關於 on line payment ，我們在網路上蒐集到這些相關的討論、資訊與評價

🌻
美國聯準會（Fed）在美東時間22日下午2時（台灣23日凌晨2時）宣布利率維持在趨近零的水準，但暗示升息可能會比預期來得快一些，同時也大幅下修今年的經濟展望。

https://udn.com/news/story/6811/5764746

🌻Adobe(ADBE)電話會議內容讀後感

ADBE前兩天發表財報了.

這次ADBE在財報後下跌, 主要是兩個原因(如下). 不過個人覺得是瑕不掩瑜:
1. 因為之前已經漲了不少(投資人期望太高)
2. 因為Digital Marketing這部分的業務受到季節性的影響, 所以表現不是很突出(沒有比預期高出很多)
a. net new Digital Media ARR (3% beat vs guide, vs 15% beat in 2Q21 vs 35% beat in 3Q20).
b. 有分析師在問(“Maybe just -- can we double-click on the seasonality commentary in the quarter? Because if we look at the beat versus guidance on net new digital media ARR, it looks, at the same time you had the weakest beat, but then the strongest guide in the last three years, which kind of speaks to and confirm some of those seasonality comments that you made.)
i. 高層對此的回答是, 主要是疫情後, 加上正值夏季, 大家的日子回復到正常&放假外出, 所以這部分的業務有受到影響(I think going into the quarter, we had expected that the consumer with a little bit more return to normalcy as what's happening in the environment.)
ii. 高層又說了一些話, 不過重點就是他不認為這是甚麼大事”So, net-net, I would say that the growth prospects for that particular business and the growth drivers remain intact. But again, very much in line. And this is what we feel good about the insights that we're getting on the business.”
iii. 也提到, Q4通常會是digital marketing業務的旺季(表現會不俗的意思)

另外, 覺得這次令我印象深刻的是, 當高層與分析師提到這些事情:
• 常在一些公司的電話會議中提到omnichannel這個字(疫情後, 更明顯了). 這次高層也有提到. ADBE可說是omnichannel概念股:
o “I mean, a big part of that is more and more companies are thirdly doing the multi-channel omnichannel, whatever they want to call it. And I think that's only going to continue to be a driver of our Digital Experience Solutions. Because today that stable stakes and so we just look at it and say whether you're shopping in-store over they are shopping online. You need a solution that treats you like a customer that we know of.”
• 網路上影片(video)的興起, 以及串流影音, 有提高了Adobe的營收天花板(用句分析師的術語, 就是TAM (total addressable market) expansion.
• 當使用者製作了越來越多的內容, 內容管理(content management)的能力就越顯重要, 內容上的流程管理(workflow)也越顯重要. Adobe的產品能夠幫內容製作者解決這樣的問題.
• 而Adobe各產品間的相容性, 標準化, 整合能力, 是它的競爭優勢之一:
o And one of the things we did really well is what we called our named user deployment and how, you know, when we have these enterprise licensing agreements, we offer enterprises the ability to download and distribute within the companies. And the more we do training and evangelism of the products, that leads to adoption. So, I would say there's an element of standardization, there's an element of more content.

而最近ADBE有個新聞, 引起了我的注意, 就是它即將在自己的平台上, 提供付款服務(payment service). 根據之前研究SHOP的經驗, 這有可能會對股價造成一定的漲幅:
On Sept. 15, Adobe announced that it will add payment services to its e-commerce platform this year to help merchants accept credit cards and other ways of paying. The move will deepen Adobe's rivalry with e-commerce firm Shopify (SHOP).
For the service, Adobe has partnered with PayPal (PYPL), which will process a variety of payment types, including credit and debit cards as well as PayPal's own payment and buy-now-pay-later offerings.
https://www.investors.com/news/technology/adbe-stock-adobe-beats-fiscal-q3-targets/

接下來該怎麼辦? 對於基本面良好的公司如ADBE, 我能說的就是buy the dip(逢低買進)了. 供參.

🌻The Facebook Files
一個星期前, WSJ上面有個關於FB的大篇幅調查報導. 有興趣的可以看看.
The Facebook Files
https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-facebook-files-11631713039

這篇文章挺長, 也沒有看到華爾街中文版本的完整翻譯, 不過可以看看這篇:
https://on.wsj.com/2ZmFimp

"《華爾街日報》的相關調查顯示，這家社交媒體巨頭心知肚明，其平台會傷害用戶，而且是以該公司常常完全了解的方式造成傷害。目前，全球近半數人口都是Facebook旗下平台的用戶。其中一些證據尤其令人不安：據《華爾街日報》報導，Facebook的內部研究顯示，在報告稱有過自殺念頭的青少年中當中，有13%的英國用戶和6%的美國用戶把這種念頭歸結於Instagram。"

另一篇相關新聞:
https://www.thenewslens.com/article/156683

"《華爾街日報》於13日揭露Facebook的XCheck系統，也就是內部系統中的VIP名單，數百萬名人、政治人物與記者等知名公眾人物都在特別的一份「白名單」之內。"

"這些「貴賓」在社群上發布的內容可以躲過一般的審查系統，即使發布明顯的不當內容，也不會立即被刪除。《衛報》報導，Facebook的獨立監督委員會表示，在閱讀該篇報導後，決定要審查XCheck系統，並要求Facebook對其進行報告與解釋。"

🌻我喜歡的Apple TV影集, "Ted Lasso", 是這次艾美獎的大贏家, 很多主要演員都得獎了.

很高興這兩年, 因為有這部戲的陪伴, 讓我撐過了疫情, 家人離世, 以及一些烏煙瘴氣的事情.

前幾天看演員的得獎影片, 一位娛樂記者問得獎的男配角(也是編劇之一)說, 你覺得這部片的核心思想是甚麼. 他說, be curious, not judgemental.

就像得獎的女演員在劇中一開始是很鴨霸很壞心的球隊主人, 但這樣做是因為被前夫傷透了心, 所以想要弄垮離婚後分到的財產(也是前夫的最愛--球隊); 外表看起來永遠陽光燦爛做啦啦隊的男主角, 在青少年時父親自殺, 造成了他心裡永遠的痛&障礙(讓他在球賽時, 會有突發恐懼症).

我們每個人其實都有很多面, 很多個故事. 尤其在社群, 大家都是萍水相逢, 對彼此的了解都是非常片面的; 而有時候在社群裡, 看到有人會因為只看到一個面向, 就去下斷語. 這其實是人之常情很難避免, 所以我們需要常用第二層思考去提醒自己. 社群裡需要更多的同理心.

