming changes.

My guest on this episode of the podcast is Mikołaj Barczentewicz, a professor of law at the University of Surrey and the author of EU Tech Reg, a blog dedicated to following developments in the EU regulatory machinery. In this episode, Mikołaj and I discuss the digital omnibus package that was recently proposed by the European Commission and which aims to reform and simplify, among many other things, the GDPR. A draft version of the digital omnibus had been leaked a few weeks before we spoke, but we waited until the formal version was unveiled by the EC to record this podcast.Among other things, we cover:The genesis of the Digital Omnibus package: why was it proposed in the first place, and what it aims to achieve;The specific changes to the GDPR proposed in the package;The scope of the opposition to GDPR reform;The implications of digital omnibus reforms on the EU's domestic AI industry;Whether any genuine progress been made against the recommendations made by last year's Draghi report;The current status of Pay or Okay in the EU and in the UK;Whether the DMA might be softened in response to pressure from the Trump administration.Thanks to the sponsors of this week's episode of the Mobile Dev Memo podcast:⁠Xsolla⁠. With the Xsolla Web Shop, you can create a direct storefront, cut fees down to as low as 5%, and keep players engaged with bundles, rewards, and analytics.⁠INCRMNTAL⁠⁠⁠. True attribution measures incrementality, always on.⁠Universal Ads⁠ is Comcast's self-serve TV ads platform that lets you launch campaigns in minutes across premium inventory from NBC, Paramount, Warner Bros. Discovery, Roku, and more.Interested in sponsoring the Mobile Dev Memo podcast? Contact ⁠⁠Marketecture⁠⁠.The Mobile Dev Memo podcast is available on:Apple PodcastsSpotify

Speaker: Professor Catherine Malecki (University of Rennes)Even in the context of the future EU Omnibus Package and the EU Directive n°2025/794 of 14 April 2025 'Stop-the-Clock', Companies and there directors must face an increasing climate litigation and this change cannot go back 20 years of progress in Sustainable Corporate Governance which is on the way on both sides of the Atlantic Ocean and in Asia. Indeed, the European Commission has been releasing innovative and often complex regulations at a breakneck speed since 2018 (CSRD, CS3D, Taxonomy, to name a few) and it would be inconceivable to come back to 2001 at the time of the first European Recommendation on CSR and to ignore the EU Green Deal of 2019.Directors have to take into account negatives externalities and stringent obligations such as the Transition Plans. Even if the the next generation of sustainable board directors is well aware of Climate risks, several questions may arise : is there a need to reshape the board despite the EU Directive WoB Women in board of 23 November 2022? What about the pressure of the Stakeholders and the pressure of the Sustainable Strategy ? In France, in the wake of the Due Diligence Law of 27 March 2017, climate litigation is also increasing (for example TotalEnergies, CA Paris, 18 June 2024) and France was the first State Member for having implemented the CSRD in December 2023. Didn't all this happen too quickly ? Can we stop European time when tackling Climate change is rather a race against time? La Fontaine famous fable " the Hare and the Tortoise" is full of wisdom.Biography: Catherine Malecki is Professor of Private Law Rennes 2 University France and Member of the IUF (Institut universitaire de France) Fundamental Chair.For more information see the Centre for Corporate and Commercial Law website:http://www.3cl.law.cam.ac.uk/

This week, the European Commission unveiled a sweeping plan to overhaul how the EU enforces its digital and privacy rules as part of a ‘Digital Omnibus,' aiming to ease compliance burdens and speed up implementation of the bloc's landmark laws. Branded as a “simplification” initiative, the omnibus proposal touches core areas of EU tech regulation — notably the AI Act and the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).The Commission argues that this update is necessary to ensure practical implementation of the laws, but civil society organizations see the proposed reform as the “biggest rollback of digital fundamental rights in EU history.”At the same time, leaders are talking loudly about digital sovereignty — including at last week's summit in Berlin. But with the Omnibus appearing to weaken protections and tilt power toward large tech firms, what kind of sovereignty is actually being built?Tech Policy Press associate editor Ramsha Jahangir spoke to two experts to understand what the EU is trying to achieve:Leevi Saari, EU Policy Fellow at AI Now InstituteJulia Smakman, Senior Researcher at the Ada Lovelace Institute

The European Commission triggered a political meltdown this week with proposals to loosen some of the EU's landmark digital regulations. The package, announced on Wednesday as part of a push to boost European innovation, drew condemnation from privacy advocates and lawmakers who accuse the Commission of capitulating to pressure from Washington and Big Tech.

In this episode, we start by discussing Greg's trip to India and the upcoming India AI Impact Summit in February 2026 (00:29). We then unpack the Trump Administration's draft executive order to preempt state AI laws (07:46) and break down the European Commission's new “digital omnibus” package, including proposed adjustments to the AI Act and broader regulatory simplification efforts (17:51). Finally, we discuss Anthropic's report on a China-backed “highly sophisticated cyber espionage campaign" using Claude and the mixed reactions from cybersecurity and AI policy experts (37:37).

