Managing IP awards Kather Augenstein three IP Stars 2022

Every year, Managing Intellectual Property (MIP) celebrates the IP industry with its IP Stars, focusing on the IP practitioners who have achieved excellent performance during the year.

The expert shortlist is the result of a comprehensive and independent study in the IP field, based on market and client data as well as interviews with professionals and representatives of the branch. To receive an IP Star ranking, a lawyer must receive a significant number of recommendations from clients, peers and fellows.

For this reason, we are very honoured and grateful that three Kather Augenstein experts were again awarded this prestigious title at this year’s IP Stars 2022 notification. Senior Partner Dr Peter Kather, Name Partner Dr Christof Augenstein and Managing Partner Miriam Kiefer LL.M. were named Patent Star 2022.

Research for the IP Stars Guide covers over six IP practice areas and more than 70 jurisdictions and has become the leading trade publication for the IP profession. MIP IP Stars is a leading resource for companies and individuals seeking experienced lawyers for contentious and non-contentious IP advice.

Handelsblatt Ranking “Germany’s Best Lawyers 2022”: Kather Augenstein Rechtsanwälte are again among the best

This year, the renowned ranking of US publisher “Best Lawyers”, published annually in cooperation with the Handelsblatt, has again ranked Dr Peter Kather, Dr Christof Augenstein, Miriam Kiefer LL.M., Christopher Weber and Sören Dahm among Germany’s best lawyers in the field of intellectual property law.

The latest Handelsblatt ranking is based on the 14th edition of Best Lawyers rating for Germany. The US publisher Best Lawyers is the world’s oldest and one of the most renowned publishers of such lawyer rankings. In Germany, it identifies the most renowned legal advisors exclusively for Handelsblatt in an extensive peer-to-peer procedure. In this procedure, lawyers are asked which competitors they can recommend. The best list is published annually in late June exclusively in the Handelsblatt.

“We are very excited that we are represented by five Partners in the list this year and have made it to the top,” says Miriam Kiefer, Managing Partner at Kather Augenstein.“ “This is a great result!”

The Handelsblatt 2022 list of Germany’s best lawyers can be found here.

Higher Regional Court (OLG) Düsseldorf: Inspection procedure during pending public procurement procedure

Higher Regional Court Düsseldorf, decision dated 23 March 2022 – docket no. 15 W 14/21

The 15th Civil Chamber of the Higher Regional Court Düsseldorf has ruled in a decision dated 23 March (docket no. 15 W 14/21) that legal action can be taken before the civil courts even during an ongoing procurement procedure for applications to carry out an inspection procedure as well as acquiescence orders. The court also held in the specific case that “testing” constitutes an act of infringement within the meaning of section 9, sentence 2, no. 1 of the Patent Act, and that an inspection is required also at the premises of the recipient of the samples.

I. THE FACTS

The applicant is the owner of a patent relating to a weapon breech system. Like the first defendant, they took part in a Europe-wide public invitation to tender for the manufacture and supply of assault rifles (public procurement procedure) which was issued by the second defendant.

After the respondent to 2) had carried out comparative tests and sampling of the samples submitted by the first defendant, it announced that it intended to award the contract to the first defendant. After the second defendant had carried out comparative tests of the samples submitted by the first defendant, the second defendant announced their intention to accept the first defendant’s tender.

On the applicant’s motion for the order of an inspection procedure and the issuance of an acquiescence and protective order against both defendants, the Düsseldorf Regional Court ordered the inspection procedure only against the first defendant on 20 November 2020, which was carried out in December 2020. The survey procedure was carried out in December 2020.

A further request to conduct independent evidence proceedings against the defendant to The Regional Court dismissed a further application to conduct independent evidentiary proceedings against the second defendant in its decision on 17 August 2021. The applicant’s appeal was dismissed by the court in its decision dated 31 August 2021. The court justified its decision by stating that it was not competent and that, in addition, the inspection was not necessary, because an inspection at the first defendant was possible.

The Higher Regional Court partially amended the order and reworded it. The Düsseldorf Higher Regional Court dismissed the remaining appeal.

II. THE DECISION

1. COMPETENCE FOR INSPECTION PROCEDURE PERSISTS DESPITE ONGOING PUBLIC PROCUREMENT PROCEDURE

The Higher Regional Court ruled that it was competent to decide on motions for the conduct of inspection proceedings as well as acquiescence orders even during pending public procurement proceedings.

