It was an afternoon in the fall of 2005. I was working at the ACLU as the organization's science advisor.
那是2005年秋日的一个下午。我时任ACLU（美国公民自由联盟）的科学顾问。
I really, really loved my job, but I was having one of those days where I was feeling just a little bit discouraged.
我真的非常喜欢我的工作，但是那段时间我时常感到有一点点受挫。
So I wandered down the hallway to my colleague Chris Hansen's office.
于是我经过走廊晃荡到同事克里斯·汉森的办公室。
Chris had been at the ACLU for more than 30 years, so he had deep institutional knowledge and insights.
克里斯在ACLU供职三十多年了，他对机构有深刻的了解和想法。
I explained to Chris that I was feeling a little bit stuck.
我向克里斯解释我为什么觉得有些举步维艰。
I had been investigating a number of issues at the intersection of science and civil liberties -- super interesting.
我当时在调查一系列处在科学和公民自由十字路口的问题--非常有意思。
But I wanted the ACLU to engage these issues in a much bigger way, in a way that could really make a difference.
但是我希望ACLU能够在更高的层面参与这些问题。以一种能真正做出改变的方式。
So Chris cut right to the chase, and he says, "Well, of all the issues you've been looking at, what are the top five?"
克里斯开门见山地说，“那好，所有你正在考虑的问题里面，排前五位的是什么？”
"Well, there's genetic discrimination, and reproductive technologies, and biobanking, and ...
“我想应该是遗传歧视，生育技术，生物样本库，还有……
oh, there's this really cool issue, functional MRI and using it for lie detection,
哦，这个真的很酷，功能性MRI（核磁共振成像），用它来测谎，
and ... oh, and of course, there's gene patents."
还有……哦，当然，还有基因专利。”
"Gene patents?" "Yes, you know, patents on human genes."
“基因专利？”“是的，你知道的，授予人类基因专利。”
"No! You're telling me that the US government has been issuing patents on part of the human body? That can't be right."
“不可能！你是说，美国政府正在对人身体的部分授予专利？这怎么可能嘛。”
I went back to my office and sent Chris three articles.
我回到我的办公室，给克里斯发了三篇文章。
And 20 minutes later, he came bursting in my office.
20分钟以后，他冲进我的办公室。
"Oh my god! You're right! Who can we sue?"
“天哪！你说中了！我们可以起诉谁？”
Now Chris is a really brilliant lawyer,
克里斯是一名杰出的律师，
but he knew almost nothing about patent law and certainly nothing about genetics.
但是他几乎完全不懂专利法，而且肯定不懂遗传学。
I knew something about genetics, but I wasn't even a lawyer, let alone a patent lawyer.
我懂一点遗传学，但我连律师都不是，更别说专利律师了。
So clearly we had a lot to learn before we could file a lawsuit.
所以很显然，在打官司之前，我们需要学很多东西。
First, we needed to understand exactly what was patented when someone patented a gene.
首先，我们需要搞清楚当有人为基因申请专利时，究竟是什么被授予了专利。
Gene patents typically contain dozens of claims, but the most controversial of these are to so-called "isolated DNA"
基因专利通常包含几十条要求，但是最矛盾的是所谓的“离体DNA”
namely, a piece of DNA that has been removed from a cell.
也就是从细胞中移出的DNA片段。
Gene patent proponents say, "See? We didn't patent the gene in your body, we patented an isolated gene."
基因专利的支持者称，“看见了吗？我们没有对你身体中的基因申请专利，我们是为离体的基因申请专利。”
And that's true, but the problem is that any use of the gene requires that it be isolated.
这话是没错，但问题在于，无论如何，要使用基因，就必须先进行分离。
And the patents weren't just to a particular gene that they isolated, but on every possible version of that gene.
而被授予专利的，并非他们分离的某个特定的基因，而是那个基因每一种可能的版本。
So what does that mean?
那么这意味着什么呢？
That means that you can't give your gene to your doctor and ask him or her to look at it, say,
这意味着你不能把你的基因给医生，然后请他/她检查，比如说，
to see if it has any mutations, without permission of the patent holder.
检查是否有变异，如果你没有专利持有者的授权。
It also means that the patent holder has the right to stop anyone from using that gene in research or clinical testing.
