Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Maybe they did and decided to revisit their legacy tech as something to add into their Mini PC boxes? Why did Dimension jump from VDK2 PVS fractals into warped RAISR knock off video scaling? Couldn't they find enough parts to assemble a old 1994 IBM PVS supercomputer to run their precious code on?
By the way RAISR "Rapid and Accurate Image Super Resolution" is widely available for free as open source, so it appears Dimension is completely worthless. Is this the reason for a 4,000,000,000 TMMI shares extortion attempt?
"It's a shame that there appears to be no communication between the principals."
After what TMMI has been through for the past 20 years and lost business opportunities due to malicious false misleading claims against this company its no wonder there's a lack of communication as you say.
What does Dimension hope to achieve by fighting so hard over the "PVS source code license"? That old code has no practical value,
even VDK3 has limited use according to their website. At least they have other things on the shelf like their Mini PC, TRUDEF Video Player, 4K streaming and who knows what else. TMMI is like a cat, it has multiple lives.
Do you really believe Dimension would accept the $54,000 and leave TMMI to carry on with its business using TRUDEF VDK3 Fractal Video, a derivative of VDK2.1 licensed from Iterated Systems Inc. in 1994?
Or do you think they will continue trying to extort 4,000,000,000 shares from TMMI?
"Too much BS to wade through here"
Talking about BS, do you remember this?
By: lpanik
08 Feb 2006, 09:28 PM EST Msg. 95248 of 99169
(This msg. is a reply to 95246 by zoomtothemoon.)
As a director of DFMI let me set the record straight. We own sole rights to the fractal video codec based on the patents originally held by Iterated Systems of Atlanta, GA. We are not in negotiations with TMMI and have no intention of doing so.
Please contact TMMI for any information about them.
Lawrence F. Panik
VP of Business Development
How about relitigating the case in California where merger laws are more strict? DFI never legally merged with DFMI. Under California law DFI still owns the restricted "PVS/SGI Source Code License". Before you guys keep high-fiving each other do you understand the contents and limitations of the "PVS/SGI Source Code License" you so highly value? Dimension can not make any claims against TMMI's VDK2.1 license from 1994, its a totally separate issue. The DFMI separatists sure got schooled in 2000, they should have stuck with DFI and received their TMMI shares when the dust settled. That's what greed does to people. The funny things is, they still haven't figured it out after all these years what they think they have is virtually worthless. Their prized "PVS/SGI Source Code License" has become nothing more than a weapon for waging a war of extortion.
4,000,000,000 TMMI shares for a $54,000 debt? Someone has been whiffing too much laughing gas.
"Too much BS to wade through here"
No BS here, I think we all know who the real source of BS is. Its strange how some people stubbornly refuse to accept the truth.
"per the 2002 Ventura County courts"
Per 2003 default judgement, will Mr. TS ever be paid the $148,000 owed to him by you know who?
"Not to mention, with a little investigation, they would have known they didn't own it (per the 2002 Ventura County courts)"
Its funny you mention that, Mr. TS counter sued in 2003 and won a default judgment for $148,000 that was never paid. Instead the counter party ran off and started a daisy chain of companies he passed the "non transferable" DFI/DFMI "PVS/SGI Source Code License" through. Just 10 days after the judgement he had a band new company registered to play hide and seek with the license. The only problem, the legal merger between DFI and DFMI was never consummated. According to California law DFI still owns the "PVS/SGI Source Code License". TMMI should take this litigation back to California just to teach Dimension a lesson.
Also, I might add Mr. TS was neither an officer or director of TMMI at that time, so your insinuation he was ordered to hand over all copies of the code (implying everything from ISI) is nonsense. How could Mr. TS possibly have been ordered to hand over source code licensed to a third party company, licenses that had nothing to do with the original ISI/DFI deal, "PVS/SGI Source Code License" for IBM PVS super computers? The 2002 litigation had nothing to do with TMMI's ISI licenses from the 1990's.
Mr. TS was never ordered to hand over TMMI's property.
Please stop with the FUD.
