MPEG LA, DVD Licensing, Toshiba - Letter From DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE - JOEL I. KLIEN of the Antitrust Division

More Iviewit Proof of Fraud and MPEG LA Involvement.Proskauer Rose LLP Corruption. Patent Fraud ?

June 10, 1999 - Letter From DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE - JOEL I. KLIEN of the Antitrust Division - Assistant Attorney General

" Carey R. Ramos, Esq.
Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison
1285 Avenue of the Americas
New York, New York 10019-6064

Dear Mr. Ramos:

This letter is in response to your request on behalf of Hitachi, Ltd., Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd., Mitsubishi Electric Corporation, Time Warner Inc., Toshiba Corporation, and Victor Company of Japan, Ltd. (collectively, the "Licensors"), for the issuance of a business review letter pursuant to the Department of Justice's Business Review Procedure, 28 C.F.R. § 50.6.

You have requested a statement of the Department of Justice's antitrust enforcement intentions with respect to a proposed arrangement pursuant to which Toshiba will assemble and offer a package license under the Licensors' patents that are "essential," as defined below, to manufacturing products in compliance with the DVD-ROM and DVD-Video formats and will distribute royalty income to the other Licensors.

I. The DVD-ROM and DVD-Video Formats

The Standard Specifications for the DVD-ROM and DVD-Video formats describe the physical and technical parameters for DVDs for read-only-memory and video applications, respectively, and "rules, conditions and mechanisms" for player units for the two formats.

(1) In either format, the DVD has more than seven times the storage capacity of a compact disc; a single-layer, single-sided DVD, for example, can store 4.7 billion bytes (4.38 GB) of information including audio, video, text, and data. Employing compression technology, a DVD-Video disc can hold a 135-minute feature film on a single side.

The Licensors, along with a number of other producers of consumer electronics hardware, software, or both,

(2) established the Standard Specifications.

(3) These Standard Specifications appear to implicate the intellectual property rights of numerous firms.

II. The Proposed Arrangement

A memorandum of understanding among the Licensors (the "MOU," attached as Exhibit 1 to your letter) sets forth the central terms of the proposed arrangement, pursuant to which Toshiba will aggregate the Licensors' "essential" patents and disseminate rights under them to makers of Digital Versatile Discs (DVDs), DVD players, and DVD decoders

(4) ("DVD Products"), and distribute royalty income to the other Licensors. The arrangement will be carried out through a group of other agreements, including:

(1) a license that Toshiba will receive from each other Licensor to enable Toshiba to license users of the Standard Specifications under that Licensor's "essential" patents (the "Authorization Agreement," attached as Exhibit 3); (2) Toshiba's sublicense to makers of DVD Products under the Licensors' patents (the "DVD Patent License," attached as Exhibit 2);

(3) an agreement among the Licensors concerning the retention and authority of experts to select and evaluate the patents to be licensed (the "Expert Agreement," attached as Exhibit 4); and

(4) the "Ground Rules for Royalty Allocation" (attached as Exhibit 7), which set forth the formula that will determine how Toshiba will distribute royalties among the Licensors.

(5) A. The patents to be licensed In the MOU, the Licensors commit to license each other and third parties to make, use and sell DVD Products under their present and future patents that are "essential" to doing so.

(6) The Licensors agree to two separate means of carrying out this obligation. First, they agree to grant Toshiba the right to sublicense third parties under their present and future "essential" patents for these purposes, and Toshiba agrees in turn to sublicense those patents, along with its own such patents, in the DVD Patent Licenses.

(7) Second, each Licensor agrees to "offer to license its essential DVD patents on a non-exclusive basis to interested third-party licensees pursuant to separate negotiations on fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory terms, whether or not said third-party licensees intend to make, use and sell DVD products that are in conformity with the Specifications."

(8) A Licensor's patent is "essential," and thus subject to the commitments in the MOU, if it is "necessarily infringed," or "there is no realistic alternative" to it, "in implementing the DVD Standard Specifications."

(9) Initially, each Licensor will identify its own "essential" patents in an attachment to its Authorization Agreement with Toshiba.

(10) Toshiba will then incorporate those patents in a list attached to the DVD Patent License.

(11) Shortly, however, an expert individual or panel, with "full and sufficient knowledge and skill in the relevant technology,"

(12) will complete a review the patents each Licensor has designated as "essential" in order to determine whether they satisfy the MOU criteria.

(13).MOU, ¶ 8; Expert Agreement, preamble.

(14) At that time, any patent initially designated by a Licensor for inclusion in the DVD Patent License that the expert determines is not "essential" will be excluded from subsequent DVD Patent Licenses, although current licensees will have the option to retain it in their existing licenses.

(15) The expert will repeat this comprehensive review of all the patents in the DVD Patent License portfolio every four years.

(16) In between the quadrennial reviews, the proposed program also provides a mechanism by which the expert may review individual patents whose essentiality comes into question. If a Licensor comes to a good faith conclusion that a licensed patent is not "essential," and provides a reasonable basis for that belief, the expert will re-examine the patent.

(17) If the expert concludes that the patent is not "essential," the patent will be excluded from the DVD Patent License.

(18) The agreement provides that the expert's determinations are "conclusive and non-appealable," although the expert must submit a report explaining any decision that a patent was not "essential."

(19) Compensation will be at the expert's "standard hourly rates."

(20) Each Licensor will bear the cost of the expert's review of its patents; the Licensors will share costs attributable to all of them, such as time spent reviewing the DVD Standard Specifications.

(21) The expert, although retained by the Licensors and selected by a majority vote among them, will not have an economic affiliation with any individual Licensor.

(22) A majority of the Licensors may remove the expert for failure or inability to perform the duties set forth in the Expert Agreement "in a professional, competent, reliable or timely manner."

(23) Although the proposed licensing program currently includes the patents of only the Licensors, it is open to any owner of an "essential" patent willing to license on the program's terms and conditions.(24)


Full Letter and Source of Post
http://www.justice.gov/atr/public/busreview/2485.htm

Save and Print the Above for Your Records.

Note: over the Last year of Writing on iViewt the companies at the top of this post have been all over my Blogs, they Ignore what is happening because the UPSTO, US Judges, Corrupt Law Firms like Foley and Lardner and ALL on my blog at http://www.deniedpatent.com/ seem to be protected by US Billionaires and Politicians. THEY know that the Massive Shareholder Liability is Inevitable and Are Protecting themselve from it.

No ONE is Protecting Investors or Inventors.

More on the Massive Shareholder Fraud Coming Soon to a Pocket Book near You.

http://www.iviewit.tv/

http://www.jeffreybewkes.com/

http://www.deniedpatent.com/

http://www.kennethrubenstein.com/

Kenneth Rubenstein, Corrupt Proskauer Rose Patent Attorney for MPEG LA - Involves Attorney Raymond Anthony Joao.