这也意味着专利持有者有权阻止任何人使用该基因从事研究或临床试验。
Allowing patent holders, often private companies, to lock up stretches of the human genome was harming patients.
允许专利持有者，通常是私有企业，关起开发人类基因组的大门，会损害患者的利益。
Consider Abigail, a 10-year-old with long QT syndrome,
比如，阿比盖尔，一个10岁的孩子，患有长QT综合症，
a serious heart condition that, if left untreated, can result in sudden death.
这是一种严重的心脏疾病，如果不治疗，可能引发猝死。
The company that obtained a patent on two genes associated with this condition developed a test to diagnose the syndrome.
有个公司拥有与这种疾病有关的两个基因的专利，他们开发了一种针对此病症的检验方法。
But then they went bankrupt and they never offered it. So another lab tried to offer the test,
但随后公司倒闭了，还没来得及推出这项检测服务。
but the company that held the patents threatened to sue the lab for patent infringement.
于是另一个实验室尝试提供这种检测，但是这家持有专利的公司起诉那个了实验室专利侵权。
So as a result, for 2 years, no test was available.
所以，结果是，两年内，没有人提供这种检测服务。
During that time, Abigail died of undiagnosed long QT.
在此期间，阿比盖尔因未诊断出长QT症去世。
Gene patents clearly were a problem and were harming patients.
基因专利明显是个问题，并且在损害患者的利益。
But was there a way we could challenge them?
但是我们有没有办法挑战他们呢？
Turns out that the Supreme Court has made clear through a long line of cases,
其实，最高法院通过一系列的判例已经清楚地表明，
that certain things are not patent eligible.
有些东西是不能申请专利的。
You can't patent products of nature -- the air, the water, minerals, elements of the periodic table.
你不能为自然界的产物申请专利--空气、水、矿产、周期表里的元素。
And you can't patent laws of nature -- the law of gravity, E = mc2.
你也不能为自然规律申请专利--引力定律，E=mc2（质能方程），
These things are just too fundamental and must remain free to all and reserved exclusively to none.
这些东西太基础了，必须对所有人免费开放，不该被任何人独自占有。
It seemed to us that DNA, the most fundamental structure of life,
对我们来说，似乎DNA，生命最本质的结构，
that codes for the production of all of our proteins, is both a product of nature and a law of nature,
掌控所有蛋白质生产的编码，既是自然界的产物，也是自然规律，
regardless of whether it's in our bodies or sitting in the bottom of a test tube.
无论它是在我们的体内，还是沉在一根试管底部。
As we delved into this issue, we traveled all over the country to speak with many different experts
我们不断深入这个问题，在国内四处奔波，和许多专家交流
scientists, medical professionals, lawyers, patent lawyers.
科学家、医疗专家、律师、专利律师。
Most of them agreed that we were right as a matter of policy, and, at least in theory, as a matter of law.
绝大多数都同意，在政策层面我们是正确的，并且在法律层面，至少在理论上是正确的。
All of them thought our chances of winning a gene-patent challenge were about zero.
但他们全都认为我们挑战基因专利授权的成功概率几乎为零。
Why is that? Well, the patent office had been issuing these patents for more than 20 years.
为什么呢？因为专利局签发这些专利已经超过20年了。
There were literally thousands of patents on human genes.
毫不夸张地说，现在已经有上千个人类基因专利。
The patent bar was deeply entrenched in the status quo,
专利律师已经深陷其中，
the biotech industry had grown up around this practice,
生物技术产业已经通过这个司法实践壮大，
and legislation to ban gene patents had been introduced year after year in Congress, and had gone absolutely nowhere.
禁止基因专利的立法提案年年在国会被提出，但很显然根本没出国会的门。
So the bottom line: courts just weren't going to be willing to overturn these patents.
所以归根结底：法院就是不愿意去推翻这些专利。
Now, neither Chris nor I were the type to shy away from a challenge,
只不过，我和克里斯都不是那种遇到挑战就退缩的人，
and hearing, "Being right just isn't enough," seemed all the more reason to take on this fight.
听到“站在正义一边还不够，”这就更值得我们去为此战斗。
So we set out to build our case.
所以我们着手准备自己的案件。
Now, patent cases tend to be: Company A sues Company B over some really narrow, obscure technical issue.
现在，专利案通常是：公司A起诉公司B，只针对一些非常局限、隐晦的技术问题。
We weren't really interested in that kind of case, and we thought this case was much bigger than that.
