Kickstarter backers have been receiving Pebble smartwatches with a black paint job since January, but if you're a supporter and haven't gotten ahold of your own yet, that's about to change. The folks behind the hardware announced today that the remaining watches are out of the factory and are being readied for delivery, making for over 55,000 shipped. Now that noir Pebbles are out of the way, the team says it's hard at work perfecting the production of the devices in other colors, and that the very first red Pebbles should be ready for shipping in two to three weeks. Other flavors don't have an estimated ship date just yet, but the team says Orange hardware will come next, with gray / white tagging along afterwards. Those who cherish speed over color can switch their order to a black ticker and snag one within roughly two weeks. On the software side, the e-paper timepiece can now take advantage of five 12-hour watch faces, so long as they carry firmware version 1.9.1. Hit the source link for details on the tribulations of color Pebble production and the perils of plastic injection.
(Reuters) - Ford Motor Co said its Focus model was the world's best-selling passenger car in 2012, boosted by demand from China and the United States, citing data from automotive consulting firm Polk.
The carmaker sold 1,020,410 Ford Focus compact cars last year, it said on Tuesday. (http://link.reuters.com/dyx27t)
More than one out of four Focus cars were sold in China, with registrations in the world's biggest auto market up 51 percent, according to Polk.
Focus was launched in China in late March last year.
U.S. sales were up 40 percent in 2012, said the carmaker, whose line-up also includes the popular F-Series pickup trucks.
The overall industry has posted annual sales increases in the double digits since 2009, when it hit the worst annual sales rate since World War Two, adjusted for population.
(Reporting by Garima Goel in Bangalore; editing by Jason Neely)
This photo released by the Syrian official news agency SANA, shows smoke rising from burned cars after a huge explosion shook the Sabaa Bahrat Square, one of the capital's biggest roundabouts, in Damascus, Syria, Monday, April. 8, 2013. A car bomb rocked a busy residential and commercial district in central Damascus on Monday, killing more than a dozen with many more injured and sending a huge cloud of black smoke billowing over the capital?s skyline, Syrian state-run media said. (AP Photo/SANA)
This photo released by the Syrian official news agency SANA, shows smoke rising from burned cars after a huge explosion shook the Sabaa Bahrat Square, one of the capital's biggest roundabouts, in Damascus, Syria, Monday, April. 8, 2013. A car bomb rocked a busy residential and commercial district in central Damascus on Monday, killing more than a dozen with many more injured and sending a huge cloud of black smoke billowing over the capital?s skyline, Syrian state-run media said. (AP Photo/SANA)
This photo released by the Syrian official news agency SANA, shows a Syrian fire fighter extinguishing a burning car after a huge explosion shook the Sabaa Bahrat Square, one of the capital's biggest roundabouts, in Damascus, Syria, Monday, April. 8, 2013. A car bomb rocked a busy residential and commercial district in central Damascus, killing at least a dozen people with more than fifty injured and causing heavy material damage, a Syrian government official said. (AP Photo/SANA)
This photo released by the Syrian official news agency SANA, shows Syrian fire fighters extinguishing burning cars after huge explosion shook the Sabaa Bahrat Square, one of the capital's biggest roundabouts, in Damascus, Syria, Monday, April. 8, 2013. A car bomb rocked a busy residential and commercial district in central Damascus, killing at least a dozen people with tens more injured and causing heavy material damage, a Syrian government official said. (AP Photo/SANA)
This photo released by the Syrian official news agency SANA, shows Syrians inspecting a damaged car at the scene of a car bomb attack near the Sabaa Bahrat Square, one of the capital's biggest roundabouts, in Damascus, Syria, Monday, April. 8, 2013. A car bomb rocked a busy residential and commercial district in central Damascus, killing at least a dozen people with tens more injured and causing heavy material damage, a Syrian government official said. (AP Photo/SANA)
This photo released by the Syrian official news agency SANA, shows smoke rising from burned cars after a huge explosion shook the Sabaa Bahrat Square, one of the capital's biggest roundabouts, in Damascus, Syria, Monday, April. 8, 2013. A car bomb rocked a busy residential and commercial district in central Damascus on Monday, killing more than a dozen with many more injured and sending a huge cloud of black smoke billowing over the capital?s skyline, Syrian state-run media said. (AP Photo/SANA)
DAMASCUS, Syria (AP) ? A suicide bomber detonated a car packed with explosives on Monday in a busy residential and financial district of central Damascus, killing at least 15 people, setting cars and buildings on fire and sending plumes of black smoke rising the capital, Syrian state-run media said.
