Podcasts about Hamburg

For much of the past two decades, renewable energy investment was viewed as a core infrastructure play—favoured by funds and long-term capital seeking predictable, government-backed cash flows. Yet the gradual phase-out of subsidies and the increasing exposure of renewables to wholesale power price volatility have eroded that stability.Are investors misreading the new market dynamics? And can renewable portfolios be optimized under a fundamentally different investment logic?FlexPower, founded in 2022 in Hamburg and, as of October 2025, fully owned by Citadel, the global hedge fund, represents this shift. The firm operates at the intersection of short-term power trading and battery optimization, deploying data-driven strategies across European markets.FlexPower exemplifies how agile, technology-led firms are reshaping power markets by leveraging algorithmic trading, high-frequency data analytics, and real-time dispatch optimization. Their approach contrasts sharply with traditional infrastructure investors who continue to rely on fixed offtake agreements and policy support.In conversation with FLexPower Managing Director Amani Joas, Laurent and Gerard examine how algorithmic trading and hedge fund participation are redefining price formation in grids increasingly dominated by intermittent renewables. The discussion highlights a structural divergence: while incumbents pursue regulatory certainty, new entrants monetize volatility itself—treating renewable assets as dynamic trading platforms rather than passive infrastructure.The energy transition is no longer just a technological revolution—it's a financial one.

Wen Mainz bei Freiburg nicht in den Griff bekommen hat, warum Unions Niederlage nicht überraschend war und wieso das Problem des VfB nicht die Nachspielzeit in Hamburg war, erklären Eva-Lotta Bohle und Nele Hüpper.

Hamburg's new General Music Director, Omer Meir Wellber, recently began his five-year tenure of the 2025/26 opera and symphony seasons with the Philharmonic State Orchestra at the striking Elbphilharmonie. The season's unique programs focus on a very special kind of dialogue between the present and the past under the motto “no risk, no fun”. In this episode, Omer will explain that and more.  Suffice it to say,  Omer unveiled his unusual idea of “over-writing” single movements of great works by international composers, to be repeated in all concerts this season. Omer regularly conducts the Orchestre National de France, the Gewand-haus-orchester Leipzig, the Swedish Radio Symphony Orchestra, the London Philharmonic Orchestra, the Orchestra del Teatro dell'Opera di Roma, the City of Birmingham Symphony Orchestra, the Staatskapelle Dresden, the Deutsche Kammer-philharmonie Bremen and the Vienna Symphony Orchestra. He is also the author of,  “Die Angst, das Risiko und die Liebe  – Momente mit Mozart” – his first book, published in spring 2017.  In it, he shares his personal understanding of the universal emotions addressed in the three Mozart/Da Ponte operas – Così fan tutte, Le nozze di Figaro and Don Giovanni, establishing him as a great voice of classical music.

Dr. Jennifer Erley, an Advanced Radiology Resident at the University Medical Center of Hamburg, led the study and is urging a fight against obesity,

In Deventer siegt der VfB unter widrigen Umständen klar, in Hamburg legt er sich mal wieder selbst einen rein. Wir hätten ja in dieser Folge relativ entspannt über einen deutlichen Auswärtssieg in Europa und ein ärgerliches, aber verkraftbares Unentschieden in Hamburg reden können. Stattdessen reden wir nicht nur über vier Tore, sondern auch über die freidrehenden Behörden in Deventer, schwedische Rotzlöffel und einen grandios verkackten (pardon!) Freistoß, der uns alle drei Punkte kostet. Wir besprechen, was der VfB in der Europa League gut machte, und was in Hamburg zum Erfolg fehlte - und wie viel Rotation gute Rotation ist. Außerdem widmen wir uns dem anstehenden Pokalspiel in Bochum und blicken auf den Südschlager, der nach dem Punktverlust in Hamburg etwas unpassend kommt. Zum Abschluss blicken wir wie immer auf andere VfB-Mannschaften und Leihspieler. Diese Folge konntet Ihr diesmal leider nicht live auf unserem Twitch-Kanal mitverfolgen, aber bald wieder. Die Themen im Überblick 00:00:45   Begrüßung 00:02:03   Aktuelle Themen 00:12:48   Das 4:0 in der Europa League in Deventer 00:14:30   Die erste Halbzeit 00:16:04   Das 1:0 und das 2:0 durch Leweling 00:24:07   Die zweite Halbzeit und das 3:0 durch El Khannouss 00:40:45   Das 4:0 durch Bouanani 00:43:16   Fazit und alles abseits des Platzes 01:04:41   Das 1:2 in Hamburg 01:07:50   Die erste Halbzeit und der frühe Rückstand durch Glatzel 01:18:08   Die zweite Halbzeit und der Ausgleich durch Undav 01:28:02   Das 1:2 durch Vieira und Fazit 01:39:29   Die Lage nach dem zwölften Spieltag 01:40:50   Blick auf Bochum 01:46:26   Blick auf München 01:51:52   Rund um die anderen VfB-Mannschaften & VfB-Leihspieler Rund um den Brustring unterstützen Wenn Ihr uns finanziell unterstützen wollt, könnt Ihr das entweder über Patreon oder PayPal tun. Das Geld nutzen wir, um die laufenden Kosten zu decken und Rund um den Brustring weiter zu entwickeln. Schon kleine Spenden helfen uns. Alle Infos findet Ihr hier. Wenn Euch unser Podcast gefällt, gebt uns gerne Feedback dazu, sei es auf Facebook, Twitter, Instagram und BlueSky oder eben in Form einer positiven Bewertung und ein paar netten Worten auf Apple Podcasts oder Spotify. Wir freuen uns natürlich auch, wenn Ihr uns ganz altmodisch offline weiterempfehlt! Abonniert auch unseren WhatsApp-Kanal, um immer über neue Folgen und Blogartikel auf dem Laufenden zu sein! Danke an: Ron für das Intro und Outro.

