Showing posts with label Intel. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Intel. Show all posts

Friday, March 5, 2010

Eliot Bernstein of Iviewit Technologies files SEC Complaint with Mary Schapiro Against Warner Brothers, AOL, Time Warner,Intel, SGI, Lockheed Martin.

Eliot Bernstein, Iviewit Technologies Filed a Detailed Complaint with the SEC, with Mary Schapiro Against Warner Brothers, AOL, Time Warner, Intel, SGI, Sony Corporation, Lockheed Martin and More.

Mary Schapiro and the SEC have been Warned in Great Detail of Major Shareholder Fraud. If you are a Shareholder of Warner Brothers, AOL, Time Warner,Intel, SGI, Sony Corporation, Lockheed Martin YOU need to be aware of the Eliot Bernstein Iviewit Complaint.

The Corporate Management of Warner Brothers, AOL, Time Warner,Intel, SGI, Sony Corporation, Lockheed Martin have known about this Liability for years and they are hiding it from you. Many of your investment firms now know of this SEC Complaint to Mary Schapiro - I have seen them on my site and Clicking through to the Enormous Amount of Details and proof in the SEC Complaint itself and at the Iviewit Technologies Website on this Iviewit Technologies Stolen Patent, www.iViewit.tv.

The SEC Complaint proves without a doubt of what will Soon be Trillion Dollar Liability to the Shareholders of Warner Brothers,AOL, Time Warner,Intel, SGI, Sony Corporation, Lockheed Martin. This will be in the Billions for Each Company, and the Shareholders of Warner Brothers, AOL, Time Warner,Intel, SGI, Sony Corporation, Lockheed Martin as well as Mary Schapiro of the SEC and the Major Law Firms involved in this Trillion Dollar Shareholder Fraud, well they will NOT be able to say they did not know, for there are well over a Thousand Documents at www.iViewit.tv that proves they have known for years.

How long will this game go on? No one can really be sure how long that Mary Schapiro of the SEC, the USPTO, the US Courts will let this continue to drag out at the expense of the shareholders of Brothers, AOL, Time Warner,Intel, SGI, Sony Corporation, Lockheed Martin. What we can see is Blatant Obvious Fraud, Obstruction of Justice and a Covering up for folks like Intel CEO Paul Otellini, Ex-General Counsel of Warner Bruce Sewell - Now the General Counsel at Apple, Jeffrey Bewkes of Warner Bros., Proskauer Rose Law Firm, Foley and Lardner Law Firm, and Many more in the SEC Complaint filed by Iviewit Technologies Eliot Bernstein.

These High Profile Law Firm and the United States Securities and Exchange Commission Keeping this information from shareholders if Unethical at best, it is Fraud and the shareholders will pay for all of this with their hard earned money as the years pile on.

Click here to Read Details of this SEC Complaint.

Eliot Bernstein of Iviewit Technologies has Filed an SEC Complaint and YOU need to Know about. Click Here for the Official SEC Complaint and Great Detail and Proof of Shareholder Fraud and Shareholder Liability cause by Neglect, Fraud and Blatantly Violations of Contracts by Warner Brothers, AOL, Time Warner,Intel, SGI, Sony Corporation, Lockheed Martin and more carry Trillions in Liability that they have seemingly reported to No One.

Eliot Bernstein SEC Complaint

Saturday, January 2, 2010

D. Bruce Sewell Ignoring the Iviewit Information, Not Telling Shareholders and Not Responsiblity Reacting Hurt Intel.

"Corporate Social Responsibility" - Not Bruce Sewell - NO WAY...

No Wonder Bruce Sewell left Intel without much to say. Not only was he offered more money and other secret sides deals to MOVE Quickly as Nokia is a Coming... but also D. Bruce Sewell had to know that at Some Point Intel and it's Shareholders would have to Deal with the iviewit Company and with the Trillion Dollar Stolen Patent and with the Patent Infringement and Contracts ... this woudl at Somepoing Come up, Bruce Sewell Being a Super Duper Attorney - He had to Know this. Obviously these Contracts would have to be honored at some point and with damges... being a good Lawyer, Bruce Sewell certainly read all the Documents at www.iviewit.TV - read the lawsuits, patent claims and ALL court documents surrounding this case in Order to Protect the Intel Corporation and to Protect the Interest of The Shareholders. I mean Come on this is a HUGE Liability to Intel and Bruce Never did any of this.. he Had to Have ... Right?