“Be curious, not judgmental” – Walt Whitman(惠特曼)(美國詩人)

Picture來源:
https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2021/09/apples-global-hit-comedy-series-ted-lasso-sweeps-the-2021-primetime-emmy-awards-scoring-history-making-win-for-outstanding-comedy-series/

這是前些日子爆出已經被加拿大法院接理對藏傳佛教噶舉派法王的訟訴。（加拿大法院鏈接在此：https://www.bccourts.ca/jdb-txt/sc/21/09/2021BCSC0939cor1.htm?fbclid=IwAR2FLZlzmUIGTBaTuKPVchEqqngcE3Qy6G_C0TWNWVKa2ksbIYkVJVMQ8f8）

這位法王的桃色事件，我是幾年前才聽到。但，藏傳佛教的高層有這些性醜聞，我已經聽了幾十年。我以前的一位前女友也被一些堪布藉故上她的家摟抱過，也有一些活佛跟她表白。（這不只是她，其他地方我也聽過不少）

這是一個藏傳佛教裡面系統式的問題。

很多時候發生這種事情，信徒和教主往往都是說女方得不到寵而報仇，或者說她們也精神病，或者說她們撒謊。

我不排除有這種可能性，但，多過一位，甚至多位出來指證的時候，我是傾向於相信『沒有那麼巧這麼多有精神病的女人要撒謊來報仇』。

大寶法王的桃色事件，最先吹哨的是一位台灣的在家信徒，第二位是香港的女出家人，現在加拿大又多一位公開舉報上法庭。

對大寶法王信徒來說，這一次的比較麻煩，因為是有孩子的。（關於有孩子的，我早在法王的桃色事件曝光時，就有聽聞）

如果法庭勒令要驗證DNA，這對法王和他的信徒來說，會很尷尬和矛盾，因為做或不做，都死。

你若問我，我覺得『人數是有力量的』，同時我也覺得之後有更多的人站出來，是不出奇的。

我也藉此呼籲各方佛教徒，如果你們真的愛佛教，先別說批判，但如鴕鳥般不討論這些爭議，你是間接害了佛教。

（下面是我從加拿大法院鏈接拷貝下來的內容，當中有很多細節。）

Table of Contents

INTRODUCTION

BACKGROUND

ANALYSIS

A. The Spousal Support Claim in this Case

B. The Test to Amend Pleadings

C. Pleadings in Family Law Cases

D. The Legal Concept of a Marriage-Like Relationship

E. Is There a Reasonable Claim of a Marriage-Like Relationship?

F. Delay / Prejudice

CONCLUSION



INTRODUCTION
[1] The claimant applies to amend her notice of family claim to seek spousal support. At issue is whether the claimant’s allegations give rise to a reasonable claim she lived with the respondent in a marriage-like relationship, so as to give rise to a potential entitlement to spousal support under the Family Law Act, S.B.C. 2011, c. 25 (“FLA”).

[2] The facts alleged by the claimant do not fit within a traditional concept of marriage. The claimant does not allege that she and the respondent ever lived together. Indeed, she has only met the respondent in person four times: twice very briefly in a public setting; a third time in private, when she alleges the respondent sexually assaulted her; and a fourth and final occasion, when she informed the respondent she was pregnant with his child.

[3] The claimant’s case is that what began as a non-consensual sexual encounter evolved into a loving and affectionate relationship. That relationship occurred almost entirely over private text messages. The parties rarely spoke on the telephone, and never saw one another during the relationship, even over video. The claimant says they could not be together because the respondent is forbidden by his station and religious beliefs from intimate relationships or marriage. Nonetheless, she alleges, they formed a marriage-like relationship that lasted from January 2018 to January 2019.

[4] The respondent denies any romantic relationship with the claimant. While he acknowledges providing emotional and financial support to the claimant, he says it was for the benefit of the child the claimant told him was his daughter.

[5] The claimant’s proposed amendment raises a novel question: can a secret relationship that began on-line and never moved into the physical world be like a marriage? In my view, that question should be answered by a trial judge after hearing all of the evidence. The alleged facts give rise to a reasonable claim the claimant lived with the respondent in a marriage-like relationship. Accordingly, I grant the claimant leave to amend her notice of family claim.

BACKGROUND
[6] It should be emphasized that this is an application to amend pleadings only. The allegations by the claimant are presumed to be true for the purposes of this application. Those allegations have not been tested in a court of law.

[7] The respondent, Ogyen Trinley Dorje, is a high lama of the Karma Kagyu School of Tibetan Buddhism. He has been recognized and enthroned as His Holiness, the 17th Gyalwang Karmapa. Without meaning any disrespect, I will refer to him as Mr. Dorje in these reasons for judgment.

[8] Mr. Dorje leads a monastic and nomadic lifestyle. His true home is Tibet, but he currently resides in India. He receives followers from around the world at the Gyuto Monetary in India. He also travels the world teaching Tibetan Buddhist Dharma and hosting pujas, ceremonies at which Buddhists express their gratitude and devotion to the Buddha.

[9] The claimant, Vikki Hui Xin Han, is a former nun of Tibetan Buddhism. Ms. Han first encountered Mr. Dorje briefly at a large puja in 2014. The experience of the puja convinced Ms. Han she wanted to become a Buddhist nun. She met briefly with Mr. Dorje, in accordance with Kagyu traditions, to obtain his approval to become a nun.

[10] In October 2016, Ms. Han began a three-year, three-month meditation retreat at a monastery in New York State. Her objective was to learn the practices and teachings of the Kagyu Lineage. Mr. Dorje was present at the retreat twice during the time Ms. Han was at the monastery.

[11] Ms. Han alleges that on October 14, 2017, Mr. Dorje sexually assaulted her in her room at the monastery. She alleges that she became pregnant from the assault.

[12] After she learned that she was pregnant, Ms. Han requested a private audience with Mr. Dorje. In November 2017, in the presence of his bodyguards, Ms. Han informed Mr. Dorje she was pregnant with his child. Mr. Dorje initially denied responsibility; however, he provided Ms. Han with his email address and a cellphone number, and, according to Ms. Han, said he would “prepare some money” for her.

[13] Ms. Han abandoned her plan to become a nun, left the retreat and returned to Canada. She never saw Mr. Dorje again.

[14] After Ms. Han returned to Canada, she and Mr. Dorje began a regular communication over an instant messaging app called Line. They also exchanged emails and occasionally spoke on the telephone.

[15] The parties appear to have expressed care and affection for one another in these communications. I say “appear to” because it is difficult to fully understand the meaning and intentions of another person from brief text messages, especially those originally written in a different language. The parties wrote in a private shorthand, sharing jokes, emojis, cartoon portraits and “hugs” or “kisses”. Ms. Han was the more expressive of the two, writing more frequently and in longer messages. Mr. Dorje generally participated in response to questions or prompting from Ms. Han, sometimes in single word messages.

[16] Ms. Han deposes that she believed Mr. Dorje was in love with her and that, by January 2018, she and Mr. Dorje were living in a “conjugal relationship”.

[17] During their communications, Ms. Han expressed concern that her child would be “illegitimate”. She appears to have asked Mr. Dorje to marry her, and he appears to have responded that he was “not ready”.

[18] Throughout 2018, Mr. Dorje transferred funds in various denominations to Ms. Han through various third parties. Ms. Han deposes that these funds were:

a) $50,000 CDN to deliver the child and for postpartum care she was to receive at a facility in Seattle;

b) $300,000 CDN for the first year of the child’s life;

c) $20,000 USD for a wedding ring, because Ms. Han wrote “Even if we cannot get married, you must buy me a wedding ring”;

d) $400,000 USD to purchase a home for the mother and child.

[19] On June 19, 2018, Ms. Han gave birth to a daughter in Richmond, B.C.

[20] On September 17, 2018, Mr. Dorje wrote, ”Taking care of her and you are my duty for life”.