我们对那种案件并不十分感兴趣，我们认为这个案件要比那些重大得多。
This was about scientific freedom, medical progress, the rights of patients.
这个案件关乎科学自由，医疗进步，患者权利。
So we decided we were going to develop a case that was not like your typical patent case -- more like a civil rights case.
所以我们决定要做和你们通常看到的专利案不同的事情--它更像是针对公民权利的申诉。
We set out to identify a gene-patent holder that was vigorously enforcing its patents
我们着手寻找这样一个基因专利持有者：他要非常强硬地推行专利；
and then to organize a broad coalition of plaintiffs and experts
然后组织一个广泛的原告和专家联盟
that could tell the court about all the ways that these patents were harming patients and innovation.
来告诉法庭这些专利侵害病人、阻碍创新的种种劣迹。
We found the prime candidate to sue in Myriad Genetics, a company that's based in Salt Lake City, Utah.
我们发现Myriad Genetics可以作为起诉的主要目标。这是一家总部设在犹他州盐湖城的公司。
Myriad held patents on two genes, the BRCA1 and the BRCA2 genes.
Myriad持有两个基因的专利，BRCA1和BRCA2基因。
Women with certain mutations along these genes
携带有这两个基因某些变异的女性
are considered to be at a significantly increased risk of developing breast and ovarian cancer.
罹患乳腺癌和卵巢癌的风险会显著升高。
Myriad had used its patents to maintain a complete monopoly on BRCA testing in the United States.
Myriad公司使用他们的专利来维持美国境内化验BRCA的全面垄断地位。
It had forced multiple labs that were offering BRCA testing to stop.
他们强行叫停了数个提供BRCA化验的实验室。
It charged a lot of money for its test -- over 3,000 dollars.
他们对化验收取高额费用--超过三千美元。
It had stopped sharing its clinical data with the international scientific community.
他们停止向国际科学界共享临床数据。
And perhaps worst of all, for a period of several years,
还有可能最糟糕的，曾经有几年，
Myriad refused to update its test to include additional mutations that had been identified by a team of researchers in France.
Myriad拒绝在他们的化验中增加由法国的一个研究团队鉴别出来的新变异类型。
It has been estimated that during that period, for several years,
据估计，在此期间，数年间，
as many as 12 percent of women undergoing testing received the wrong answer
有近12%接受化验的女性得到了错误的结果
a negative test result that should have been positive.
也就是本应该是阳性的阴性结果。
This is Kathleen Maxian. Kathleen's sister Eileen developed breast cancer at age 40 and she was tested by Myriad.
这是卡瑟琳·马克西安。卡瑟琳的姐姐艾琳40岁得了乳腺癌。
The test was negative. The family was relieved.
她曾做过Myriad的化验，结果是阴性。这家人松了口气。
That meant that Eileen's cancer most likely didn't run in the family,
这说明艾琳的癌症很可能不会在家族中重现。
and that other members of her family didn't need to be tested.
她的家人也不需要再接受化验。
But two years later, Kathleen was diagnosed with advanced-stage ovarian cancer.
但是两年后，卡瑟琳被诊断出晚期卵巢癌。
It turned out that Kathleen's sister was among the 12 percent who received a false-negative test result.
原来卡瑟琳的姐姐就是那12%得到了假阴性结果的病人之一。
Had Eileen received the proper result, Kathleen would have then been tested,
如果艾琳得到了正确的化验结果，卡瑟琳就也会去做化验，
and her ovarian cancer could have been prevented.
她的卵巢癌就可能得到预防。
Once we settled on Myriad, we then had to form a coalition of plaintiffs and experts that could illuminate these problems.
我们确定目标为Myriad后，就需要组建一个能够陈述这些问题的原告和专家团。
We ended up with 20 highly committed plaintiffs: genetic counselors,
我们找到了20位非常积极的原告：遗传学咨询顾问，
geneticists who had received cease and desist letters, advocacy organizations,
收到叫停信件的遗传学家：支持我们的组织，
four major scientific organizations that collectively represented more than 150,000 scientists and medical professionals,
四个主要科学组织，集中代表了超过15万名科学工作者和医疗专家，
and individual women who either couldn't afford Myriad's test,
以及无力支付Myriad的检测
or who wanted to obtain a second opinion but could not, as a result of the patents.