The demos really are .fvf fractal video files, they really are! Its amazing TMMI actually has their VDK3 fractal video compressor (a derivative of VDK2.1) running. Its humorous to see those still in denial try to convince themselves otherwise. No million dollar plus IBM PVS super computer required.
ftp://ftp.tmmi.us/
TRUDEF™ VDK3 Fractal Video Codec for AMD64 hardware
A derivative of VDK2.1 originally licensed from Iterated Systems Inc.
TRUDEF_IRIS32FREE_A001_C039_1010D_2k.fvf 509817 KB
TRUDEF_IRIS32FREE_A001_C039_1010D_4k.fvf 1977676 KB
TRUDEF_IRIS32FREE_A003_C042_2k.fvf 333321 KB
TRUDEF_IRIS32FREE_A003_C042_4k.fvf 1387521 KB
TRUDEF_IRIS32FREE_A026_C054_0910H_2k_60fps.fvf 1190736 KB
TRUDEF_IRIS32FREE_A026_C054_0910H_4k_60fps.fvf 4513470 KB
TRUDEF_IRIS32FREE_H054_C034_03141M_2k.fvf 777368 KB
TRUDEF_IRIS32FREE_H054_C034_03141M_4k.fvf 2930445 KB
"TOTAL MULTIMEDIA's TRUDEF™ Fractal Video Codec for AMD64 hardware was developed for high bitrate CPU based decoding. TRUDEF™ has been upgraded from VDK2.1 originally licensed from Iterated Systems Inc. in 1994 to an improved VDK3 code base using Microsoft Visual Studio 2017 for Windows 10-64, and provides near lossless quality 8K playback on 2019 commodity hardware."
It appears you will have to wait for the new player:
"The TRUDEF™ VDK3 Fractal Decoder is currently being ported to TMMI's new UWP compliant TRUDEF™ Video Player, replacing the original TRUDEF™ Fractal Video Player developed in 2012/13."
More FUD and extortion. Do you even comprehend the limitations of the "PVS/SGI Source Code License"? Its is not an open license for all versions of VDK2, end of story. The problem with Dimension is they refuse to accept the fact that the original ISI/DFI was a restricted license for a specific hardware platform, IBM PVS super computers.
Dimension is burying itself going down this path. How can litigation (in 2002 or 2013) involving a specific source code license between ISI and DFI in 2000 possibly effect previous licenses between ISI and TMMI formalized in the 1990's for other hardware platforms? TMMI emerged from bankruptcy in 1996 owning these licenses in exchange for millions of dollars paid to ISI.
I repeat, TMMI was not interested in using the "PVS/SGI Source Code License" because it did not have expensive and now obsolete IBM PVS super computers. Instead TMMI is using VDK2.1 for Intel computers originally licensed in 1994.
Having said this, it was worth TMMI challenging Dimension's claim to the useless "PVS/SGI Source Code License" to stop the brazen interference by Dimension in TMMI business affairs. There never was a legal merger between DFI and DFMI. As of now, the "PVS/SGI Source Code License" is worthless but Dimension is still using it as a thorn in TMMI's side. And now, claims for 4,000,0000,0000 TMMI shares! When will this insane nonsense ever end?
I believe any confusion can be resolved if the Court re-reads the actual restricted 2000 ISI/DFI "PVS/SGI Source Code License" under the correct context. Dimension is grasping at straws if they continue to make claims beyond the limitations of the license. I wonder if Dimension's funders understand these details, or are they being deceived, led to believe they own VDK2 technology in its entirety? If so, this type of misrepresentation of facts while soliciting investment can be a costly mistake. A certain individual could be liable if his investors choose to seek restitution for money invested under false pretences. Of course I am only speculating here and its up to Dimension to manage their own internal affairs.
You are welcome. I just want the record set straight. After MCI, Steve Bender stole code from TMMI he used in Genuine Fractals and others saw TMMI as a carcass to be picked clean. Steve Bender even had the audacity to have his software save files in the .svf format right under TMMI's nose. TMMI shareholders are the real losers here who had nobody looking out for their interests while years of abuse took place.