The special exclusive assignment imposed by section 156 para. 2 of the Act against Restraints of Competition (GWB) does not oppose its competence, since the motion to conduct an inspection procedure is not founded on a “claim” within the meaning of the provision. “Other claims” within the meaning of Section 156 of the GWB could also be legal provisions under non-procurement law which grant subjective rights and have a connection to the public procurement procedure. In particular, section 124 para. 1 no. 3 GWB, which governs the exclusion of companies from the procurement procedure due to serious misconduct, could also be used to assess a patent infringement in an incidental manner. However, the special allocation of section 156 para. 2 GWB does not apply to such claims which are not aimed at the protection of primary rights in the procurement procedure. However, the inspection claim which was motioned for was merely aimed at the preparation of patent law claims. In this respect, the civil courts were competent in parallel. The enforcement of patent claims should not be suspended during pending public procurement proceedings.

2. SAMPLING AND TESTING DURING THE PUBLIC PROCUREMENT PROCEDURE MAY CONSTITUTE PATENT-INFRINGING USE WITHIN THE MEANING OF SECTION 9 SENTENCE 2 NO. 1 OF THE PATENT ACT.

The Higher Regional Court further held that the sampling and testing of a patent-infringing object during the public procurement procedure may constitute “using” within the meaning of section 9, sentence 2, no. 1 of the Patent Act.

“Using” within the meaning of section 9, sentence 2, no. 1 of the Patent Act is to be interpreted broadly and encompasses any reasonable use in the broadest sense of any intended purpose. In the case of product patents, the designated use – in this case, military use – was not relevant.

Moreover, testing is not privileged under section 11 no. 2 of the Patent Act. Only the acquisition of knowledge about the subject-matter of the invention is privileged. However, in the public procurement procedure, the tests did not serve technical progress, but merely the assertion of competitive purposes.

3. THE INSPECTION WAS NECESSARY

Moreover, the inspection was necessary because a military weapon cannot be purchased on the public market. In addition, an inspection conducted at the first defendant’s premises would not have been equally effective. During the inspection at the first defendant, the applicant found various drawings showing different designs as well as embodiments that matched the most recent drawing made on the day on which the drawings and samples were handed over. 1) would not have been equally suitable. During the inspection at the respondent’s premises, the applicant had to 1) During the inspection at the first defendant, the applicant found various drawings showing different designs as well as embodiments that matched the most recent drawing made on the day on which the drawings and samples were handed over. Since drawings are usually created first and only then reproduced, it seems likely that other, older designs could be found with 2) the second defendant than with the first defendant.

Dr Benedikt Walesch

Kather Augenstein appoints Dr Benjamin Pesch as Counsel

Dr Benjamin Pesch joined Kather Augenstein in January 2019. He advises national and international businesses from various industries in the field of patent and utility model law.

After his state examination and a dissertation, completed summa cum laude, on the legal implications of disclosing trade secrets and insider information in the context of due diligence, Dr Benjamin Pesch was admitted to the German Bar in 2016. He started his career at one of the leading international law firms in Düsseldorf, already focusing on patent law.

In October 2021, Dr Benjamin Pesch was awarded “Rising Star 2021” by Managing Intellectual Property. He regularly publishes on patent law topics and is co-author of The Pharmaceutical Intellectual Property and Competition Law Review Germany.

“With Dr. Benjamin Pesch, we have a very qualified and experienced lawyer in our ranks, who is also highly appreciated by our clients,” says Miriam Kiefer, Managing Partner of Kather Augenstein. “We sincerely congratulate Benjamin Pesch on his appointment as Counsel and look forward working with him in the future.”

women in ip e.V. celebrates its 11th anniversary!

Last Friday, women in ip e.V. celebrated its 11th anniversary. With summery temperatures, the exclusive members’ event was a complete success thanks to a large number of guests, exciting keynote speeches and a dream location in the centre of Munich.

The event started with a welcoming speech by Ms Cornelia Rudloff-Schäffer, President of the German Patent and Trade Mark Office, followed by welcome words of the five women in ip e.V. board members Gabriele Mohsler, Claudia Dr. Schwarz, Pia Björk, Andrea Zehetner and our Managing Partner, Miriam Kiefer LL.M.