STERNENGESCHICHTEN LIVE TOUR in D und Ö: Tickets unter https://sternengeschichten.live Hallo liebe Hörerinnen und Hörer der Sternengeschichten, Kurz bevor das Jahr zu Ende geht, melde ich mich noch einmal außerhalb der normalen Folgen bei euch, denn es gibt ein paar wichtige Dinge, die ich euch sagen möchte. Das wichtigste gleich zu Beginn: Die Veränderungen im Podcast, die ich im Titel angesprochen habe, bedeuten nicht, dass die Sternengeschichten nicht mehr so sein werden wie jetzt. Das wird alles so bleiben wie immer. Ich möchte nur eventuell etwas zusätzliches, neues machen. Aber dazu kommen wir später. Zuerst möchte ich auf die Live-Shows zu meinem Podcast hinweisen. Es gibt noch ein paar Termine für 2025 und einige für 2026, aber das werden die letzten Termine sein. Ich werde die Live-Shows danach bis auf weiteres beenden; nicht weil sie keinen Spaß gemacht haben und nicht, weil niemand sie sehen wollte. Ganz im Gegenteil. Aber aus Gründen, die zu komplex sind um sie hier zu erläutern und aus Gründen, für die ich selbst auch nichts kann, hat sich die ganze Organisation der Tour als äußerst unerfreulich erwiesen, sowohl aus persönlicher als auch aus finanzieller Sicht. Aber der Punkt um den es geht ist: Wenn ihr meine Live-Show noch besuchen wollt, dann geht das bis auf weiters nur an den Terminen, die derzeit im Verkauf sind. Wenn ihr mich im Ruhrgebiet sehen wollt, also in Essen, Düsseldorf und Dortmund, dann müsst ihr zu den Shows kommen, die demnächst stattfinden. Nämlich am 10. Dezember in Essen, am 11. Dezember in Dortmund und am 13. Dezember in Düsseldorf. Am 14. Dezember bin ich mit der Show das letzte Mal in Berlin, da ist zwar schon quasi ausverkauft, aber es kann sein, dass kurzfristig noch Tickets in den Verkauf kommen. 2026 kann man die Show auch in Österreich sehen; am 29. Januar in Wien, am 30. Januar in Salzburg, am 20. Februar in Wörgl, am 26. Februar in Oberwaltersdorf und am 28. Februar in Linz. Danach geht es Ende 2026 im Norden von Deutschland weiter, am 3. Oktober bin ich in Lübeck und am 4. Oktober in Hamburg. Der einzige Auftritt in Bayern wird 2026 am 23.10 in Fürth stattfinden. Im Osten bin ich am 9.November in Erfurt, am 10.November in Leipzig und am 11. November in Dresden. Am 24. November geht es ein letztes Mal nach Bremen und die allerletzte Live-Show wird am 26. November in Osnabrück stattfinden. Wenn ihr mich live mit den Sternengeschichten sehen wollt, gibt es dafür leider nur noch diese Möglichkeiten. Tickets und die weiteren Infos dazu findet ihr unter sternengeschichten.live Ich würde mich freuen, euch zu sehen - denn trotz allem macht es immer wieder großen Spaß, nicht nur ins Mikrofon zu sprechen, sondern live zu euch. Ach ja - und bevor ich es vergesse: Die ganz Kurzentschlossenen können mich am 3. Dezember in Schwandorf besuchen, da halte ich meinen Vortrag "Eine Geschichte des Universums in 100 Sternen" und am 4. Dezember bin in Freistadt mit einem Vortrag zu "Wie viel Astronomie steckt in einem Glas Bier?". Soweit zur Live-Show. Der zweite wichtige Punkt betrifft den Podcast selbst. Wie gesagt: Es wird sich nichts ändern; es wird weiterhin jeden Freitag eine neue Folge der Sternengeschichten geben, so wie ihr es seit 13 Jahren gewohnt sein. Ich überlege aber, zum Beispiel einmal im Monat noch eine extra Folge zu veröffentlichen; in einem etwas anderen Format. Eine Spezialfolge, wo ich vielleicht auch auf die eine oder andere Neuigkeit aus der Wissenschaft eingehen kann, was ich ja in den regulären Folgen nicht mache; wo ich vielleicht auch auf Feedback aus der Hörerschaft eingehen kann und wo ich Dinge besprechen kann, wie ich sie jetzt gerade in dieser Spezialfolge bespreche. Wer den Podcast finanziell unterstützen möchte, kann das hier tun: Mit PayPal (https://www.paypal.me/florianfreistetter), Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/sternengeschichten) oder Steady (https://steadyhq.com/sternengeschichten) Sternengeschichten-Hörbuch: https://www.penguin.de/buecher/f

On this week's main show, Manu is joined by Matt and Dan to chat about Bundesliga matchday 12. They start the show by chatting about Schalke going first in the 2. Bundesliga and whether they are poised to come up. Up next, they discuss Bayern's late win against St. Pauli and Dortmund's impressive win against Bayer Leverkusen. Finally, they round up the show by chatting about Hamburg's last-minute winner against Stuttgart and whether Bo Henriksen can survive as Mainz head coach. Enjoy! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In dieser Episode berichten wir über die gesundheitlichen Hürden, die Aufnahmen im November verhindert haben. Dabei kommen wir aber zu einem positiven Ausblick. Vielen Dank für euer Verständnis und eure Geduld! Wie man uns unterstützen kann, könnt ihr hier nachlesen. Zum HOAXILLA Merchandise geht es hier

Im 235. Special bei den WildMics gingen wir der Frage nach: Gibt es eigentlich so etwas wie Detox? Welche Pseudoversprechen zu diesem Thema gibt es? Was bringen Tees und Nahrungsergänzungsmittel? Und was schafft unser Körper eigentlich von allein? Darüber sprachen wir mit Christine Moissl-Eichinger und Martin Moder. Diese Sendung wurde am 04.11.2025 aufgezeichnet. Hier findet ihr Martins Bücher und hier die Bücher der Science Busters* *Affiliate Links Wie man uns unterstützen kann, könnt ihr hier nachlesen. Zum HOAXILLA Merchandise geht es hier

Diese Episode wurde unterstützt von der GLS Bank. Wenn auch du selbst oder dein Unternehmen zu meinen Themen passt, melde dich gern – ob als Gast oder Werbepartnerin. Schön, dass du reinschaltest! Ich freue ich mich über deinen Support! Meinen wöchentlichen Newsletter gibt es bei steady. Es gibt es mein erstes Kinderbuch! Und „Picknick auf der Autobahn.“ In unserem hoffnungsfrohen Buch bieten wir konkrete und detaillierte Antworten und somit Doping für unsere Vorstellungskraft. Meinen Podcast schon abonniert? Wenn dir diese oder auch eine andere Folge gefällt, lass´ gern eine Bewertung da und/oder supporte mich per Ko-Fi oder PayPal. Anfragen an backoffice@katja-diehl.de! Diese Podcastfolge ist etwas ganz Besonderes – weil wir zu viert zusammensitzen. In einem ehemaligen Turmbunker in Hamburg, mitten an einer sechsspurigen Straße, haben wir uns getroffen, um über unser gemeinsames Projekt zu sprechen: Unser neues Buch "Nehmen wir das Leben wieder selbst in die Hand", das am 15. Dezember erscheint. Das Buch ist ein Gesprächsband – etwa 140 Seiten, zugänglich geschrieben, aber mit Tiefgang. Es dokumentiert die Gespräche zwischen einem VW-Arbeiter, einem Aktivisten und mir als Mobilitätsexpertin. Die zentrale Frage: Wie schaffen wir eine gerechte Transformation, die niemanden zurücklässt? Der Untertitel macht klar, worum es geht: "Eine Einladung zum Kampf für das gute Leben für alle." Wir müssen raus aus der automobilen fossilen Sackgasse. Aber wie machen wir das, ohne dass Zigtausende Menschen in die Arbeitslosigkeit geschickt werden? 1. Die Realität der Arbeitenden Thorsten macht gleich zu Beginn klar: Die Beschäftigten bei VW sind nicht das Problem. Sie haben jahrzehntelang gute Arbeit geleistet, Autos gebaut, die weltweit nachgefragt wurden. Doch jetzt stehen sie vor dem Scherbenhaufen einer verfehlten Unternehmensstrategie. Die Krise bei VW ist hausgemacht: Versäumnisse im Management Zu späte Reaktion auf die Elektromobilität Fokus auf Gewinnmaximierung statt nachhaltiger Planung Missachtung der Klimakrise Und jetzt? Jetzt sollen die Beschäftigten die Zeche zahlen – mit Werksschließungen, Entlassungen, Lohnverzicht. Thorsens klare Ansage: "Das ist ein gesellschaftliches Problem. Wir können nicht einfach akzeptieren, dass Betriebe geschlossen werden und Menschen in die Arbeitslosigkeit geschickt werden, die ihr Handwerk perfekt beherrschen." 2. Die falsche Alternative: E-Auto statt Verbrenner Ein zentraler Punkt, den Thorsten immer wieder betont: Das Elektroauto ist klimapolitisch nur ein bisschen weniger absurd als der Verbrenner. Warum? Seltene Erden werden unter katastrophalen Bedingungen abgebaut Riesige Landschaften werden für den Rohstoffabbau zerstört Chemikalien werden eingesetzt, um diese Rohstoffe zu gewinnen Die ökologische Bilanz ist bei weitem nicht so gut, wie oft behauptet wird Thorsens Kritik: "Den Menschen, die Schlosser gelernt haben und wirklich was auf dem Kasten haben, zu sagen, dass E-Autos das Ende der Musik sind und wir nichts Besseres produzieren können – das kratzt an meinem Berufsethos." 3. Was könnten wir stattdessen produzieren? Hier wird das Gespräch richtig spannend. Denn die Frage ist nicht: "Können wir etwas anderes bauen?", sondern: "Was hindert uns daran?" Beispiel aus der Corona-Zeit: VW-Beschäftigte haben in kürzester Zeit aus Scheibenwischer-Motoren Beatmungsgeräte gebaut. Das zeigt: Das Wissen und die Fähigkeiten sind da. Sie werden nur nicht abgerufen. Mögliche Alternativen: Schienenfahrzeuge (Züge, Straßenbahnen, S-Bahnen) Lastenräder und Cargo-Bikes Komponenten für den öffentlichen Nahverkehr Technologie für erneuerbare Energien Medizintechnik Es ist eine Machtfrage. Wer entscheidet, was produziert wird? Aktuell sind es Konzernvorstände und Aktionäre – nicht die Beschäftigten, nicht die Gesellschaft. 4. Arbeitszeitverkürzung statt Entlassungen Wenn wir weniger produzieren müssen (was klimapolitisch sinnvoll wäre), dann verteilen wir die Arbeit auf meh