A blast from the past is certainly right and I would rather skip over the entire MCI/Peter Olsen debacle. Incidentally, MCI stole VDK2.1 and tried to use it in RealVideo, owned by RealNetworks which they were major shareholders of. When TMMI emerged from bankruptcy RealVideo was switched to a DCT based codec.
I see the iHub Gods granted me more posts today.
Yes, I agree the license was mislabelled, but still this does not change the contents of the license itself.
It appears nobody in the Court bothered reading the actual 2000 ISI/DFI license to understand what this case was even about.
"The court will also wonder why Tmmi bothered to purchase DFM"
There were still a number of DFI shareholders still loyal to TMMI who tendered their own shares to raise money for the 2000 ISI/DFI "PVS/SGI Source Code License" purchase. TMMI made good on the promise to follow though with the original agreement with those shareholders and issued 11,000,000 TMMI common shares for the acquisition of DFI.
Should the 2000 ISI/DFI deal even happened? imo there was no reason for TMMI to purchase the "PVS/SGI Source Code License" since it was not using million dollar plus IBM PVS multi processor super computers to compress .fvf files. I believe other factors were at play back then, i.e. money grab from TMMI's run to $2.87 per share and extreme greed evolved into a state of insanity by some involved.
TMMI was correct at the start of the litigation staing they were not using anything covered by the "PVS/SGI Source Code License". In 2013 I am not aware that TMMI had a IBM PVS multi processor super computer to run the code on. As for the Court, I believe they just have to read the actual "PVS/SGI Source Code License" to clarify what they ruled on.
TMMI's other licenses issued by ISI in 1994 are not part of this litigation, they have nothing to do with DFI. The bankruptcy Court in 1996 already made a ruling regarding these licenses. TMMI is free and clear to utilize its VDK2.1 and other licenses. Also, I should point out all of the relevant patents have expired and now its just an issue of source code copyright.
VDK3 is a derivative of VDK2.1 source code. TMMI owns the modifications it has since made to this code and other derivative software. Nobody has any claims on the VDK2 core technology, not even HP, the patents have expired.
"I doubt Dimension will simply accept that VDK 3 isn’t derived from VDK 2."
This is my last post for today. I have tried to explain Dimension has no rights to VDK2 core technology which is used in all licensed version ISI granted for various hardware platforms.
Dimension's "PVS/SGI Source Code License" is for VDK2 source code that runs on IBM PVS multi processor super computers using the IBM AIX UNIX operating system.
Once again, forget the name the Court used to describe the license, what is relevant is the contents of the ISI/DFI license.
Its deceptive to suggest Dimension has any rights outside the restrictions of the "PVS/SGI Source Code License". This is the lie
Dimension has been spreading for years and has damaged TMMI's ability to carry on its business, not to mention brazen interference between TMMI and potential customers. imo Dimension is exposed to liabilities for their past nefarious activities.
Please re-read all of my posts on this subject, its not that difficult to understand.
Dimension is seeking 4,000,000,000 TMMI common shares (200:1 conversion of 20,000,000 Preferred Shares) so settle a debt of $54,000. Now you can see the level of insanity TMMI is dealing with regarding the restricted "PVS/SGI Source Code License" litigation. This extreme criminal extortion against TMMI and its shareholders should be reported to the authorities.
"Well that clears it right up. Who’s the licensor for VDK 3? Can you answer in fewer than three paragraphs?"
Already covered by the ISI VDK2.1 license, TMMI made changes to that code according to their website.
Google Derivative work software.
By: lpanik
08 Feb 2006, 09:28 PM EST Msg. 95248 of 99169
(This msg. is a reply to 95246 by zoomtothemoon.)
As a director of DFMI let me set the record straight. We own sole rights to the fractal video codec based on the patents originally held by Iterated Systems of Atlanta, GA. We are not in negotiations with TMMI and have no intention of doing so.
Please contact TMMI for any information about them.
Lawrence F. Panik
VP of Business Development
The reference to VDK2 as used in A-13-678054-B is confusing.
"The PVS/SGI Code also known as the VDK 2.0 Code (the "Code")" refers to the 2000 ISI/DFI "PVS/SGI Source Code License" which is quite difference than the entire VDK2 core used in all versions of licenses.