On this bonus episode of Top in Tech, Megan Stagman, Director in our Tech, Media and Telecoms (TMT) team, is joined by Divya Singh, Senior Associate and Gosia Szczodrowska, Associate Director, both in our TMT team in Brussels, to discuss the European Commission's Digital Omnibus proposals, the Digital Sovereignty Declaration and their wider implications for Europe's digital policymaking. Megan, Divya and Gosia outline how the package seeks to simplify the EU's digital rulebook - especially on data governance, cybersecurity, and AI. They explore political tensions around privacy, competitiveness, and reflect on whether these developments marks a genuine step toward European digital autonomy. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Late-stage financing plays a critical role in the growth trajectory of technology scale-ups, particularly as they transition from early innovation phases to market dominance and potential exits via IPOs or acquisitions. Larger capital injections can be found from multiple avenues; VCs, private equity, corporate investors, family offices, sovereign wealth funds and growth-focused hedge funds. While the volume of capital to European growth stage companies since 2015 has tripled, there is still a funding gap and bottlenecks in Europe compared to the US.In this episode three experts discuss Europe's growth stage tech landscape, the funding available, challenges ahead and what is needed to build more billion dollar companies in Europe. They are Luca Ferrari, Co-Founder & CEO of Bending Spoons, Hilary Gosher, Managing Director at Insight Partners and Tommaso Fassati, Head of Wealth Management Italy at BNP Paribas.Sources: FT Resources, Atomico, Roland Berger, Anthropic, European Commission, Semiconductor Industry Association, Korn FerryThis content is paid for by BNP Paribas and is produced in partnership with the Financial Times' Commercial Department. The views and claims expressed are those of the guests alone and have not been independently verified by The Financial Times. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Transcript of the interview Minna Salami is a writer, social critic, and thought leader on feminism, knowledge production, and the aesthetics and structures of power. She formerly served as Programme Chair and Senior Fellow at THE NEW INSTITUTE, where she led the Black Feminism and the Polycrisis programme. Her work sits at the intersection of ideas, culture, and systems thinking, with a commitment to making complex theories accessible through books, essays, public speaking, and creative projects. She is the author of Can Feminism Be African? (Harper Collins, 2025) and Sensuous Knowledge: A Black Feminist Approach for Everyone (Bloomsbury, 2020), which has been translated into multiple languages. Her writing also appears in numerous anthologies and educational publications exploring feminism, African philosophy, media, and cultural criticism. Her work has featured in The Guardian, The Financial Times, The Ideas Letter, Project Syndicate, and The Philosopher, and she has delivered talks at global institutions including TEDx, the Institute of Arts and Ideas, the European Commission, the Oxford and Cambridge Unions, Yale, and Singularity University at NASA. Salami was the creative director of the short film Black Feminism and the Polycrisis, which won the Silver Award for Public Service and Activism at the 2024 Lovie Awards. From 2019 to 2022, she co-directed Activate, an intersectional feminist movement that supported minoritised women in politics and community organising through visibility campaigns, mentoring, and fundraising. The initiative played a key role in shifting narratives and resources toward a more inclusive political landscape in the UK. She has also worked as a Research Associate and Editor at Perspectiva, advised governments on gender equality, developed national school curricula, and curated cultural events at institutions such as the Victoria & Albert Museum in London. Her blog, MsAfropolitan, launched in 2010, has reached over a million readers and remains a platform for exploring feminist and African-centred approaches to contemporary life. Salami is a Full Member of the Club of Rome, a BMW Foundation Responsible Leader, and serves on the advisory boards of the African Feminist Initiative at Penn State University and Public Humanities at Cambridge University Press, as well as the council of the British Royal Institute of Philosophy. Links to References:Apart Together – essay on Leopold Senghor and Aimé Césaire's radical vision for the world Africa's Populist Trap for The Ideas Letter The Niger River and the Dearth of History: Deconstructing the Myths of Mungo Park by Ezenwa E. Olumba Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Transcript of the interview Minna Salami is a writer, social critic, and thought leader on feminism, knowledge production, and the aesthetics and structures of power. She formerly served as Programme Chair and Senior Fellow at THE NEW INSTITUTE, where she led the Black Feminism and the Polycrisis programme. Her work sits at the intersection of ideas, culture, and systems thinking, with a commitment to making complex theories accessible through books, essays, public speaking, and creative projects. She is the author of Can Feminism Be African? (Harper Collins, 2025) and Sensuous Knowledge: A Black Feminist Approach for Everyone (Bloomsbury, 2020), which has been translated into multiple languages. Her writing also appears in numerous anthologies and educational publications exploring feminism, African philosophy, media, and cultural criticism. Her work has featured in The Guardian, The Financial Times, The Ideas Letter, Project Syndicate, and The Philosopher, and she has delivered talks at global institutions including TEDx, the Institute of Arts and Ideas, the European Commission, the Oxford and Cambridge Unions, Yale, and Singularity University at NASA. Salami was the creative director of the short film Black Feminism and the Polycrisis, which won the Silver Award for Public Service and Activism at the 2024 Lovie Awards. From 2019 to 2022, she co-directed Activate, an intersectional feminist movement that supported minoritised women in politics and community organising through visibility campaigns, mentoring, and fundraising. The initiative played a key role in shifting narratives and resources toward a more inclusive political landscape in the UK. She has also worked as a Research Associate and Editor at Perspectiva, advised governments on gender equality, developed national school curricula, and curated cultural events at institutions such as the Victoria & Albert Museum in London. Her blog, MsAfropolitan, launched in 2010, has reached over a million readers and remains a platform for exploring feminist and African-centred approaches to contemporary life. Salami is a Full Member of the Club of Rome, a BMW Foundation Responsible Leader, and serves on the advisory boards of the African Feminist Initiative at Penn State University and Public Humanities at Cambridge University Press, as well as the council of the British Royal Institute of Philosophy. Links to References:Apart Together – essay on Leopold Senghor and Aimé Césaire's radical vision for the world Africa's Populist Trap for The Ideas Letter The Niger River and the Dearth of History: Deconstructing the Myths of Mungo Park by Ezenwa E. Olumba Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/gender-studies