Kenneth Rubenstein 's lackey, attorney Raymond Anthony Joao, who was a patent attorney working DIRECTLY under Proskauer Rose Attorney Kenneth Rubenstein 's direction.

Raymond Joao now claims 90 patents in his own name and Iviewit gives him kudos as the greatest slime ball inventor and patent attorney.

No really, Iviewit considers our former counselors Raymond Joao and Kenneth Rubenstein to be nothing more than co-inventors of a system and method to defraud shareholders and inventors of their inventions and commit fraud upon worldwide patent intellectual property organizations, an invention that should carry some stiff federal sentences.

Click here for a press article on the amazing inventiveness of Joao

Raymond Joao was so non-inventive that many of these patents resemble ideas and concepts lifted straight from the Iviewit business plan and invention disclosures and ideas that he was supposed to be patenting for the inventors and shareholders.

More on Raymond Joao Click Here

Source of Above and LOTS More
http://iviewit.tv/about/index.htm


More on Iviewit Massive Shareholder Fraud

www.JeffreyBewkes.com

www.CEOpaulOtellini.com

www.BruceSewell.com

www.iviewit.TV

www.DeniedPatent.com

posthed here by
Investigative Blogger
Crystal L. Cox
Crystal@CrystalCox.com

Proskauer Rose LLP Elects Joseph M. Leccese as Chairman of the Corrupt Proskauer Rose LLP.

Does Joseph M. Leccese Know about the Federal RICO Lawsuit that Proskauer Rose LLP is involved in over the STEALING of the Iviewit Technologies?

Does Joseph Leccese - Proskauer Rose LLP NEW Chairman KNOW about the HUGE Liability he is Taking in NOT Looking into the Kenneth Rubenstein and Illegal Patent Pooling of MPEG LA over the Iviewit Technologies ?

Joseph Leccese is in deep on this... Does Joseph Leccese know of the SEC Complaint that Proskauer Rose is involved over the Iviewit Technology?

Does Joseph Leccese KNOW about the Perjured Deposisiton of Kenneth Rubenstein Proskauer Rose LLP over the Blatant Theft of a Multi-Trillion Dollar Technology.

My Guess is that Joseph Leccese - Proskauer Rose LLP is Either CLUELESS or Corrupt .. Either way is dangerous.

Here is the Breaking NEWS on Proskauer Rose LLP, as if it's a Good Thing..

Proskauer Rose LLP has Elected Joseph M. Leccese as Chairman

Proskauer Rose LLP has elected Joseph M. Leccese as the next Chairman of Proskauer Rose LLP.

Joseph M. Leccese is said to be assuming office in January 2011.

Joseph M. Leccese is 49, is the youngest Chairman of Proskauer Rose’s 135-year history.

Joseph M. Leccese began his legal career at the firm as a summer associate, and is currently a Partner in the Corporate Department, a member of the firm’s Executive Committee, and co-head of its renowned Sports Law Group.

Joseph M. Leccese will succeed Allen I. Fagin, who has served as Proskauer's Chairman since 2005, and is completing his maximum six year term as Chairman.

This Corrupt Gibberish is Said on Allen Fagin

“Under Allen’s leadership, Proskauer Rose LLP has made significant strides building a global platform, expanding our presence in key markets, enhancing our capabilities in a number of practice areas and deftly navigating challenging economic times,” said Mr. Leccese. “I am honored and delighted to take on this role as the firm enters its next exciting chapter.”

According to Allen Fagin, Joseph M. Leccese is the right person to continue the firm’s momentum and growth to best serve its clients. This means that Joseph M. Leccese is the Right Man to keep the Legacy of Corruption Alive at Proskauer Rose LLP, and that Joseph Leccese is easily bought of... and will HIDE their Secrets..

Joseph M. Leccese will maintain his practice, represents many of the most prominent sports teams, leagues and sports lenders in a range of corporate, finance and transactional matters, including the National Basketball Association, the National Hockey League, Major League Soccer, the ATP Tour, the WTA Tour, J.P. Morgan, Citibank and Bank of America.

Ok so the Corrupt Proskauer Rose LLP is in Bed with the Corrupt JP Morgan, no wonder the Cozy - Cozy with George Demos who Protected JP Morgan from the SEC Fraud Charges over $300 Million Dollars...

Joseph M. Leccese also has led numerous stadium and arena developments and related project financings, including the New Meadowlands Stadium, Prudential Center, Amway Center and Lincoln Financial Field. - GOT an tips on Corruption, Conflicts of Interest ??? on Joseph M. Leccese - eMail me at Crystal@CrystalCox.com

Over the past six years, Proskauer Rose has opened offices in Chicago, Hong Kong, London, and São Paulo, and increased its revenues by over sixty percent. The firm recently announced plans to move its New York headquarters in early 2011 to a new, state-of-the-art building at 11 Times Square.

About Proskauer Rose LLP

Founded in 1875, Proskauer Rose is a global law firm widely recognized for its leadership in a variety of legal services provided to clients worldwide from offices in Boca Raton, Boston, Chicago, Hong Kong, London, Los Angeles, New Orleans, New York, Newark, Paris, São Paulo and Washington, DC. Additional information about the firm, which has extensive experience in all areas of practice important to businesses, not-for-profit institutions and individuals.

Source information in post on
Joseph M. Leccese - Proskauer Rose LLP Post
http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20101004006860/en/Proskauer-Elects-Joseph-M.-Leccese-Chairman

More on Allen Fagin at
www.AllenFagin.com

More on Proskauer Rose Fraud at
http://www.proskauersucks.com/

and More To Come on Joseph M. Leccese
at http://www.josephleccese.com/

posted Here by Investigative Blogger
Crystal L. Cox

Perjured Deposition by Corrupt Proskauer Rose Attorney Kenneth Rubenstein - MPEG LA Corrupt Patent Pooling.

Kenneth Rubenstein, Corrupt Patent Attorney from Proskauer Rose LLP - Working with MPEG LA. Kenneth Rubenstein Perjured himself in Depositions Regarding the Iviewit Technologies Patents in Which Kenneth Rubenstein was Directly Involved in Derailing the Rightful Inventors to Getting their Rightful Patent.

MPEG LA - with the Help of Kenneth Rubenstein Corrupt Proskauer Rose Patent Attorney, Pooled the Technology in patents and well the Iviewit Inventors NEVER got rights or any compensation for the Mult-Trillion Dollar Invention that WE ALL USE.