[21] Ms. Han’s expectation was that the parties would live together in the future. She says they planned to live together. Those plans evolved over time. Initially they involved purchasing a property in Toronto, so that Mr. Dorje could visit when he was in New York. They also discussed purchasing property in Calgary or renting a home in Vancouver for that purpose. Ms. Han eventually purchased a condominium in Richmond using funds provided by Mr. Dorje.

[22] Ms. Han deposes that the parties made plans for Mr. Dorje to visit her and meet the child in Richmond. In October 2018, however, Mr. Dorje wrote that he needed to “disappear” to Europe. He wrote:

I will definitely find a way to meet her

And you

Remember to take care of yourself if something happens

[23] The final plan the parties discussed, according to Ms. Han, was that Mr. Dorje would sponsor Ms. Han and the child to immigrate to the United States and live at the Kagyu retreat centre in New York State.

[24] In January 2019, Ms. Han lost contact with Mr. Dorje.

[25] Ms. Han commenced this family law case on July 17, 2019, seeking child support, a declaration of parentage and a parentage test. She did not seek spousal support.

[26] Ms. Han first proposed a claim for spousal support in October 2020 after a change in her counsel. Following an exchange of correspondence concerning an application for leave to amend the notice of family claim, Ms. Han’s counsel wrote that Ms. Han would not be advancing a spousal support claim. On March 16, 2020, counsel reversed course, and advised that Ms. Han had instructed him to proceed with the application.

[27] When this application came on before me, the trial was set to commence on June 7, 2021. The parties were still in the process of discoveries and obtaining translations for hundreds of pages of documents in Chinese characters.

[28] At a trial management conference on May 6, 2021, noting the parties were not ready to proceed, Madam Justice Walkem adjourned the trial to April 11, 2022.

ANALYSIS
A. The Spousal Support Claim in this Case
[29] To claim spousal support in this case, Ms. Han must plead that she lived with Mr. Dorje in a marriage-like relationship. This is because only “spouses” are entitled to spousal support, and s. 3 of the Family Law Act defines a spouse as a person who is married or has lived with another person in a marriage-like relationship:

3 (1) A person is a spouse for the purposes of this Act if the person

(a) is married to another person, or

(b) has lived with another person in a marriage-like relationship, and

(i) has done so for a continuous period of at least 2 years, or

(ii) except in Parts 5 [Property Division] and 6 [Pension Division], has a child with the other person.

[30] Because she alleges she has a child with Mr. Dorje, Ms. Han need not allege that the relationship endured for a continuous period of two years to claim spousal support; but she must allege that she lived in a marriage-like relationship with him at some point in time. Accordingly, she must amend the notice of family claim.

B. The Test to Amend Pleadings
[31] Given that the notice of trial has been served, Ms. Han requires leave of the court to amend the notice of family claim: Supreme Court Family Rule 8-1(1)(b)(i).

[32] A person seeking to amend a notice of family claim must show that there is a reasonable cause of action. This is a low threshold. What the applicant needs to establish is that, if the facts pleaded are proven at trial, they would support a reasonable claim. The applicant’s allegations of fact are assumed to be true for the purposes of this analysis. Cantelon v. Wall, 2015 BCSC 813, at para. 7-8.

[33] The applicant’s delay, the reasons for the delay, and the prejudice to the responding party are also relevant factors. The ultimate consideration is whether it would be just and convenient to allow the amendment. Cantelon, at para. 6, citing Teal Cedar Products Ltd. v. Dale Intermediaries Ltd. et al (1986), 19 B.C.L.R. (3d) 282.

C. Pleadings in Family Law Cases
[34] Supreme Court Family Rules 3-1(1) and 4-1(1) require that a claim to spousal support be pleaded in a notice of family claim in Form F3. Section 2 of Form F3, “Spousal relationship history”, requires a spousal support claimant to check the boxes that apply to them, according to whether they are or have been married or are or have been in a marriage-like relationship. Where a claimant alleges a marriage-like relationship, Form F3 requires that they provide the date on which they began to live together with the respondent in a marriage-like relationship and, where applicable, the date on which they separated. Form F3 does not require a statement of the factual basis for the claim of spousal support.

[35] In this case, Ms. Han seeks to amend the notice of family claim to allege that she and Mr. Dorje began to live in a marriage-like relationship in or around January 2018, and separated in or around January 2019.

[36] An allegation that a person lived with a claimant in a marriage-like relationship is a conclusion of law, not an allegation of fact. Unlike the rules governing pleadings in civil actions, however, the Supreme Court Family Rules do not expressly require family law claimants to plead the material facts in support of conclusions of law.

[37] In other words, there is no express requirement in the Supreme Court Family Rules that Ms. Han plead the facts on which she relies for the allegation she and Mr. Dorje lived in a marriage-like relationship.

[38] Rule 4-6 authorizes a party to demand particulars, and then apply to the court for an order for further and better particulars, of a matter stated in a pleading. However, unless and until she is granted leave and files the proposed amended notice of family claim, Ms. Han’s allegation of a marriage-like relationship is not a matter stated in a pleading.

[39] Ms. Han filed an affidavit in support of her application to amend the notice of family claim. Normally, evidence would not be required or admissible on an application to amend a pleading. However, in the unusual circumstances of this case, the parties agreed I may look to Ms. Han’s affidavit and exhibits for the facts she pleads in support of the allegation of a marriage-like relationship.

[40] Because this is an application to amend - and Ms. Han’s allegations of fact are presumed to be true - I have not considered Mr. Dorje’s responding affidavit.

[41] Relying on affidavit evidence for an application to amend pleadings is less than ideal. It tends to merge and confuse the material facts with the evidence that would be relied on to prove those facts. In a number of places in her affidavit, for example, Ms. Han describes her feelings, impressions and understandings. A person’s hopes and intentions are not normally material facts unless they are mutual or reasonably held. The facts on which Ms. Han alleges she and Mr. Dorje formed a marriage-like relationship are more important for the present purposes than her belief they entered into a conjugal union.

[42] Somewhat unusually, in this case, almost all of the parties’ relevant communications were in writing. This makes it somewhat easier to separate the facts from the evidence; however, as stated above, it is difficult to understand the intentions and actions of a person from brief text messages.

[43] In my view, it would be a good practice for applicants who seek to amend their pleadings in family law cases to provide opposing counsel and the court with a schedule of the material facts on which they rely for the proposed amendment.

D. The Legal Concept of a Marriage-Like Relationship
[44] As Mr. Justice Myers observed in Mother 1 v. Solus Trust Company, 2019 BCSC 200, the concept of a marriage-like relationship is elastic and difficult to define. This elasticity is illustrated by the following passage from Yakiwchuk v. Oaks, 2003 SKQB 124, quoted by Myers J. at para. 133 of Mother 1:

[10] Spousal relationships are many and varied. Individuals in spousal relationships, whether they are married or not, structure their relationships differently. In some relationships there is a complete blending of finances and property - in others, spouses keep their property and finances totally separate and in still others one spouse may totally control those aspects of the relationship with the other spouse having little or no knowledge or input. For some couples, sexual relations are very important - for others, that aspect may take a back seat to companionship. Some spouses do not share the same bed. There may be a variety of reasons for this such as health or personal choice. Some people are affectionate and demonstrative. They show their feelings for their “spouse” by holding hands, touching and kissing in public. Other individuals are not demonstrative and do not engage in public displays of affection. Some “spouses” do everything together - others do nothing together. Some “spouses” vacation together and some spend their holidays apart. Some “spouses” have children - others do not. It is this variation in the way human beings structure their relationships that make the determination of when a “spousal relationship” exists difficult to determine. With married couples, the relationship is easy to establish. The marriage ceremony is a public declaration of their commitment and intent. Relationships outside marriage are much more difficult to ascertain. Rarely is there any type of “public” declaration of intent. Often people begin cohabiting with little forethought or planning. Their motivation is often nothing more than wanting to “be together”. Some individuals have chosen to enter relationships outside marriage because they did not want the legal obligations imposed by that status. Some individuals have simply given no thought as to how their relationship would operate. Often the date when the cohabitation actually began is blurred because people “ease into” situations, spending more and more time together. Agreements between people verifying when their relationship began and how it will operate often do not exist.