Having had Fair Warning on all this, and Failing ... is D. Bruce Sewell liable to Intel ? Liable to the Shareholders for this Seemingly Undisclosed Damage he Did while at Intel that has been swept under the Rug as D. Bruce Sewell is Now general counsel at Apple and His gearing up to ATTACK the Rights of Nokia... wonder what judges, what connections, what favors owed or inside informatio nBruce Sewell will use to Win for Apple.

Maybe D. Bruce Sewell will tell the companies involved that he won't tell about their Iviewit Patent Infringement if they help Apple to Fight Nokia and Win.. just speculative of course.. but hey don't we have a "Corporate Social Responsibility" to examine all parts of this story? And to Expose the Truth about all this...

Email me Your Story about Bruce Sewell at Crystal@CrystalCox.com - I am Nobody, I am simply a researcher, who Does not like to see the Rights of People STOMPED on by Billion Dollar Companies Stealing Trillion Dollar technology while the Real Inventors are Bombed and subjected to severe economic terror. I am simply the Self Proclaimed Industry Whistleblower and Standing up for Those who are not being heard, and using the Power of the Internet to Get them Heard....

My Expose' of Bruce Sewell.. I am not claiming to be
Tech Writer, I am Simply One Gal.. telling You What I see...
Crystal Cox

Friday, January 1, 2010

FEDERAL COMPLAINT SERVICE - Intel Corporation - Bruce Sewell

"From: Eliot I. Bernstein
Sent: Friday, February 27, 2009 11:23 PM

To: D. Bruce Sewell, Senior Vice President -
General Counsel @ Intel Corporation
Cc: Caroline Prochotska Rogers, Esquire
(caroline@cprogers.com); Marc R. Garber Esq. @ Flaster
Greenberg P.C.; Michele M. Mulrooney Esq. -
Jackoway Tyerman Wertheimer Austen
Mandelbaum & Morris (MMulrooney@JTWAMM.com)

Subject: FEDERAL COMPLAINT SERVICE Docket No. 08-4873-cv FINAL SIGNED BRIEF
PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT BERNSTEIN USCA 2nd Circ 13988ll.pdf - Adobe Acrobat Professional D. Bruce Sewell and Lawrence S. Palley,

Please accept the following as service of my Brief in the USCA 2nd Circ. as INTEL
CORPORATION and Lawrence S. Palley, Director of Business Development are named
Defendants in these matters. Please report this liability to all proper regulatory agencies,
shareholders, and liability carriers.

Thank you, Eliot Bernstein

From: Eliot I. BernsteinSent: Friday, February 27, 2009 7:05 PM
To: Deborah Holmes, Deputy Clerk,
United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit; Pro Se
Cases @ United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit;
Civil Cases @ United States Court
of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Cc: Caroline Prochotska Rogers, Esquire;
Marc R. Garber Esq. @ Flaster Greenberg P.C.;
Michele M. Mulrooney Esq. -
Jackoway Tyerman Wertheimer Austen Mandelbaum & Morris; 'Andy Dietz';

Subject: Docket No. 08-4873-cv FINAL SIGNED BRIEF PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT BERNSTEIN USCA 2nd Circ 13988ll.pdf - Adobe Acrobat Professional
I-VIEW-IT TECHNOLOGIES, INC.

Surf with Vision

Dear Deborah,
I have enclosed, per our conversations and your instructions, a PDF copy of my FINAL
SIGNED BRIEF FOR PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT BERNSTEIN USCA 2nd Circ for
Docket No. 08-4873-cv.

I have also sent the document via US Mail as you specified and thus this electronic communication and the mailed copy should constitute a timely filing.

I have attached in the document the following, 1. US Postmaster Certified Letter Receipts showing the same Document as attached herein has been mailed and postmarked with the date Friday, February 27th 2009, 2. A signed Electronic Notification Agreement, 3. A Signed Anti-Virus Certification Form of which a virus check was performed, 4. A Signed Notice of Appearance Form and 5. A Signed Brief.

