Securities: Its Conception and Protection of Interests of its Holders

Theoretical studies of the problems of the securities markets in the Russian Federation incline to one or other of the two traditional approaches. The first consists of comparing the definition of "valuable paper" set forth in the current legislation of the Russian Federation, with the theoretical model of "Wertpapiere" elaborated by German scholars more than 90 years ago. The problem with this approach is, in Mr. Pentsov's opinion, that any new features of the definition of "security" that do not coincide with the theoretical model of "Wertpapiere" (such as valuable papers existing in non-material, electronic form) are claimed to be incorrect and removed from the current legislation of the Russian Federation. The second approach works on the basis of the differentiation between the Common Law concept of "security" and the Civil Law concept of "valuable paper". Mr. Pentsov's research, presented in an article written in English, uses both methodological tools and involves, firstly, a historical study of the origin and development of certain legal phenomena (securities) as they evolved in different countries, and secondly, a comparative, synchronic study of equivalent legal phenomena as they exist in different countries today. Employing the first method, Mr. Pentsov divided the historical development of the conception of "valuable paper" in Russia into five major stages. He found that, despite the existence of a relatively wide circulation of valuable papers, especially in the second half of the 19th century, Russian legislation before 1917 (the first stage) did not have a unified definition of valuable paper. The term was used, in both theoretical studies and legislation, but it covered a broad range of financial instruments such as stocks, bonds, government bonds, promissory notes, bills of exchange, etc. During the second stage, also, the legislation of the USSR did not have a unified definition of "valuable paper". After the end of the "new economic policy" (1922 - 1930) the stock exchanges and the securities markets in the USSR, with a very few exceptions, were abolished. And thus during the third stage (up to 1985), the use of valuable papers in practice was reduced to foreign economic relations (bills of exchange, stocks in enterprises outside the USSR) and to state bonds. Not surprisingly, there was still no unified definition of "valuable paper". After the beginning of Gorbachev's perestroika, a securities market began to re-appear in the USSR. However, the successful development of securities markets in the USSR was retarded by the absence of an appropriate regulatory framework. The first effort to improve the situation was the adoption of the Regulations on Valuable Papers, approved by resolution No. 590 of the Council of Ministers of the USSR, dated June 19, 1990. Section 1 of the Regulation contained the first statutory definition of "valuable paper" in the history of Russia. At the very beginning of the period of transition to a market economy, a number of acts contained different definitions of "valuable paper". This diversity clearly undermined the stability of the Russian securities market and did not achieve the goal of protecting the investor. The lack of unified criteria for the consideration of such non-standard financial instruments as "valuable papers" significantly contributed to the appearance of numerous fraudulent "pyramid" schemes that were outside of the regulatory scheme of Russia legislation. The situation was substantially improved by the adoption of the new Civil Code of the Russian Federation. According to Section 1 of Article 142 of the Civil Code, a valuable paper is a document that confirms, in compliance with an established form and mandatory requisites, certain material rights whose realisation or transfer are possible only in the process of its presentation. Finally, the recent Federal law No. 39 - FZ "On the Valuable Papers Market", dated April 22 1996, has also introduced the term "emission valuable papers". According to Article 2 of this Law, an "emission valuable paper" is any valuable paper, including non-documentary, that simultaneously has the following features: it fixes the composition of material and non-material rights that are subject to confirmation, cession and unconditional realisation in compliance with the form and procedure established by this federal law; it is placed by issues; and it has equal amount and time of realisation of rights within the same issue regardless of when the valuable paper was purchased. Thus the introduction of the conception of "emission valuable paper" became the starting point in the Russian federation's legislation for the differentiation between the legal regimes of "commercial papers" and "investment papers" similar to the Common Law approach. Moving now to the synchronic, comparative method of research, Mr. Pentsov notes that there are currently three major conceptions of "security" and, correspondingly, three approaches to its legal definition: the Common Law concept, the continental law concept, and the concept employed by Japanese Law. Mr. Pentsov proceeds to analyse the differences and similarities of all three, concluding that though the concept of "security" in the Common Law system substantially differs from that of "valuable paper" in the Continental Law system, nevertheless the two concepts are developing in similar directions. He predicts that in the foreseeable future the existing differences between these two concepts will become less and less significant. On the basis of his research, Mr. Pentsov arrived at the conclusion that the concept of "security" (and its equivalents) is not a static one. On the contrary, it is in the process of permanent evolution that reflects the introduction of new financial instruments onto the capital markets. He believes that the scope of the statutory definition of "security" plays an extremely important role in the protection of investors. While passing the Securities Act of 1933, the United States Congress determined that the best way to achieve the goal of protecting investors was to define the term "security" in sufficiently broad and general terms so as to include within the definition the many types of instruments that in the commercial world fall within the ordinary concept of "security' and to cover the countless and various devices used by those who seek to use the money of others on the promise of profits. On the other hand, the very limited scope of the current definition of "emission valuable paper" in the Federal Law of the Russian Federation entitled "On the Valuable Papers Market" does not allow the anti-fraud provisions of this law to be implemented in an efficient way. Consequently, there is no basis for the protection of investors. Mr. Pentsov proposes amendments which he believes would enable the Russian markets to become more efficient and attractive for both foreign and domestic investors.