[45] In Mother 1, Mr. Justice Myers referred to a list of 22 factors grouped into seven categories, from Maldowich v. Penttinen, (1980), 17 R.F.L. (2d) 376 (Ont. Dist. Ct.), that have frequently been cited in this and other courts for the purpose of determining whether a relationship was marriage-like, at para. 134 of Mother 1:

1. Shelter:

(a) Did the parties live under the same roof?

(b) What were the sleeping arrangements?

(c) Did anyone else occupy or share the available accommodation?

2. Sexual and Personal Behaviour:

(a) Did the parties have sexual relations? If not, why not?

(b) Did they maintain an attitude of fidelity to each other?

(c) What were their feelings toward each other?

(d) Did they communicate on a personal level?

(e) Did they eat their meals together?

(f) What, if anything, did they do to assist each other with problems or during illness?

(g) Did they buy gifts for each other on special occasions?

3. Services:

What was the conduct and habit of the parties in relation to:

(a) preparation of meals;

(b) washing and mending clothes;

(c) shopping;

(d) household maintenance; and

(e) any other domestic services?

4. Social:

(a) Did they participate together or separately in neighbourhood and community activities?

(b) What was the relationship and conduct of each of them toward members of their respective families and how did such families behave towards the parties?

5. Societal:

What was the attitude and conduct of the community toward each of them and as a couple?

6. Support (economic):

(a) What were the financial arrangements between the parties regarding the provision of or contribution toward the necessaries of life (food, clothing, shelter, recreation, etc.)?

(b) What were the arrangements concerning the acquisition and ownership of property?

(c) Was there any special financial arrangement between them which both agreed would be determinant of their overall relationship?

7. Children:

What was the attitude and conduct of the parties concerning children?

[46] In Austin v. Goerz, 2007 BCCA 586, the Court of Appeal cautioned against a “checklist approach”; rather, a court should "holistically" examine all the relevant factors. Cases like Molodowich provide helpful indicators of the sorts of behaviour that society associates with a marital relationship, the Court of Appeal said; however, “the presence or absence of any particular factor cannot be determinative of whether a relationship is marriage-like” (para. 58).

[47] In Weber v. Leclerc, 2015 BCCA 492, the Court of Appeal again affirmed that there is no checklist of characteristics that will be found in all marriages and then concluded with respect to evidence of intentions:

[23] The parties’ intentions – particularly the expectation that the relationship will be of lengthy, indeterminate duration – may be of importance in determining whether a relationship is “marriage-like”. While the court will consider the evidence expressly describing the parties’ intentions during the relationship, it will also test that evidence by considering whether the objective evidence is consonant with those intentions.

[24] The question of whether a relationship is “marriage-like” will also typically depend on more than just their intentions. Objective evidence of the parties’ lifestyle and interactions will also provide direct guidance on the question of whether the relationship was “marriage-like”.

[48] Significantly for this case, the courts have looked to mutual intent in order to find a marriage-like relationship. See, for example, L.E. v. D.J., 2011 BCSC 671 and Buell v. Unger, 2011 BCSC 35; Davey Estate v. Gruyaert, 2005 CarswellBC 3456 at 13 and 35.

[49] In Mother 1, Myers J. concluded his analysis of the law with the following learned comment:

[143] Having canvassed the law relating to the nature of a marriage-like relationship, I will digress to point out the problematic nature of the concept. It may be apparent from the above that determining whether a marriage-like relationship exists sometimes seems like sand running through one's fingers. Simply put, a marriage-like relationship is akin to a marriage without the formality of a marriage. But as the cases mentioned above have noted, people treat their marriages differently and have different conceptions of what marriage entails.

[50] In short, the determination of whether the parties in this case lived in a marriage-like relationship is a fact-specific inquiry that a trial judge would need to make on a “holistic” basis, having regard to all of the evidence. While the trial judge may consider the various factors listed in the authorities, those factors would not be treated as a checklist and no single factor or category of factors would be treated as being decisive.

E. Is There a Reasonable Claim of a Marriage-Like Relationship?
[51] In this case, many of the Molodowich factors are missing:

a) The parties never lived under the same roof. They never slept together. They were never in the same place at the same time during the relationship. The last time they saw each other in person was in November 2017, before the relationship began.

b) The parties never had consensual sex. They did not hug, kiss or hold hands. With the exception of the alleged sexual assault, they never touched one another physically.

c) The parties expressed care and affection for one another, but they rarely shared personal information or interest in their lives outside of their direct topic of communication. They did not write about their families, their friends, their religious beliefs or their work.

d) They expressed concern and support for one another when the other felt unwell or experienced health issues, but they did not provide any care or assistance during illness or other problems.

e) They did not assist one another with domestic chores.

f) They did not share their relationship with their peers or their community. There is no allegation, for example, that Mr. Dorje told his fellow monks or any of his followers about the relationship. There is no allegation that Ms. Han told her friends or any co-workers. Indeed, there is no allegation that anyone, with the exception of Ms. Han’s mother, knew about the relationship. Although Mr. Dorje gave Ms. Han’s mother a gift, he never met the mother and he never spoke to her.

g) They did not intend to have a child together. The child was conceived as a result of a sexual assault. While Mr. Dorje expressed interest in “meeting” the child, he never followed up. He currently has no relationship with the child. There is no allegation he has sought access or parenting arrangements.

[52] The only Molodowich factor of any real relevance in this case is economic support. Mr. Dorje provided the funds with which Ms. Han purchased a condominium. Mr. Dorje initially wrote that he wanted to buy a property with the money, but, he wrote, “It’s the same thing if you buy [it]”.

[53] Mr. Dorje also provided a significant amount of money for Ms. Han’s postpartum care and the child’s first year of life.

[54] This financial support may have been primarily for the benefit of the child. Even the condominium, Ms. Han wrote, was primarily for the benefit of the child.

[55] However, in my view, a trial judge may attach a broader significance to the financial support from Mr. Dorje than child support alone. A trial judge may find that the money Mr. Dorje provided to Ms. Han at her request was an expression of his commitment to her in circumstances in which he could not commit physically. The money and the gifts may be seen by the trial judge to have been a form of down payment by Mr. Dorje on a promise of continued emotional and financial support for Ms. Han, or, in Mr. Dorje’s own words, “Taking care of her and you are my duty for life” (emphasis added).

