Pandemic has changed the way everyone works. Organisations have adopted digital and cloud working for remote work in this pandemic restrictions. The cloud 1.0 was software as a service applications (SaaS applications like WWW). The second generation was all about infrastructure as a servie (IaaS) and Platform as a service (PaaS). Now many industry experts believe that we are on the brink of entering cloud 3.0. In which everyone is working in collaborating way with their convenience with the help of slack and zoom and other services. Just like earlier versions the third wave is also driven by competition and surviving in changing economy. Connectivity and engagement is driving factor for this. The companies are now seeing cloud as a primary way to operate their business and grow rather than just as a service used. 


Why cloud is the future


There are many reasons why cloud is getting popular among businesses. Many of them are simple and utility based. One can work flexibly with the help of cloud.The organisations and business can work in cloud with saving them the hassle and cost for premises based servers. However there is no defined term for 3.0 yet but there are some common agreement between industry experts that it is based on theme of abstraction and orchestration.with this layer of abstraction on multiple cloud vendors the functioning of the same will be much easier and the differences will be smoothed out. With the adoption of cloud 3.0 there will be increase in microservices. This use of microservices gives the advantage to cloud 3.0 by its decentralized, work from anywhere and scale-and-adapt nature. According to a google survey almost 27% business have adopted cloud and this figure is surely to increase rapidly in near future. 


Challenges ahead for cloud 3.0


The adoption and introduction of new technologies always have some challenges with it. Coud 3.0 is no exception to it. Primary challenge in adopting it is that cloud adoption is already in vogue and almost every business is adopting it. Chances are that competitors of a business have already adopted it. So to do it uniquely to stand out is a major concern for every business. Another challenge will be that the cloud 3.0 approach is decentralized which is totally different from the previous one based on centralized approach. In simple the new approach emphasis on resilience and responsiveness rather than previous approach of control like in centralized one. But foremost challenge is security and privacy of sensitive data in the adoption of cloud. There is always a threat to cyber attack on internet that’s why the business have to be very careful while adopting this. Strong measurements to prevent such incident have to be taken. Some other challanges are updating existing applications and managing servers which are still done manually. 


How to benefit from cloud 3.0


Another challenge associated with the cloud 3.0 is the management of skilled people for the work.The reliance on multiple cloud system proliferate the need of help for selecting, optimizing performance and integrating of the services they provide.This creates a lot of complexity in the process. To tackle this business have to take help and hire consultancies and value-added resellers (VARs) 


Cloud 3.0 is very promising for the future as with its use the business can have a look at their current state and plan holistically to be more competitive and efficient in every aspect of their business. 

• An estimated 3.7 billion people globally are offline and many more do not enjoy a full digital experience;
• Connecting more people to AR and VR technologies could transform everything from education and healthcare to mining and tourism;
• To take AR and VR mainstream, the right technologies must be enabled and local knowledge and support systems must be established.

For the privileged few, augmented reality (AR) and virtual reality (VR) have become commonplace, increasingly used in everything from entertainment and online commerce to healthcare. Many communities, however, still do not experience the real impact of these transformational technologies because of an innovation gap that compounds our digital divides.

Imagine the value of this technology for sectors such as education, mining and tourism, all of which were effectively shut down during the current COVID-19 pandemic. The current global health crisis has shown us how a failure to digitize value chains across sectors has significantly affected social conditions worldwide and highlighted – even exacerbated – the digital divide.

There are two concrete ways to help close the digital divide and enable inclusive digital economies:

• establish a sound enabling environment for digital transformation, and
• foster collaborative digital innovation systems that address “Main Street” problems.

AR/VR is mainstream – but only for a small segment of our digital world

For novices, virtual reality and augmented reality can be considered as simulated experiences, where a scenario is replicated in a digital environment and where users are able to interact with that virtual world using computer-based objects.

If you ask young people about VR or AR, they will probably tell you about that latest headset on the market to play video games or engage with social media. You may have come across the technology yourself without really knowing it: virtual clothes shopping, virtual apartment visits, virtual tourism even high-end industrial solutions, such as professional flight simulators. The potential of AR/VR systems is boundless – yet for the moment, access and impact are limited to the very few communities who can afford them.