The explosion came as U.N. chief Ban Ki-moon said inspectors were ready to deploy to Syria within 24 hours to investigate reports of chemical weapon attacks, but have not yet received permission from President Bashar Assad's government.
The blast, described by state-run Syrian TV as a terrorist suicide bombing, occurred near Sabaa Bahrat Square, one of the capital's biggest roundabouts. The Syrian central bank, the Finance Ministry and state-run investment agency, a mosque and a school are located nearby.
The explosion also wounded 146 people, according to the official news agency SANA.
It was the latest in a series of car bombs and suicide bombings to hit the Syrian capital in recent months. The two-year civil war, which the U.N. says has killed more than 70,000 people, has become increasingly chaotic as rebels press closer to Assad's seat of power in Damascus after seizing large areas in northern and eastern parts of the country.
TV images showed thick black smoke billowing from a wide street with several cars on fire. At least six bodies were seen lying on the pavement. Paramedics carried a young woman lying on a stretcher, her face bloodied, into an ambulance.
Shaken teenage students holding their backpacks were seen walking away. The blast occurred some 20 meters (yards) from the Bukhari School.
Among the buildings damaged was the state-run Syrian Investment Agency. Several cars in the building's parking lot were set ablaze in the explosion. Witnesses said a suicide attacker tried to storm the building with his vehicle but was stopped by guards. He then detonated his explosives outside the building.
In the early days of the uprising, the Sabaa Bahrat Square was home to huge pro-regime demonstrations that took place with a giant poster of Assad hanging as a backdrop over the central bank building.
"I was in the square when I heard a strong explosion that threw me on the ground," civil servant Hussein Khalil, 32, told The Associated Press at the scene. "I ran and saw what happened."
Electrician Mohammed Ali Kheir, 21, said he was nearby and felt the pressure of the blast. "I immediately ran here and helped paramedics evacuate four wounded people," he said.
"Is this the freedom that Qatar and Saudi Arabia want?" asked the man, referring to the Gulf Arab countries that have backed Syrian rebels fighting to remove Assad from power.
In Syrian TV footage, one woman shouted sarcastically: "Thank you, Hamad!" She was referring to the emir of Qatar, a major rebel supporter. "Is this what you want?" she asked.
Assad's regime denies there is a popular uprising and refers to the rebels as "terrorists" and "mercenaries," allegedly backed by foreign powers trying to destabilize the country.
Prime Minister Wael al-Halqi, visiting the scene, said the blast targeted the Syrian economy.
"This is the work of cowards," he said, vowing that the army would continue to crush all armed groups.
According to the TV footage, the dead included a young man whose face was blown off by the force of the blast. Shortly after, another man is seen covering the victim's head with his T-shirt.
Nearby, several men are seen twisting the wreckage of a car, trying to rescue a man who appears motionless in the back seat of a car.
Fire fighters struggled to extinguish flames that engulfed the two buildings near the site of the explosion as well as a row of cars near the roundabout.
The last large explosion in central Damascus was on March 21, when a suicide bomb ripped through a mosque in the heart of the capital. That bombing killed 42 people, including a top Sunni Muslim preacher and outspoken supporter of Assad in what was one of the most brazen assassinations of the war.
A month earlier, a suicide car bombing near the ruling Baath Party headquarters, just a few blocks from Monday's site, killed 53 people and wounded more than 200, according to state media.
Anti-regime activists at the time put the death toll at 61, which would make it the deadliest bombing in the capital in the two-year Syrian civil war.
There was no claim of responsibility for those two Damascus attacks and there was no immediate claim for Monday's blast.
In the past, Jabhat al-Nusra, an Islamic militant group with ties to al-Qaida that the U.S. has designated as a terrorist organization, has claimed responsibility for some of the deadliest suicide bombings targeting regime and military facilities across the country.