Part 1


Part 2


Part 3


Part 4


Part 5


Part 6 - Final

www.Iviewit.TV
For More on Iviewit

www.ProskauerSucks.com
more on Proskauer Rose Corruption

http://www.kennethrubenstein.com/
more on MPEG LA Corruption and Kenneth Rubenstein
Corrupt Patent Attorney.

posted by
Crystal L. Cox
Investigative Blogger
Crystal@CrystalCox.com

Kenneth Rubenstein, Esq. Perjured Deposition Proskauer Rose - MPEG LA for Iviewit and Eliot Bernstein

Part 1
Kenneth Rubenstein, Esq. Deposition
Proskauer Rose & MPEG LA for Iviewit & Eliot Bernstein.

Kenneth Rubenstein - Patent Attorney Proskauer Rose Partner



Hear More on Kenneth Rubenstein, Esq. Deposition Proskauer Rose & MPEG LA for Iviewit & Eliot Bernstein at Eliot Bernstein's Iviewit Technologies Channel - Click Here

More on the Iviewit Stolen Patent at
www.Iviewit.TV and www.DeniedPatent.com

Proskauer Rose Law Firm involved in Mass Cover Ups of Multi-Trillion Dollar Patent.

"Where once caught stealing the patents, Proskauer Rose has gone through elaborate steps to obstruct justice and deny due process of complaints against them.

Through abuses of public office positions and a series of diabolical conflicts of interests at Supreme Court bar associations and in a civil court in Florida, where initial complaints were filed, including a counter complaint.

The counter complaint was denied to be allowed and in this civil billing case Proskauer Rose won through a default judgment after the judge dismissed two sets of Iviewit counsel and granted Proskauer Rose a victory for Iviewit's failure to retain replacement counsel.

This case will be appealed pending information from the investigations, because as it turns out, Iviewit defended companies it did not own, as Proskauer Rose appears to have sued the companies they fraudulently set up to own the stolen patents.

That once caught stealing the patents, Proskauer Rose made a desperate attempt to rid the shell companies that they had put the Stolen IP into and gain control of the assets through a lawsuit claiming monies owed, while their management referrals tried and involuntary bankruptcy claiming monies owed.

In fact, the company was not even aware that Proskauer Rose and their management had taken such actions.

The company was notified by members of AOLTW/WB while seeking a twenty five million dollar raise that such legal actions were found while doing their due-diligence but the company was never made aware they were even lawsuits or bankruptcy, as these were for companies named similar and identical to the shareholder companies but not owned by the shareholders.

Upon learning of the legal actions and involuntary bankruptcy the company through a friend and hero (and you will learn of many who have helped carry the torch this far through personal sacrifice and risk), Caroline Prochotska Rogers, Esq. fired the counsel we were unaware we had and filed the counter complaint in the civil case and filed in the bankruptcy.

We retained new counsel, Steven Selz, Esq., Greenberg Traurig, and others to begin to peel the onion and file back but Judge Jorge Labarga would not allow us to present our case and through denying due process and procedure threw the case. All prior counsel was fired that had been prior representing the companies without authorization and this new team took over the cases.

At the time, it was not known that two sets of identical companies had been set up and that the companies we were now defending were not owned by the shareholders but by the companies lawyers. Therefore, Iviewit at the time thought that it was representing companies that its shareholders owned.

It was not until the USPTO found that certain patents listed by the attorneys as assets of the Iviewit companies, where not in fact owned or assigned to the parties the attorneys listed on the IP dockets, (USPTO LETTER SHOWING THAT CERTAIN IP ASSETS THOUGHT TO BE IVIEWIT ASSETS ARE OTHERS) that evidence of the multi-layered corporate and patent shell scheme began to surface.

Identically named companies, as illustrated in the Company History section, were formed to transfer stolen IP in the wrong inventors names and with no assignment or ownership to shareholders; fascinating, like a shell game of hide the real patents.

Upon attempting to ascertain why the patents were all wrong in inventors, assignees, owners and content, it was learned that dual named corporations were set up and again the information has been forwarded to state and federal authorities and the company is awaiting the outcome of these investigations.

Federal and international authorities have been notified that the organization MPEGLA LLC and other patent pools now controlled by our former Proskauer patent attorneys are acting as anti-competitive and monopolistic criminal enterprises to further aid in the theft and proliferation of the Iviewit inventions through a tying and bundling scheme.

This scheme denies paying royalties to the Iviewit Shareholders including the SBA.

Why, you may ask, is Proskauer Rose LLP a former real estate firm since the 1800's, suddenly controlling patent pools that directly infringe upon the Iviewit inventions, after Proskauer Rose learned of the inventions directly from the inventors?

In fact, Proskauer Rose attorney Kenneth Rubenstein, a member of the Advisory Board for Iviewit and lead patent counsel to MPEGLA LLC, is now trying to claim that he never heard of Iviewit under deposition (Kenneth Rubenstein Deposition) and sworn statements to a civil court.

Where evidence shows Rubenstein's direct involvement, Kenneth Rubenstein is found to be a BIG FAT LIAR..

Evidence such as his name in the Iviewit billings and letters from executives of AOLTW/WB showing that he opined favorably on the patents to induce investment from them, contradicts his perjured deposition.

Evidence like his name as an Advisory Board Member in a Wachovia Private Placement Memorandum, co-authored, disseminated and billed for by his firm Proskauer Rose and hosts of other evidence clearly showing his knowledge and involvement.

When confronted under deposition with such evidence, Kenneth Rubenstein, Proskauer Rose LLP refused to answer direct deposition questions (at his civil billing case) and left his deposition stating that we would have to have the court order him back to answer questions that directly affect the shareholders.

The court did order him back to the answer the questions but before he could be re-deposed the civil case trial was thwarted by the judge. Iviewit after being released of retained counsel by the judge never got the opportunity.

Kenneth Rubenstein who swears under deposition, under sworn statements to the Supreme Court of New York Appellate Division: First Department Departmental Disciplinary Committee and in a written statement to Judge Jorge Labarga of the civil court in Florida to have never heard of Iviewit, the Iviewit inventions or inventors; cannot be the same Kenneth Rubenstein opining favorably on the Iviewit patents to AOLTW/WB -

(click here for AOLTW/WB letter dusting Rubenstein's statements and exposing him for perjury).

Source and More
http://iviewit.tv/about/index.htm

More on the Iviewit Stolen Patent
and the Massive Shareholder Fraud

www.DeniedPatent.com

www.Iviewit.TV

www.JeffreyBewkes.com

www.CEOpaulOtellini.com

Kenneth Rubenstein Corrupt Patent Attorney at Proskauer Rose Law Firm CONSPIRES with MPEG LA to Commit Massive Fraud and Anti-Trust Violations

MPEG-LA hit by antitrust suit over video codecs. Kenneth Rubenstein Corrupt Patent Attorney Proskauer Rose DOES it Again...

MPEG LA has been in the Illegal - Unethical
Patent Pooling Business for Years.