A power of attorney (POA) is a legal document giving one person (the agent or attorney at fact) the power to act for another person (the principal). The agent can have broad legal authority or limited authority to make legal decisions about the principal’s property, finances, or medical care. The power of attorney is frequently used in the event of a principal’s illness or disability, or when the principal can’t be present to sign necessary legal documents for financial transactions.

A power of attorney can end for a number of reasons, such as when the principal dies, the principal revokes it, a court invalidates it, the principal divorces their spouse, who happens to be the agent, or the agent can no longer carry out the outlined responsibilities.

The primary difference between the Legal Representative (“PR”) and the person appointed under a power of attorney the attorney in fact (the “POA”) is that the PR is administering the estate after the person has passed away and the POA is caring for the person while they are incapacitated, but still living.  POA powers terminate upon death.

Legal Representative

•  The PR is responsible for securing the Last will and testimony of the decedent (if there is one) and distributing the decedent’s property according to the terms of the Will. There are usually bills to pay, a tax return to file, personal belongings to gather and other items that need to be addressed. In some cases, a probate proceeding may be necessary.  The PR would be responsible for getting this proceeding filed and completed (with the assistance of an attorney).

Attorney in Fact

•  The POA receives power to act on behalf of the incapacitated person when the person is determined to be incapacitated under the terms of the power of attorney document.  Typically, this is when a determination is made by at least one medical professional that person can no longer care for themselves.
• The POA is charged with taking care of the incapacitated person’s financial needs, health and welfare needs and other day-to-day to issues.  For example, a POA may pay bills, communicate with the doctors and make decisions about the incapacitated person is going to be cared for.
•  Legally, it probably makes no difference whether it is the same person who is POA and PR.  However, practically, many times the other spouse is the person chosen to be both the POA and then the PR.  A person who has acted as the POA and then acts as the PR has a bit of an advantage because they already have experience with the decedent’s estate.

ANSWER 3.Power of Attorney (POA) is all about giving the right to act on your behalf to a trusted friend or family member. A Power of Attorney allows the holder of the POA to take clearly defined actions and decisions on behalf of the donor in this case. The person who gives the power of attorney (POA) is known as the donor while the person who gets the POA is called the holder. But there are some precautions you need to take while signing the POA agreement and ensure that your interests are fully protected. Let us look at it entirely from the point of view of the donor. Let us focus on things to know about power of attorney and the power of attorney rights and limitations. Above all, there are some basic rules you need to follow irrespective of whether you are giving the power of attorney to a family member or to a trusted friend.

8 points to keep in mind when giving power of attorney

1.First and foremost understand the difference between Letter of Authority and Power of Attorney. The LOA is good for small tasks but for more important tasks that involve larger amounts of money or asset values, it is always better to execute a Power of Attorney as the rights and duties are more enforceable in case of POA.

2.Ensure that the Power of Attorney is duly registered and the stamp duty prescribed by the state where the POA is executed has been paid. The legal jurisdiction should be the place where the POA is executed and the stamp duty is paid. An unregistered POA is like an LOA and is not enforceable in a court of law.

3.Signatures and photographs of the principal and power agent must be affixed. This can be a useful source of information in case any of the transactions are disputed at a future date or if the POA goes to a legal recourse.

4.The holder of the POA should first check whether the principal or the donor of the POA has a valid title to the property and that his/her name is reflected as owner in government revenue records. Also, before accepting the POA he must check that the no-encumbrance certificate is obtained.

5.The rights and obligations of the principal and the POA holder should be clearly laid out including decisions like leasing the property, hypothecating the property, selling the property etc. For availing loans based on a POA, check whether the power agent has the authority to sign loan documents and can create an equitable mortgage in favour of banks/financial institutions on behalf of the principal.

6.Ensure that as on the date of execution of any document based on the POA, the POA is in force and the principal is alive. Otherwise the POA is void ab initio. Normally, POAs that are pre dated or post dated are not acceptable at the time of registration of the POA with the concerned authorities.

7.If the POA is being executed abroad, ensure that it is either notarised or signed before Indian Consulate officials and then duly adjudicated within 120 days from the date of execution of the said POA. This is important since NRIs are those who normally give POAs to operate their local bank account and demat cum online trading account.