Anu Talus was elected Chair of the European Data Protection Board in May of 2023. The EDPB, which was established in 2018, ensures that the EU General Data Protection Regulation and Data Protection Law Enforcement Directive are consistently applied in the EU. It also provides general GDPR guidance, adopts findings to ensure the GDPR is implemented consistently across member nations, advises the European Commission on data protection matters, and encourages DPAs to work together.    In other words, leading the EDPB is no small task, especially in an increasingly complex digital marketplace during the dawn of the AI Era. While here in Brussels, IAPP Editorial Director Jedidiah Bracy sat down with Chair Talus during an especially significant week in EU data protection on the eve of the release of the EU's Digital Omnibus package, which proposes to amend parts of the GDPR and other EU digital regulations.    In this wide-ranging conversation, Bracy and Talus discuss the EDPB's priorities and work in these transformative times. 

Transcript of the interview Minna Salami is a writer, social critic, and thought leader on feminism, knowledge production, and the aesthetics and structures of power. She formerly served as Programme Chair and Senior Fellow at THE NEW INSTITUTE, where she led the Black Feminism and the Polycrisis programme. Her work sits at the intersection of ideas, culture, and systems thinking, with a commitment to making complex theories accessible through books, essays, public speaking, and creative projects. She is the author of Can Feminism Be African? (Harper Collins, 2025) and Sensuous Knowledge: A Black Feminist Approach for Everyone (Bloomsbury, 2020), which has been translated into multiple languages. Her writing also appears in numerous anthologies and educational publications exploring feminism, African philosophy, media, and cultural criticism. Her work has featured in The Guardian, The Financial Times, The Ideas Letter, Project Syndicate, and The Philosopher, and she has delivered talks at global institutions including TEDx, the Institute of Arts and Ideas, the European Commission, the Oxford and Cambridge Unions, Yale, and Singularity University at NASA. Salami was the creative director of the short film Black Feminism and the Polycrisis, which won the Silver Award for Public Service and Activism at the 2024 Lovie Awards. From 2019 to 2022, she co-directed Activate, an intersectional feminist movement that supported minoritised women in politics and community organising through visibility campaigns, mentoring, and fundraising. The initiative played a key role in shifting narratives and resources toward a more inclusive political landscape in the UK. She has also worked as a Research Associate and Editor at Perspectiva, advised governments on gender equality, developed national school curricula, and curated cultural events at institutions such as the Victoria & Albert Museum in London. Her blog, MsAfropolitan, launched in 2010, has reached over a million readers and remains a platform for exploring feminist and African-centred approaches to contemporary life. Salami is a Full Member of the Club of Rome, a BMW Foundation Responsible Leader, and serves on the advisory boards of the African Feminist Initiative at Penn State University and Public Humanities at Cambridge University Press, as well as the council of the British Royal Institute of Philosophy. Links to References:Apart Together – essay on Leopold Senghor and Aimé Césaire's radical vision for the world Africa's Populist Trap for The Ideas Letter The Niger River and the Dearth of History: Deconstructing the Myths of Mungo Park by Ezenwa E. Olumba Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/political-science

Transcript of the interview Minna Salami is a writer, social critic, and thought leader on feminism, knowledge production, and the aesthetics and structures of power. She formerly served as Programme Chair and Senior Fellow at THE NEW INSTITUTE, where she led the Black Feminism and the Polycrisis programme. Her work sits at the intersection of ideas, culture, and systems thinking, with a commitment to making complex theories accessible through books, essays, public speaking, and creative projects. She is the author of Can Feminism Be African? (Harper Collins, 2025) and Sensuous Knowledge: A Black Feminist Approach for Everyone (Bloomsbury, 2020), which has been translated into multiple languages. Her writing also appears in numerous anthologies and educational publications exploring feminism, African philosophy, media, and cultural criticism. Her work has featured in The Guardian, The Financial Times, The Ideas Letter, Project Syndicate, and The Philosopher, and she has delivered talks at global institutions including TEDx, the Institute of Arts and Ideas, the European Commission, the Oxford and Cambridge Unions, Yale, and Singularity University at NASA. Salami was the creative director of the short film Black Feminism and the Polycrisis, which won the Silver Award for Public Service and Activism at the 2024 Lovie Awards. From 2019 to 2022, she co-directed Activate, an intersectional feminist movement that supported minoritised women in politics and community organising through visibility campaigns, mentoring, and fundraising. The initiative played a key role in shifting narratives and resources toward a more inclusive political landscape in the UK. She has also worked as a Research Associate and Editor at Perspectiva, advised governments on gender equality, developed national school curricula, and curated cultural events at institutions such as the Victoria & Albert Museum in London. Her blog, MsAfropolitan, launched in 2010, has reached over a million readers and remains a platform for exploring feminist and African-centred approaches to contemporary life. Salami is a Full Member of the Club of Rome, a BMW Foundation Responsible Leader, and serves on the advisory boards of the African Feminist Initiative at Penn State University and Public Humanities at Cambridge University Press, as well as the council of the British Royal Institute of Philosophy. Links to References:Apart Together – essay on Leopold Senghor and Aimé Césaire's radical vision for the world Africa's Populist Trap for The Ideas Letter The Niger River and the Dearth of History: Deconstructing the Myths of Mungo Park by Ezenwa E. Olumba Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/critical-theory