If you need additional information, please feel free to contact me.

Eliot I. Bernstein
Inventor
Iviewit Technologies, Inc.
www.iviewit.tv


From: Eliot I. Bernstein
Sent: Friday, March 13, 2009 7:13 PM
To: D. Bruce Sewell, Senior Vice President
- General Counsel @ Intel
Corporation(bruce.sewell@intel.com);
Paul S. Otellini, President and Chief Executive Officer @
Intel Corporation (paul.otellini@intel.com);
Steven R. Rodgers, Vice President and Associate
General Counsel Legal and Corporate Affairs, Director,
Litigation @ Intel Corporation
(steven.rodgers@intel.com)
Cc: Caroline Prochotska Rogers, Esquire
(caroline@cprogers.com); Michele M. Mulrooney Esq. -
Jackoway Tyerman Wertheimer Austen Mandelbaum & Morris (MMulrooney@JTWAMM.com);

Marc R. Garber Esq. @ Flaster Greenberg P.C.; Marc R. Garber Esq. @ Flaster Greenberg P.C.
(marcrgarber@verizon.net); 'Andy Dietz'; 'Barry Becker'; 'krhall007@aol.com'

Subject: INTEL DEFENDANT IN FEDERAL LAWSUIT
Please see the attached Amended Complaint wherein Intel is a Named Defendant in a Trillion Dollar Lawsuit.

Please report this liability to all proper regulatory agencies,
shareholders and liability carriers.

Thank you,
Eliot Bernstein "

Source of This Post
http://iviewit.tv/press/press4.pdf

To: Sewell, Bruce - D. Bruce Sewell Intel Corporation - Intel ABOVE the Law, not MADE to Honor Contracts, WHY?

"From: P. Stephen Lamont
Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2007 8:14 PM
To: Sewell, Bruce - Bruce Sewell

Cc: Eliot I. Bernstein; Caroline P. Rogers Esq.; Andrew Dietz; Simon, David; Rodgers, Steve R
Subject: RE: Email to Paul S. Otellini

Mr. Bruce Sewell:
Thank you for your quick response on behalf of Intel, and, of course, Iviewit will abide by your wishes and communicate directly with you in the immediate future. Iviewit has the reputation in the community for creating those solutions necessary for the benefit of our children and our children's children.

Moreover, and perhaps this was not made clear in my previous email, but Iviewit's irritation stems more from the fact that contracts were walked away from in 1999, whereby Iviewit presented to Real 3D, taught them how to scale video and zoom on images without pixelation and for delivery over low bandwidth networks (clearly, we later found that such solutions apply to all networks at any higher bandwidth), witnessed Real 3D's validation of same, executed NDA's and alliance contracts with Real 3D, saw the acquisition by Intel with the promise that they would abide by such confidentialities and contracts, then saw the then Intel employees halt any further communication.

Second to this issue would be my recent discussion with SSG and DHG concerning Viiv, where you may know better than I what future business emphasis may be steered for this platform.

Additionally, grant it, I was not a participant, as I only assumed my post in December 2001, but at this point may I suggest a reverse chronological approach that might bring us to the heart of the matters in a quicker fashion:

• I have attached my email of December 12 to Rajeev Kapur (SSG) and David Vogel (DHG);

• Attached v-cards for those SSG and DHG employees concerned;

• Mutual production of executed Iviewit and Real 3D contracts that Intel assumed;

• Mutual production of Iviewit and Real 3D NDA's that Intel assumed; and

• As Intel is intimately familiar with its just past Managing Director in the Intel Capital Group, Hassan Miah, a discussion with Mr. Miah, as to what Iviewit is and what Iviewit does (v-card attached for your convenience), and a discussion with former head of Real 3D, Gerald Stanley, is in order (contact information unknown to Iviewit).

Iviewit looks forward to your response to this proposed approach and working together with Intel on these matters, and hopefully my friends in SSG and DHG; as should be clear from the email history attached, it is not Iviewit's style nor interest in a quick payment, but keeping our eye on the real prize, 105 million U.S. digital households, together.