[56] On the other hand, I find it difficult to attach any particular significance to the fact that Mr. Dorje agreed to provide funds for Ms. Han to purchase a wedding ring. It appears to me that Ms. Han demanded that Mr. Dorje buy her a wedding ring, not that the ring had any mutual meaning to the parties as a marriage symbol. But it is relevant, in my view, that Mr. Dorje provided $20,000 USD to Ms. Han for something she wanted that was of no benefit to the child.

[57] Further, Ms. Han alleges that the parties intended to live together. At a minimum, a trial judge may find that the discussions about where Ms. Han and the child would live reflected a mutual intention of the parties to see one another and spend time together when they could.

[58] Mr. Dorje argues that an intention to live together at some point in the future is not sufficient to show that an existing relationship was marriage-like. He argues that the question of whether the relationship was marriage-like requires more than just intentions, citing Weber, supra.

[59] In my view, the documentary evidence referred to above provides some objective evidence in this case that the parties progressed beyond mere intentions. As stated, the parties appear to have expressed genuine care and affection for one another. They appear to have discussed marriage, trust, honesty, finances, mutual obligations and acquiring family property. These are not matters one would expect Mr. Dorje to discuss with a friend or a follower, or even with the mother of his child, without a marriage-like element of the relationship.

[60] A trial judge may find on the facts alleged by Ms. Han that the parties loved one another and would have lived together, but were unable to do so because of Mr. Dorje’s religious duties and nomadic lifestyle.

[61] The question I raised in the introduction to these reasons is whether a relationship that began on-line and never moved into the physical world can be marriage-like.

[62] Notably, the definition of a spouse in the Family Law Act does not require that the parties live together, only that they live with another person in a marriage-like relationship.

[63] In Connor Estate, 2017 BCSC 978, Mr. Justice Kent found that a couple that maintained two entirely separate households and never lived under the same roof formed a marriage-like relationship. (Connor Estate was decided under the intestacy provisions of the Wills, Estates and Succession Act, S.B.C. 2009, c. 13 ("WESA"), but courts have relied on cases decided under WESA and the FLA interchangeably for their definitions of a spouse.) Mr. Justice Kent found:

[50] The evidence is overwhelming and I find as a fact that Mr. Chambers and Ms. Connor loved and cared deeply about each other, and that they had a loving and intimate relationship for over 20 years that was far more than mere friendship or even so-called "friendship with benefits". I accept Mr. Chambers' evidence that he would have liked to share a home with Ms. Connor after the separation from his wife, but was unable to do so because of Ms. Connor's hoarding illness. The evidence amply supports, and I find as a fact, that Mr. Chambers and Ms. Connor loved each other, were faithful to each other, communicated with each other almost every day when they were not together, considered themselves to be (and presented themselves to be) "husband and wife" and were accepted by all who knew them as a couple.

[64] Connor Estate may be distinguishable from this case because Mr. Chambers and Ms. Connor were physically intimate for over 20 years, and presented themselves to the world as a married couple.

[65] Other decisions in which a marriage-like relationship has been found to exist despite the parties not living together have involved circumstances in which the couple lived under the same roof at previous points in the relationship, and the issue was whether they continued to be spouses after they took up separate residences: in Thompson v. Floyd, 2001 BCCA 78, the parties had lived together for a period of at least 11 years; in Roach v. Dutra, 2010 BCCA 264, the parties had lived together for approximately three years.

[66] However, as Mr. Justice Kent noted in Connor Estate:

[48] … [W]hile much guidance might be found in this case law, the simple fact is that no two cases are identical (and indeed they usually vary widely) and it is the assessment of evidence as a whole in this particular case which matters.

[67] Mr. Justice Kent concluded:

[53] Like human beings themselves, marriage-like relationships can come in many and various shapes. In this particular case, I have no doubt that such a relationship existed …

[68] As stated, Ms. Han’s claim is novel. It may even be weak. Almost all of the traditional factors are missing. The fact that Ms. Han and Mr. Dorje never lived under the same roof, never shared a bed and never even spent time together in person will militate against a finding they lived with one another in a marriage-like relationship. However, the traditional factors are not a mandatory check-list that confines the “elastic” concept of a marriage-like relationship. And if the COVID pandemic has taught us nothing else, it is that real relationships can form, blossom and end in virtual worlds.

[69] In my view, the merits of Ms. Han’s claim should be decided on the evidence. Subject to an overriding prejudice to Mr. Dorje, she should have leave to amend the notice of family claim. However, she should also provide meaningful particulars of the alleged marriage-like relationship.

F. Delay / Prejudice
[70] Ms. Han filed her notice of family claim on July 17, 2019. She brought this application to amend approximately one year and nine months after she filed the pleading, just over two months before the original trial date.

[71] Ms. Han’s delay was made all that more remarkable by her change in position from January 19, 2021, when she confirmed, through counsel, that she was not seeking spousal support in this case.

[72] Ms. Han gave notice of her intention to proceed with this application to Mr. Dorje on March 16, 2021. By the time the application was heard, the parties had conducted examinations for discovery without covering the issues that would arise from a claim of spousal support.

[73] Also, in April, Ms. Han produced additional documents, primarily text messages, that may be relevant to her claim of spousal support, but were undecipherable to counsel for Mr. Dorje, who does not read Mandarin.

[74] This application proceeded largely on documents selected and translated by counsel for Ms. Han. I was informed that Mandarin translations of the full materials would take 150 days.

[75] Understandably in the circumstances, Mr. Dorje argued that an amendment two months before trial would be neither just nor convenient. He argued that he would be prejudiced by an adjournment so as to allow Ms. Han to advance a late claim of spousal support.

[76] The circumstances changed on May 6, 2021, when Madam Justice Walkem adjourned the trial to July 2022 and reset it for 25 days. Madam Justice Walkem noted that most of the witnesses live internationally and require translators. She also noted that paternity may be in issue, and Mr. Dorje may amend his pleadings to raise that issue. It seems clear that, altogether apart from the potential spousal support claim, the parties were not ready to proceed to trial on June 7, 2021.

[77] In my view, any remaining prejudice to Mr. Dorje is outweighed by the importance of having all of the issues between the parties decided on their merits.

[78] Ms. Han’s delay and changes of position on spousal support may be a matter to de addressed in a future order of costs; but they are not grounds on which to deny her leave to amend the notice of family claim.

CONCLUSION
[79] Ms. Han is granted leave to amend her notice of family claim in the form attached as Appendix A to the notice of application to include a claim for spousal support.

[80] Within 21 days, or such other deadline as the parties may agree, Ms. Han must provide particulars of the marriage-like relationship alleged in the amended notice of family claim.

[81] Ms. Han is entitled to costs of this application in the cause of the spousal support claim.