Transcript of the interview Minna Salami is a writer, social critic, and thought leader on feminism, knowledge production, and the aesthetics and structures of power. She formerly served as Programme Chair and Senior Fellow at THE NEW INSTITUTE, where she led the Black Feminism and the Polycrisis programme. Her work sits at the intersection of ideas, culture, and systems thinking, with a commitment to making complex theories accessible through books, essays, public speaking, and creative projects. She is the author of Can Feminism Be African? (Harper Collins, 2025) and Sensuous Knowledge: A Black Feminist Approach for Everyone (Bloomsbury, 2020), which has been translated into multiple languages. Her writing also appears in numerous anthologies and educational publications exploring feminism, African philosophy, media, and cultural criticism. Her work has featured in The Guardian, The Financial Times, The Ideas Letter, Project Syndicate, and The Philosopher, and she has delivered talks at global institutions including TEDx, the Institute of Arts and Ideas, the European Commission, the Oxford and Cambridge Unions, Yale, and Singularity University at NASA. Salami was the creative director of the short film Black Feminism and the Polycrisis, which won the Silver Award for Public Service and Activism at the 2024 Lovie Awards. From 2019 to 2022, she co-directed Activate, an intersectional feminist movement that supported minoritised women in politics and community organising through visibility campaigns, mentoring, and fundraising. The initiative played a key role in shifting narratives and resources toward a more inclusive political landscape in the UK. She has also worked as a Research Associate and Editor at Perspectiva, advised governments on gender equality, developed national school curricula, and curated cultural events at institutions such as the Victoria & Albert Museum in London. Her blog, MsAfropolitan, launched in 2010, has reached over a million readers and remains a platform for exploring feminist and African-centred approaches to contemporary life. Salami is a Full Member of the Club of Rome, a BMW Foundation Responsible Leader, and serves on the advisory boards of the African Feminist Initiative at Penn State University and Public Humanities at Cambridge University Press, as well as the council of the British Royal Institute of Philosophy. Links to References:Apart Together – essay on Leopold Senghor and Aimé Césaire's radical vision for the world Africa's Populist Trap for The Ideas Letter The Niger River and the Dearth of History: Deconstructing the Myths of Mungo Park by Ezenwa E. Olumba Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/world-affairs

Transcript of the interview Minna Salami is a writer, social critic, and thought leader on feminism, knowledge production, and the aesthetics and structures of power. She formerly served as Programme Chair and Senior Fellow at THE NEW INSTITUTE, where she led the Black Feminism and the Polycrisis programme. Her work sits at the intersection of ideas, culture, and systems thinking, with a commitment to making complex theories accessible through books, essays, public speaking, and creative projects. She is the author of Can Feminism Be African? (Harper Collins, 2025) and Sensuous Knowledge: A Black Feminist Approach for Everyone (Bloomsbury, 2020), which has been translated into multiple languages. Her writing also appears in numerous anthologies and educational publications exploring feminism, African philosophy, media, and cultural criticism. Her work has featured in The Guardian, The Financial Times, The Ideas Letter, Project Syndicate, and The Philosopher, and she has delivered talks at global institutions including TEDx, the Institute of Arts and Ideas, the European Commission, the Oxford and Cambridge Unions, Yale, and Singularity University at NASA. Salami was the creative director of the short film Black Feminism and the Polycrisis, which won the Silver Award for Public Service and Activism at the 2024 Lovie Awards. From 2019 to 2022, she co-directed Activate, an intersectional feminist movement that supported minoritised women in politics and community organising through visibility campaigns, mentoring, and fundraising. The initiative played a key role in shifting narratives and resources toward a more inclusive political landscape in the UK. She has also worked as a Research Associate and Editor at Perspectiva, advised governments on gender equality, developed national school curricula, and curated cultural events at institutions such as the Victoria & Albert Museum in London. Her blog, MsAfropolitan, launched in 2010, has reached over a million readers and remains a platform for exploring feminist and African-centred approaches to contemporary life. Salami is a Full Member of the Club of Rome, a BMW Foundation Responsible Leader, and serves on the advisory boards of the African Feminist Initiative at Penn State University and Public Humanities at Cambridge University Press, as well as the council of the British Royal Institute of Philosophy. Links to References:Apart Together – essay on Leopold Senghor and Aimé Césaire's radical vision for the world Africa's Populist Trap for The Ideas Letter The Niger River and the Dearth of History: Deconstructing the Myths of Mungo Park by Ezenwa E. Olumba Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/african-studies