Proskauer Rose Law Firm has made a Living and Lifetime Business of Billion Dollar Corruption Schemes and screwing over investors. And Well Proskauer Rose's Patent Department has a Billion Dollar Patent Pooling Scheme going on with the help of Corrupt Proskauer Rose Patent Attorney Kenneth Rubenstein and the Illegal, Secret Patent Pool technology Stealing Schemes of MPEG LA.

Corrupt Law Firm ... Proskauer Rose Corrupt Law Firm...

MPEG-LA hit by antitrust suit over video codecs - MPEG LA is Corrupt, it is my understand that MPEG LA Stole a Trillion Dollar Patent with the Aid of Corrupt Law Firms, Tech Companies, Patent Attorneys and Executives

"MPEG-LA hit by antitrust suit over video codecs

German software maker Nero has filed an antitrust complaint against MPEG-LA, the company that oversees licensing for the H.264 video codec favoured by Microsoft and Apple.

MPEG-LA (MPEG Licensing Authority) controls the licenses for the pools of patents needed to use the MPEG-2, MPEG-4 and AVC/H.264 video standards.

As such, it collects royalties from the sale or distribution of almost every PC, DVD, DVD player, digital TV set, TV set-top box, still camera, video camera, iPhone and BlackBerry in the world.

Nero, best known for its CD burning software, alleges that MPEG-LA abuses its monopoly power in these technology markets.

The company filed its antitrust complaint in California district court in Los Angeles on 14 May, seeking unspecified monetary damages and an injunction to halt the alleged anti-competitive actions.

"Absolute power has corrupted MPEG-LA absolutely,"

Nero maintained in its complaint.

"Once MPEG-LA obtained monopoly power in the relevant technology markets, it used that power to wilfully maintain or extend its monopolies for years beyond their natural expiration... and administer its licences in an unfair, unreasonable, and discriminatory manner that stifles competition and innovation, and harms consumers."

MPEG-LA charges licensees different amounts for the same MPEG-2 patent, collects administration fees and royalties multiple times for the same device, and does not communicate its policies adequately to certain licensees, according to Nero.

"By remaining silent on vital aspects of its licensing programs, MPEG-LA has created a system that favours some licensees, such as insiders (ie, licensors), and disfavours others, such as outsiders (ie, non-licensor licensees)," Nero's complaint read.

"As a result, outsiders such as Nero have great difficulty planning technology changes and embarking on programmes to research, develop and implement technological innovations — and are charged supracompetitive royalties on distributions as to which they never agreed to pay royalties — while other licensees, such as insiders, do not face such problems."

According to Nero's complaint, MPEG-LA only obtained monopoly power in the relevant audio and video codec markets after getting assurances in 1997 that the Department of Justice (DoJ) would not launch antitrust proceedings against it.

These assurances were conditional on patent pools not being used to stifle competition, Nero stated. It added that MPEG-LA suggested to the DoJ at the time that the pool for MPEG-2 contained no more than 53 essential patents.

MPEG-LA subsequently added around 800 patents it deemed to be essential to the MPEG-2 pool, so as to extend the duration of the codec's licence, Nero said.

The company did the same thing with the MPEG-4 pool, which now includes more than 1,000 patents, and the AVC/H.264 pool, now with over 1,300 patents, according to the filing.

AVC/H.264 is the video codec of choice for Microsoft, which will support it natively in Internet Explorer 9, and for Apple, which is backing it as a superior alternative to Flash.

While Google also supports H.264 in Chrome, it recently open-sourced its own alternative, VP8, in a bid to provide a free alternative to the proprietary and paid-for H.264.

As part of its complaint, Nero said that MPEG-LA used its own patent counsel, Kenneth Rubenstein, as "a so-called 'independent' expert" to evaluate the essentiality of patents.

MPEG-LA had not responded at the time of writing to a request on Tuesday for comment on Nero's allegations. The next stage in the case will be for MPEG-LA to answer Nero's complaint. ""

http://www.zdnet.co.uk/news/regulation/2010/05/25/mpeg-la-hit-by-antitrust-suit-over-video-codecs-40089042/

Lets See How German Tech Companies Handle the Corrupt,
UnEthical and Illegal Behavior of MPEG LA....

Ok so a Decade after Kenneth Rubenstein, Corrupt MPEG LA - Proskauer Rose Law Firm Patent Attorney, helped MPEG LA to steal the Holy Grail of Video / Technology inventions in which we all use every day and have for years upon years, well now this same Corrupt Patent Attorney is involved in more patent theft and illegal patent pool... why is Proskauer Rose standing with Kenneth Rubenstein?

I mean Christopher Wheeler was involved in this stolen patent and he was pushed out.. Kenneth Rubenstein was not even at Proskauer Rose when he first started his patent theft FOR MPEG LA to illegally pool the iviewit technologies in patent pools to hide their existence.. then Corrupt Law Firm Proskauer Rose hired Kenneth Rubenstein after he already lied to the Iviewit Company and said that he was with Proskauer Rose.. so Corrupt Law Firm - Proskauer Rose must be getting billions from MPEG LA dirty dealings or they would not have harbored a CRIMINAL for so long.. also see.. Proskauer ROSE was the reason for the Fall of Enron with this patent .. this technology theft.. and no accountable?

Well that day has come... Unless of Course Corrupt Proskauer Rose also owns judges, ethics committees, supreme courts, and patent officials in Germany as Well as the US?

I will discuss a WHOLE lot more about MPEG LA, Kenneth Rubenstein and Proskauer ROSE and the Horrible Injustice, Flat Out Fraud, Shareholder Deception, and more that surrounds MPEG LA - Proskauer Rose and Kenneth Rubenstein Corrupt Patent Attorney STEALING a Trillion Dollar Technology and Illegally Pooling this Technology in MPEG patent Pools.. all orchestrated by ONE very Corrupt Patent attorney Kenneth Rubenstein..

PS don't forget.. MPEG and APPLE are seeming quite cozy and Bruce Sewell knew about Iviewit .. while at Intel and when informed went to APPLE.. more on that later..

Collecting Royalties from Stolen Technologies and Illegal Patent Pooling,
What an Incredible Racket... Billions hand over Fist on Someone Else's Invention .. and many of these inventors are harassed, bankrupted, their cars bombed and well just plain ol' SHUT Up..