******

From: Sewell, Bruce [mailto:bruce.sewell@intel.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2007 6:28 PM

Cc: Rodgers, Steve R; Simon, David
Subject: Email to Paul S. Otellini

Dear Mr. Lamont,

Given the nature of the allegations contained in your e-mail to Mr. Paul Otellini dated March 6, 2007, I have been asked to respond to you on behalf of Intel Corporation.

Intel treats the use of third party intellectual property very seriously.
We endeavor to investigate and resolve any legitimate claim of unlicensed use that is brought to our attention. At the same time we are frequently a target for spurious or premature claims by individuals or companies hoping for a quick nuisance payment.
In order to properly characterize and respond to your assertions I must ask you to provide us with some more pertinent information about the nature of the intellectual property you believe you own and the basis for your claim that certain Intel products may infringe those rights. Specifically, please provide the following information at your convenience so that we may properly analyze your claims:

the number, date of issuance, and ownership for each patent or patents that you believe Intel has infringed; each claim, including the claim number and a brief description of the specific claim language, that you believe Intel has infringed;

each Intel product that you allege infringes the patents and claims identified in answers #1 and #2; a brief description of the structures or methods within each product identified in answer #3 that you allege to be infringing;

a brief statement regarding the basis for your belief that the Intel products are infringing, i.e.,
describe the documentation or testing that you rely upon as the foundation for your allegations;
and, the names of the individuals within DHG and SSG with whom you have already communicated regarding the technology or the intellectual property rights that are the subject of your allegations, including a copy of the "December 12, 2006 email to DHG and SSG" referenced in your most recent note.

Receipt of this preliminary information will enable Intel to investigate and analyze your claims.
Your failure to provide any of the information requested will delay the point at which we can
effectively begin our investigation.

For the immediate future please communicate directly with me rather than with Mr. Otellini or any other executives within the company. As this matter progresses I may ask you to work with other lawyers either inside Intel or retained on behalf of Intel.

Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.

Sincerely,
Bruce Sewell
Senior Vice President
General Counsel
Intel Corporation
******
From: P. Stephen Lamont
Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2007 11:38 AM
To: Arena, Marise G
Cc: Caroline P. Rogers Esq.; Andrew Dietz; Eliot I. Bernstein
Subject: Email to Paul S. Otellini
Importance: High
Dear Mr. Paul Otellini:

By way of introduction, I am CEO of Iviewit Holdings, Inc., and its subsidiaries, affiliates, and
related parties, where we have designed and developed video frame manipulation techniques
and image overlay systems for the encoding, delivery of, and rendering/decoding of, when
combined with other proprietary technologies, DVD quality video across all transmission networks and viewable on all display devices with the value propositions of lower bandwidth, processing, and storage requirements than other solutions than do not utilize Iviewit techniques and systems;

Hassan Miah was an early on looker and termed Iviewit solutions "Holy Grail" technologies, and a tagline we have used more than once.

Since October 2006, we have been in touch with Intel's Digital Home Group through the SSG
people when it became clear that the Intel G695 Express Chipset, and any other chipset
designed for the Viiv platform, probably through the chipset functions of, including but not limited to, Clear Video processing, overlaps our patent pending claims filed in 2000 in rendering full screen, full frame rate video encoded by your major motion picture studio partners who, upon information and belief, have all adopted Iviewit's patent ending video scaling and image overlay techniques.
Moreover, we have waited patiently for an answer to the implications of my
December 12, 2006 email to DHG and SSG, specifically advising them that Intel, in the rendering of full screen, full frame rate Iviewit encoded video from your studio partners on including but not limited to the Viiv platform, is directly infringing on our proprietary rights. Since their answer has not been forthcoming in almost 90 days, I can only assume that Intel is continuing to render such video in blatant disregard for Iviewit's patent pending claims and in direct, disregard for Iviewit's proprietary rights.