8.Last but not the least, make it a point to verify the availability of the original duly registered GPA (General Power of Attorney). You need to be clear that the rights are clear and unfettered. You must also check whether the description of the property (schedule of property) is in order.

ANSWER 4. Yes, we can give power of attorney online. If you want to make a  Power of Attorney deed online you can do it easily sitting in your home and in a minimum cost. 

The process are given below:

Select your State and start Preparing your Power of Attorney document

Fill the form and make payment online

Print the document and register it

So simple! No hassles of finding a lawyer, no time waste, no tensions of finding the right clauses to include in the document  and everything done so fast within a few minutes. That is the best part about making an online document.

The documents required for power of attorney are;

An Adhar Card or Voter ID Card or Passport for address proof and identity proof.

We’ve all been at the supermarket and observed parents pacing around the food aisle in an effort to choose the right choice for their child’s growth. From infant formulas, tables food, and bags for snacks that are hand-held, the options seem infinite. Foods that are prepared commercially and “shelf food items that are stable” bab than $7 billion each year in April of 2020, around five percent of U.S. consumers reported that they were expecting to increase their expenditure on baby food because of the coronavirus epidemic. Food for babies is a huge business and food manufacturers are required to create safe and healthy items for their customers. That’s why the latest report from Congress on the findings of heavy metal tests for popular brands of baby food has caused controversy in the media and filing heavy metal baby food lawsuits.

Background and Overview

The House Oversight Committee report (PDF)released on February 4 examined the existence of heavy metals in baby food in the course of an investigation that demanded companies submit reports and internal test data. In the month of November, the subcommittee of Congress demanded seven of the largest baby food producers to submit internal reports and test results following an investigation by outsiders revealed the presence of toxic chemicals, like arsenic as well as lead in some products. The subcommittee demanded information from the following firms:

• Nurture, Inc. (Happy Family Organics)
• Beech-Nut Nutrition Company
• Hain Celestial Group (Earth’s Best Organic)
• Gerber
• Campbell Soup Company (Plum Organics)
• Walmart, Inc. (Parent’s Choice brand)
• Sprout Foods Inc.

When Nurture, Beech-Nut, Hain Celestial, and Gerber have responded to the request of Congress, Walmart, Campbell, and Sprout did not produce any documentation, causing the subcommittee “greatly worried about the possibility that their inaction may be concealing the presence of higher levels of dangerous heavy metals within their infant food products than their rivals in their products.”

The tests showed the presence of arsenic, Cadmium, as well as lead found in baby food items. The tests revealed that some of the products had more heavy metals than allowed in water bottles. There are no Federally mandated upper limits on mercury, lead, or cadmium found in baby food The FDA set the maximum levels allowed in the bottled water as 10 parts for every billion (ppb) for arsenic inorganic 5 ppb for lead, and 5 ppm of cadmium. According to the report of Congress the test results for baby food and its ingredients “eclipse the limits of these substances, including results as high as 91 % arsenic levels and up to 177 times lead levels up to 70 times the cadmium levels as well as up five times the mercury levels.” A high concentration of heavy metals that are toxic is also present in organic foods.

In one instance highlighted within the study, tests by Nurture which produces Happy Family Organics products revealed that the company did not adhere to their internal guidelines for 100 parts per billion (ppb) for infant snacks. The food for babies included levels far above the limit. Hain Celestial, the maker of Earth’s Best Organic Foods, had arsenic levels of more than 100ppb also.

Metals with heavy metals are naturally present in certain foods, including vegetables and rice, but the amount can be increased through the addition of vitamins, enzymes, and mineral mix. Businesses often do this which can lead to high concentrations of heavy metals in the final product.

How Does Metal Exposure can affect infants and toddlers?

Exposure to heavy metals in infants is a major problem. Based on the American Academy of Pediatrics, exposure to lead at any level is extremely harmful to children. Previous studies have connected heavy metal exposure to behavior impairments and brain damage, damages to the nervous system seizures, growth impairments, seizures as well as the death of a child.

In a recent class-action lawsuit in Clark County, Nevada plaintiffs comprise families of seven children with neurological disorders and autism that parents say is the result of long-term exposure to the heavy metals in baby food items.