The violence has shattered the sense of normalcy that the Syrian regime has desperately tried to maintain in Damascus, a city that was until recently mostly insulated from the bloodshed and destruction that has left other urban centers in ruins.
The anti-Assad rebels launched an offensive on Damascus in July after a stunning bombing on a high-level government crisis meeting that killed four top regime officials, including Assad's brother-in-law and the defense minister. Following that attack, rebel groups that had established footholds in the suburbs pushed in, battling government forces for more than a week before being routed and swept out.
Since then, government warplanes have pounded opposition strongholds on the outskirts of the capital, and rebels have managed only small incursions on the city's southern and eastern sides. More recently, they have taken to firing deadly mortar shells deep into the capital as way to loosen the regime's grip on power.
Assad's government has asked the U.N. chief to investigate an alleged chemical weapons attack by rebels on March 19 on a village in northern Syria. Both the rebels and the regime traded blame for the alleged attack in the village of Khan al-Assal in the northern Aleppo province, which has not been confirmed.
Also Monday, a Syrian human rights group said nearly 9,000 Syrian government troops have been killed since the uprising started in March 2011. The Syria-based Violations Documentation Center, which tracks the dead, wounded and missing, said 8,785 Syrian troops have died in the fighting.
It said the rare report on the regime's death toll was compiled from government and opposition sources.
At the start of the revolt, authorities published names of the fallen troops daily. As the uprising turned more violent and eventually became a civil war, reports of casualties on the government side vanished from the public domain.
___
AP writers Barbara Surk and Bassem Mroue in Beirut and Mike Corder in The Hague contributed.
Research examines corporate communications in the 'gilded age' of free speechPublic release date: 8-Apr-2013 [ | E-mail | Share ]
Contact: Dawn Fuller dawn.fuller@uc.edu 513-556-1823 University of Cincinnati
An analysis of U.S. Supreme Court decisions suggests "historical amnesia" regarding the growing power of speech rights for corporations in electronic media, versus the First Amendment rights of individuals. Jeff Blevins, associate professor and head of the University of Cincinnati's Department of Journalism, will present his research on Tuesday, April 9, at the 58th annual convention of the Broadcast Education Association in Las Vegas.
Blevins' presentation, titled "Historical Amnesia in First Amendment Jurisprudence on Corporate Power and Electronic Media," suggests that recent decisions from the nation's highest court have "allowed corporations' power to speak to become even greater than that of human citizens."
Blevins examined eight U.S. Supreme Court cases over a 30-year period that defined speech rights for corporations.
The study analyzed:
Corporate speech in campaigns and elections
Corporations and commercial speech
Corporations and conflicts of speech and privacy
"In a bygone era, the U.S. Supreme Court had once predicated commercial speech rights on the public's right to receive information, and also understood the need to limit corporate speech even in the political arena in the interest of protecting the integrity of the public's electoral process," says Blevins. "However, the court's most recent decisions have dramatically extended power under the First Amendment and have marked a new, gilded age of free speech."
The research examined the following court cases:
Buckley v. Valeo (1976) A challenge to the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 which limited the amount of money that individuals could contribute to election campaigns. The court made the distinction between contributions and expenditures, lifting limitations on expenditures. The ruling resulted in significant growth of Political Action Committees (PACs.)
Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce (1990) The challenge involved a Michigan state law that prohibited corporations from using money from their general treasuries to support or oppose candidates in state elections. The Michigan Chamber of Commerce challenged the law because of its interest in purchasing newspaper advertisements in support of a particular candidate running for state office. The Supreme Court ruled that limiting speech based on corporate identity was permissible under the law and that the law did not silence corporate speech.
McConnell v. Federal Election Commission (FEC) (1990) The campaign finance case, brought by U.S. Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, was a challenge to the Bipartisan Campaign Finance Reform Act (BCRA) of 2002, which banned campaign advertising by corporations and other organizations 30 days prior to a primary election and 60 days prior to a general election. The ruling upheld most of the act, including prohibitions on corporate advertising during pivotal periods of political campaigns.