Der Advent ist eine Zeit voller Vorfreude. Wir erwarten neu, dass Gott zu uns spricht, uns begegnet und unsere Herzen mit seinem Leben erfüllt. In unserer Advent-Predigtserie möchten wir gemeinsam entdecken, wie Gottes Licht in unsere Welt scheint und wie seine Gegenwart Hoffnung in uns weckt. Diese Wochen laden uns ein, stehen zu bleiben, aufzublicken und mit offenem Herzen zu erwarten, was Gott tun möchte. Wir wollen uns von seiner Freude anstecken lassen, seine Verheißungen neu ergreifen und uns bewusst darauf ausrichten, dass er mitten unter uns wirkt. Wir dürfen staunen, erwarten und vertrauen, dass Gott auch in diesem Advent Leben verändert.

In dieser Episode von "Dirty Minutes Left" sprechen Holger und Arne über eine Vielzahl von Themen, angefangen mit ihrem Getränk der Wahl, dem Bullet Energy Drink in Pfirsichgeschmack, das sie kühl genießen. Während sie sich dem aktuellen Spiel zuwenden, Mr. Gimmick, handelt es sich um ein Plattformer-Jump'n'Run aus der NES-Ära, das Arne als sehr herausfordernd beschreibt. Die schwierige Steuerung und die Physik der Spielfigur sorgt bei beiden für Frustration und sie reflektieren über ihre Erfahrungen beim Spielen. Arne erklärt die Handlung des Spiels, in dem ein kleiner grüner Blob, Gimmick, das Spielzeug eines Mädchens namens Mary ist, und das Abenteuer, um sie zu retten, spannend und herausfordernd gestaltet ist. Es wird schnell klar, dass die beiden aufgrund der Schwierigkeit, sich mit dem Spiel anzufreunden, unterschiedliche Meinungen zum Spielvergnügen haben. Sie diskutieren auch über kommende Spiele, die sie demnächst spielen möchten, sowie das Interesse an Retro-Spielen und deren heilendem Wert. Die Unterhaltung wechselt zu ihren persönlichen Erlebnissen, darunter ein Besuch bei einem Exit Room in Hamburg, den Arne empfiehlt, sowie Arnes Auftritte mit seinem Chor, wo sie verschiedene adventliche und weihnachtliche Konzerte planen. Die Begeisterung für Musik und Live-Auftritte kommt durch, während sie über die Weihnachtsvorbereitungen und die Vorfreude auf die Aufführungen sprechen. Holger teilt seine eigenen Erfahrungen im Homeoffice und wie er während seiner Genesung viel Zeit mit seinen Kindern verbringt, die gerade neue Meilensteine im Laufen erreichen. Der Austausch über 3D-Drucker wird ebenfalls behandelt, wobei Holger seine Überlegungen zu einem neuen Drucker mit erweiterten Funktionen anstellt und die Vor- und Nachteile verschiedener Modelle erörtert. Arne bringt sich mit seinen eigenen Ansichten über 3D-Druck in die Diskussion ein und bietet wertvolle Einblicke. Zuletzt treten sie auf Zombies in Videospielen ein, besonders in Bezug auf den Switch-Titel "Vampire Survivors", den Arne begeistert spielt und der auch bei seiner Frau Angela großen Anklang findet. Die Episode schließt mit der Hoffnung auf eine nächste Folge, während sie weiter über ihre Spiele und Erlebnisse nachdenken.

Our second in a series of podcasts about New York City and American immigration history. Between the late 1890s and early 1920s, over 2 million Jews from Eastern Europe fled their homes and made the long journey to America, escaping persecution and violence in their native countries. Many were fleeing state-sanctioned antisemitism in Russia.This mass immigration effort was, in large part, brought about by three entrepreneurial men: Albert Ballin, the director of the Hamburg-America line; Jacob Schiff, the German-born New York-based philanthropist and financier; and the Gilded Age financial titan J.P. Morgan.It is through the research and writing of historian Steven Ujifusa that many details of this story have finally been brought to light in his book The Last Ships from Hamburg: Business, Rivalry, and the Race to Save Russia's Jews on the Eve of World War I. In this special presentation of the Gilded Gentleman podcast, Steve joins Carl to discuss these momentous events. In addition, Steve shares his personal story about how he uncovered little-known material to bring this history to life. Check out last week's show on Ellis Island after you've listened to this one. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

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.

Das US-Außenministerium unter Marco Rubio überwacht künftig die Auswirkungen der Masseneinwanderung auf westliche Staaten. Fälle wie die Gruppenvergewaltigung in Hamburg sollen exemplarisch aufzeigen, welche Probleme Migration mit sich bringt. Präsident Trump fordert europäische Regierungen auf, ihre Grenzpolitik zu ändern und die öffentliche Sicherheit zu gewährleisten.

Kurz vor ihrem alljährlichen Live Podcast in Hamburg tauchen Torsten und Gerry in der Folge 12 von STRÄTER & STREBERG tief in die düstere Zukunft von "RUNNING MAN" ein. Wie kam die lang ersehnte Verfilmung bei den beiden Fans an? Es gibt ein Update zu "IT – WELCOME TO DERRY". Gerry hält ein paar großartige Bücher in die Kamera und erzählt von seiner Erfahrung mit dem Videospiel ARC RAIDERS. Und zu guter Letzt erzählt Torsten exklusiv von seinem epischem New York-Trip! Dazu gibt's Serientipps wie PLOR1BUS und das True-Crime-Drama MURDAUGH - MORD IN DER FAMILIE, spannende Dokus über Marc Maron und SNL, sowie Gerrys John Sinclair Debüt: DIE WÖLFIN VON ROM. Viel Spaß! Unsere Werbepartner für diesen Monat: https://linktr.ee/StraeterStreberg.podcast

Britain's Darkest WW2 Newspaper Headlines 1940 PART TWO Part Two of a Stop Press Party as we read through more fascinating newspaper headlines of Second World War 1940  - the London Blitz, Battle of Britain, bombers, blimps and the silly adverts. Hear about all the war time drama as it happened yesterday! This is Part Two See Episode 124 for Part One I'm recommending this service for FREE automatic new epsiode notifications: FeedSpot automatic email service for free email notifications. Find the Fighting Through Podcast on the list at this link. Fill in your details and get notified every time an episode drops. These folks help me to promote the show in the search engines so please support them. https://podcast.feedspot.com/world_war_ii_podcasts/ Fighting Through website - Show notes and photos:https://www.fightingthroughpodcast.co.uk/125-part-two-britains-darkest-ww2-newspaper-headline Buy Me a Coffeehttps://www.buymeacoffee.com/fightingthrough Patreon:https://www.patreon.com/FightingThrough Episode shortlist - All the episodes for this podcast in a short list (or link via the website menu)https://www.fightingthroughpodcast.co.uk/about/ Reviews: Please review in your usual app or on my website here: https://www.fightingthroughpodcast.co.uk/reviews/new/ Follow me on Facebook:https://www.facebook.com/FightingThroughPodcast YouTube Channel:https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCnlqRO9MdFBUrKM6ExEOzVQ?view_as=subscriber Interested in Bill Cheall's book?  Link here for more information. Fighting Through from Dunkirk to Hamburg, hardback, paperback and Kindle etc. The aftermath of an enemy plane crash over England, below:

(Rec: 17/6/20) Kev slouches and talks frankly about money again, and his good friend opens the wine. Meanwhile, Gunter Netzer launches the official Hamburg magazine... Join the Iron Filings Society: https://www.patreon.com/topflighttimemachine and on Apple Podcast Subscriptions. Get a 7-day full access free trial and pay for 10 months up front for the price of 12 if you like a bargain. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Die Strecke zwischen Hannover und Hamburg ist eine wichtige Verbindung im nationalen Bahnverkehr. Die Bahn will wegen ständiger Überlastung eine neue Trasse zwischen beiden Städten bauen. Kritiker fänden es jedoch besser, die alte Trasse auszubauen. Brandau, Bastian www.deutschlandfunk.de, Hintergrund

In seiner „Theorie der feinen Leute“ („The Theory of the Leisure Class“) analysierte der amerikanische Soziologe Thorstein Veblen bereits 1899, warum Menschen Konsumgüter erwerben, obwohl sie diese gar nicht wirklich brauchen. Besonders die Klasse der Reichen demonstriert durch Konsum ihre Macht.Jedoch können auch diejenigen, die nur wenig Geld haben, sich der Logik des Status-Konsums nicht entziehen. Mag ökonomische Verschwendung eigentlich gar keinen Sinn ergeben, erhält sie plötzlich Bedeutung, wenn damit ein Status manifestiert und demonstriert werden kann.Der Klassiker der Soziologie, in dem es um Konkurrenzkämpfe und Statuswettbewerbe geht, ist bis heute lesenswert. Wenn teure Uhren, schnelle Autos und sonstige Utensilien eines gehobenen Lebensstils noch immer wichtig sind, um gesellschaftliche Anerkennung zu erlangen, sind wir noch immer in Veblens Welt. Aber diese Theorie hat auch ihre Tücken, wenn der Autor ständig anthropologische Konstanten zu erkennen meint und somit gesellschaftliche Verhältnisse enthistorisiert werden. Mehr dazu in der neuen Folge von „Wohlstand für Alle“ von Ole Nymoen und Wolfgang M. Schmitt.WERBUNG:Zum Surplus-Magazin geht es hier entlang:https://www.surplusmagazin.de/wfa/Literatur:Thorstein Veblen: The Theory of the Leisure Class. Oxford World`s Classics.Unsere Zusatzinhalte könnt ihr bei Apple Podcasts, Steady und Patreon hören. Vielen Dank!Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/de/podcast/wohlstand-f%C3%BCr-alle/id1476402723Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/oleundwolfgangSteady: https://steadyhq.com/de/oleundwolfgang/aboutTermine:Ole ist am 27. November in Rudolstadt:https://www.rosalux.de/veranstaltung/es_detail/ZNFIQ/warum-ich-niemals-fuer-mein-land-kaempfen-wuerde?cHash=d6c6a7c899351443efabc525ed4888a9Wolfgang ist am 4.12. in Frankfurt: https://www.instagram.com/p/DRDNuEsjFJC/Wolfgang ist am 5. Dezember gemeinsam mit Ole bei der Studio-Rot-Gala in Hamburg: https://schauspielhaus.de/stuecke/weihnachtsgala-studio-rotWolfgang ist mit Ole Liebl in Dresden: https://scheune.org/show/5408/radikale-rede-by-ole-liebl-und-wolfgang-m-schmitt.htmlOle und Wolfgang sind am 9.12. in Paderborn: https://www.hnf.de/veranstaltungen/vortraege/date/2025/12/09/cal/event/tx_cal_phpicalendar/wissen-und-bildung-durch-die-magischen-kanaele-von-influencern-youtubern-und-podcastern.htmlWolfgang ist am 10.12. in Berlin: https://lfbrecht.de/events/2025-12-10/

Part One of a Stop Press Party as we read through the exciting newspaper headlines of Second World War 1940  - the London Blitz, Battle of Britain, bombers, blimps and the silly adverts. Hear about all the war time drama as it happened yesterday! This is Part One See Episode 125 for Part Two FeedSpot automatic email service Use Feedspot for free email notifications. Find the Fighting Through Podcast on the list at this link. Fill in your details and get notified every time an episode drops. https://podcast.feedspot.com/world_war_ii_podcasts/   Fighting Through website - Show notes and photos:https://www.fightingthroughpodcast.co.uk/124-britains-darkest-ww2-newspaper-headlines-of-1940 Buy Me a Coffeehttps://www.buymeacoffee.com/fightingthrough Patreon:https://www.patreon.com/FightingThrough Episode shortlist - All the episodes for this podcast in a short list (or link via the website menu)https://www.fightingthroughpodcast.co.uk/about/ Reviews: Please review in your usual app or on my website here: https://www.fightingthroughpodcast.co.uk/reviews/new/ Follow me on Facebook:https://www.facebook.com/FightingThroughPodcast YouTube Channel:https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCnlqRO9MdFBUrKM6ExEOzVQ?view_as=subscriber Interested in Bill Cheall's book?  Link here for more information. Fighting Through from Dunkirk to Hamburg, hardback, paperback and Kindle etc.

Am Orange Day geht es in der neuen Episode des Podcasts um das Recht auf sexuelle Selbstbestimmung. Debbie sprach mit Fiona und Lucy, unter anderem auch über den Safe Abortion Day. (Titelbild: Hoodspirit // Titelsong: Harbour Rebels) Im Konferenzraum der Fanräume habe ich mich mit Lucy und Fiona zu einem sehr angenehmen Klönschnack über ein emotionales und wichtiges Thema getroffen: den Einsatz gegen die Kriminalisierung von Abtreibungen. Vielleicht habt ihr die beiden schon an ihrem Infostand vor dem Stadion zum „Safe Abortion Day“ beim Leverkusen-Heimspiel getroffen. Fiona ist Medizinstudentin und Mitgründerin der Initiative „Students for Medical Choice“ in Hamburg. Lucy engagiert sich beim Bündnis für sexuelle Selbstbestimmung Hamburg (BfsS). Ich war ehrlich schockiert, wie schlecht Deutschland beim Thema Abtreibungen dasteht – und hatte beim Zuhören mehr als einmal Gänsehaut. Also: hört unbedingt rein und lernt diese beiden tollen, engagierten Frauen kennen! // Debbie

Welcome to this episode of Hamburg All Stars, this week we cover December 8th & 15th 1979 WWF All Star where we will see :- Ivan Putski & Tito Santana vs. Johnny Rodz & Pete Doherty Ken Patera vs. Johnny Rivera Hulk Hogan vs. Frank Williams Larry Zbyszko vs. Jose Estrada Tony Atlas vs. John Callahan Two On One Handicap Match Andre The Giant vs. John Buford & Pete Doherty Hulk Hogan vs. Dan Patrick Johnny Rivera & Sylvano Sousa vs. The Wild Samoans (Afa & Sika) (w/Captain Lou Albano) Dominic DeNucci vs. Jose Estrada Hussein Arab vs. Angelo Gomez Check out Youtube.com/@memphiscast & patreon.com/memphiscast for videos Check out patreon.com/memphiscast for our Heat Stroke podcast (Its FREE) Follow the show on facebook Memphis Continental Wrestling Cast (facebook.com/memphiscast)