The NCBI published a research study in 2015 that concluded that heavy metals interfere with metabolism by two methods:

1. They build up and cause disruption to functions in important glands and organs like the brain, heart kidneys, bone, liver, etc.
2. They take away vital minerals that are essential to nutrition from their natural location and hinder their function in the biological system.

More supervision is needed to safeguard babies from serious health-related side effects and long-term health harm as the report concludes. This report by the Oversight Committee is urging the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to establish what is the appropriate amount of exposure for infants, and require that manufacturers adhere to these limitations. On March 5th, the FDA announced new measures to further reduce the presence of harmful elements in food products for children and infants. As part of the actions, it announced that the FDA sent a letter to toddler and baby food manufacturers, urging them to take into account the chemical hazards contained in their product while conducting their own hazard analysis. The letter continued to say that although harmful elements and other chemical compounds found in food can cause health risks, however, the FDA is taking steps to remove these products from the marketplace. So far there have not been any recalls issued for the infant food items that are mentioned in the report of Congress.

Halo Theory in Food Litigation

“The “halo impact” is the phenomenon where one characteristic of a thing or person is used to form an overall assessment of that individual or thing. In the courtroom, it’s the argument made by the lawyers representing plaintiffs that reasonable consumers wouldn’t be expecting to find any amount of heavy metals in food items that are promoted to be “healthy” and healthy”. In addition, since there aren’t safe harbor levels for the majority of heavy metals specifically for baby food, there’s not a particular threshold that a defendant could use to claim the protection of consumers.

At the time of writing, the total number of lawsuits are pending in federal courts in 12 states which led to a motion being filed before the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) to arrange preliminary proceedings within the Eastern District of New York where the bulk of cases are in the process. Gerber as well as other defendants are against consolidation , arguing that their lawsuits should not be included with lawsuits that are filed against Hain Celestial Group. The JPML has not yet issued a decision regarding coordination, however, plaintiffs’ firms like Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll, Moore Law Group and Baum Hedlund Aristei & Goldman are taking clients on and focus on the personal injury part of the lawsuit.

Baby Food Companies Respond

Following the release of the report, several companies that were involved in the testing released statements in defense of their procedures for procurement and testing and vowed to fight the lawsuits brought against them.

Plum Organics said that given the absence of any specific FDA guidelines on infant food, Campbell utilized “standards taken from California’s Proposition 65, the EU (European Union) as well as the WHO (World Health Organization) as well as general guidelines from the FDA on lead , which is not specifically applicable to infant food.” Gerber, a founding member of the Baby Food Council has stated that the safety standards “are one of the highest in not only the US and around across the globe,” adding they “take various steps like prioritizing growth places based on climate as well as soil composition; and approving the fields prior to planting crops on the basis of soil tests.”

Hain Celestial asserts that the congressional report incorrectly classified a meeting in conjunction with FDA (the report stated that the FDA received the FDA a “secret informational presentation”) and also that the information that was used for the study was not current and didn’t accurately reflect their current methods. The company further claimed that following the attending a conference with FDA they took a variety of steps to reduce the level of heavy metals present in their products. One of them was not using Brown rice as a component in the products, which comprise mainly rice.

Happy Family Organics also claimed that the committee relied on “select information” and also claimed that the report was biased and “tone prejudice.” Beech-Nut stated that the report did not note that a lot of everyday food products contain trace amounts the heavy metals mentioned, regardless of whether they are cooked at the home or sold as packaged food items. Beech-Nut used the occasion to assure parents that their product is safe as well as healthy.

Potential issues

There are legal hurdles in the litigation involving baby food and it’s not evident if the claims submitted will be compensated for families. The FDA has declared that heavy metals are not completely eliminated from the grains, fruits and vegetables that form the base of infant food. Even though the comparison is not as strong as the FDA limitations for heavy metals in bottles of juices and water It is crucial to keep in mind that chemicals that dissolve in juices or in water are absorption by the body in different ways than heavy metals found in food that are generally coupled by intricate carbon ligands which reduce their ability to be absorb into the human body.

Furthermore, the courts have not been open to lawsuits involving small amounts of pesticide residues present in food. Legal actions for General Mills over their Nature Valley Products and Cheerios, Florida’s Natural Growers over glyphosate in orange juice as well as Kellogg’s Co. over their Nutrigrain bars were unable to prevail on motions to dismiss or otherwise dismissed.