"PVS/SGI Source Code License" is for a version of VDK2 source code intended for IBM PVS multi processor super computers that ran on the IBM AIX UNIX operating system.
In 1994 TMMI licensed VDK2.1 which is a version of VDK2 that runs on i386 Intel computers.
A-13-678054-B is limited to the contents of the 2000 ISI/DFI "PVS/SGI Source Code License". Dimension's claims can not exceed these limitations, as much as they have tried to insinuate in the past.
Over the years, TMMI's licensing rights for ISI fractal technology have been slandered by certain individuals who contacted multiple potential TMMI clients making fraudulent claims that TMMI didn't own any rights.
I can assure you the 2000 $500,000 ISI/DFI license did not cover $5,000,000 worth of previous licenses already granted by ISI to TMMI for other hardware platforms. ISI did not unload the "PVS/SGI Source Code License" to some unrelated third party, it was always meant for TMMI/DFI in lieu of the millions previously paid, including the use of expensive IBM PVS super computers the code was developed on.
VDK3 is a derivative of VDK2.1. TMMI can call this derivative anything they want and it does not require a separate license since the related source code is already covered by the VDK2.1 license.
In 1996 when TMMI emerged from bankruptcy it issued a news release about an agreement with Advanced Multimedia Concepts Inc., ("AMCI") to carry of development of this code.
In 2012 TMMI announced Dr. Alan Sloan had joined the Company's newly formed Advisory Board at the same time their new development lab was being setup.
The lawsuit in 2013 was not just about "PVS/SGI Source Code License", it was to stop Dimension's interference in TMMI's business. Dimension attempted to patent ISI's prior art that covers TMMI's VDK2.1 and other licenses. Dimension shareholders posted messages in various public forums claiming Dimension owned new patents on VDK2 and TMMI would be in violation of those patents and would have to pay royalties. It no surprise TMMI launched the litigation against this extortion.
TMMI's VDK 2.1, 2.2, 2.3 and 2.4 licenses have nothing to do with DFI which is probably why they never made their way into the factual record. The litigation was based on TMMI's claim that a legal merger between DFI and DFMI never was consummated, and legally DFI is still the owner of the "PVS/SGI Source Code License".
Once again, The context of "VDK2" in A-13-678054-B is a label applied to the restricted "PVS/SGI Source Code License" for IBM PVS super computers. It does not apply to previous licenses ISI issued for other hardware platforms.
Details regarding the ISI/DFI "PVS/SGI Source Code License" were discussed in these forums years ago. This should all be well understood by now.
FINDINGS OF FACT Case No.: A-13-678054-B and Case No.: A-19-798443-C:
Despite the FUD that continues to permeate on this board for what ever reason here are some points to consider:
Case No.: A-13-678054-B
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. The PVS/SGI Code also known as the VDK 2.0 Code (the "Code") was created by Iterated Systems, Inc. ("ISI") who is the predecessor in interest of MediaBin.
2. TMM, Inc. ("TMMI") is a Nevada corporation, and the purported holder of the license to the Code.
3. Digital Focus, Inc. ("DFI") is a California Corporation, who entered into an agreement with ISI, for a license to the Code.
Back to the original ISI/DFI License:
As I recall, this agreement with ISI was for a version that runs on certain multi processor computers which is why the name of the license is "PVS/SGI Source Code License" as it is referenced in A-19-798443-C.
https://dimensioninc.tv/news/Abuse.pdf
Page 6 line 1
"Plaintiffs’ perpetual, fully-paid, exclusive world-wide license to certain software code known as
the PVS/SGI Source Code (“Exclusive License” or “License”) that Defendants had conveyed to
Plaintiffs approximately 13 years earlier in exchange for $500,000."
Page 7 line 7
Iterated Systems, Inc. (“ISI”) originally created the PVS/SGI Source Code. In
early March of 2000, Simpson learned that ISI would sell an Exclusive License in the Code for
$500,000. At the time, Simpson held approximately $1.2 million in proceeds from his sale of
stock on behalf of certain investors that later became the investors in Plaintiff DFMI (“Investors”).