Citizens United v. FEC (2010) The case involved a challenge to the BCRA in that a nonprofit wanted to release a documentary a movie holding negative criticism of Hillary Clinton via on-demand cable television, 30 days before the primary election in which Clinton was seeking the Democratic Party's nomination for U.S. President. Citizens United opposed the BCRA in that it wanted to advertise the film within 30 days of the primary. The organization appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court after a lower court found Citizens United in violation of the federal rules. The U.S. Supreme Court reversed the lower court's decision, stating the ban on corporate independent expenditures violated the First Amendment. Blevins cited the ruling as a case of "historical amnesia," in that the ruling appeared to be in contradiction to the high court's decision in the case of McConnell v. FEC. The decision also contradicted the high court's judgment in Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce.
Virginia State Board of Pharmacy v. Virginia Citizens Consumer Council (1976) A consumer group challenged a rule by the Virginia State Board of Pharmacy that forbade pharmacists to advertise the price of prescription drugs a rule aimed at discouraging price wars among drug companies.
Blevins states that in this case, the high court brought commercial speech under First Amendment protections, but found commercial speech deserves less protection than political speech.
Central Hudson Electric and Gas v. Public Service Commission of New York (1980) This involved a challenge to the Public Service Commission of New York's order to cease all utility company advertising that promoted the use of electricity, an effort to conserve energy amid concerns that consumer demand would grow greater than the energy supply. The order was upheld under the New York Court of Appeals and then reversed by the U.S. Supreme Court, which found that the commission's order unduly burdened free speech.
Sorrell v. IMS Health (2011) The challenge was against a Vermont State law prohibiting pharmaceutical "detailing," on drugs that doctors prescribed to their patients, allowing marketers and manufacturers to gather that information for their own marketing strategies. The case was argued before the U.S. Supreme Court by William Sorrell, Virginia State Attorney General. Several information mining companies challenged the law, citing it was a violation of their freedom of speech under the First Amendment. After conflicting rulings in the lower courts, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the law as an unconstitutional restriction of corporate speech.
FCC v. AT&T (2011) Under the Freedom of Information Act, government records and documents can be made publicly available, unless those records result in an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. This case resulted in action from AT&T, after a trade organization requested documents from an FCC action on AT&T. AT&T filed to have the Freedom of Information Act apply to both individuals and the corporation, which was upheld by the Third Circuit Court of Appeals but struck down by the Supreme Court, which found that the Freedom of Information Act only applied to individuals.
Blevins suggests the rulings indicate that the court actions imply that more speech is better, yet Blevins emphasizes that the First Amendment was written at a time when only humans, not corporations, were doing the communicating. "The real value of commercial speech resides in the receiver's interest and not the speaker's. It is the interest of humans to receive information that is more important than the speaker's self interest," writes Blevins.
"Through the evolution of Supreme Court jurisprudence, it seems that corporations' limited right to speak to serve the people has become an interest superior to that of the people it purports to serve," concludes Blevins.
The paper was awarded first place in the Broadcast Education Association's History Division open paper competition.
Blevins' research focuses on U.S. telecommunication law and policy, and engages critical political economy theory. His research has examined media ownership regulation, First Amendment jurisprudence on media ownership regulation, Internet media policy and the politics of the telecommunication policymaking process.
###
The Broadcast Education Association is the professional association for educators, industry professionals and graduate students who are interested in teaching and research related to electronic media and multimedia enterprises.
[ | E-mail | Share ]
?
AAAS and EurekAlert! are not responsible for the accuracy of news releases posted to EurekAlert! by contributing institutions or for the use of any information through the EurekAlert! system.
Research examines corporate communications in the 'gilded age' of free speechPublic release date: 8-Apr-2013 [ | E-mail | Share ]
Contact: Dawn Fuller dawn.fuller@uc.edu 513-556-1823 University of Cincinnati
An analysis of U.S. Supreme Court decisions suggests "historical amnesia" regarding the growing power of speech rights for corporations in electronic media, versus the First Amendment rights of individuals. Jeff Blevins, associate professor and head of the University of Cincinnati's Department of Journalism, will present his research on Tuesday, April 9, at the 58th annual convention of the Broadcast Education Association in Las Vegas.
Blevins' presentation, titled "Historical Amnesia in First Amendment Jurisprudence on Corporate Power and Electronic Media," suggests that recent decisions from the nation's highest court have "allowed corporations' power to speak to become even greater than that of human citizens."