或者希望有其他选择，但因为专利原因无法实现的女性个体。
One of the major challenges we had in preparing the case was figuring out how best to communicate the science.
我们在准备案件期间遇到的主要挑战是，搞清楚如何最有效地阐述科学观点。

So in order to argue that what Myriad did was not an invention, and that isolated BRCA genes were products of nature,
所以，为了辩明Myriad的成果并不属于创新，以及离体的BRCA基因是自然界的产物，
we had to explain a couple of basic concepts, like: What's a gene? What's DNA?
我们必须解释一些基本概念，比如：基因是什么？DNA是什么？
How is DNA isolated, and why isn't that an invention?
如何分离DNA，以及为什么这不是创新？
We spent hours and hours with our plaintiffs and experts,
我们和原告以及专家团花费了无数日夜，
trying to come up with ways of explaining these concepts simply yet accurately.
努力寻找能够简洁又不失准确地解释这些概念的方式。
And we ended up relying heavily on the use of metaphors, like gold.
我们最终非常依赖比喻，比如说黄金。
So isolating DNA -- it's like extracting gold from a mountain or taking it out of a stream bed.
因此，分离DNA--就像从大山中挖出黄金，或者从溪流河床里淘出黄金。
You might be able to patent the process for mining the gold, but you can't patent the gold itself.
你或许可以为采集黄金的流程申请专利，但你不能为黄金本身申请专利。
It might've taken a lot of hard work and effort to dig the gold out of the mountain; you still can't patent it, it's still gold.
你可能要靠无数艰辛努力才能从山中挖到黄金；但你仍旧不能为它申请专利，黄金还是黄金。
And the gold, once it's extracted, can clearly be used for all sorts of things that it couldn't be used for when it was in the mountain;
而黄金，一旦被挖掘出来，显然可以被用于各种它藏在山中时不能实现的用途；
you can make jewelry out of it for example -- still can't patent the gold, it's still gold.
比如，你可以把它做成珠宝--但仍然不能为金子申请专利，金子还是金子。
So now it's 2009, and we're ready to file our case.
然后就到了2009年，我们准备起诉了。
We filed in federal court in the Southern District of New York, and the case was randomly assigned to Judge Robert Sweet.
我们向纽约南区的联邦法庭递交了诉讼，然后案子被随机分配给了法官罗伯特·斯威特。
In March 2010, Judge Sweet issued his opinion -- 152 pages -- and a complete victory for our side.
2010年3月，斯威特法官宣布了他的判决意见。152页。我方完胜。
In reading the opinion, we could not get over how eloquently he described the science in the case.
在判决意见里，我们对他在案子中如此雄辩地陈述科学事实激动不已。
I mean, our brief -- it was pretty good, but not this good.
我是说，我们的简述--挺不错的，但没有这么出彩。
How did he develop such a deep understanding of this issue in such a short time?
他是如何在这么短的时间内做出如此深刻的理解？
We just could not comprehend how this had happened.
我们真的无法想象一切是怎么发生的。
So it turned out, Judge Sweet's clerk working for him at the time, was not just a lawyer -- he was a scientist.
后来我们才发现，当时斯威特法官手下的助手不仅仅是一个律师--他还是个科学家。
He was not just a scientist -- he had a PhD in molecular biology.
他又不仅仅是个科学家--他是分子生物学博士。
What an incredible stroke of luck!
我们真是太走运了！
Myriad then appealed to the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. And here things got really interesting.
Myriad随后向美国联邦巡回上诉法庭上诉。然后事情就变得非常有意思了。
First, in a pivotal moment of this case, the US government switched sides.
首先，本案中的一个关键时刻，美国政府倒戈了。
So in the district court the government submitted a brief on Myriad's side.
在地区法庭上，政府递交了一份简述支持Myriad。
But now in direct opposition to its own patent office,
但是这回美国政府直接反对了它自己的专利局，
the US government files a brief that states that is has reconsidered this issue in light of the district court's opinion,
政府递交了一份摘要声明，他们基于地区法庭的判决，重新考虑了问题，
and has concluded that isolated DNA is not patent eligible. This was a really big deal, totally unexpected.