-Spotify has unveiled an upcoming interactive feature called SongDNA designed to show you the samples, collaborators and covers included in a given track, the company announced. As part of that update, Spotify also revealed that it has acquired WhoSampled, the company behind the SongDNA technology. -Google is rolling out an update to Maps that brings some new tools to the table, including the ability to check on EV charger availability. The app already showed the location of EV chargers, but not if they were available or not. In other words, it was entirely possible to roll up to a charging station only to find a line of EVs waiting for juice. -European policymakers have proposed sweeping changes to the way the EU regulates the tech industry. In just the last few months, the likes of Meta and Google have questioned strict EU policies relating to privacy and AI expansion, but if the European Commission's new package of proposals are passed, a number of big tech roadblocks will be removed. Or at least lifted up a bit. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Transcript of the interview Minna Salami is a writer, social critic, and thought leader on feminism, knowledge production, and the aesthetics and structures of power. She formerly served as Programme Chair and Senior Fellow at THE NEW INSTITUTE, where she led the Black Feminism and the Polycrisis programme. Her work sits at the intersection of ideas, culture, and systems thinking, with a commitment to making complex theories accessible through books, essays, public speaking, and creative projects. She is the author of Can Feminism Be African? (Harper Collins, 2025) and Sensuous Knowledge: A Black Feminist Approach for Everyone (Bloomsbury, 2020), which has been translated into multiple languages. Her writing also appears in numerous anthologies and educational publications exploring feminism, African philosophy, media, and cultural criticism. Her work has featured in The Guardian, The Financial Times, The Ideas Letter, Project Syndicate, and The Philosopher, and she has delivered talks at global institutions including TEDx, the Institute of Arts and Ideas, the European Commission, the Oxford and Cambridge Unions, Yale, and Singularity University at NASA. Salami was the creative director of the short film Black Feminism and the Polycrisis, which won the Silver Award for Public Service and Activism at the 2024 Lovie Awards. From 2019 to 2022, she co-directed Activate, an intersectional feminist movement that supported minoritised women in politics and community organising through visibility campaigns, mentoring, and fundraising. The initiative played a key role in shifting narratives and resources toward a more inclusive political landscape in the UK. She has also worked as a Research Associate and Editor at Perspectiva, advised governments on gender equality, developed national school curricula, and curated cultural events at institutions such as the Victoria & Albert Museum in London. Her blog, MsAfropolitan, launched in 2010, has reached over a million readers and remains a platform for exploring feminist and African-centred approaches to contemporary life. Salami is a Full Member of the Club of Rome, a BMW Foundation Responsible Leader, and serves on the advisory boards of the African Feminist Initiative at Penn State University and Public Humanities at Cambridge University Press, as well as the council of the British Royal Institute of Philosophy. Links to References:Apart Together – essay on Leopold Senghor and Aimé Césaire's radical vision for the world Africa's Populist Trap for The Ideas Letter The Niger River and the Dearth of History: Deconstructing the Myths of Mungo Park by Ezenwa E. Olumba Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Transcript of the interview Minna Salami is a writer, social critic, and thought leader on feminism, knowledge production, and the aesthetics and structures of power. She formerly served as Programme Chair and Senior Fellow at THE NEW INSTITUTE, where she led the Black Feminism and the Polycrisis programme. Her work sits at the intersection of ideas, culture, and systems thinking, with a commitment to making complex theories accessible through books, essays, public speaking, and creative projects. She is the author of Can Feminism Be African? (Harper Collins, 2025) and Sensuous Knowledge: A Black Feminist Approach for Everyone (Bloomsbury, 2020), which has been translated into multiple languages. Her writing also appears in numerous anthologies and educational publications exploring feminism, African philosophy, media, and cultural criticism. Her work has featured in The Guardian, The Financial Times, The Ideas Letter, Project Syndicate, and The Philosopher, and she has delivered talks at global institutions including TEDx, the Institute of Arts and Ideas, the European Commission, the Oxford and Cambridge Unions, Yale, and Singularity University at NASA. Salami was the creative director of the short film Black Feminism and the Polycrisis, which won the Silver Award for Public Service and Activism at the 2024 Lovie Awards. From 2019 to 2022, she co-directed Activate, an intersectional feminist movement that supported minoritised women in politics and community organising through visibility campaigns, mentoring, and fundraising. The initiative played a key role in shifting narratives and resources toward a more inclusive political landscape in the UK. She has also worked as a Research Associate and Editor at Perspectiva, advised governments on gender equality, developed national school curricula, and curated cultural events at institutions such as the Victoria & Albert Museum in London. Her blog, MsAfropolitan, launched in 2010, has reached over a million readers and remains a platform for exploring feminist and African-centred approaches to contemporary life. Salami is a Full Member of the Club of Rome, a BMW Foundation Responsible Leader, and serves on the advisory boards of the African Feminist Initiative at Penn State University and Public Humanities at Cambridge University Press, as well as the council of the British Royal Institute of Philosophy. Links to References:Apart Together – essay on Leopold Senghor and Aimé Césaire's radical vision for the world Africa's Populist Trap for The Ideas Letter The Niger River and the Dearth of History: Deconstructing the Myths of Mungo Park by Ezenwa E. Olumba Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/politics-and-polemics