Das Spiel in Dortmund wird erneut zu einem Highlight, nur diesmal ohne Sieger. Mit dem Auswärtsspiel im Westfalenstadion startete der VfB aus der Länderspielpause wieder in den Pflichtspielbetrieb und darf sich nach dem 3:3 nach zweimaligem Rückstand durchaus auf die Schulter klopfen - und bei Deniz Undav bedanken, der mit einem Dreierpack wohl alle Diskussionen beendet. Mit unserem Gast, BVB-Fan und -Blogger Nick, reden wir natürlich auch über die drei Dortmunder Tore, inklusive Elfmeter-Diskussion. Am Ende einigen wir uns auf ein verdientes Unentschieden, welches in Dortmund immer noch anders bewertet wird als in Stuttgart. Natürlich blicken wir auch zurück auf die Länderspielpause und reden sowohl über die Ergebnisse unserer Nationalspieler und das im März stattfindende Frauen-Heimspiel im Neckarstadion, als auch über die abstrusen Pläne der Innenministerkonferenz und die Proteste dagegen (hier geht es zur Petition "Der Fußball ist sicher. Schluss mit Populismus - Ja zur Fankultur!"  der Fanszenen Deutschlands).  Im Anschluss schauen wir voraus auf die anstehenden Auswärtsspiele in Deventer und Hamburg und widmen uns den anderen VfB-Mannschaften und den Leihspielern.  Diese Folge konntet Ihr diesmal leider nicht live auf unserem Twitch-Kanal mitverfolgen, aber bald wieder. Die Themen im Überblick 00:01:00   Begrüßung 00:02:31   Aktuelle Themen 00:09:28   Der Fußball ist sicher 00:22:00   Das 3:3 in Dortmund 00:24:57   Die erste Halbzeit 00:30:56   Der Elfmeter von Can und das 2:0 von Beier 00:43:49   Die zweite Halbzeit und das 2:1 durch Undav 00:50:46   Das 2:2 durch Undav 00:59:08   Das 3:2 durch Adeyemi und das 3:3 durch Undav 01:12:07   Fazit 01:18:21   Die Lage nach dem elften Spieltag 01:18:47   Blick auf Deventer 01:25:50   Blick auf Hamburg 01:31:55   Rund um die anderen VfB-Mannschaften & VfB-Leihspieler Rund um den Brustring unterstützen Wenn Ihr uns finanziell unterstützen wollt, könnt Ihr das entweder über Patreon oder PayPal tun. Das Geld nutzen wir, um die laufenden Kosten zu decken und Rund um den Brustring weiter zu entwickeln. Schon kleine Spenden helfen uns. Alle Infos findet Ihr hier. Wenn Euch unser Podcast gefällt, gebt uns gerne Feedback dazu, sei es auf Facebook, Twitter, Instagram und BlueSky oder eben in Form einer positiven Bewertung und ein paar netten Worten auf Apple Podcasts oder Spotify. Wir freuen uns natürlich auch, wenn Ihr uns ganz altmodisch offline weiterempfehlt! Abonniert auch unseren WhatsApp-Kanal, um immer über neue Folgen und Blogartikel auf dem Laufenden zu sein! Danke an: Ron für das Intro und Outro.

Wer heute von der Hamburger Alster spricht, meint meistens den idyllischen innerstädtischen See. Seinen Ursprung hat er in einem Wassermühlenbau im Jahr 1195. Von Heide Soltau.

Wahnsinn direkt aus dem echten Leben: In "extra 3 Spezial: Der reale Irrsinn" nehmen wir euch mit auf eine Reise durch Deutschland – dahin, wo Vorschriften den Verstand überholen. Acht Realsatiren zeigen, wie Bürokratie, Steuergeld und gute Absichten manchmal grandios an der Realität scheitern. Lachen erlaubt. Kopfschütteln unvermeidlich.

Bu bölümde fotoğrafçılık, LinkedIn kullanmanın önemi, Pluribus dizisi, Hit Makers kitabı ve Steam Machine üzerine sohbet ettik.Bizi dinlemekten keyif alıyorsanız, kahve ısmarlayarak bizi destekleyebilir ve Telegram grubumuza katılabilirsiniz. :)Yorumlarınızı, sorularınızı ya da sponsorluk tekliflerinizi info@farklidusun.net e-posta adresine iletebilirsiniz.Zaman damgaları:00:00 - Power Podcast Ödülleri06:45 - Hamburg Gezisi ve Franzbrötchen14:22 - İstanbul'daki Apple Etkinliği21:03 - Fotoğrafçılık43:33 - İzlediklerimiz, Pluribus (Spoiler'lı)1:07:48 - Okuduklarımız, Hit Makers1:20:38 - LinkedIn'in Önemi1:30:20 - Okuduklarımız Devam1:40:28 - Oynadıklarımız2:00:00 - Steam MachineBölüm linkleri:MonoforPower Podcast Ödüllerinde Oy Vermek İçinBölümde paylaşılan tüm linklerFatih'in Hamburg'ta Çektiği FotoğraflarPluribusMr. ScorseseRemnickHit Makers: How Things Become PopularKaybolan BağlarGlühweinCrush It!: Why Now Is the Time to Cash In on Your PassionJab, Jab, Jab, Right Hook: How to Tell Your Story in a Noisy Social WorldThe thank you economy1000 Words: A Writer's Guide to Staying Creative, Focused, and Productive All Year RoundSyberia - RemasteredARC RaidersSteam Machine

Wahnsinn direkt aus dem echten Leben: In "extra 3 Spezial: Der reale Irrsinn" nehmen wir euch mit auf eine Reise durch Deutschland – dahin, wo Vorschriften den Verstand überholen. Acht Realsatiren zeigen, wie Bürokratie, Steuergeld und gute Absichten manchmal grandios an der Realität scheitern. Lachen erlaubt. Kopfschütteln unvermeidlich.

Have you ever had a buyer fall in love with a home only to get spooked by the words “HOA,” “condo,” or “association fees”? In this episode, “What Every Realtor Needs to Know About Community Associations (But Is Afraid to Ask),” we're pulling back the curtain on how associations really work, what they are, how they're governed, discussing resale documents and disclosures, and how Realtors and community managers can work together to the benefit of all parties. Our panel features three industry experts with deep knowledge of real estate transactions in associations: Jody Buchter, CMCA, AMS, Realtor®, owner of Calibre Property Management, brings 25+ years of hands-on experience working with community associations and guiding buyers and sellers through the resale process. Edward Hoffman, Jr., Esq., CCAL, Founder and Managing Member of Hoffman Law LLC, offers a legal perspective on association governance, documentation, and common pitfalls that can surprise even seasoned real estate professionals. Carl N. Weiner, Esq., CCAL of Hamburg, Rubin, Mullin, Maxwell & Lupin, is one of the region's most recognized authorities in association law. With more than three decades in real estate and land development, Carl has advised on the creation of over 150 condominium and homeowners' associations and has earned a reputation for his practical, real-world approach to complex real estate issues. Special thanks to our sponsor Hoffman Law, LLC. Visit Hoffman Law online for more information. Community Matters is available in the iTunes store, on Google Play, and on Spotify. Subscribe there or download the Podbean app and be the first to receive notifications when new episodes are posted.