Here are some Sites for more information in the iViewit Stolen Technology and the Illegal Patent Pooling Tricks and Schemes at MPEG LA with the Help of Proskauer Rose and Kenneth Rubenstein that has created Massive Shareholder Fraud that is now a High Profile SEC Complaint and a Federal RICO Lawsuit .. still undisclosed to unsuspecting shareholders of IBM, Intel Corp, AOL, Time Warner Inc. , Lockheed Martin, Warner Bros. , SGI, and More involved in the Blatant Theft of a Trillion Dollar Technology that We all used Every Day...

www.Iviewit.TV

www.DeniedPatent.com

www.ProskauerSucks.com

www.KennethRubenstein.com

www.BruceSewell.com

www.JeffreyBewkes.com

www.CEOpaulOtellini.com

Proskauer Rose bio Clip on Kenneth Rubenstein"


" Kenneth Rubenstein is co-head of the Patent Law Group and a Partner in the New York office. He also is a registered patent attorney before the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office and a former member of the legal staff at Bell Laboratories. While there are numerous patent law groups at various firms, Ken and his group distinguish themselves from competitors by being able to deal with very sophisticated technology. "


Source
http://www.proskauer.com/professionals/Detail.aspx?professional=0eae1af8-e822-4a75-9414-d8ee3f87e890&tabId=0


posted by
Crystal L. Cox
Investigative Blogger
Crystal@CrystalCox.com

more on the MPEG LA stealing and pooling patents
.. at www.iViewit.tv/
and at www.DeniedPatent.com

the Marc Drier / Raymond Joao / Iviewit connection - Formal SEC - FBI Iviewit Complaint

"" Joao’s Dreier & Baritz LLP Bio

“ Raymond A. Joao joined Dreier & Baritz LLP in 2001 as Of Counsel to the Firm's intellectual property department. Mr. Joao brings to the Firm an extensive legal, business and engineering background encompassing virtually all aspects of intellectual property, including prosecution of patent applications; reexaminations; preparation of patent opinions; litigation; and counseling clients in the development, management and exploitation of their intellectual property assets.

Mr. Joao is also currently an intellectual property management consultant for various start-up software, telecommunication, Internet and e-commerce companies.

He regularly directs new business and intellectual property development efforts; negotiates contracts; drafts license agreements; performs due diligence in mergers and acquisitions; assists in the preparation of business plans, executive summaries and other corporate documents; conducts competitive analysis studies; aids in the formulation of litigation strategies; and assists in capital raising efforts.

Notably, Mr. Joao is the inventor of 10 issued U.S. patents and has over 80 patent pending technologies. Mr. Joao was also a founder of Electroship (N.Y.), Inc. which was formed to exploit certain patent pending technologies of which Mr. Joao was a co-inventor.

Electroship (N.Y.), Inc. was acquired by a public company within six months of its formation. Mr. Joao headed Electroship's intellectual property and corporate efforts, as well as the merger and acquisition deal leading up to the merger.

Prior to joining Dreier & Baritz, Mr. Joao was head of the Intellectual Property Department at Meltzer, Lippe, Goldstein & Schlissel, P.C. in Mineola, New York.

He was also formerly a partner at Anderson Kill & Olick, P.C. in New York in the Intellectual Property Group. Prior to the commencement of his legal career, Mr. Joao was an electrical engineer with Loral Corporation in the Systems Engineering Group, and prior to that was an engineer with Sperry Corporation.

Mr. Joao obtained a Bachelor of Science in Electrical Engineering in 1982 and a Master of Science in Electrical Engineering in 1984 from Columbia University School of Engineering and Applied Science.

He received his law degree in 1990 from St. John's University School of Law. Most recently, in 1999, he obtained a Masters in Business Administration in Finance from Baruch College/City University.

Mr. Joao is admitted to practice before the United States Patent and Trademark Office, the U.S. District Courts for the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York, and the New York State and Connecticut Bars. e-mail: rjoao@dreierbaritz.com.

· January 02, 2009 ~ The WallStreet Journal “Former AUSA Selected as Bankruptcy Trustee in Dreier Case”

“For a week, it’d been all quiet on the Marc Dreier front. But now a new lawyer is set to be welcomed to the Dreier Party. The NYLJ reports that Sheila M. Gowan (University of Minnesota, Brooklyn Law) has been selected as the bankruptcy trustee in the case. Dreier, founder and sole owner of the law firm Dreier LLP — for those of you took December off — is alleged to have perpetrated a massive fraud against a group of hedge funds. (Here’s our coverage.) Gowan, a former Proskauer associate [Emphasis Added] and AUSA in the Southern District of New York, is now a partner at Diamond McCarthy…”

Again, the SEC should note Proskauer’s direct involvement in the Dreier matters as trustee Gowan was a former Proskauer associate.

The conflict is absolute in light of the claims herein, now demanding full disclosure by Gowan and conflict waivers from the victims. When viewed in light of the Joao / Proskauer / Dreier connections described and evidenced already herein, these conflicts will preclude Gowan’s continued involvement.

Again, the entire crime depends on continued conflicts of interests that preclude due process and procedure by infiltration of the Criminal Enterprise law firms into Regulatory, Prosecutorial and Court actions against them.

The law firms are also well versed in court-orchestrated schemes and with infiltration into regulatory agencies are alleged to use the courts actually to effectuate further frauds. ""

"" March 03, 2009 ~ USDOJ Letter by Lev L. Dassin, Acting US Attorney to Judge Stuart M. Bernstein. Note that not only Gowan is copied but also Proskauer Attorney Jeffrey W. Levitan, Esq. ( Levitan ) is also copied.

The SEC has absolute cause to investigate if Levitan, Gowan and/or Proskauer failed fully to disclose their involvement with Dreier through Joao and the Iviewit matters. Proskauer and presumably Gowan are fully aware of their alleged involvement in my patent theft through my Federal RICO and ANTITRUST Lawsuit against the Proskauer firm.

Failure to disclose this material fact to the Bankruptcy court is allegedly further fraudulent activity. The SEC should also note that the courts have been notified in my legal actions and have obligations through Judicial Cannons to notify the proper authorities of any possible attorney misconduct they are aware of, or face Misprision of Felony charges and more.

Thus, the courts should have also notified the SEC of the information given them in official court filings in my lawsuit regarding the Dreier lawsuit, including the correlating information in the Stanford case, which would have forced Gowan’s disclosures regarding her involvement with Proskauer and the Dreier matters and her withdrawal as Trustee.

http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/20090325%20Dreier%20USDOJ%20Letter%20to%20BK%20Judge%20copies%20Proskauer%20and%20former%20Proskauer%20Gowan.pdf

Again, all this new information is cause for the SEC to reinvestigate the Dreier Ponzi in light of these facts and whereby the Dreier Ponzi may be further efforts to launder monies gained from the stolen Intellectual Properties; this would represent possible Fraud Upon a United States Bankruptcy Court.

All asset sales and other distributions should instantly be halted until these material facts can be reviewed to determine if these funds are also relating to the Iviewit stolen patents. ""

Source and Full SEC Complaint
http://docs.google.com/View?id=dgvpzjzw_9ghxg4km9

More on the Iviewit Stolen Patent at
www.iViewit.TV and www.DeniedPatent.com

Posted Here by
Investigative Blogger
Crystal L. Cox

MPEG Lawyers Accused Of Taking Inventions They Reviewed And Patenting Them

One Wonders How MPEG Attorneys Can Take Inventions and be a Part of a Trillion Dollar Lawsuit, a RICO Lawsuit, and a part of Florida Supreme Court Fraud and Corruption and The Legal System does not seem to Care.