Blevins examined eight U.S. Supreme Court cases over a 30-year period that defined speech rights for corporations.
The study analyzed:
Corporate speech in campaigns and elections
Corporations and commercial speech
Corporations and conflicts of speech and privacy
"In a bygone era, the U.S. Supreme Court had once predicated commercial speech rights on the public's right to receive information, and also understood the need to limit corporate speech even in the political arena in the interest of protecting the integrity of the public's electoral process," says Blevins. "However, the court's most recent decisions have dramatically extended power under the First Amendment and have marked a new, gilded age of free speech."
The research examined the following court cases:
Buckley v. Valeo (1976) A challenge to the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 which limited the amount of money that individuals could contribute to election campaigns. The court made the distinction between contributions and expenditures, lifting limitations on expenditures. The ruling resulted in significant growth of Political Action Committees (PACs.)
Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce (1990) The challenge involved a Michigan state law that prohibited corporations from using money from their general treasuries to support or oppose candidates in state elections. The Michigan Chamber of Commerce challenged the law because of its interest in purchasing newspaper advertisements in support of a particular candidate running for state office. The Supreme Court ruled that limiting speech based on corporate identity was permissible under the law and that the law did not silence corporate speech.
McConnell v. Federal Election Commission (FEC) (1990) The campaign finance case, brought by U.S. Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, was a challenge to the Bipartisan Campaign Finance Reform Act (BCRA) of 2002, which banned campaign advertising by corporations and other organizations 30 days prior to a primary election and 60 days prior to a general election. The ruling upheld most of the act, including prohibitions on corporate advertising during pivotal periods of political campaigns.
Citizens United v. FEC (2010) The case involved a challenge to the BCRA in that a nonprofit wanted to release a documentary a movie holding negative criticism of Hillary Clinton via on-demand cable television, 30 days before the primary election in which Clinton was seeking the Democratic Party's nomination for U.S. President. Citizens United opposed the BCRA in that it wanted to advertise the film within 30 days of the primary. The organization appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court after a lower court found Citizens United in violation of the federal rules. The U.S. Supreme Court reversed the lower court's decision, stating the ban on corporate independent expenditures violated the First Amendment. Blevins cited the ruling as a case of "historical amnesia," in that the ruling appeared to be in contradiction to the high court's decision in the case of McConnell v. FEC. The decision also contradicted the high court's judgment in Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce.
Virginia State Board of Pharmacy v. Virginia Citizens Consumer Council (1976) A consumer group challenged a rule by the Virginia State Board of Pharmacy that forbade pharmacists to advertise the price of prescription drugs a rule aimed at discouraging price wars among drug companies.
Blevins states that in this case, the high court brought commercial speech under First Amendment protections, but found commercial speech deserves less protection than political speech.
Central Hudson Electric and Gas v. Public Service Commission of New York (1980) This involved a challenge to the Public Service Commission of New York's order to cease all utility company advertising that promoted the use of electricity, an effort to conserve energy amid concerns that consumer demand would grow greater than the energy supply. The order was upheld under the New York Court of Appeals and then reversed by the U.S. Supreme Court, which found that the commission's order unduly burdened free speech.
Sorrell v. IMS Health (2011) The challenge was against a Vermont State law prohibiting pharmaceutical "detailing," on drugs that doctors prescribed to their patients, allowing marketers and manufacturers to gather that information for their own marketing strategies. The case was argued before the U.S. Supreme Court by William Sorrell, Virginia State Attorney General. Several information mining companies challenged the law, citing it was a violation of their freedom of speech under the First Amendment. After conflicting rulings in the lower courts, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the law as an unconstitutional restriction of corporate speech.
FCC v. AT&T (2011) Under the Freedom of Information Act, government records and documents can be made publicly available, unless those records result in an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. This case resulted in action from AT&T, after a trade organization requested documents from an FCC action on AT&T. AT&T filed to have the Freedom of Information Act apply to both individuals and the corporation, which was upheld by the Third Circuit Court of Appeals but struck down by the Supreme Court, which found that the Freedom of Information Act only applied to individuals.
Blevins suggests the rulings indicate that the court actions imply that more speech is better, yet Blevins emphasizes that the First Amendment was written at a time when only humans, not corporations, were doing the communicating. "The real value of commercial speech resides in the receiver's interest and not the speaker's. It is the interest of humans to receive information that is more important than the speaker's self interest," writes Blevins.