As Mickey-Jo gets ready to bring you dozens of updates from his most recent trip to New York including reviews and vlog content, he's taking on an unusual challenge.Mickey-Jo has decided to briefly review every show currently playing on Broadway (as of last week) by telling you what he thinks the best and worst thing about each of them is...About Mickey-Jo:As one of the leading voices in theatre criticism on a social platform, Mickey-Jo is pioneering a new medium for a dwindling field. His YouTube channel: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠MickeyJoTheatre⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ is the largest worldwide in terms of dedicated theatre criticism, where he also share features, news and interviews as well as lifestyle content for over 89,000 subscribers. With a viewership that is largely split between the US and the UK he has been fortunate enough to be able to work with PR, Marketing, and Social Media representatives for shows in New York, London, Edinburgh, Hamburg, Toronto, Sao Pãolo, and Paris. His reviews and features have also been published by WhatsOnStage, for whom he was a panelist to help curate nominees for their 2023 and 2024 Awards as well as BroadwayWorldUK, Musicals Magazine and LondonTheatre.co.uk. Instagram/TikTok/X: @MickeyJoTheatre Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Last night, after considerable anticipation, Mickey-Jo finally saw WICKED: For Good, the second film in the two part adaptation of the global musical phenomenon, Wicked.Both films have been directed by Jon M Chu and star Cynthia Erivo (The Color Purple) as Elphaba, Ariana Grande (13 the Musical) as Glinda, and Jonathan Bailey (Company) as Fiyero. The supporting cast also includes Marissa Bode, Ethan Slater, Michelle Yeoh, and Jeff Goldblum.Check out today's brand new *spoiler-free* review video for Mickey-Jo's thoughts on the film, its choices as an adaptation, its aesthetics, its themes and its performances without the details that would prevent you from enjoying the experience for yourself when the film is released.Remember to keep your thoughts spoiler-free in the comments section!•00:00 | introduction04:03 | context / overview09:12 | more general thoughts13:07 | adapting Act 217:30 | central themes23:24 | the score28:56 | performances33:24 | cinematography / design36:49 | final thoughtsAbout Mickey-Jo:As one of the leading voices in theatre criticism on a social platform, Mickey-Jo is pioneering a new medium for a dwindling field. His YouTube channel: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠MickeyJoTheatre⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ is the largest worldwide in terms of dedicated theatre criticism, where he also share features, news and interviews as well as lifestyle content for over 89,000 subscribers. With a viewership that is largely split between the US and the UK he has been fortunate enough to be able to work with PR, Marketing, and Social Media representatives for shows in New York, London, Edinburgh, Hamburg, Toronto, Sao Pãolo, and Paris. His reviews and features have also been published by WhatsOnStage, for whom he was a panelist to help curate nominees for their 2023 and 2024 Awards as well as BroadwayWorldUK, Musicals Magazine and LondonTheatre.co.uk. Instagram/TikTok/X: @MickeyJoTheatre Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

One of London's most anticipated new theatrical openings this year has been a much talked about stage adaptation of THE HUNGER GAMES, based on the young adult dystopian novel by Suzanne Collins which has also been adapted for film.The brand new production, written by Connor McPherson and directed by Matthew Dunster, is now playing at the purpose built Troubadour Theatre Canary Wharf and celebrated its official opening night earlier this month.Today, ahead of returning to the show to create his own full review, Mickey-Jo is sharing a range of those published so far to find out what London's critics thought of the bold new venture...•00:00 | introduction02:39 | WhatsOnStage11:01 | The Times16:32 | The Stage21:34 | TimeOut31:04 | The TelegraphAbout Mickey-Jo:As one of the leading voices in theatre criticism on a social platform, Mickey-Jo is pioneering a new medium for a dwindling field. His YouTube channel: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠MickeyJoTheatre⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ is the largest worldwide in terms of dedicated theatre criticism, where he also share features, news and interviews as well as lifestyle content for over 89,000 subscribers. With a viewership that is largely split between the US and the UK he has been fortunate enough to be able to work with PR, Marketing, and Social Media representatives for shows in New York, London, Edinburgh, Hamburg, Toronto, Sao Pãolo, and Paris. His reviews and features have also been published by WhatsOnStage, for whom he was a panelist to help curate nominees for their 2023 and 2024 Awards as well as BroadwayWorldUK, Musicals Magazine and LondonTheatre.co.uk. Instagram/TikTok/X: @MickeyJoTheatre Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

After starring in back to back off-Broadway musicals, the name on everybody's lips is rising star Matt Rodin.Of course, his face may be familiar to anyone who caught him as Jamie on the most recent US Tour of Company or from his multi-year, game filled red carpet coverage for outlets such as Broadway.com.After enjoying many of his performances and looking up to him in the theatre industry for years, Matt and Mickey-Jo finally sat down as friends to discuss the successful year he's had and the unique road that brought him here...•00:00 | introduction01:59 | red carpet games10:04 | touring with COMPANY16:22 | ALL THE WORLD'S A STAGE19:31 | building BEAU the Musical27:12 | lessons from BEAUAbout Mickey-Jo:As one of the leading voices in theatre criticism on a social platform, Mickey-Jo is pioneering a new medium for a dwindling field. His YouTube channel: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠MickeyJoTheatre⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ is the largest worldwide in terms of dedicated theatre criticism, where he also share features, news and interviews as well as lifestyle content for over 89,000 subscribers. With a viewership that is largely split between the US and the UK he has been fortunate enough to be able to work with PR, Marketing, and Social Media representatives for shows in New York, London, Edinburgh, Hamburg, Toronto, Sao Pãolo, and Paris. His reviews and features have also been published by WhatsOnStage, for whom he was a panelist to help curate nominees for their 2023 and 2024 Awards as well as BroadwayWorldUK, Musicals Magazine and LondonTheatre.co.uk. Instagram/TikTok/X: @MickeyJoTheatre Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Mickey-Jo has officially arrived back in New York City for another marathon theatre trip filled with as many Broadway and Off-Broadway shows as possible.Ahead of sharing plenty of review and vlog-style coverage, Mickey-Jo is letting you know which shows he plans to see, which he is still considering and which he will deliberately avoid...Check out Mickey-Jo's thoughts on what's currently playing in New York by way of this update on his trip!•00:00 | introduction02:23 | shows I'm seeing12:08 | shows I might see19:39 | shows I'm skipping28:36 | final thoughts...About Mickey-Jo:As one of the leading voices in theatre criticism on a social platform, Mickey-Jo is pioneering a new medium for a dwindling field. His YouTube channel: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠MickeyJoTheatre⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ is the largest worldwide in terms of dedicated theatre criticism, where he also share features, news and interviews as well as lifestyle content for over 89,000 subscribers. With a viewership that is largely split between the US and the UK he has been fortunate enough to be able to work with PR, Marketing, and Social Media representatives for shows in New York, London, Edinburgh, Hamburg, Toronto, Sao Pãolo, and Paris. His reviews and features have also been published by WhatsOnStage, for whom he was a panelist to help curate nominees for their 2023 and 2024 Awards as well as BroadwayWorldUK, Musicals Magazine and LondonTheatre.co.uk. Instagram/TikTok/X: @MickeyJoTheatre Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On only the second day of Mickey-Jo's most recent trip to New York, he headed to City Center and caught the penultimate performance of BAT BOY, the venue's annual gala presentation.A cult hit musical first seen around the millennium, this revival starred Taylor Trensch alongside Kerry Butler, who returned to the show having played a role in its original off-Broadway run.Check out what Mickey-Jo thought of the show, with no prior knowledge of its material, and why he thinks it's ready for Broadway...•00:00 | introduction03:19 | synopsis / material12:34 | creative choices16:33 | performances24:37 | featured castAbout Mickey-Jo:As one of the leading voices in theatre criticism on a social platform, Mickey-Jo is pioneering a new medium for a dwindling field. His YouTube channel: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠MickeyJoTheatre⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ is the largest worldwide in terms of dedicated theatre criticism, where he also share features, news and interviews as well as lifestyle content for over 89,000 subscribers. With a viewership that is largely split between the US and the UK he has been fortunate enough to be able to work with PR, Marketing, and Social Media representatives for shows in New York, London, Edinburgh, Hamburg, Toronto, Sao Pãolo, and Paris. His reviews and features have also been published by WhatsOnStage, for whom he was a panelist to help curate nominees for their 2023 and 2024 Awards as well as BroadwayWorldUK, Musicals Magazine and LondonTheatre.co.uk. Instagram/TikTok/X: @MickeyJoTheatre Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