Moreover, the issue is more serious than outlined above, and as we have discussed that it is mathematically impossible to deliver DVD quality, full screen, full frame rate video, in less than ideal bandwidth, storage, and processing power conditions without overlapping Iviewit's
proprietary rights, and since Iviewit management began discussions with representatives of Real 3D, Inc. some years ago we have watched our techniques drive across your product groups, including but not limited to microprocessors and chipsets for home entertainment PCs, and embedded consumer electronics designs such as digital televisions, video recorders, and set-top boxes.
Since Intel acquired the Real 3D business in 1999, pursuant to Iviewit/Real 3D contracts and confidentiality agreements, therefore, Intel has consistently conducted these unauthorized uses on the aforementioned products, without limitation, learned in prior business discussions with executed contracts, confidentiality agreements, and such.

Of course, it is Iviewit's goal to resolve the situation of the unauthorized use of Iviewit techniques embodied in prior Iviewit/Real 3D contracts and agreements in the easiest and most seamless way possible, prior to my shareholders pushing me to an edge I would rather not walk upon at this time, but will do so if the need be.

Please let us know when you are available for a conversation with our Founder, Eliot Bernstein,
and myself at your earliest convenience.

Best regards,
P. Stephen Lamont
Chief Executive Officer
Iviewit Technologies, Inc.
URL: www.iviewit.tv

******
From: P. Stephen Lamont
Sent: Friday, March 02, 2007 1:35 PM

To: Caroline P. Rogers Esq.; Andrew Dietz
Cc: Eliot I. Bernstein
Subject: Intel Email and Advanced Royalty Agreement
-- Comments Requested
Importance: High
David/Raj,
We have waited patiently for an answer to the implications of my December 12, 2006 email,
specifically advising you that Intel, in the rendering of full screen, full frame rate Iviewit encoded video from your studio partners on including but not limited to the Viiv platform, is directly
infringing on our proprietary rights.
Since your answer has not been forthcoming in more than 60 days, I can only assume that you are continuing to render such video in blatant disregard for Iviewit's patent pending claims and in direct, disregard for Iviewit's proprietary rights.
Therefore, unfortunately, Iviewit must demand that you CEASE AND DESIST rendering such Iviewit encoded scaled video and imaging according to our claims, else we must follow-up on the issue in due course.

Moreover, the issue is more serious than outlined above, and as we have discussed it is
mathematically impossible to deliver DVD quality, full screen, full frame rate video, in less than
ideal bandwidth, storage, and processing power conditions without overlapping Iviewit's
proprietary rights, and since Iviewit management began discussions with representatives of Real 3D, Inc. some years ago we have watched our techniques drive across your product groups, including but not limited to microprocessors and chipsets for home entertainment PCs, and
embedded consumer electronics designs such as digital televisions, video recorders, and set-top
boxes.
Since Intel acquired the Real 3D business in 1999, pursuant to Iviewit/Real 3D contracts
and confidentiality agreements, therefore, you must similarly CEASE AND DESIST these
unauthorized uses on the aforementioned products, without limitation, learned in prior business
discussions.

Please take notice that this is advise of a future complaint seeking permanent injunction, and that the previous offer of license is withdrawn, and is substituted in its entirety by the attached
agreement, executable only for 30 days post hence, else Intel must CEASE AND DESIST the use of rendering full screen, full frame rate video and image overlays where an image can be zoomed upon and panned without pixelation from Intel products, and please advise if anything will prevent you from accepting our demand, in which case we will file suit shortly thereafter complaining of breach of prior confidential disclosures and our attached offer will be deemed withdrawn;

certainly, as a public company governed by the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, you have
perfect record keeping of those 1999 discussions and the agreements signed thereunder.
Finally, I await timely execution of the attached and your request of wire transfer instructions,
where Iviewit is firmly committed to protecting its proprietary rights against any and all knowing and willful breaches of its confidential disclosures and disregard of recent advise and discussions.

Source of Post
http://iviewit.tv/press/press4.pdf
intel
Industry Whistle Blower Crystal L. Cox asks -

Do you have any Information on Bruce Sewell,
why he Left Intel Corp ?

Why he Denied Iviewit their Rights? or any other Whistleblowing on D. Bruce Sewell - aKa - Durward Bruce Sewell - Email me at Crystal@CrystalCox.com