Following this, Gerlinde Kaltenbrunner, professional mountaineer with passion, who was the first woman ever who reached all eight-thousander peaks without the use of supplementary oxygen and without the support of high altitude porters, impressed the guests with her imposing keynote speech, before the evening turned into a dinner with inspiring exchange, networking and music.

Our colleague Dr Katharina Brandt describes her take away from the anniversary celebration:

“It was a great evening where I could meet many of the members personally. That was exciting for me, especially as a new member – I was welcomed openly and warmly.” Cornelia Rudloff-Schäffer shared her personal experiences in her welcome words, which are of particular value to me as a newcomer to this field. The unique story of Gerlinde Kaltenbrunner impressed me a lot. The fact that she shared her experiences with us and that she also took the time to speak personally to all members was really something special. I am looking forward to the next women in ip e.V. events and can only thank them for their organisation.

Looking forward to the next 11 years and many more get-togethers!”

“Miriam Kiefer adds: “I have been a board member of women in ip since 2019, as it is a particular concern for me to support and strengthen especially younger colleagues in their careers. A lot has been achieved in the past years, companies and law firms have set up programmes, among other things, to support the compatibility of career and family. However, there is still a lot to do; some women often lack the courage to take on professional responsibilities alongside family responsibilities. At women in ip, in addition to professional exchange, there is also the opportunity to talk about these topics, even in the context of mentoring if requested.”

For more information about women in ip, click here.

IAM Patent 1000: Kather Augenstein among the world’s leading patent professionals 2022

IAM Patent 1000 – The World’s Leading Patent Professionals and the world’s leading industry guide for patent lawyers, has published its rankings for the 9th time. Kather Augenstein is again recommended in the current 2022 edition and is thus among the world’s elite of the best patent professionals in the field of patent law infringement this year.

IAM bewertet die Rechtsanwälte von Kather Augenstein als „eines der stärksten IAM rates Kather Augenstein’s lawyers as “one of the largest teams of its kind, handling technically complex cases while making it appear simple.”

Five Kather Augenstein partners are recommended in the list of the 1000 leading patent lawyers worldwide. Congratulations to our partners Dr Peter Kather, Dr Christof Augenstein, Miriam Kiefer LL.M., Christopher Weber and Sören Dahm, being featured in the current ranking as recognized experts in patent infringement litigation.

“Following this year’s nominations by IP Stars, top rankings at The Legal500 and Best Lawyers by Handelsblatt, this is another award in 2022 which we are very excited about with the entire team,” adds Miriam Kiefer, Managing Partner, Kather Augenstein.

IAM 1000 makes it its business to bring together the best patent professionals in the most important jurisdictions. The extensive research process for this year’s edition was conducted over a five-month period by a team of analysts and included more than 1,800 interviews with patent specialists around the world.

Read the full IAM Patent 1000 entry here.

Copyright protects ideas, it protects – in terms of pop music – the artist who has first turned an idea into a work, i.e. who has created something new. This mechanism clashes with an industry that thrives on inspiration and further development. Also, because chord progressions are finite, the danger of similarity constantly lurks – whether intentional or not. In times of digitalization, retrieving music is much easier, but so is copying and transforming. When even the smallest similarities result in copyright lawsuits, there’s not much left of the creative process – at least that’s what artists like Ed Sheeran complain about.

Copyright infringement litigation is not only complex from a legal point of view, but also from an economic point of view, because the artist affected usually has a lot at stake, and the plaintiff is tempted by potentially high settlement sums. Thus, a copyright infringement can quickly become an expensive matter. Just recently, after four years, the English High Court ruled that singer Ed Sheeran had not cribbed from Sami Chokri and Ross O’Donoghue and their song “Oh Why” from 2015 for his most famous song “Shape of you” from 2017. This brings an argument to an end, but it does not put the problem to rest. Because in other places it is always the same problem, that famous musicians have stolen from lesser known. Dua Lipa currently has to defend herself in court because of her song “Levitating”. Stars such as Mariah Carey and Katy Perry have also been accused of copyright infringement. A summary of the problem:

Copyright infringement – the plagiarism

In 2020, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) made a landmark decision in the case of Kraftwerk against Moses Pelham, which at least provided clarity in the EU. We have already presented this judgment (https://www.katheraugenstein.com/en/metal-on-metal-judgement-on-judgement-the-copyright-dispute-between-kraftwerk-and-moses-pelham/). Basically, the ECJ ruled that “the reproduction of an audio fragment – even a very short one – of a phonogram by a user is in principle considered to be a partial reproduction within the meaning of Art. 2 lit. c of Directive 2001/29/EC and such reproduction is thus covered by the exclusive right of the phonogram producer under this provision”.