并认定离体DNA不具备申请专利的条件。这件事意义非凡，完全出人意料。
The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit hears all patent cases,
联邦巡回上诉法庭受理过所有的专利案例，
and it has a reputation for being very, very pro-patent.
对专利持坚决支持态度也是众所周知。
So even with this remarkable development, we expected to lose.
所以即使取得了如此长足的进步，我们仍然觉得会败诉。
And we did. Sort of. Ends up split decision, 2 to 1.
我们是败诉了。差不多吧。结果是2比1的意见。
But the two judges who ruled against us, did so for completely different reasons.
但是两位反对我们的法官选择了完全不同的理由。
The first one, Judge Lourie, made up his own novel, biological theory -- totally wrong.
第一位，法官洛里，胡编乱造了他自己的生物理论--完全是胡说八道。
He decided Myriad had created a new chemical -- made absolutely no sense.
他觉得Myriad制造了一种新化学物质--驴唇不对马嘴。
Myriad didn't even argue this, so it came out of the blue.
Myriad竟然对这一点没有争议，真是令人大跌眼镜。
The other, Judge Moore, said she basically agreed with us that isolated DNA is a product of nature.
另一位，法官莫尔，说她基本同意我们说的离体DNA是自然界的产物。
But she's like, "I don't want to shake up the biotech industry."
但是她声称“我不想动摇生物技术产业的根基”，等等。
The third, Judge Bryson, agreed with us. So now we sought review by the Supreme Court.
第三位，法官布里森，同意我们。于是我们申请最高法院复审。
And when you petition the Supreme Court, you have to present a question that you want the Court to answer.
当你向最高法院情愿时，你需要提出一个希望法院回应的问题。
Usually these questions take the form of a super-long paragraph,
通常这些问题都是长长的一段话，
like a whole page long with lots and lots of clauses, "wherein this" and "therefore that."
从句套从句，可以写满一页，“其中包括”、“由此得知”，等等。
We submitted perhaps the shortest question presented ever. Four words: Are human genes patentable?
我们提交了可能是有史以来最短的问题。四个词：能否授予人类基因专利？
Now when Chris first asked me what I thought of these words, I said,
克里斯第一次问我觉得这个问题靠不靠谱时，我说，
"Well, I don't know. I think you have to say, 'Is isolated DNA patentable?'"
“我不知道。我想你可能得说，‘能否授予离体DNA专利？’”
"Nope. I want the justices to have the very same reaction that I had when you brought this issue to me seven years ago."
“非也。我希望大法官的反应能和我在七年前你跟我提这个问题时一模一样。”
Well, I certainly couldn't argue with that.
好吧，我当然没理由反驳。
The Supreme Court only hears about one percent of the cases that it receives, and it agreed to hear ours.
最高法院只受理大约1%收到的案件，他们接受了我们的。
The day of the oral argument arrives, and it was really, really exciting -- long line of people outside,
口头辩论那天到来时，真的是太激动人心了--法庭外排起了长队，
people had been standing in line since 2:30 in the morning to try to get into the courthouse.
人们从凌晨2:30起就开始排队，希望能挤进法庭。
Two breast cancer organizations, Breast Cancer Action and FORCE, had organized a demonstration on the courthouse steps.
两个乳腺癌的组织，乳腺癌行动组织和FORCE，在法庭台阶上组织声援。
Chris and I sat quietly in the hallway, moments before he was to walk in and argue the most important case of his career.
克里斯和我坐在走廊里一声不响，随后他走进法庭，为他职业生涯中最重要的案件辩护。
I was clearly more nervous than he was.
我显然比他更紧张。
But any remaining panic subsided as I walked into the courtroom and looked around at a sea of friendly faces:
但是当我走进法庭时，所有的慌张都不见了。我看到周围都是熟悉的面孔：
our individual women clients who had shared their deeply personal stories,
我们的一位位女性客户，她们毫无保留地分享了自己的亲身经历；
the geneticists who had taken huge chunks of time out of their busy careers to dedicate themselves to this fight
有在百忙之中抽出大量时间投身于这场斗争的遗传学家，
and representatives from a diverse array of medical, patient advocacy, environmental and religious organizations,
还有来自许多不同领域的代表：医疗、患者救助、环保和宗教组织，
who had submitted friend of the court briefs in the case.