Sui Generis Rights for the Protection of Traditional Cultural Expressions Policy Implications

Within the international community there have been many calls for better protection of traditional cultural expressions (TCEs), for which classic instruments of intellectual property rights do not seem to fit. In response, at least five model laws have been advanced within the last 40 years. These are referred to as sui generis because, though they generally belong to the realm of intellectual property they structurally depart from classic copyright law to accommodate the needs of the holders of TCEs. The purpose of this paper is to provide a well-founded basis for national policy makers who wish to implement protection for TCEs within their country. This is achieved by systematically comparing and evaluating economic effects that can be expected to result from these regulatory alternatives and a related system or private ordering. Specifically, we compare if and how protection preferences of local communities are met as well as the social costs that are likely to arise from the different model laws.

Bioavailability of pharmaceuticals in waters close to wastewater treatment plants: use of fish bile for exposure assessment

Pharmaceuticals are ubiquitous in surface waters as a consequence of discharges from municipal wastewater treatment plants. However, few studies have assessed the bioavailability of pharmaceuticals to fish in natural waters. In the present study, passive samplers and rainbow trout were experimentally deployed next to three municipal wastewater treatment plants in Finland to evaluate the degree of animal exposure. Pharmaceuticals from several therapeutic classes (in total 15) were analyzed by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry in extracts of passive samplers and in bile and blood plasma of rainbow trout held at polluted sites for 10 d. Each approach indicated the highest exposure near wastewater treatment plant A and the lowest near that of plant C. Diclofenac, naproxen, and ibuprofen were found in rainbow trout, and their concentrations in bile were 10 to 400 times higher than in plasma. The phase I metabolite hydroxydiclofenac was also detected in bile. Hence, bile proved to be an excellent sample matrix for the exposure assessment of fish. Most of the monitored pharmaceuticals were found in passive samplers, implying that they may overestimate the actual exposure of fish in receiving waters. Two biomarkers, hepatic vitellogenin and cytochrome P4501A, did not reveal clear effects on fish, although a small induction of vitellogenin mRNA was observed in trout caged near wastewater treatment plants B and C.

Specific, Reversible Cytostatic Protection of Normal Cells Against Negative Effects of Chemotherapy

Chemotherapy is a common and effective method to treat many forms of cancer. However, treatment of cancer with chemotherapy has severe side effects which often limit the doses of therapy administered. Because some cancer chemotherapeutics target proliferating cells and tissues, all dividing cells, whether normal or tumor, are affected. Cell culture studies have demonstrated that UCN-01 is able to reversibly and selectively arrest normal dividing cells; tumor cells lines do not undergo this temporary arrest. Following UCN-01 treatment, normal cells displayed a 50-fold increase in IC50 for camptothecin; tumor cells showed no such increased tolerance. We have examined the response of the proliferating tissues of the mouse to UCN- 01 treatment, using the small bowel epithelium as a model system. Our results indicate that UCN-01 treatment can cause a cell cycle arrest in the gut epithelium, beginning 24 hours following UCN-01 administration, with cell proliferation remaining suppressed for one week. Two weeks post-UCN-01 treatment the rate of proliferation returns to normal levels. 5-FU administered during this period demonstrates that UCN-01 is able to provide protection to normal cells of the mouse within a narrow window of efficacy, from three to five days post-UCN-01. UCN-01 pretreated mice displayed improved survival, weight status and blood markers following 5-FU compared to control mice, indicating that UCN-01 can protect normal dividing tissues. The mechanism by which UCN-01 arrests normal cells in vivo was also examined. We have demonstrated that UCN-01 treatment in mice causes an increase in the G1 phase cell cycle proteins cdk4 and cyclin D, as well as the inhibitor p27. Phosphorylated Rb was also elevated in the arrested cells. These results are a departure from cell culture studies, in which inhibition of G1 phase cyclin dependent kinases led to hyposphosphorylation of Rb. Future investigation will be required to understand the mechanism of UCN-01 action. This is important information, especially for identification of alternate compounds which could provide the protection afforded by UCN-01.

Book Review: Protection of Cultural Diversity from a European and International Perspective

A review of the volume of collected essays edited by Hildegard Schneider and Peter van den Bossche (Intersentia 2008), which looks at diverse implications of the recently adopted UNESCO Convention on Cultural Diversity and discusses these from European and international law perspectives.

Vesicular stomatitis virus replicon expressing the VP2 outer capsid protein of bluetongue virus serotype 8 induces complete protection of sheep against challenge infection.

Bluetongue virus (BTV) is an arthropod-borne pathogen that causes an often fatal, hemorrhagic disease in ruminants. Different BTV serotypes occur throughout many temperate and tropical regions of the world. In 2006, BTV serotype 8 (BTV-8) emerged in Central and Northern Europe for the first time. Although this outbreak was eventually controlled using inactivated virus vaccines, the epidemic caused significant economic losses not only from the disease in livestock but also from trade restrictions. To date, BTV vaccines that allow simple serological discrimination of infected and vaccinated animals (DIVA) have not been approved for use in livestock. In this study, we generated recombinant RNA replicon particles based on single-cycle vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV) vectors. Immunization of sheep with infectious VSV replicon particles expressing the outer capsid VP2 protein of BTV-8 resulted in induction of BTV-8 serotype-specific neutralizing antibodies. After challenge with a virulent BTV-8 strain, the vaccinated animals neither developed signs of disease nor showed viremia. In contrast, immunization of sheep with recombinant VP5 - the second outer capsid protein of BTV - did not confer protection. Discrimination of infected from vaccinated animals was readily achieved using an ELISA for detection of antibodies against the VP7 antigen. These data indicate that VSV replicon particles potentially represent a safe and efficacious vaccine platform with which to control future outbreaks by BTV-8 or other serotypes, especially in previously non-endemic regions where discrimination between vaccinated and infected animals is crucial.