New ideas on reaching climate targets as COP30 gets underway In this episode of The Sound of Economics, host Rebecca Christie sits down with Bruegel's Georg Zachmann and professor Jos Delbeke, former Director General of the European Commission's climate division, to discuss how Europe can use its ambitious climate targets to best catalyse global decarbonisation. Zachmann proposes to develop the European Emission Trading System into an anchor for mitigation activities in other sectors and countries. Delbeke acknowledges the need to enhance the ETS so that it can continue to play its important role in the efficient decarbonisation of the EU economy. But he cautions against a direct use of foreign mitigation credits in EU trading systems. Ten years after the Paris accord, how can Europe be more proactive in the global debate and make the most of this year's UN climate conference? Related research: Zachmann, G. (2025) 'A Strawman Proposal to Use International Flexibility in Achieving Developed Countries Climate Targets to Catalyse Global Decarbonisation', De Gruyter Bill Europe's energy future: balancing climate goals and competitiveness, Bruegel event, 14 November 2025 International decarbonisation through coalitions of the willing: carbon pricing, climate finance, trade and nature, Bruegel event, 20 November 2025 

The European Commission, backed strongly by France and Germany, is preparing to roll out a sweeping “digital simplification” package. This Wednesday the Commission will present a major omnibus plan to simplify digital rules, everything from data protection to the freshly minted AI Act.Officials call it a way to ease burdens on European companies. Critics including MEPs, NGOs, and a good number of lawyers, say it's more like opening Pandora's box. But what does this digital simplification mean?Join us on our journey through the events that shape the European continent and the European Union.Production: By Europod, in co production with Sphera Network.Follow us on:LinkedInInstagram Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Today on Galway Talks with John Morley:  9am-10am European parliament to vote on legal move on Mercosur Agreement    Coalition leaders meeting on tightening migration rules  Galway senator brings forward motion regarding extra time in State exams for students with dyslexia   10am-11am Calls for Government to enact Occupied Territories Bill before year end   ICCL files complaint against European Commission over use of ChatGPT   GARDA SLOT  Cyber Safe kids warn parents to have caution when giving their kids smart devices this Christmas  11am-12pm Galway resident returns after swimming the entire coast of Ireland!   We hear about the benefits of promoting the Corrib as a bioregion  Music Mornings - Valter Romulo 

Watch The X22 Report On Video No videos found (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:17532056201798502,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-9437-3289"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="https://cdn2.decide.dev/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs");pt> Click On Picture To See Larger PictureThe EU and many other countries are not getting free money, they were dependent on the money, now with their policies their economies are declining. ADP shows that employment is on a rebound. Trump has inflation under control, and a 150 years of data proves that he was right again, the [CB] mislead the public. The [DS] is in trouble, Trump & Elon set them up, remember when Elon said Trump was in the Epstein files. Now the D's and the fake news do not know how to get out of this and Trump has called for an investigation. The gloves are off. Trump is sending a clear message to the [DS], everything you put into place is now being reversed. The people are taking back control, Tariffs are more important than anyone realizes.   Economy EU cuts economic growth forecast for 2026 The European Commission has cut its forecast for the bloc's economic growth in 2026 amid risks posed by US tariffs and geopolitical tensions. In its twice-yearly outlook released on Monday, the European Commission said it expects the eurozone to grow by 1.2% next year, down from 1.4%, and the broader EU to grow by 1.4% instead of 1.5%. It added that the downgrade reflects higher-than-expected US tariffs on EU exports and uncertainty over possible further US moves.   Source: rt.com (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:18510697282300316,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-8599-9832"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="https://cdn2.decide.dev/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs"); ADP Employment Report Signals Rebound In Labor Market; Claims Confirm Resilience  For the four weeks ending Oct. 31, 2025, private employers shed an average of 2,500 jobs a week, according to ADP's new weekly employment report update, suggesting that the labor market improved significantly in the last week (from an 11,250 average drop during the prior week). Extrapolating with some simple math that implies a monthly drop of 10,000 jobs... While job growth is admittedly sluggish, ADP reports that new hires are on the upswing: In October, new hires accounted for 4.4 percent of all employees, ADP payroll data shows, up from 3.9 percent a year ago. This growing share of new hires would seem to run counter to the slowed pace of hiring. That contradiction tells us a lot about today's jobs market.   New hires typically fluctuates with the business cycle, but the aging U.S. workforce means that demographics have begun playing a bigger role in hiring decisions.    Source: zerohedge.com https://twitter.com/epaleezeldin/status/1990539413550420062?s=20  Under the Clean Water Act of 1972, the federal government regulates pollution and activities in certain bodies of water to protect water quality. WOTUS defines which waters fall under this federal jurisdiction—things like rivers, lakes, streams, and wetlands. The definition has been contentious for decades because a broader one means more federal oversight (e.g., requiring permits for development, farming, or industrial activities near those waters), while a narrower one shifts more control to states and reduces regulations on private land use. What is the Sackett decision?In the 2023 Supreme Court case Sackett v. EPA, the Court (in a 5-4 ruling) significantly limited the EPA's authority by narrowing WOTUS to include only "relatively permanent" bodies of water with a "continuous surfac...