“Master Elwood”

Adyen ผู้พัฒนาระบบชำระเงิน 2 ล้านล้าน ที่แย่ง eBay ไปจาก PayPal /โดย ลงทุนแมน
PayPal ถือเป็นแพลตฟอร์มชำระเงินที่ใหญ่สุดในโลก
ที่ทำระบบชำระเงินให้กับ eBay มาอย่างยาวนาน

มาวันนี้ สัญญาของทั้งสองบริษัทก็ได้สิ้นสุดลง
และที่น่าสนใจก็คือ eBay ได้หันไปหาผู้พัฒนา
ระบบรับชำระเงินรายใหม่ ที่ชื่อว่า Adyen

Adyen เป็นหนึ่งในบริษัทที่ทำธุรกิจพัฒนาระบบรับชำระเงินคล้ายกับ PayPal
ที่นักลงทุนหลายคนกำลังให้ความสนใจ และมีมูลค่าเพิ่มขึ้นแบบก้าวกระโดด
กระโดดในระดับที่มีมูลค่าเพิ่มขึ้นเป็น 9 เท่า
เมื่อเทียบกับมูลค่าตอน IPO เมื่อ 2 ปีก่อน
ทำให้ปัจจุบัน Adyen มีมูลค่าบริษัท 2.4 ล้านล้านบาท

แล้ว eBay เห็นอะไรใน Adyen?
ลงทุนแมนจะเล่าให้ฟัง
╔═══════════╗
Blockdit เป็นแพลตฟอร์ม สำหรับนักอ่าน และนักเขียน
ที่มีผู้ใช้งาน 1 ล้านคน ลองใช้แพลตฟอร์มนี้เพื่อได้ไอเดียใหม่ๆ
แล้วอาจพบว่าสังคมนี้เหมาะกับคนเช่นคุณ
Blockdit. Ideas Happen. Blockdit.com/download
╚═══════════╝
Adyen ถูกก่อตั้งขึ้นโดย Pieter van der Does และ Arnout Schuijff
ที่ประเทศเนเธอร์แลนด์ในปี 2006 หรือราว 15 ปีก่อน

บริษัทแห่งนี้ทำธุรกิจพัฒนาแพลตฟอร์มการชำระเงิน
โดยจุดแข็งของ Adyen ก็คือ การออกแบบระบบสถาปัตยกรรมหลังบ้านให้แบบครบวงจร
ซึ่งสามารถเชื่อมต่อโดยตรงได้กับทั้งบัตรเครดิต Visa และ Mastercard
รวมถึงวิธีการชำระเงินออนไลน์มากกว่า 200 รูปแบบตามแต่ละท้องถิ่น
และครอบคลุมมากกว่า 150 สกุลเงิน

ปัจจุบัน Adyen เป็นผู้พัฒนาระบบรับชำระเงินให้กับลูกค้ารายใหญ่
เช่น Facebook, Uber, Spotify, Microsoft และล่าสุดก็คือ eBay

ทีนี้ เรามาดูกันว่า Adyen มีผลประกอบการเป็นอย่างไร?

ปี 2018 รายได้ 59,880 ล้านบาท กำไร 4,752 ล้านบาท
ปี 2019 รายได้ 96,363 ล้านบาท กำไร 7,396 ล้านบาท
ปี 2020 รายได้ 132,000 ล้านบาท กำไร 9,452 ล้านบาท

รายได้เติบโตเฉลี่ย 48%
กำไรเติบโตเฉลี่ย 41%

หลังจากเห็นภาพรวมการเติบโตของบริษัท Adyen แล้ว
ทีนี้เรามาดูกันว่า ทำไม eBay ถึงไม่ต่อสัญญากับ PayPal
แลัวหันมาเป็นพันธมิตรกับ Adyen?

หากเรายังจำกันได้ ที่ผ่านมา เวลาเราจะซื้อขายของบน eBay
เราจำเป็นที่จะต้องมีบัญชีของ PayPal เสียก่อน เพื่อทำธุรกรรมบนระบบ

เรื่องดังกล่าวเหมือนจะเป็นเรื่องดี เพราะ eBay มีผู้คอยทำระบบตัวเลือกการจ่ายเงิน
รวมถึงระบบตรวจสอบบัตรเครดิตให้

อย่างไรก็ตาม การที่ eBay ผูกระบบชำระเงินไว้กับ PayPal แทบจะทั้งหมด
มันก็ได้ทำให้ผู้ใช้งานจากหลายประเทศไม่สะดวกสบายมากนัก
เช่น ในประเทศไทยสมัยก่อน ที่กว่าเราจะสั่งของจาก eBay ได้สำเร็จแต่ละชิ้น จะมีขั้นตอนค่อนข้างมาก
อีกทั้ง PayPal ก็ยังไม่ได้เป็นที่ใช้งานกันแพร่หลายมากนักในไทย

เรื่องดังกล่าวก็ได้ทำให้ผู้เล่นอีคอมเมิร์ซรายอื่น
ที่สามารถออกแบบบริการที่ยืดหยุ่น และมีทางเลือกกับผู้ใช้งานมากกว่าอย่าง Amazon.com และ Alibaba
สามารถเข้าถึงกลุ่มผู้ใช้งานได้อย่างรวดเร็ว จนทุกวันนี้แซงหน้า eBay ไปแบบไม่เห็นฝุ่น

นั่นจึงทำให้ eBay เลือกที่จะพัฒนาระบบรับชำระเงิน และระบบตรวจสอบบัตรเครดิตเองทั้งหมด
ทั้งหมดนี้ก็เพื่อให้ผู้ใช้งานสามารถชำระเงินได้ทันที จบ ครบ บนแพลตฟอร์มของตัวเอง

บริษัทได้ลดบทบาทกับ PayPal ให้เป็นเพียงตัวเลือกในการชำระเงิน
ในขณะที่ระบบใหม่ที่ว่านี้ ก็จะหันมาร่วมมือกันพัฒนากับ Adyen

และบริษัทก็ยังระบุว่าระบบดังกล่าว นอกจากจะทำให้
ผู้ใช้งานบนระบบมีตัวเลือกในการชำระเงินมากขึ้นแล้ว
ผู้ขายก็จะมีต้นทุนค่าธรรมเนียมในการขายที่ต่ำลง

ซึ่งการเข้ามาของ Adyen ไม่เพียงแต่จะมาเคาะประตู
บอก PayPal ว่าเรากำลังแข่งกับคุณอยู่
แต่ Adyen ยังเข้ามาทำให้วงการระบบชำระเงินเปลี่ยนไปอีกด้วย

อย่างที่ได้บอกไปว่า Adyen มีความสามารถในการรองรับระบบการชำระเงินของแต่ละท้องถิ่น
ครอบคลุมมากกว่า 150 สกุลเงิน และวิธีการชำระเงินที่มากกว่า 200 วิธี
นั่นจึงทำให้บริการของ Adyen เข้าถึงกลุ่มผู้ใช้งานอย่างกว้างขวาง
แม้แต่ Mobile Banking ในประเทศไทยก็รองรับ

นอกจากจะโดดเด่นในเรื่องความหลากหลายแล้ว
Adyen ก็ยังรวบรวมข้อมูลการชำระเงิน เพื่อเสนอข้อมูลเชิงลึกของผู้บริโภคแก่ผู้ขาย

รวมถึงมีระบบการจัดการความเสี่ยงในตัว นั่นหมายความว่าบริษัทที่ใช้บริการของ Adyen
จะไม่ต้องจ้างบริษัทอื่นๆ เพื่อมาบริหารความเสี่ยง ที่จะเกิดขึ้นในระบบรับชำระเงิน

ถึงแม้จะดูว่าช้าไปหน่อยสำหรับ eBay
ที่ได้ตัดสินใจทำระบบรับชำระเงินใหม่ในปีนี้

แต่ก็น่าติดตามเหมือนกันว่าเมื่อระบบของ eBay เข้ารูปเข้ารอย
บริษัทแห่งนี้จะกลับมาแย่งส่วนแบ่งในธุรกิจอีคอมเมิร์ซ ได้มากน้อยขนาดไหน