Thousands of pages, Literally, of Documentation and the USPTO, the Florida Supreme Court, th Florida Attorney Bar, the New York Supreme Court, the New York Bar, the SEC, the FBI, the FTC, the FCC .... Senators... Governors No One Can do anything about it, Why?

It would seem that an Internet Changing, Mind Blowing invention that changed the way EVERYTHING was done on the Internet, well this kind of invention should certainly have enough money to pay off a few judges, the SEC, those who handle RICO complaints, Supreme Court Judges, those who handle attorney complaints, the USPTO and Government Officials at the Top Levels.

Warner Bros. Signed agreements - John Calkins, Chuck Dages, and Alan Bell were fully aware of this. And yet Time Warner Inc. went ahead and used the Technology with no compensation to the Inventors thought they had signed Confidentiality agreements.

Which apparently meant nothing because they did not honor them and no one made them, kind of like a Pinky Swear. However, Time Warner had Contracts with Iviewit Technologies - How many years can they get away with NOT honoring these contracts?

What Court will have the Moxy to Stop Time Warner from doing this to Inventors?. Kind of makes you scared to take an invention to Warner Bros. When you know full well they can easily steal the technology.

The Thing is it is Inevitable that Time Warner Inc. will have to come clean on all this and will it then not be an obvious SEC Violation as they had years upon years of warning and knowledge and not only did they do nothing to make it right, but they also neglected to tell their shareholders of this pending Trillion Dollar Liability.

Sony had Contracts with Iviewit Holdings - Iviewit Technologies, and what do Sony and Time Warner Have in Common? John Calkins and his Career advancement and the fact that John Calkins knows of has for years of this technology that is Illegally being Used. Did John Calkins tell Sony any of this or was that part of how John Calkins got his job?

So how does an MPEG attorney Steal a Trillion Dollar Patent? I would suppose that IBM Connections don't hurt, patent pools to protect is a plus, and all the years of Connections that Kenneth Rubenstein brought with him made him think he was above ALL laws. Kenneth Rubenstein Primary patent reviewer for MPEG, and a former IBM patent counsel thinks he can control the USPTO and the US Justice System.

Kenneth Rubenstein of Proskauer Rose thinks that Proskauer Rose will protect his Conflicts of Interest, Law Breaking, Ethics Violations, Flat Out Lies - and I have a Feeling with all the Proof I have read that some court somewhere SOON is going to have to listen to this case and go by the facts of the Trillion Dollar Lawsuit with thousands of documents of Evidence and that the Super Power of Proskauer Rose will No Longer Protect the MPEG Patent Pools. And the MPEG Corruption will end and the Iviewit Inventors will get justice.

One More Note Here on the Kenneth Rubenstein MPEG Lawyer who VIOLATED the Iviewit Inventors Rights ~ I ask this If David Kappos, Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) - Who Used to be the vice president and assistant general counsel for intellectual property at IBM and Specifically, David Kappos managed IBM’s patent and trademark portfolios – protecting and licensing intellectual property worldwide. ... Well then David Kappos must be connected to Kenneth Rubenstein Right? I mean both at IBM and Kenneth Rubenstein was a former IBM patent counsel ?

I mean Come On the Conflicts of Interest in this Case runs Rampant and How Long Will You all sit back and let this Injustice, this High Level Corruption Keep Going On. The Department of Justice, the SEC, the FTC, the FCC, the Supreme Court and Congress ... and none of them are listening the FACTS of the Iviewit Stolen Patent Case - the Evidence is Overwhelming - it is Obvious and the Constant Cover up year after Year is So Blatant that there is No way to Not Scream Foul - no Way to Imagine there is No Pay offs or Government Corruption - there would be no way to pull off a Trillion Dollar Patent Heist without it.

More on the Iviewit Trillion Dollar Patent Heist
www.DeniedPatent.com and www.Iviewit.TV
MPEG LA, MPEG-4, MPEGLA
http://74.125.155.132/search?q=cache:ktIVkVh6K68J:www.iviewit.tv/20091005%2520NY%2520Judiciary%2520Committee%2520Prepared%2520Statement.doc+%22David+Kappos%22+%22Iviewit%22&cd=3&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

http://www.inventorsdigest.com/?p=1504

Jorge Labarga, what is his Involvement to all This? What Case did he Throw Out and Why?

Jorge Labarga may have alot more connection then previously known... Coming Soon Much more on Jorge Labarga. Why did Jorge Labarga Throw the Prosksauer Fraudulent billing case, despite having direct evidence that Kenneth Rubenstein perjured himself and even more evidence?

What Connections Does Jorge Labarga have to Proskauer Rose and Kenneth Rubenstein, I mean this case was just many now of Cover Ups, Side Deals, Favors Owed and Secret Agendas..

Much More Coming Soon on Jorge Labarga in the Case of the Trillion Dollar Patent Heist.

RESPONSE OF KENNETH RUBENSTEIN AUTHORED BY STEVEN

"RESPONSE OF KENNETH RUBENSTEIN AUTHORED BY STEVEN
KRANE TO THE NEW YORK STATE BAR TO THE COMPLAINT FILED ON
BEHALF OF IVIEWIT HOLDINGS, INC."

Source Page 15 to Page 30 - Read This Stuff it is Great...
http://www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/2004%2012%2015%20Letter%20to%20Thomas%20Cahill%20Re%20Krane%20Conflict.pdf
r
r

MPEGLA - Guilty and Above the Law - Consolidation of DVD royalties collection is goal ofConsolidation of DVD royalties collection is goal of MPEG LA .

"Billboard, August 9, 1997 v109 n32 p3(3)
Consolidation of DVD royalties collection is goal of MPEG LA (digital video disk;
licensing administrator) Seth Goldstein.

Abstract: MPEG LA, a newly formed royalty collection agency, has set its goals on consolidating digital video disk (DVD) royalties collection in an all-in-one fee from program suppliers and disc replicators to make DVD prices within consumer range. However, its plan to charge 40 cents for each DVD title for rent and 4 cents for each title for sale has been criticized for its impracticality, considering the separate tracking requirements of rental and sell-through inventories.

However,MPEG LA believes that separate tracking is possible and the proposed rates are reasonable. Full Text: COPYRIGHT 1997 BPI Communications NEW YORK - The movers and shakers in DVD, including Hollywood heavyweights, are about to be jostled by a well-heeled new company with five employees.

MPEG LA has set itself up as a collection agency for the holders of about 80% of the MPEG-2 patents that made possible the home entertainment format.