It has been announced today that the Tony Award winning musical AVENUE Q is heading back to the West End for a 20th anniversary production that is being called a 'revisal'.Find out why I'm excited for the irreverent, fuzzy show to return, who I would like to see starring in it, and what we might expect in terms of updates to the material...•00:00 | introduction01:44 | what we know08:50 | what I think14:44 | who should be in itAbout Mickey-Jo:As one of the leading voices in theatre criticism on a social platform, Mickey-Jo is pioneering a new medium for a dwindling field. His YouTube channel: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠MickeyJoTheatre⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ is the largest worldwide in terms of dedicated theatre criticism, where he also share features, news and interviews as well as lifestyle content for over 89,000 subscribers. With a viewership that is largely split between the US and the UK he has been fortunate enough to be able to work with PR, Marketing, and Social Media representatives for shows in New York, London, Edinburgh, Hamburg, Toronto, Sao Pãolo, and Paris. His reviews and features have also been published by WhatsOnStage, for whom he was a panelist to help curate nominees for their 2023 and 2024 Awards as well as BroadwayWorldUK, Musicals Magazine and LondonTheatre.co.uk. Instagram/TikTok/X: @MickeyJoTheatre Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Germany has long been considered an industrial powerhouse—but in recent years, its energy policies have charted a path that looks less like progress and more like self-inflicted decline. From shuttering reliable energy sources to binding one of its most prosperous cities to an aggressive net-zero mandate, Germany's “energy transition” raises a serious question: is this bold environmental leadership, or a slow-motion economic unraveling?In this episode of Created to Reign, Dr. David Legates examines Germany's rapid de-development—what led to it, why citizens of Hamburg voted to accelerate it, and what these decisions mean for industry, energy security, and everyday people. As Europe's wealthiest nation grapples with soaring costs and shrinking energy supply, Dr. Legates explores whether Germany's path offers a cautionary tale for the United States.Stay with us as we consider what happens when well-intended climate goals collide with the realities of energy, economics, and human flourishing.Visit our podcast resource page: https://cornwallalliance.org/listen%20to%20our%20podcast%20created%20to%20reign/Our work is entirely supported by donations from people like you. If you benefit from our work and would like to partner with us, please visit www.cornwallalliance.org/donate.

Bei Barbara Schöneberger verrät Ina Müller, warum sie morgens schon sportlich genug ist – nämlich, sobald die schwarze Jogginghose sitzt! Außerdem erzählt sie, wie plötzlich Sting vor ihr stand, warum sie durchtrainierte Männer albern findet und wieso sie keinen Hund, aber jede Menge Lästerbedarf hat. Barbara erfährt, was Ina an lila Abendkleidern traumatisiert, weshalb sie Shapewear hasst, warum Pickel ausdrücken befriedigend ist – und was sie tun würde, wenn's im Seniorenheim nur noch drei Männer gäbe. Und ganz ehrlich: So offen, ehrlich und schlagfertig war's selten!

Dankbarkeit hilft uns auch, die Bitterkeit und den Schmerz zu überwinden, die wir alle mit uns herumtragen Entnommen aus: Jay Shetty "Ruhe in dir. Zeitlose Weisheit für ein selbstbestimmtes Leben", Rowohlt Taschenbuch Verlag, Hamburg 2024

Heute geht es um die Frage, wie gut Hamburg eigentlich auf den Winter vorbereitet ist, der sich an diesem Freitag schon einmal andeutete. Weitere Themen: Tarzan ist zurück in der Stadt, eine Frau stiehlt Waren im Wert von mehr als 2000 Euro aus einer Drogerie – und eine der bekanntesten Tankstellen der Stadt verschwindet.

Ut Hamborg und de wiede Welt vun maandaags bet sünnavends: Die aktuellen Nachrichten auf Plattdeutsch.

TRADCAST EXPRESS - Episode 218 Topics covered: Leo XIV on how the Resurrection of Christ relates to integral ecology. Correction of an error in previous TRADCAST EXPRESS episode. Rev. James Martin, S.J., says he is 'fascinated' by blasphemous heresy that St. Joseph was Christ's biological father. Archdiocese of Hamburg, Germany, issues perverted sex education guidelines for its schools. Mexican Novus Ordo bishops claim Cristero martyrs died for 'conscience'. Links: Leo XIV, General Audience catechesis (Nov. 19, 2025) TRADCAST EXPRESS 217 (Nov. 6, 2025) Rev. James Martin, S.J., "Review: What was Jesus' childhood like?", America (Sep. 11, 2025) Jeromiah Taylor, "Hamburg Archdiocese Issues Educational Guidelines Respecting Sexuality and Gender Diversity", New Ways Ministry (Sep. 4, 2025) David Ramos, "'Christ is King, not the oppressive state': Mexico's bishops recall Cristero legacy", Catholic World Report (Nov. 15, 2025) Full Text of Mexican Novus Ordo Bishop's Message of Nov. 13, 2025 (Spanish) Pope Pius XI, Encyclical Quas Primas (Dec. 11, 1925) Sign up to be notified of new episode releases automatically at tradcast.org. Produced by NOVUSORDOWATCH.org Support us by making a tax-deductible contribution at NovusOrdoWatch.org/donate/

This year, alongside writing his own book, Tony was gripped by that of another writer - Ian Leslie's ‘John & Paul: A Love Story in Songs'. Tony, who is a lifelong Beatles fan, has invited Ian onto Cunningcast to chat all about The Beatles. In Part 1 of this 3 Part series, Ian and Tony explore how a shared adolescent intensity, mutual trauma, and obsessive love of music forged the unique and complex relationship between John and Paul that fuelled the Beatles's extraordinary innovation. This is audible in songs such as We Can Work It Out and If I Fell, where harmonic complexity reflects their intertwined identities. They trace how the band's early experiences, especially in Hamburg, were transformative, exposing them to avant-garde influences, encouraging them to see themselves as artists, and blending silliness and Dada-like humour, which ultimately helped them discover who they were as a band. Hosted by Sir Tony Robinson | Instagram @sirtonyrobinsonProducer: Melissa FitzGerald | X @melissafitzgWithIan Leslie | www.ian-leslie.comIan Leslie is the author of acclaimed and bestselling books on human psychology and creativity which have been translated into over a dozen languages. Malcolm Gladwell describes him as “one of my favourite writers”. Ian has written for the Financial Times, the Economist, the New York Times, The Sunday Times, and the New Statesman, among others, covering everything from technology to politics to music.‘John & Paul: A Love Story in Songs' | https://ian-leslie.com/johnandpaul/ | The New York Times and Sunday Times bestseller Follow us on our socials:Instagram @cunningcastpod | X @cunningcastpod | YouTube @cunningcast | TikTok @cunningcast-------If you enjoy this podcast, please follow us and leave us a rating or review.Thank you, Love Tony x Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