อีกเรื่องที่น่าสนใจไม่แพ้กันก็คือ การเติบโตของ Adyen
ที่ได้สะท้อนให้เห็นว่าธุรกิจฟินเทคประเภทนี้กำลังโตระเบิด

ณ ตอนนี้ Adyen มีมูลค่าเพิ่มขึ้นเป็น 9 เท่า
เมื่อเทียบกับราคา IPO จนบริษัทมีมูลค่าระดับ 2.4 ล้านล้านบาท
ก็มาติดตามกันต่อไปว่า จากตรงนี้ Adyen จะเติบโตไปได้อีกขนาดไหน..
╔═══════════╗
Blockdit เป็นแพลตฟอร์ม สำหรับนักอ่าน และนักเขียน
ที่มีผู้ใช้งาน 1 ล้านคน ลองใช้แพลตฟอร์มนี้เพื่อได้ไอเดียใหม่ๆ
แล้วอาจพบว่าสังคมนี้เหมาะกับคนเช่นคุณ
Blockdit. Ideas Happen. Blockdit.com/download
╚═══════════╝
ติดตามลงทุนแมนได้ที่
Website - longtunman.com
Blockdit - blockdit.com/longtunman
Facebook - ลงทุนแมน
Twitter - twitter.com/longtunman
Instagram - instagram.com/longtunman
Line - page.line.me/longtunman
YouTube - youtube.com/longtunman
Spotify - open.spotify.com/show/4jz0qVn1AL7tRMHiTvMbZH
Apple Podcasts - podcasts.apple.com/th/podcast/ลงท-นแมน/id1543162829
Soundcloud - soundcloud.com/longtunman
References
-https://www.adyen.com/
-https://www.ebayinc.com/stories/news/ebay-to-intermediate-payments-on-its-marketplace-platform/
-https://medium.com/iveyfintechclub/how-adyen-is-disrupting-payment-processing-7e0e261f0ea
-https://www.adyen.com/press-and-media/2020/adyen-and-microsoft-launch-network-token-optimization
-https://www.facebook.com/eBay.Thailand/posts/1139063992897316?comment_id=1139381429532239
-https://www.krungsrifinnovate.com/th/blog/fintech/april-2560/12-top-fintech-companies-to-watch.html
-https://techsauce.co/news/adyen-sets-up-new-office-in-singapore-and-partners-with-grab
-https://ahead.asia/2018/02/02/ebay-replace-paypal-with-adyen/

#netflix #Netflix劇集 #Netflix推介

Follow Me:-
? My Instagram: @iamhakme
? My Facebook: www.facebook.com/hakmebeauty
? Blog: www.hakmebeauty.com
? Weibo: https://www.weibo.com/iamhakme
? 小紅書: http://bit.ly/2W2LcSx

Series Mentioned:-

⭐️ DARK
⭐️ Grey Anatomy
⭐️ The Queen’s Gambit
⭐️ Blacklist
⭐️ Line of Duty
⭐️ The Investigator
⭐️ Better than Us
⭐️ Emily in Paris
⭐️ Ratched
⭐️ The Ripper
⭐️ The Twelve
⭐️ Locke & Key
⭐️ Timeless
⭐️ The Alienist
⭐️ Criminal

Follow Me:-
? My Instagram: @iamhakme
? My Facebook: www.facebook.com/hakmebeauty
? Blog: www.hakmebeauty.com
? Weibo: https://www.weibo.com/iamhakme
? 小紅書: http://bit.ly/2W2LcSx

Follow Hakme Beauty:-
?黑咪店地址: https://www.hakmebeauty.com/store-locations/
?黑咪店路線圖: http://bit.ly/2W3pUZr
?黑咪店Online: https://shop.hakmebeauty.com
?黑咪店Instagram: @hakmebeauty
?黑咪店Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com/hakmebeautyltd/


*************************************************************


Disclaimer: This video is created and edited by my editor. All the content are my own thoughts. As always, all opinions are based on my experience and honesty. Products are either purchased by me or for those which are sent by PR are marked with an “*”. For any collaboration with brands which involves monetary payment, “Ad” will be in the video so that you are aware of the collaboration. Some of the links used above might be affiliate links and please be aware that I will earn a % of commission if you decide to buy through the affiliate links.

iPhone 12 Pro 只剩3筒相機？現在可以買iPhone 11嗎？Apple Watch 6 會準時嗎？與電池新消息：https://youtu.be/8t820iNwxhE
iPhone 12 確認延後開賣！蘋果親口承認 & 高通爆雷：https://youtu.be/uB6Ei3opaXA
iPhone 12 確定取消 120 Hz？Apple Glass 與發表會各項新品心得：https://youtu.be/ITOZqID7Y4M
iPhone 12 變更貴？不附充電頭還要漲價：https://youtu.be/9YGIYMfIPRA
iPhone 12 跟 Apple Watch 6 都有海軍藍：https://youtu.be/eysNzJaR8GA
iPhone 12 京東方 vs 三星：https://youtu.be/y4dd14HuUME
iPhone 12 竟然這麼小？比 iPhone SE 2020 還要小：https://youtu.be/o4_Vyq7rABI
iPhone 12 九月開賣：https://youtu.be/_ck61RRSma0
iPhone 12 與 Apple Glass ：https://youtu.be/aK7UQ7NnUOA

可以詳細看更多的影片了解：
【iPhone SE2開箱實測！超多缺點？對決 iPhone 11 Pro！續航耗電, 拍照人像夜拍, 尺寸對照】
https://youtu.be/fpFldVsdwBI
【Apple Watch 必要嗎？Line, Nike版, GPS與LTE ,Siri, 運動, 心電圖, 錶帶, 生活應用和版本選擇心得全分享】
https://youtu.be/0sLMNYMLE4Q
【Apple Watch 6 消息流出？不負責任心得預測】
https://youtu.be/Fqm8xtpMkyc
【必學功能與技巧！完美解放 Apple Watch 生活安全又方便！】
https://youtu.be/rCzo4e8IOfg
【鈦金屬 Apple Watch 5 開箱！哪個版本適合你？鋁殼版不鏽鋼版鈦金屬版怎麼選？】
https://youtu.be/gfMPP7kxuCE
【必看！完美解放你的 Apple Watch！心電圖ECG跟這個都很重要！】
https://youtu.be/E_2p0jCoBiY
【港版 Apple Watch Series 5 開箱！台灣沒有的心電圖ECG與兩大重要功能應用】
https://youtu.be/CHvtgE-EFIU

概念影片
Enoylity Technology：
https://youtu.be/I10nRm8uHhM
conceptsiPhone：
https://youtu.be/1Tk22uoG4es
https://youtu.be/Mo2OniiJ3v4
https://youtu.be/1yppdE0LTCA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qfhGTXcQNK8
https://youtu.be/n44oRvkv2qQ

消息來源參考：
https://www.macrumors.com/2020/08/13/apple-one-bundled-subscription-services/
https://www.macrumors.com/2020/08/13/fornite-adds-direct-payment-option-on-ios/
https://twitter.com/komiya_kj
EverythingApplePro
IG：appledesign
IG：theapplehub
IG：9techeleven
IG：9.41news
IG：Techtoids
Twitter @ Komiya