Is therefore already the minimal inspiration and adoption of harmonics or a short melodic section plagiarism, if it is not indicated who served as inspiration? It is true that an copyright infringement can be avoided despite the adoption of audio fragments if an audible reference to the original work is no longer comprehensible due to the modification of the fragment. However, pop music at least lives from simple chord sequences that may quickly seem familiar from other songs. Therefore, the complex question must always be answered: Where does artistic freedom end and copyright infringement begin?

The decisive factor in answering this question is whether there is a sufficient distance between the original work and the adaptation and whether both works are considered independent. The individuality of the work and its recognition value are decisive for the recognition value. It therefore depends on whether an average listener perceives the new work as such or whether the similarity to the original is unmistakable.

In the case of Ed Sheeran, the court has now decided that he had not copied parts of his song, neither “intentionally nor subconsciously”. So the court is basing this purely on the subjective level.

Courts have to deal with the question: Where is the boundary between art and copying? This question cannot be answered in a general manner, because it is almost impossible to draw a sharp line.

Against this background, a separate branch has even developed that provides expert opinions on the similarity of works – and thus analyses in terms of music theory what is a copy and what is not. However, the evaluation of the legal definition and differentiation of art and copy is ultimately left to the courts.

Leaders League honors Kather Augenstein in two categories in latest 2022 ranking

The international French media and rating agency Leaders League, which has been evaluating professional service firms for more than 20 years, has published its ranking for Best Law Firms – 2022 in Germany.

Kather Augenstein was again awarded one of the “Best Law Firms” in the categories “Trademark Litigation” and “Patent Litigation” this year. In the field of Trademark Litigation, the two partners Dr Christof Augenstein and Sören Dahm were recommended for their expertise. In the field of Patent Litigation, the partners Dr Peter Kather, Dr Christof Augenstein, Christopher Weber and Managing Partner Miriam Kiefer LL.M. were highlighted as excellent for their work in the current ranking.

The media group publishes international rankings and news content for the legal, financial, technology and human resources sectors. The company is specialised in producing rankings and market research, which are used by a large number of companies and executives in their decisions. All the rankings are available free of charge at www.leadersleague.com

Congratulations for this special award!

„The North Face“ „The North Face“ vs. „The Dog Face“

Can dog owners who do sports and wear “The North Face” now do their outdoor sports in a partner look with their pet? At least that’s what you might think when dog clothing is advertised with the name “The Dog Face”. The name sounds familiar, because it is associated with the outdoor and lifestyle brand “The North Face” – at least that’s how the well-known clothing manufacturer saw it and went to court.

It is becoming increasingly common for small companies to use the familiarity of major brands to advertise their own products. The exploitation of well-known trademarks or catchy design language creates a familiar feeling among customers and influences their buying behavior. The exploited appreciation gives less established companies a better market position, much to the annoyance of the established brands. After all, a brand’s products are creative services that determine the company’s value. To ensure that companies remain the sole users of their innovative services, they must protect their intellectual property. Trademark law serves to protect against the exploitation of a company’s own reputation. A trademark is protected if it is registered. According to the German Trademark Act, registration can take place at the German Patent Office, or at the EU level – at the Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market. Once the trademark has been registered, the following principle applies: competitors may no longer advertise their products under this brand name. If they do so, they may be entitled to injunctive relief or monetary compensation. It is important to note that not only brand names can be registered. Combinations of words and images or simple figurative representations such as the “Nike Swoosh” can also be protected under trademark law. This is also the case with “The North Face”, whose brand name and logo are protected under trademark law.

In the case in question, the OLG Frankfurt has now ruled by order that animal clothing may not be marketed with “The Dog Face”. Initially, the Frankfurt Regional Court had decided otherwise and dismissed the injunction claims asserted by “The North Face” in an urgent proceeding. On appeal, the Frankfurt Higher Regional Court amended this decision to the effect that the pet clothing company must now refrain from using the brand name and the well-known logo. According to the court, there is a similarity between “The Dog Face” and “The North Face”, which is causing damage to “The North Face” and exploiting its reputation in a “parasitic manner”.