VDK 1.0-1.4 is mentioned twice on Page 13 Line 16 and page 14 line 4
They do not refer directly to VDK2 in Abuse.pdf.
The license itself is the basis of the lawsuit. The devil is in the details and I can assure you the 2000 $500,000 ISI/DFI license did not cover $5,000,000 worth of previous licenses already granted by ISI to TMMI for other hardware platforms.
Just because a certain "label" is slapped on a license for litigation doesn't change the content of the license, which in this case is a version of the code intended for IBM PVS multi processor super computers that ran on the IBM AIX UNIX operating system. Those were the multi millions dollar super computers TMMI provided to ISI for the development of this code in the first place.
Is "The PVS/SGI Code also known as the VDK 2.0 Code (the "Code")" the actual name of the 2000 ISI/DFI license? I think not, so the label applied to litigation is meaningless. Go back to the original license before making outrageously expanded claims far in excess of what is being litigated.
TMMI emerged from bankruptcy in 1996, reorganized and owning the VDK2.1, VDK2.2, VDK2.3 and VDK2.4 licenses that originated with ISI in 1994, and also previous VDK 1.0-1.9. The cost of the VDK2.1, VDK2.2, VDK2.3 and VDK2.4 licenses was $5,000,000 which TMMI settled in full.
September, 1996 TMM, Inc. entered into an agreement with Advanced Multimedia Concepts Inc., ("AMCI") of Camarillo, California for the enhancement of TMM's Soft Video codec (VDK2.1).
In 1997 TMM, Inc./AMCI made modifications to VDK2.1. VDK2.1 runs on i386 Intel hardware.
In early 2000 with TMMI's stock coming off a run to $2.87 per share ISI offered TMMI the opportunity to purchase the "PVS/SGI Source Code License" for $500,000 and arrangements were made to conduct this transaction through DFI due to TMMI's share structure.
In 2000, certain individuals conspired to strip this ISI/DFI opportunity from TMMI which over time morphed into bizarre public claims of owning the rights to all of ISI's fractal technologies, implying that TMMI had nothing. TMMI struggled for years against constant public attacks regarding legal ownership over its ISI fractal codec licenses.
In 2013 TMMI launched legal action against Dimension over the DFI/DFMI non legal merger and also due to Dimension's attempts to patent ISI's prior art that covers TMMI's VDK2.1 and other licenses.
The current fight is over "PVS/SGI Source Code License", TMMI's VDK2.1, VDK2.2, VDK2.3 and VDK2.4 licenses are not part of this litigation, end of story.
TMMI's website describes a derivative of ISI's VDK2.1 called VDK3 that has been updated for today's hardware.
Nothing from Case No.: A-13-678054-B and Case No.: A-19-798443-C effects TMMI's ability to move forward with VDK3 is it so chooses.
Having said that, the window of opportunity is closing due to advancements in competing technologies so TMMI needs to step up with deployment of this technology in some form into the market.
In conclusion TMMI still owns its VDK2.1, VDK2.2, VDK2.3 and VDK2.4 licenses that are separate from the DFI, DFMI and Dimension "PVS/SGI Source Code License" issues. Ignore any noise claiming otherwise.
Also, if I understand correctly, do 20,000,000 TMMI Preferred shares Dimension is asking for convert into 2,000,000,000 TMMI common shares? If so that's like Ms. King x 10.
Setting the record straight:
The PVS/SGI License Agreement is for PVS/SGI Source Code (code for certain multi processor UNIX computers, mainly the IBM PVS)
https://dimensioninc.tv/news/Abuse.pdf
TMMI's previous ISI Licenses it retained after emerging from bankruptcy in 1996 are not effected by the 2013 lawsuit. TMMI was working with VDK2.1 source code back in 1997.
2019 TRUDEF™ VDK3 Fractal Video Codec for AMD64 hardware
A derivative of VDK2.1 originally licensed from Iterated Systems Inc.
http://www.trudef.us/technology.php
I hope this clears up any lingering confusion.