From Inactivity to Full Enforcement: The Implementation of the Do No Harm Approach in Initial Coin Offerings

This Article analyzes the way the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) has enforced securities laws with regard to Initial Coin Offerings (“ICOs”). In a speech held in 2016, the U.S. Commodities Futures Trading Commission (“CFTC”) Chairman Christopher Giancarlo emphasized the similarities between the advent of the blockchain technology and the Internet era. He offered the “do no harm” approach as the best way to regulate blockchain technology. The Clinton administration implemented the “do no harm” approach at the beginning of the Internet Era in the 1990s when regulators sought to support technological innovations without stifling them with burdensome rules. This Article suggests that the SEC adopted a “do no harm approach” and successfully pursued two of its fundamental institutional goals when enforcing securities laws in the context of ICOs: investor protection and preservation of capital formation. After providing a brief description of the basics of ICOs and the way they have evolved in the last two years, this Article examines the transition into a new phase of full enforcement action implemented by the SEC. This shift from inactivity to enforcement was gradual, characterized by clearly identifiable steps. Data on ICOs demonstrates that this rigorous enforcement of securities laws has not damaged the industry in the United States and may suggest that entrepreneurs have adapted to this enforcement approach. By contrast, a lack of enforcement would have probably increased uncertainty to the detriment of investors and entrepreneurs and put the UNITED STATES at a disadvantage in the international arena. Furthermore, this paper emphasizes the importance of pursuing specific goals in the short-to-medium term, particularly in order to make securities regulation uniform and avoid differences at the state and federal levels, as well as to encourage industry authorities such as Self-Regulatory Organizations (SROs) to develop high standards for self-regulation

Intrinsic host restriction factors of human cytomegalovirus replication and mechanisms of viral escape

Before a pathogen even enters a cell, intrinsic immune defenses are active. This first-line defense is mediated by a variety of constitutively expressed cell proteins collectively termed “restriction factors” (RFs), and they form a vital element of the immune response to virus infections. Over time, however, viruses have evolved in a variety ways so that they are able to overcome these RF defenses via mechanisms that are specific for each virus. This review provides a summary of the universal characteristics of RFs, and goes on to focus on the strategies employed by some of the most important RFs in their attempt to control human cytomegalovirus (HCMV) infection. This is followed by a discussion of the counter-restriction mechanisms evolved by viruses to circumvent the host cell’s intrinsic immune defenses. RFs include nuclear proteins IFN-γ inducible protein 16 (IFI16) (a Pyrin/HIN domain protein), Sp100, promyelocytic leukemia, and hDaxx; the latter three being the keys elements of nuclear domain 10 (ND10). IFI16 inhibits the synthesis of virus DNA by down-regulating UL54 transcription - a gene encoding a CMV DNA polymerase; in response, the virus antagonizes IFI16 via a process involving viral proteins UL97 and pp65 (pUL83), which results in the mislocalizing of IFI16 into the cytoplasm. In contrast, viral regulatory proteins, including pp71 and IE1, seek to modify or disrupt the ND10 proteins and thus block or reverse their inhibitory effects upon virus replication. All in all, detailed knowledge of these HCMV counter-restriction mechanisms will be fundamental for the future development of new strategies for combating HCMV infection and for identifying novel therapeutic agents

Connettere il territorio tra patrimonio e informazione: banche dati e modelli per le Cultural Heritage Routes

Il contributo affronta la ‘connessione’ tra patrimonio costruito e territorio approfondendo le forme ed i ruoli della ‘rappresentazione’ multidimensionale declinata tra ‘architettura’ e ‘rotta culturale’. Le Cultural Heritage Routes [ICOMOS 2008] assumono un ruolo chiave come collettori di un patrimonio che supera i propri confini geografici e politici. Attraverso le esperienze offerte dal progetto H2020-RISE-PROMETHEUS (2019-2021) viene condotta una riflessione sul patrimonio diffuso del bacino dell’Upper Kama, in Russia, quale caso pilota sulla rotta culturale dell’architettura religiosa ed insediativa del mercato del sale tra Europa e Asia. Il progetto è indirizzato all’elaborazione di una Charta programmatica per Modelli Informativi Territoriali replicabile in contesti europei. L’obiettivo è evidenziare i molteplici livelli di conoscenza stratificati sul singolo sito-monumento, dalla fabbrica costruttiva al complesso architettonico fino alla rete di relazione territoriale con il bacino culturale, in un processo di semantizzazione morfologica, tecnologica e tipologica che permetta di coordinarne la gestione combinata di memoria, informazione ed intervento sull’opera