封面概念：
https://www.macrumors.com/2020/08/13/fornite-adds-direct-payment-option-on-ios/

各種系列清單：
阿康Apple Watch 錶帶開箱介紹：https://reurl.cc/ex5Rej
阿康Apple Watch 必裝Apps：https://reurl.cc/Wd465Z
阿康Apple Watch 保護殼&錶帶開箱全系列：https://reurl.cc/qdD7Qg
阿康iPhone保護殼開箱系列：https://reurl.cc/xZD5n1
所有全部影片開箱系列：https://reurl.cc/pdDlOa
阿康食記 & 生活 Vlog：https://reurl.cc/d0rN68

如果喜歡我的影片文章願意支持贊助我的話

還請加入我的Patreon 計畫 （每月5鎂）
https://www.patreon.com/goodskang
或是透過paypal單筆贊助
https://paypal.me/goodskang

阿康IG：https://instagram.com/goodskang
按讚Facebook 粉絲專頁：https://www.facebook.com/goodskang/

拍攝器材：Sony a6400 + SEL18135, iPhone 11 Pro, 智雲Smooth 4, GoPro Max
收音設備：RODE VideoMicro, AirPods Pro, iPhone 11 Pro 和 GoPro Max 內建
剪輯軟體：Final Cut Pro X
片內素材：Pexels
背景音樂：Epidemicsound, https://www.epidemicsound.com/
合作邀約請寄：goodskang@gmail.com
或是到FB, IG私訊都可以囉！

#AppleWatch6 #AppleWatchSE #EpicGames #Fortnite #iPhone12

#密密清 #用光光 #空瓶 #分享 #empties

Follow Me:-
? My Instagram: @iamhakme
? My Facebook: www.facebook.com/hakmebeauty
? Blog: www.hakmebeauty.com
? Weibo: https://www.weibo.com/iamhakme
? 小紅書: http://bit.ly/2W2LcSx
? Shop My Looks: https://goxi.ps/iamhakme


Products Mentioned:-

⭐️ Chanel Biphase Eye Makeup Remover [@Chanel]
⭐️ Simple Cleansing Micellar Water [@Watsons]
⭐️ Valmont Aqua Falls [@Valmont]
⭐️ Fresh Soy Face Cleanser [@fresh]
⭐️ Aquafolia Soothing Cleansing Essence [@Hakme Beauty]
?? Shop: http://bit.ly/2MjTG7v
⭐️ Avene Thermal Spring Water [@Watsons]
⭐️ Glossier Soothing Face Mist [@Glossier]
⭐️ La Mer The Treatment Lotion [@La Mer]
⭐️ zkin Line Smoothing Serum [@Hakme Beauty]
?? Shop: http://bit.ly/2NGgGcJ
⭐️ Drunk Elephant B-Hyra Intensive Hydration Gel [@Sephora]
? Review: https://bit.ly/3cELBmj
?? Shop: https://bit.ly/2MvyXv8
⭐️ Esterel Moisturizing Serum [@Hakme Beauty]
?? Shop: http://bit.ly/2KUhgpV
⭐️ *Clarins Moisture Replenishing Lip Balm [@Clarins]
⭐️ Aquafolia Rescue Cream [@Hakme Beauty]
?? Shop: http://bit.ly/30c3HpW
⭐️ Drunk Elephant Lala Retro Whipped Cream [@Sephora]
? Review: https://bit.ly/3cELBmj
?? Shop: https://bit.ly/2MyM7rl
⭐️ zkin Relief Moisturizer [@Hakme Beauty]
⭐️ Fancl Moisturizing Mask [@fancl]
⭐️ belief Moisturizing Bomb Sheet Mask [@belief]
⭐️ Valmont Renewing Pack [@Valmont]
⭐️ Lebon Toothpaste [@Hakme Beauty]
?? Shop: http://bit.ly/2sz4RNF
⭐️ Phytocode Gentle Intimate Wash [@Hakme Beauty]
?? Shop: http://bit.ly/2MFufIK
⭐️ seba Anti-Dry Wash Emulsion [@Mannings]
⭐️ Kiehl’s Smoothing Oil to Foam Body Cleanser [@Kiehl’s]
⭐️ Lush Sleepy Shower Gel [@lush]
⭐️ Yves Rocher Mango Coriander Shower Gel [@Yves Rocher]
⭐️ Jo Malone Exfoliating Shower Gel in Pomegranate Noir [@Jo Malone]
⭐️ Cetaphil Pro AD Derma Skin Restoring Moisturizer [@Mannings]
⭐️ Esterel Action ÉQUILIBRANTE Shampoo for Oily Scalp [@Hakme Beauty]
?? Shop: https://bit.ly/2Y0AmiC
⭐️ Kiehl’s Amino Acid Shampoo [@Kiehl’s]
⭐️ Chanel Coco Mademoiselle Fresh Hair Mist [@Chanel]
⭐️ Aromatherapy Associates Essential Oil in De-Stress [@Lane Crawford]
⭐️ Aromatherapy Associates Essential Oil in Relax [@Lane Crawford]
⭐️ Aromatherapy Associates Essential Oil in Revive [@Lane Crawford]
⭐️ Tom Ford F**king Fabulous Eau De Parfum [@Tom Ford]
⭐️ Jo Malone Lupin & Patchouli Cologne [@Jo Malone]
⭐️ Jo Malone Nettle & Wild Achillea Cologne [@Jo Malone]
⭐️ Jo Malone Willow & Amber Cologne [@Jo Malone]
⭐️ Jo Malone Cade & Cedarwood Cologne [@Jo Malone]
⭐️ Bondi Wash Hand Spray [@Hakme Beauty]
?? Shop: https://bit.ly/2Lq0mhL
⭐️ Grown Alchemist Hydra-Hand Sanitizer [@Hakme Beauty]
?? Shop: http://bit.ly/398FllB
⭐️ Bioderma Ultra Repair Hans Cream [@Bioderma]


Follow Hakme Beauty:-
?黑咪店地址: https://www.hakmebeauty.com/store-locations/
?黑咪店路線圖: http://bit.ly/2W3pUZr
?黑咪店Online: https://shop.hakmebeauty.com
?黑咪店Instagram: @hakmebeauty
?黑咪店Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com/hakmebeautyltd/

On Me:-
+ Lipstick: Lunasol Lipstick in EX06
+ Top: from Taobao
+ Dinh Van Bracelet
+ Hermes Finesse Bracelet in Rose Gold (Link: http://bit.ly/2PvKvyk)
+ Cartier Love Bracelet SM (Blog: http://tinyurl.com/mgs7o2c)
+ DPT Endless Diamonds Bracelet (Link: http://bit.ly/2BQz11h)
+ VendomeAoyama Diamond Necklace (Link: http://bit.ly/2yhxcLw)

************************************************************************************

Disclaimer: This video is created and edited by my team. All the content are my own thoughts. As always, all opinions are based on my experience and honesty. Products are either purchased by me or for those which are sent by PR are marked with an “*”. For any collaboration with brands which involves monetary payment, an indication will be in the video so that you are aware of the collaboration. Some of the links used above might be affiliate links and please be aware that I will earn a % of commission if you decide to buy through the affiliate links.