European markets are sharply in the red amid an accelerating global sell-off. Investors are now awaiting economic data prints Stateside following the recent re-opening of the federal government. Big technology stocks remain under pressure as fears of A.I. over-valuations show no signs of abating. In crypto news, Bitcoin sees its gains for the year wiped out and there are concerns a bigger rout still lies ahead. The European Commission hikes its growth forecast for the year despite predictions that government deficits are set to rise over the next few years. European Economy Commissioner Valdis Dombrovskis warns CNBC any downturn in markets would knock investor confidence in the bloc.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Why do profitable giants like Apple and Amazon report billions in earnings yet often pay surprisingly low effective tax rates (ETR)? On this episode of Corporate Finance Explained on FinPod, we pull back the curtain on corporate tax strategy, focusing on legal optimization and the strategic levers finance teams use to manage this massive cash outflow. Listen in to learn how taxes are not just a cost, but a manageable and critical strategic function.The Corporate Tax Playbook: 5 Key LeversFinance teams at multinationals use a sophisticated toolkit to legally minimize their ETR, often utilizing government-built policy incentives:Tax Deductions and Credits: Maximizing credits for R&D investment and strategically using accelerated depreciation to generate short-term cash flow benefits.Transfer Pricing: The controversial method of setting internal prices for goods and intellectual property (IP) traded between subsidiaries. The goal is to allocate more profit to low-tax jurisdictions while adhering to the arm's length standard.Holding Structures: Parking high-value assets (like core IP/patents) in subsidiaries based in low-tax jurisdictions (e.g., Ireland, Luxembourg) to have associated royalties taxed at a lower rate.Deferred Tax Assets: Booking tax benefits now that relate to future profits or past losses, providing financial flexibility.Corporate Inversions: The ultimate move of changing a company's legal home to a lower-tax country (largely curtailed by 2017 US regulations).Real-World Pitfalls and Regulatory ChallengesOptimization is a tightrope walk. We examine where legal planning clashes with public opinion and regulatory pressure:Apple and the EC: A stark example of a legal structure being challenged retroactively as illegal state aid by the European Commission, forcing the company to pay back billions.Starbucks in the UK: Faced massive reputational risk and boycotts because of paying almost no corporation tax, despite generating high sales, by using large transfer pricing royalty payments to a Dutch subsidiary.Pfizer and Policy Risk: The company's multi-billion-dollar inversion strategy was instantly killed by a sudden US Treasury change in administrative rules, demonstrating how policy shifts can wreck financial models.Amazon's Strategy: A focus on maximizing R&D deductions and using geographical allocation to book operating costs in high-tax countries while recognizing profit in lower-tax jurisdictions.The Modern Tax Mandate for FinanceThe focus has shifted from mere compliance to strategic resilience. The modern tax mandate requires a global, proactive approach:Align Tax with Business Strategy: The tax structure must support real business activity and have economic substance; structures built purely for tax avoidance are major red flags.Focus on Cash Taxes: Finance must rigorously forecast cash taxes paid out the door, not just the accounting tax expense, as cash flow impacts liquidity and valuation.Rigorous Documentation: Meticulous records and data are the best defense against audits for complex intercompany policies like transfer pricing.Monitor Global Trends (BEPS): Understanding the OECD's BEPS (Base Erosion and Profit Shifting) initiative and the push for a 15% global minimum corporate tax rate is essential, as it fundamentally undermines traditional low-tax strategies.

A meeting between Hacienda and the autonomous communities discusses the stability path for 2026 budgets. The government forecasts 2.9% economic growth for Spain this year, while the European Commission predicts 2.3% for 2026 and 2% for 2027, warning about high unemployment and impacts on tourism. This week marks 50 years since Franco's death, sparking political comparisons. Mario, a recently retired lighthouse keeper, reflects on his 30 years in Mesa Roldán, now a museum, highlighting the solitude and the changing role due to automation. He advocates for the museum to be permanently open. In Madrid, Metro line 7B reopens after 1200 days of consolidation works, while traffic experiences complications. A cold front approaches Madrid, with temperatures dropping to 0 grados by Wednesday and potential snow in the Sierra. María León discusses the impact of social media on young people, noting that many primary students have profiles. She emphasizes the importance of healthy social media ...