In support of its decision, the court states that “The North Face” is a well-known mark within the meaning of the EU Trade Mark Regulation [Regulation (EU) 2017/1001]. It is known to a significant part of the public.

It is true that there is no likelihood of confusion between the names “The North Face” and the name “The Dog Face” used by the animal clothing manufacturer. This is because the words “Dog” and “North” are recognizably different. However, exact copying is not a prerequisite for injunctive relief under Article 9 2 lit. c) of the Regulation. Sufficient is a similarity which causes the relevant public to form a mental link between the two signs. This is the case, according to the Higher Regional Court of Frankfurt. It is true that the words “dog” and “north” are recognizably different for third parties. The similarity lies in the fact that the word sequence “The Dog Face” is clearly recognizable as being based on “The North Face”. Due to the high degree of recognition of the trademark and the fact that there is a certain similarity between the goods offered, the court assumes that the two companies are mentally linked to each other.

The animal clothing company is now no longer allowed to profit from this link. But perhaps The North Face will soon launch its own animal clothing line. Then sports enthusiasts will indeed soon be able to dress as partners with their dogs.

LEL 2022: Christoper Weber on his 1500km long distance cycle ride from London > Edinburgh > to London in less than 120 hours

This year’s LEL 2022 edition took place from 7 to 12 August. LEL is a 1500 km long race across the United Kingdom between the famous capitals of England and Scotland. LEL is not a cycling race of the classic kind with support vehicles on closed-off tracks, it is an audax event (endurance challenge) for self-supported cyclists, who use it to demonstrate not only their physical and mental endurance, but also their independence within a tight time limit.

Besides the impressive Trailer of the organizers, we interviewed our partner Christopher Weber about how he fared on his tour.

CHRISTOPHER, WHAT INSPIRED YOU TO PARTICIPATE IN LEL 2022 AND HOW DO YOU MANAGE TO BALANCE YOUR TRAINING TIME WITH FAMILY, JOB AND POSSIBLY OTHER HOBBIES TO GET PREPARED FOR SUCH A SPORTING EVENT?

LEL is certainly one of the most famous ultra long distance events and therefore attracts riders from all over the world. I have met Argentines and Australians, Latvians and Japanese, Malaysians and US Americans, Italians and Norwegians, Indians and South Africans. The passion for the challenge, for the long distance, for this very specific experience unites the participants, despite all the differences in terms of culture, but also in terms of having a specific cycling experience. It is a different thing for a Malay to ride through the night at 6° C than for a Norwegian. It is different for an Indian to ride through 37° C midday heat compared to a North German. Wind and mountains are also felt differently depending on experience.

At the same time, LEL is organized by an association with the help of volunteers. It is not an event with an all-inclusive carefree package and a corresponding sense of entitlement on the part of the participants, but a friendly, enthusiastic and inspiring event.

I found all of this very attractive. Add to that the fact that 3 years ago, when I signed up, I was reasonably in shape and a bit overconfident. Well what has happened since then, we all know only too good unfortunately. And last but not least, it was not conducive to my sporting form, so I went with some fear of my own courage to the start. Because more “training” than commuting to the office or sometimes at 6am a quick round or sometimes a “Weekend-Warrior” ride was simply not there for me last year. But accordingly intensely I have done the weekend rides.

HOW DID YOU REACH ENGLAND WITH YOUR EQUIPMENT AND HOW DID YOUR START WENT ?

On Friday I went to England with the car, the ferry and my bikes. Registration and last test drive on Saturday, check the equipment and the bags three times and repack and then I put my legs up properly and strengthened myself with fast food We started on Sunday from 6 o’clock, I had got my desired starting place at 9:45 o’clock. I found quite good to be able to sleep in. In addition, I could overtake more riders at the start than vice versa, which I found psychologically helpful. I was incredibly relieved when it finally started, because I don’t know myself as excited as I was before the start. I think it’s known reasonably well how calm I usually stay around negotiations … but this was really, really far out of my comfort zone.

Because you have to be able to help yourself at any time on the course, a fair amount of brain power went into the equipment. For example, I had tools, spare parts, spare rear lights, a self-soldered charging station for the dynamo, a rescue bivy sack, sports headphones and about 45 other things with me.