MPEG LA - "LA" stands for "licensing administrator" - is just now contacting program suppliers, including Hollywood studios and disc replicators, about an all-in-one fee that would avoid the expense of multiple royalties paid to CD licensers. Without MPEG LA, according to one replicator, DVD could be priced beyond the reach of the mass-market consumer.

But, unless it changes course, MPEG LA will bump up against one of the pillars of the home video
trade and reignite a controversy the industry thought it settled 15 years ago: recognition that the First Sale Doctrine permits retailers to rent or sell prerecorded videocassettes as they wish.
Program suppliers lose control once the cassettes are in distribution. MPEG LA seeks to turn back the clock, in the view of several observers.

Its plan is to charge 40 cents for each DVD title priced to rent and 4 cents for each priced to sell. Differentiating between the two, never easy, has become increasingly difficult as more video stores stock up on $20-$25 cassettes to build inexpensive rental inventories.

"I can't see how anyone could propose a system of what was going to rent and what was going to sell through. There's no way anyone could tell," says a veteran movie industry source. "And if anyone did propose such a thing, the Video Software Dealers Assn. [VSDA] would be up in arms." As a fledgling trade group, VSDA earned its stripes defeating studio attempts in 1982 to rewrite the First Sale Doctrine to give them a share of rental revenue.

DVD inventories likely will be built along similar lines since the majority of releases are priced at
$24.98 suggested list. Indeed, at least one distributor, Major Video Concepts in Indianapolis, has already instituted a rental program for its accounts, based on sell-through pricing (Picture This, Billboard, Aug. 2).

But MPEG LA manager/CEO Baryn Futa, who owns a piece of the venture, disputes the argument that rental and sell-through can't be tracked separately at retail. "It's an element of folklore" that he maintains won't survive close examination. Baryn Futa says that conversations with some of the licensers supporting MPEG LA indicate the trade can support his two-tiered royalties.

"I'm not an expert in that area," Baryn Futa acknowledges. "We're going to ask a lot of questions. We're not dogmatic, and I'm here to listen. I want to find out for myself whether nobody knows." If the royalties "can't be implemented," he said during a meeting in New York last month, "we won't implement them."

Nonetheless, in a subsequent conversation, Baryn Futa maintained that the proposed rates are "awfully reasonable" and claimed that MPEG LA will "absolutely" pursue royalties on the 1 million-1.2 million DVDs estimated to have been shipped to stores. (The 130,000 DVD players on the market would be subject to a proposed fee of $4 per unit.)

Baryn Futa believes a set amount is "fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory," in contrast to a percentage of the wholesale or retail price "where some people pay more than others."
His next step is determining who to pursue. "Our orientation is either the replicator or the content provider." Licensers, meanwhile, are responsible for enforcing the contracts. "We're not creating the MPEG police," Baryn Futa emphasizes. "I would find it ironic if [content providers] who respect intellectual copyrights ignored this. MPEG-2 investment is a total crapshoot, so the inventors deserve something."

Hollywood is slow getting the message. Because of the broad scope of MPEG-2 patents, which deal with various aspects of the data-compression technology integral to DVD, in computers, and direct broadcast satellite, home video has received scant attention thus far. Baryn Futa says he's held informal talks with the studios and replicators "but nothing since July 8," when a road show introducing MPEG LA got under way.

Only one of numerous industry executives contacted by Billboard admitted to knowing anything
about the company or its charter. That executive is Richard Marquardt, head of Warner Advanced Media Operations (WAMO) in Olyphant, Pa., which replicates discs for Warner Home Video, its distributed labels, and several DVD independents.

Marquardt would not comment directly on MPEG LA, but says that WAMO has already taken steps to make sure it complies with a payment schedule. "We're accruing reserves based on my personal estimate of what the royalty will be," he notes.

Fees paid to various CD patent holders are "exorbitant," Marquardt maintains. "We need to avoid that situation in DVD if the consumer is going to benefit from low-cost mass media. Otherwise, it has got laserdisc written all over it." Royalties are a big reason for the high cost of laserdisc production, hampering acceptance of the format.

Baryn Futa thinks the MPEG LA approach eventually will limit the royalties pain to a single check, smaller in total than ones written to a bevy of licensers. That is, once word gets out.

MPEG LA, which Baryn Futa says he conceived several years ago while at Cable Television Laboratories, an R&D company, only emerged from its cocoon early last month. It took flight after the Department of Justice approved the proposal of nine companies and one university - Columbia - to pool their MPEG-2 patents to create "a one-stop-shopping clearinghouse" for Fujitsu, General Instrument, Matsushita, Mitsubishi, Philips Electronics N.V., Scientific-Atlanta, and Sony.

With a government green light, Futa and outside attorney Kenneth Rubenstein, who researched 8,000 patents, began a series of informational meetings in July that began in Tokyo and ended in Amsterdam. There were sessions in California and New York, as well. Handouts included a 25-page MPEG-2 patent portfolio license, with an attachment listing the holdings of the MPEG LA pool.

The list is incomplete, Futa acknowledges. Although mentioned in MPEG LA press materials as a
likely participant, Lucent Technologies (formerly AT&T subsidiary Western Electric) has elected to stay independent. So has Thomson Consumer Electronics, representing the GE/RCA patents. "I find it disappointing they're not coming in now," Futa says. "I don't know why."

Thus far, MPEG LA is closest to signing contracts with the replication and player manufacturing
arms of licensers such as Sony and Matsushita. The hope is those agreements will set the precedents -and a rate card - for the rest of the trade Baryn Futa expects other discussions to begin in earnest this fall.

MPEG LA, which has begun life with $3 million from Cable Labs and the licensers, takes a 10% cut of annual revenue during the start-up phase on a scale that slides to 2.5% at maturity. "The slope of the curve is fairly clear," Baryn Futa says. "When it starts is the issue."
He's anticipating rapid growth. MPEG opens a Washington, D.C., office in August, under the
direction of a new licensing VP, Larry Horn, and will have 10-15 staffers "at full trot."

Source of Post
http://www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/Copy%20of%20MPEG%20Articles/1997%2008%2007.pdf
p

Raymond A. Joao Complaint - Proskauer Rose Guilty and ABOVE the Law..

" Raymond A. Joao, (hereinafter "Joao"), believed to be a resident of the State of New
York, and who at various times relevant hereto was initially misrepresented to the
Company as a partner of Proskauer Rose LLP (hereinafter “Proskauer”) and was factually
a partner of Meltzer Lippe Goldstein and Schlissel, and who provided legal services to
the Company.

Moreover, beginning on or about September of 1998, the Company, through its agent and
principal, Eliot I. Bernstein ("Bernstein"), began negotiations with Proskauer with regard
to Proskauer providing legal services to the Company the purpose of which was to
develop and market specific technologies developed by Bernstein and two others, which
technologies allowed for the scaling, enlargement, panning and zooming of digital
images and video without degradation to the quality of the digital image due to what is
commonly referred to as “pixelation”, the delivery of digital video using proprietary

scaling techniques, a combination of the image pan and zoom techniques and video
scaling techniques, and the remote control of video and image applications.