EU countries are beginning negotiations on the bloc's next Multiannual Financial Framework, covering 2028 to 2034. The European Commission has proposed a budget of €2 trillion, up from the current €1.2 trillion, with the aim of increasing flexibility for national spending and boosting funding for defence and competitiveness. But as discussions open, why are richer member states drawing the line on how far they're willing to go?Join us on our journey through the events that shape the European continent and the European Union.Production: By Europod, in co production with Sphera Network.Follow us on:LinkedInInstagram Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Our payment habits are changing. With digital payments on the rise, we need to preserve people's freedom to choose how to pay: there's cash, card, online transfers – and soon, we could have a digital euro. But what is the digital euro, and how will it work? Will it replace cash? Concerns about data security and government control have sparked debate around the digital euro, often fuelled by disinformation. We separate fact from fiction as our host Stefania Secola teams up with Aidas Palubinskas from EU Finance Podcast to speak to Executive Board member Piero Cipollone about modernising our money. The views expressed are those of the speakers and not necessarily those of the European Central Bank. Recorded on 4 November 2025 and published on 13 November 2025. In this episode: 02:18 The digital what? What is the digital euro, and how will it work in practice? Don't we already pay digitally? 13:48 What will happen to cash? Would introducing the digital euro mean the end of cash? And could it take away business from banks and other financial service providers? 16:25 How secure would the digital euro be really? What about hackers? Will our money be safe, and will the digital euro affect the integrity of the payments system? 19:31 Did someone say Big Brother? Will central banks, governments and other authorities have access to our data ? How private will our payments really be? 24:52 When will we have a digital euro? Where are we in the process and what are the next steps? How are EU institutions like the European Commission and the European Parliament involved in the digital euro project? 29:17 Our guests' hot tips Piero Cipollone shares his hot tip. EU Finance Podcast – the future of finance https://finance.ec.europa.eu/eu-finance-podcast-future-finance_en Digital euro https://www.ecb.europa.eu/euro/digital_euro/html/index.en.html President Lagarde explains the next digital euro phase https://www.instagram.com/reel/DQd60z9jfjV/?igsh=MTV2OW4zNXp5cHJvNA== The ECB Podcast: The digital euro, demystified https://www.ecb.europa.eu/press/tvservices/podcast/html/ecb.pod231024_episode71.en.html Press release: Eurosystem moving to next phase of digital euro project, 30 October 2025 https://www.ecb.europa.eu/press/pr/date/2025/html/ecb.pr251030~8c5b5beef0.en.html The ECB Blog: Making euro cash fit for the future https://www.ecb.europa.eu/press/blog/date/2025/html/ecb.blog20250804~9d3993abe0.en.html Fit of the digital euro in the payment ecosystem https://www.ecb.europa.eu/euro/digital_euro/timeline/profuse/shared/pdf/ecb.deprep251030_digital_euro_fit_payment_ecosystem_report.en.pdf

How much plastic are we actually absorbing and what's it doing to our health?In this eye-opening episode, I'm joined by Dr. Stephanie Wright, one of the UK's leading scientists in microplastic research, to explore what happens when plastic pollution doesn't just affect the environment, but our bodies too.We dive into:

The lurch rightwards in our politics has brought a wave of disinformation and discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans and intersex people.As well as exacerbating prejudice, the anti-LGBTIQ+ campaigns, many supported by US evangelicals and Russian oligarchs, foment social divisions and aim to weaken liberal democracy. That's why the new era of bigotry should be seen as a strategic threat for Europe, former Irish Prime Minister Leo Varadkar explains in this episode. Leo is currently a Senior Fellow for the Global LGBTQI+ Human Rights Program at the Carr-Ryan Center for Human Rights at the Harvard Kennedy School. He stepped down as Taoiseach last year after serving two terms and making history as Ireland's first openly gay head of government.Among Leo's current concerns: how US diplomats and corporate executives who formerly supported LGBT rights have changed position or melted away, leaving regions like Central and Eastern Europe especially vulnerable."The fact that America is withdrawing from that space has left it open to Russia," says Leo. "That's where I think the European Union needs to come in and needs in many ways I think to fill the space of the Americans."A particular focus is Hungary, the EU state that is the subject of what Rémy Bonny, executive director of Forbidden Colours, calls the largest human rights lawsuit in the bloc's history.That lawsuit concerns a so-called child-protection law that censors inclusive sex education, equates LGBTI lifestyles with pedophilia, blocks adoption for LGBTI couples, and restricts content in media and advertising.A top advisor has already issued a preliminary finding against Hungary and the Court of Justice of the EU is expected to reach a verdict next year.A definitive ruling against Hungary "can't go without a meaningful response" from EU authorities, says Leo. "The treaties are worth nothing if that's the case."When it comes to EU politics, Leo encourages a return to centrist leadership rather than reliance by his political family, the center-right European People's Party, on the possibility of majorities with the far right."I much prefer us being in alliance with Liberals and Social Democrats and Greens."Leo also critiques fellow conservative Ursula von der Leyen, the president of the European Commission, for saying "too little, too late" about homophobia in Hungary — and about Israel's conduct of the war in Gaza.Even so von der Leyen does "come around to the right position eventually, which is better than the reverse."As for Donald Trump, who Leo met several times as Taoiseach, the US president is taking a far more hostile approach to LGBT rights compared to his first term. Whether Trump actually leaves office after 2027 general could come down to the US military."It's a dangerous time."Asked whether he could have done more as Taoiseach to regulate the giant US tech companies that have bases in Ireland, Leo says he oversaw stepped up enforcement during his time in office. There was however a wider failure, where tech companies still are shielded from liability for the illegal and highly polarizing content hosted on their platforms."We allowed them to really get away with this idea that they're not publishers" and "that wasn't right," says Leo, who says he supports a crackdown on algorithms that amplify hate and toxicity.Support the show

Apple has delayed the launch of the 2nd-gen iPhone Air, the European Commission is set to classify WhatsApp as a “Very Large Online Platform”, and Google is investing approximately €5 billion to expand its infrastructure and data center capacity in Germany. MP3 Please SUBSCRIBE HERE for free or get DTNS Live ad-free. A special thanksContinue reading "Microsoft Has Changed Its AI Strategy To Compete More Aggressively In The Race For Artificial General Intelligence – DTH"