以及本案中向法院递交摘要的朋友。
Also in the room were three leaders of the Human Genome Project, including the co-discoverer of DNA himself, James Watson,
同时在场的还有三位人类基因组计划的先驱者，包括DNA的发现者之一，詹姆斯·沃森。
who had submitted a brief to the court, where he referred to gene patenting as "lunacy."
他也向法庭递交了简述，其中他指出基因专利是“疯子行为”。
The diversity of the communities represented in this room
出席法庭的群体背景之广，
and the contributions each had made to make this day a reality spoke volumes to what was at stake.
以及他们中每一位为实现这一天而做出的贡献，都为我们岌岌可危的局势打了一剂了强心针。
The argument itself was riveting. Chris argued brilliantly.
辩论本身非常有说服力。克里斯出色地完成了辩论。
But for me, the most thrilling aspect was watching the Supreme Court justices grapple with isolated DNA,
但是对我而言，最激动人心的一刻是看着最高法院的大法官为离体DNA激烈争论，
through a series of colorful analogies and feisty exchanges,
换着花样打比方，激烈地交换意见，
very much the same way as our legal team had done for the past seven years.
就和我们的法律团队过去七年中所做的一样。
Justice Kagan likened isolating DNA to extracting a medicinal plant from the Amazon.
大法官卡根把离体DNA比作从亚马孙雨林中提取医疗植物。
Justice Roberts distinguished it from carving a baseball bat from a tree.
大法官罗伯茨把它比作把树木雕成棒球棒。
And in one of my absolutely favorite moments, Justice Sotomayor proclaimed isolated DNA to be "just nature sitting there."
以及绝对是我最喜欢的一个瞬间，大法官索托马约尔宣称离体DNA“就是自然存在的”。
We felt pretty confident leaving the courtroom that day,
我们那天离开法庭时信心满满，
but I could never have anticipated the outcome: nine to zero.
但我从未奢望这样的结局：九比零。
"A naturally occurring DNA segment is a product of nature,
“一段自然形成的DNA片段是自然界的产物，
and not patent-eligible merely because it has been isolated. And furthermore, Myriad did not create anything."
并不因为它被分离出体外就可以被授予专利。另外，Myriad并没有创造任何东西。”
Within 24 hours of the decision, five labs had announced that they would begin to offer testing for the BRCA genes.
判决生效后24小时内，就有五个实验室宣布他们将开始提供BRCA基因的检测服务。
Some of them promised to offer the tests at a lower price than Myriad's.
他们有些承诺检测的价格将比Myriad的要低。
Some promised to provide a more comprehensive test than the one Myriad was offering.
有些承诺将提供更全面的检测，比Myriad提供的更多。
But of course the decision goes far beyond Myriad.
不过显然，这个决定远远不止影响Myriad。
It ends a 25-year practice of allowing patents on human genes in the United States.
它终结了美国境内25年来允许授予人类基因专利的行为。
It clears a significant barrier to biomedical discovery and innovation.
它为生物医疗领域的发现和创新扫除了一个重要的障碍。
And it helps to ensure that patients like Abigail, Kathleen and Eileen have access to the tests that they need.
它也有助于保证像阿比盖尔、卡瑟琳和艾琳这样的患者能够获得她们所需要的检测。
A few weeks after the court issued its decision, I received a small package in the mail.
最高法院宣判几周之后，我收到了一个邮件小包。
It was from Bob Cook-Deegan, a professor at Duke University
是鲍勃·库克-德根寄来的，他是杜克大学的教授，
and one the very first people Chris and I went to visit when we started to consider whether to bring this case.
是我和克里斯开始考虑是否要开始准备此案时最先拜访的人之一。
I opened it up to find a small stuffed animal.
我打开包裹，里面是一个小小的毛绒玩具。
We took a big risk in taking this case.
为了这个案件，我们冒了很大的风险。
Part of what gave us the courage to take that risk was knowing that we were doing the right thing.
给予我们勇气面对风险的部分原因是我们知道我们在做正确的事。
The process took nearly eight years from the start to finish, with many twists and turns along the way.
从开始到结束，整个过程将近八年，经历了许多曲折和反复。
A little luck certainly helped, but it was the communities that we bridged,
当然还借助了一点点运气，但正是我们牵线拉到一起的群体，
the alliances that we created, that made pigs fly. Thank you.
正是我们创造的同盟，让不可能变成了可能。谢谢。