Furthermore, Bernstein engaged the services of Proskauer and in turn Joao, among
others, through an engagement letter a true copy of which I attach herein as Exhibit “A”,
to obtain multiple patents and oversee US and foreign filings for such technologies
including the provisional filings for the technologies as described above, and such other
activities as were necessary to protect the intellectual property.

Additionally, upon information and belief, Raymond Joao upon viewing the technologies developed by Eliot Bernstein and the Iviewit Company, and held by the Company, realized the significance of the technologies, its various applications to communication networks for distributing video data and images and for existing digital processes, including, but not limited to digital cameras, digital video disks (DVD), digital imaging technologies for medical purposes and digital video.

And that Kenneth Rubenstein designed and executed, sometimes for himself or others similarly situated, deceptions, improprieties, and, even in certain circumstances, outright malfeasances by the disingenuous insertion of his own interests or the interests of third parties, who were other clients of Proskauer Rose and/or Meltzer Lippe Goldstein and Schlissel, between the Company, as his client and together with its disclosed techniques, and the ultimate end users of its future OEM and other licensees, to the detriment and
damage of the Company.

Many of the malfeasances against the Company have also
involved fraud against the US Patent and Trademark Office.

Specifics of General Complaint

Where the Company employed Raymond Joao, Proskauer Rose and Meltzer Lippe Goldstein & Schlissel for purposes of representing the Company to obtain multiple patents and oversee foreign filings for such technologies including the provisional filings for the technologies as
described above, and that pursuant to such employment, Raymond Anthony Joao, Proskauer Rose and Meltzer Lippe Goldstein & Schlissel owed a duty to ensure that the rights and interests of the Company were protected, Raymond Joao, Proskauer Rose LLP and Meltzer Lippe Goldstein & Schlissel neglected that reasonable duty of care in the performance of legal services in that they:
r
a. Failed to take reasonable steps to ensure that the intellectual property of the Company
was protected; and,

r
b. Failed to and/or inadequately completed work regarding patents, copyrights and
trademarks; and,

r
c. Failed to list proper inventors of the technologies based on improper legal advise by
Proskauer, and in turn Joao in his lead technological role, that foreign inventors could not
be listed until their immigration status was adjusted leading to further erroneous billings
by Proskauer for frivolous immigration work. This resulted in the failure of the patents to
include their rightful and lawful inventors; and,

r

d. Failed to ensure that the patent applications for the technologies, contained all
necessary and pertinent information relevant to the technologies and as required by law;
and,
r

e. Falsified billing statements and transmitted documents, and,
r
f. Falsified patent documents and changed the contents of patents prior to filing so as to
make the Company patents weak and inaccurate, so as to file patents in his own name
that would succeed upon the Companies patents failing. That Mr. Joao who was
contracted to procure patents for the Company has now applied for 70+ patents in his
own name, many of which appear to be ideas learned while representing the Company.
r
g. That due to the discovery of many of the above described events the Company’s lead
investor Crossbow Ventures (a referral of Proskauer Rose) of West Palm Beach, Fla.,
pulled funding on the Company.
e
Lastly, the negligent actions of Raymond Anthony Joao, MLGS and Proskauer Rose resulted in and were the proximate cause of loss to the Company; today, the Company’s processes are believed to be on digital camera’s, DVD’s and virtually all Internet and Broadcast streams of video; true copies of exhibits and witnesses are available on request and/or I will, on behalf of the Company, present them according to proof at commencement of investigation into
this General Complaint.

Due to the highly sensitive nature of the patent and copyright materials, exhibits and
witnesses will be provided once formal protections have been established in regard to this
complaint. "
r
Eliot Bernstein
Iviewit.com, Inc

Source of Post
http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/2003%2002%2025%20Joao%209th%20district%20original%20complaint.pdf

t

Kenneth Rubenstein of Proskauer Rose Claimed No Knowledge of Iviewit - is that the Story your Going With?

Can it possibly be True that with all the proof and evidence out there that Proskauer Rose - Kenneth Rubenstein could claim to have know knowledge of Iviewit?

I mean wasn't there contracts, bills, emails, texts, phone calls, documents... What?

Uh.. I don't them, ya I happen to control their technology but that was just a coincidence...

More Tidbits on Kenneth Rubenstein's statement to the Court of No Knowledge of Iviewit.

*Wheeler Letter to Investors Regarding Proskauer Rose's Review of Technologies.

* Hassan Regarding Rubenstein

* Proskauer Rose - Wheeler letter relating to patent services

* Kenneth Rubenstein whereabouts unknown immediately after learning of Iviewit moves from MLGS to Proskauer Rose, Letter to Wheeler who is Rubenstein.

* Kenneth Rubenstein Directs Raymond Joao who he claims is coming to Proskauer Rose with him from MLGS and Joao's statment to the Bar contradicts this. Factually, after meeting with Iviewit Proskauer Rose buys MLGS entire patent department which specializes in Iviewit Niche.

* Kenneth Rubenstein as advisor to MPEG - COI that is never disclosed since Iviewit thought Kenneth Rubenstein - Proskauer Rose was their "counsel", Kenneth Rubenstein repeatedly stated with Wheeler that the patent pools will soon pay royalities on the Iviewit Techs.

Source and Full Document.
http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/RICO%20CRIME%20CHARTS.pdf
r
r

Kenneth Rubenstein Conflict of Interest Issue over the Iviewit Stolen Patent - Rubenstein Patent Evaluator, Stockholder, MPEGLA Attorney ....

Some of the Conflicts of Interest - Kenneth Rubenstein - Proskauer Rose

Is anyone Listening?

Does the FBI, the SEC, the US Patent Office or the Depart of Justice even care about ANYONE who breaks the law to this extent? Or do they just look the other way because of the Big - REALLY BIG money and political power that is at play here.

And if this makes them look away ... well then there is NO JUSTICE system at all and your Tax Dollars paying to have one is the Biggest Hoax on You in a long line of Hoax's and Illustions.

So Conflicts of Interest Kenneth Rubenstein, Proskauer Rose LLP

MPEGLA - Proskauer Rose Client with Kenneth Rubenstein as Patent Evaluator ( on this also see Rubenstein Deposition and Response to New York Bar.)

DVD Patent Pool - Proskauer Rose Client with Kenneth Rubenstein as Patent Evaluator.

Proskauer Rose Clients

Investors Relied on Kenneth Rubenstein

Private Placement Documents Edited, Reviewed, and Disseminated by Proskauer Rose contain Kenneth Rubenstein as Advisor, and also a Shareholder of Iviewit.