(Rec: 10/6/20) Money, German life confusion, a friendly red card, buckets of petrol, unpleasant meat, and eating a doughnut before you pay for it. Join the Iron Filings Society: https://www.patreon.com/topflighttimemachine and on Apple Podcast Subscriptions. Get a 7-day full access free trial and pay for 10 months up front for the price of 12 if you like a bargain. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From Restraint to Ruin - The Birth of the Bombing WarAt the dawn of World War II in 1939, a fragile consensus existed among the warring powers. Spurred by an appeal from President Roosevelt, leaders like Neville Chamberlain and even Hitler gave public undertakings to abstain from the horror of aerial attacks on civilians. There was a genuine, if naïve, belief that the looming conflict could be "humanised," and that the bomber would be restricted to purely military targets.But how did this initial restraint crumble into the devastating strategic bombing campaigns that would define the war? In this episode, we delve into Richard Overy's "The Bombing War" to explore the complex factors that shaped Britain's approach to aerial warfare in the crucial early years of 1939-1942.Join us as we uncover the story of a nation caught between its self-image as a "civilised" power and the brutal necessities of total war. We'll examine why RAF Bomber Command was initially held back, not just by political and legal niceties, but by its own operational unreadiness. Discover how the unique, independent institutional culture of Bomber Command—a force designed solely to attack—fostered a doctrine that would eventually target the enemy's home front, leading to the destruction of cities like Hamburg, Cologne, and Dresden under the infamous command of Sir Arthur "Bomber" Harris.If you liked this episode, listen to: https://shows.acast.com/explaininghistory/episodes/the-politics-of-rearmament-in-britain-1936Go Deeper: Visit our website at www.explaininghistory.org for articles and detailed explorations of the topics discussed.▸ Join the Conversation: Our community of history enthusiasts discusses episodes, shares ideas, and continues the conversation. Find us on:Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/groups/ExplainingHistoryPodcast/Substack: https://theexplaininghistorypodcast.substack.com/▸ Support the Podcast: Explaining History is a listener-supported production. Your contribution helps us cover the costs of research and keep these conversations going. You can support the show and get access to exclusive content by becoming a patron.Support on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/explaininghistoryExplaining History helps you understand the 20th Century through critical conversations and expert interviews. We connect the past to the present. If you enjoy the show, please subscribe and share.▸ Support the Show & Get Exclusive ContentBecome a Patron: patreon.com/explaininghistory▸ Join the Community & Continue the ConversationFacebook Group: facebook.com/groups/ExplainingHistoryPodcastSubstack: theexplaininghistorypodcast.substack.com▸ Read Articles & Go DeeperWebsite: explaininghistory.org Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

When renovation crews began digging beneath a small ice cream shop in Vienna, they didn't expect to uncover a gruesome secret. What they found unraveled the double life of Estibaliz Carranza, a woman who hid two murders for years. Dubbed The Ice Lady of Austria, Establiz's crimes spun the media into a frenzy, especially when she was represented by the very same man who defended another of Austria's most notorious criminals. Connect with us on Social Media!You can find us at:Instagram: @bookofthedeadpodX: @bkofthedeadpodFacebook: The Book of the Dead PodcastTikTok: BookofthedeadpodOr visit our website at www.botdpod.comAdams, S. (2017, January 16). Infamous baby-obsessed “ice cream parlour murderer” is so dangerous she'll be jailed with men not women. Daily Mirror. https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/infamous-baby-obsessed-ice-cream-9631172Arts - ISKCON - the Hare Krishna Movement. (n.d.). ISKCON - the Hare Krishna Movement. https://www.iskcon.org/about-us/what-is-iskcon.phpBBC News. (2012, November 22). “Ice cream” murder woman gets life sentence in Austria. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-20453491Bell, B. (2014, November 16). “Ice cream” killer Carranza publishing memoirs. BBC News. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-30056611Charter, D. (2014, November 17). One last scoop from ice cream parlour murders. The Times. https://www.thetimes.com/travel/inspiration/ski-holiday/one-last-scoop-from-ice-cream-parlour-murders-6p8s00c2j33Del Cabo/El Correo, A. (2012, November 22). La descuartizadora Estíbaliz Carranza era «amable y sumisa» con sus examantes. Diario ABC. https://www.abc.es/internacional/abci-descuartizadora-amable-sumisa-examantes-201211210000_noticia.html?ref=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.abc.es%2Finternacional%2Fabci-descuartizadora-amable-sumisa-examantes-201211210000_noticia.htmlEspaña, L. N. (2011, June 13). La descuartizadora mataba por ira y dinero. La Nueva España. https://www.lne.es/sucesos/2011/06/13/descuartizadora-mataba-ira-dinero-21083577.htmlGhosh, S. (2017, January 18). Who is Estibaliz Carranza? Infamous “Ice Cream killer” being moved to All-Male prison in Austria. International Business Times. https://www.ibtimes.com/who-estibaliz-carranza-infamous-ice-cream-killer-being-moved-all-male-prison-austria-2476821“Ice lady” killer buried husband, lover in Vienna cellar. (2012, November 20). NBC News. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/ice-lady-killer-buried-husband-lover-vienna-cellar-flna1c7172322Jh. (2019, March 6). Scary True Stories: The ice-cream lady - J.H. Moncrieff. J.H. Moncrieff. https://www.jhmoncrieff.com/scary-true-stories-the-ice-cream-lady/Kazim, H. (2018, September 8). “Am I still beautiful?” DER SPIEGEL, Hamburg, Germany. https://www.spiegel.de/panorama/justiz/doppelmoerderin-estibaliz-carranza-buch-zelle-14-ueber-die-eislady-a-1226978.htmlKurier.At. (2014, November 14). Die Memoiren der Eislady. Kurier. https://kurier.at/chronik/wien/meine-zwei-leben-die-memoiren-der-eislady/97.062.087#google_vignettePayreder, M., & Peyerl, R. (2020, May 14). Das Geständnis der Estibaliz Carranza. Kurier. https://kurier.at/chronik/wien/das-gestaendnis-der-estibaliz-carranza/1.263.891#google_vignettePiggott, M. (2014, November 16). “Ice Cream Killer” Estibaliz Carranza Publishes Memoir Describing her Horrific Crimes. International Business Times UK. https://www.ibtimes.co.uk/ice-cream-killer-estibaliz-carranza-publishes-memoir-describing-her-horrific-crimes-1475063Prodhan, G. (2012, November 23). Austria's “Ice Lady” gets life for double murder. Times Colonist, B9.Reuters. (2012, November 12). “Ice Lady” confesses in deaths of two men. The Leader Post, B9.Velkova, V. (2025, June 12). The Ice Cream Killer: The Chilling Story of Estibaliz Carranza. Medium. https://medium.com/@victoria.vlkva/the-ice-cream-killer-the-chilling-story-of-estibaliz-carranza-8d40c7581cc6If you enjoyed the episode, consider leaving a review or rating! It helps more than you know! If you have a case suggestion, or want attention brought to a loved one's case, email me at bookofthedeadpod@gmail.com with Case Suggestion in the subject line.Stay safe, stay curious, and stay vigilant.

A round-up of the main headlines in Sweden on November 18th 2025. You can hear more reports on our homepage www.radiosweden.se, or in the app Sveriges Radio. Producer/presenter: Sujay Dutt

Stefan Diethelm is a Swiss and German artist, originally from Uzwil, Switzerland. He fell in love with performing at a young age, was trained in classical voice throughout his teens, and studied musical theatre in Hamburg, Germany. He moved to New York City to further his craft, and studied at the HB Studio under instructors like Lonny Price, Peter Francis James and Theresa McElwee. HB Studio is also where he met Eduardo Machado and started writing plays while in his class. Since graduating from the studio, he has been a working playwright, actor, producer, and director here in the city.He has acted on various stages, from Off- and Off-Off-Broadway to Switzerland and Germany, and his plays have been performed in a variety of theaters and festivals in New York and beyond, garnering positive national and international reviews.His biggest influences as a playwright include Sarah Kane, Samuel Beckett, Adrienne Kennedy and the European classics. He aims to create original, human art for our commercialized times.Bradly Valenzuela is a New York City based director, playwright and producer. He is originally from Rocklin, California and attended university in Southern California at California State University, Fullerton. He graduated with a BA in Theatre with an Emphasis in Directing. Bradly is a recipient of the Honorable Mention Directing Award for Region 8 of the Kennedy Center American College Theater Festival. For the past 5 years, he has worked within many theater companies such as Bated Breath Theatre Company, Mabou Mines and Theatre for the New City. He also has worked in multiple festivals, including the Rogue Theater Festival and the New York Theater Festival.Along with collaborating in these given spaces, Bradly shows continued commitment to workshopping and developing new works, both as a director, playwright and as a producer, being responsible for 6 debuts in the last 2 years.This is Something Rather Than Nothing