"Through the evolution of Supreme Court jurisprudence, it seems that corporations' limited right to speak to serve the people has become an interest superior to that of the people it purports to serve," concludes Blevins.
The paper was awarded first place in the Broadcast Education Association's History Division open paper competition.
Blevins' research focuses on U.S. telecommunication law and policy, and engages critical political economy theory. His research has examined media ownership regulation, First Amendment jurisprudence on media ownership regulation, Internet media policy and the politics of the telecommunication policymaking process.
###
The Broadcast Education Association is the professional association for educators, industry professionals and graduate students who are interested in teaching and research related to electronic media and multimedia enterprises.
[ | E-mail | Share ]
?
AAAS and EurekAlert! are not responsible for the accuracy of news releases posted to EurekAlert! by contributing institutions or for the use of any information through the EurekAlert! system.
Below you can find some of the notable comments made Sunday on "This Week with George Stephanopoulos." Political roundtable guests included former Newark Mayor Cory Booker, D-N.J.; Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y.; ABC News political analyst and special correspondent Matthew Dowd; ABC News senior Washington correspondent Jeff Zeleny; and editor and publisher of The Nation Katrina vanden Heuvel. Our special religion and politics roundtable included writer and religious scholar Reza Aslan; Rev. Calvin Butts, Pastor of the Abyssinian Baptist Church in New York; author and atheist Susan Jacoby; Dr. Richard Land, of the Southern Baptist Convention's Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission; and Sojourners president Rev. Jim Wallis, author of "On God's Side."
King describes North Korean government as 'organized crime family'
KING: As far as I see, this is not even government. It's more like an organized crime family running a territory. They are brutal, he is brutal, his father was brutal, his grandfather was brutal. I don't see any purpose at all in [direct talks with North Korea] at all. It would demoralize our allies in Asia, certainly in South Korea, and it would - to me - serve no constructive purpose whatsoever.
Vanden Heuvel on gay marriage: 'justice delayed is justice denied'
VANDEN HEUVEL: "Justice delayed is justice denied. But I think that the Supreme Court is lagging so far behind now that marriage equality has won in this country? It is moving in states, it is moving politically. And I think you've seen, perhaps, the most rapid mass evolution on an issue, among our politicos as well. They know where the future of this country is. It is also a qualifier to win a next generation."
So I think whatever happens in the court, and it may well be that Kennedy's - Justice Kennedy's consuming affection for state rights does lead to overruling DOMA, I think we are going to see a social, moral, and political paradigm shift that is extraordinary.
King supports President Obama's position on guns
KING: Let me say, I support the president's position on guns. So I'll say that. Having said that, it's going to be very difficult to get very meaningful legislation through the congress, because despite what [Mayor Booker] was saying? is that you get a majority of Americans who don't seem to want this type of legislation. And I support it. So I'm - I am again, supporting legislation on gun trafficking, on background checks, assault weapons, all of that. But I just don't see the intensity building up.
Vanden Heuvel states 'the Republican Party is a values challenged party'
VANDEN HEUVEL: If they don't go along with immigration. I mean, as you head into 2014, the Republican Party is a values challenged party. They have big problems on immigration, on same-sex marriage, on gun reform, commonsense gun reform. So I think this is going to be a test case
Land thinks immigration reform 'needs to be done'
LAND: "Immigration reform is tearing the social fabric of the country. It needs to be done. The lack of doing it is causing havoc that will be difficult to repair in the social fabric of the country. And there is a way to do it, and a way to do it that's fair, and a way to do it that will heal the country."
Like "This Week" on Facebook here. You can also follow the show on Twitter here.
Get more pure politics at ABC News.com/Politics and a different take on the news at OTUSNews.com.
![[ Back to EurekAlert! ]](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_tz9DFaX6GZ9l72Xq9ycPp7AP4uC7z7e_yzuefEC1snfCnhzfRn-oC2MdhxVwa8eJt6qis-bTO-N1TChkKZT9bX-Lntfk_4pQyAo2xky1U=s0-d){kind=small}
Public release date: 8-Apr-2013
Share ] 