1500 KM IS A LONG DISTANCE. HOW DID YOU FEEL ON THE TOUR AND HOW DID YOU MANAGE THE INDIVIDUAL STAGES?

I wanted to gain a nice time pad at the beginning to take the pressure out of the time limit. So I managed 360 km in the first stage and after a short sleep a good 420 km in the first 24 hours. From there it became very, very hilly, it went through high moors, The Wolds and through the Northern Pennines, a low mountain range, and then already to Scotland, in the so-called Lowlands. But I didn’t found them that low. After another 2 hours sleep and a total of 48 hours, the iconic bridges over the Firth of Forth behind Edinburgh were already in my sight!

Behind Edinburgh was the turning point. From there the route led through the middle of the beautiful but very busy Edinburgh back into the mountains and back to England, where I then reached a checkpoint again on Wednesday morning around 3am. Unfortunately, it was overcrowded, so that I only had a sleeping place outside. Sweating and at a few degrees and two blankets weren’t enough, so I got up a bit undercooled and after 2 hours I was on my way again. After 3 hours in the first night and 2 hours in the second night that was a bit little sleep and I had to rest several times next to the trail on some meadow. In the area also fell probably the most strenuous stages of the tour, there were steep climbs through the Northern Pennines and then also through the Howardian Hills to cope. Pushing would have been smarter, but you are a cyclist …

Anyway, by then I had experienced a very comfortable time cushion and I could switch to the mode “enjoy”. From then on, I ate as much as I could at absolutely every route control, so mostly two main dishes and dessert. Every 200 km or so, I also took an anti-cyclical nap for about 2 hours, so I wasn’t disturbed by snorers. So I made good and steady progress and the time limit was never really in danger. But then the usual long-distance aches and pains came up. Sure, the seating area and the hands and sometimes the feet, or the knees, or a shoulder or the stomach. There is always something. But the hands have properly got something damage on the Scottish humps. It was very difficult to change the tire at the first puncture and not easier at the second puncture. But apart from that, I was spared any technical difficulties.

I am attracted by the electronic gearshift, without which the hands would have had even more to do. In addition, the battery is still more than half full after more than 1,500 km. And was switched on the route with over 14,500 meters of altitude, of course, quite neat.

Towards the end of the tour there was some real, real fun again, both through the area of The Fens (a flat, windy area with meadows, canals and windmills), and through the area around Cambridge and towards the finish it was either flat or just undulating enough to be challenging, but without any more double-digit climbs. And finally with another luxurious 3,5 hours sleep, I then tackled the last 110 km on the last morning at a nice average speed. On the last 50 km you are anyway carried by the euphoria and so I arrived with a big grin and sprinting at the finish.

LEL 2022 IS CERTAINLY A GREAT TEST FOR MENTAL AND PHYSICAL RESILIENCE, USING SKILLS AND EXPERIENCE. ALL RESPECT AND CONGRATULATIONS CHRISTOPHER, YOU MADE IT! WHAT WAS GOING THROUGH YOUR MIND AT THE FINISH LINE AND HAVE YOU RECOVERED FROM THE EXERTIONS IN THE MEANTIME?

Before the strt I didn’t expect to be able to finish. There are simply too many things that can go wrong on such a long ride that you can’t control yourself. It was also questionable how I would cope with the lack of sleep. And my longest ride before wasn’t even a third as long. And after all, only half of the participants make it to the finish line within the time limit, and they are no beginners at all …

But the doubts were all blown away once the ride started. From then on, I didn’t doubt for a second that I would make it. I believed so strongly in success with everything I had that it felt like certain knowledge. So even with the lack of sleep and the effort, I never got into mental trouble, never looked up train connections or dithered, but always just thought about the next step. I think this subjective component made it objectively easier for me in the end. And physically, you can say it in the immortal words of legend Jens Voigt: “Shut up, legs!” Except that at some point that was no longer enough, but a few more body parts had to be enumerated.

At the finish line, I wasn’t proud or relieved or anything else that you could be put into words so specifically. I was just unbelievably happy. Any pride would also be opposed to the fact that LEL as a challenge teaches you a fair amount of humility. I recovered amazingly fast. Basically, I caught up on sleep.

I couldn’t have made it without the many cheering and funny messages of family, friends and colleagues from home and the kindness of strangers, whether by helping me to change a tyre or just having a nice chat during a night that dragged on like chewing gum. There were many absolutely fascinating sights and things that happened, both in nature and in purely human terms. I will definitely think back on this experience for a very long time.