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.
Management returned my phone call with a message on my machine. I called RP and he took my call. Now that is something.
He stated that the law firm was responsible for putting the press announcement out. They did their due diligence and were sold on the value of the ASNAP patent. Also they do not accept clients without taking action, so watch out for the NEWS. They must have some infringer(s) in their crosshairs.
I would think a deal would be practical in order to avoid the legal dogfight with a few of the infringers so just a matter of time.
From my conversation RP was very professional and appeared confident in the future. The recent new about Mexico and European patents was very positive and needed before a law firm would accept us. These steps will provide great appreciation for the shareholders in the coming months.
Be smart and buy your shares in a Roth IRA account if you qualify!
Any CLYW News? A sweet grandmother telephoned St. Joseph's Hospital. She timidly asked, "Is it possible to speak To someone who can tell me how a patient is doing?".
The operator said "I'll be glad to help,
Dear. What's the name and room number?".
The grandmother in her weak tremulous voice said, "Norma Findlay, Room 302.".
The operator replied, "Let me place you on hold while I check with her nurse.".
After a few minutes the operator returned to the
Phone and said, "Oh, I have good news, her nurse just
Told me that Norma is doing very well. Her blood pressure is fine; her blood work just came back as normal and her Physician, Dr.Cohen, has scheduled her to be discharged on Tuesday.".
The grandmother said, "Thank you. That's wonderful! I was so worried! God bless you for the good news.".
The operator replied, "You're more than welcome. Is Norma your daughter?".
The grandmother said, "No, I'm Norma Findlay in 302. No one tells me shit!".
NO RETURN PHONE CALLS FROM MANAGEMENT AND OTHERS. VERY LITTLE SUPPORT FOR THE AVERAGE INVESTOR WHO SUPPORTS THE COMPANY DURING THIS EXTENDED SELLOFF. WHO WOULD SELL SO MANY SHARES FOR THE PAST FEW DAYS, MONTHS & YEARS? JUST CONSTANT SELLING BUT AT LEAST WE HAVE A TOP NOTCH LAW FIRM HELPING US.
Surprise the announcement did not move the share price. Acceptance of Calypso by this law firm is a major vote of confidence. A review was done and research into prior patents must have been undertaken before this alliance was created.
Unsure what the financial terms are but having strong representation is a major step forward. Most large firms will shy away from questionable patents, so the value to bring litigation must prove worthwhile.
After the filings are made public the price should spike. A full discussion of these actions should be presented at the meeting.
FIRST OF MANY! Sounds like the plan is coming together.
Patin states, "This engagement by a seasoned IP law firm goes a long way in establishing the validity and relevance of ASNAP. This is only the first of many very positive developments."
The other developments could be more patents, signed deals, law suits on infringers, shareholder's meeting, loan compliance and other issues.
Slowly but surely the plan is unfolding.
Now that the lawyers are selected, how much longer before we get a filing?
Will the licensing come first or a lawsuit?
How big is the pot?
What is the split with the suits?
What about the other patents?
When is the meeting?
So much news will be forthcoming over the next few months. Most of it positive. Buy now or regret it later.
Gizmo5 Defends Nokia VoIP Intentions
August 27, 2008
By Doug Mohney
In an email CC'ed to FierceVoIP, Gizmo5 CEO Michael Robertson comes to defend the honor of Nokia with tech talk.
Robertson, also the founder of Linspire, MP3tunes and REEF, has never been shy about sharing his opinions. In the letter, addressed to Om Malik of GigaOm fame, Robertson says the Nokia N78 phone runs the latest version of the Symbian operating system, which changes how VoIP is supported in the OS framework.
"It actually adds more VOIP support to the OS so developers will need to do less work to build VOIP capable programs. This means that VOIP software which previously worked with Symbian 3.0 and 3.1 devices such as Gizmo will not run on these devices without being altered to account for this new VOIP structure."
Robertson goes on to say work is underway to make Gizmo compatible with Symbian 3.2, which will enable VoIP calls on devices such as the N78. He also points out that Nokia is nice enough to feature Gizmo on the e71 phone under its "Setup Internet Tel" application and Symbian 3.1 OS.
Michael says "...as the software applications and operating system come into sync, I expect the support to actually improve as core VOIP functionality is embedded even further into the OS. Remember, Nokia now owns Symbian." Gizmo5 continues to see "constant growth" as more WiFi enabled devices are sold.
My understanding is the prior management trumped up false accusation against CT and failed to finalized the Baxter shares due to incompetence or as a result of the law suit against CT. How could they issue shares when the claim the deal was bogus?
So the settlement side stepped the trouble of Baxter with the hope of his awareness of the issues. Baxter protects himself and files in order to preserve his interest.
The million shares would have been worth approximately $150,000.
Will the issue be advanced to the courts? Most likely not. Will it be resolved with understanding and some sort of arbitration? Maybe.
Baxter is a smart business person and the details of this deal have not been fully released. Time will show the facts and provide a path to resovle this little fiasco.
This is minor compared to Carlos's years of control.
Baxter is not a party to the agreement. Was this a hoax?
************* Time we have some answers.*******************
13. Brennan executed the Patent Agreement on behalf of Voice to Phone. Pursuant to the Patent Agreement, Voice to Phone agreed to assign to Calypso its right, title and
interest in four patents specified therein (the “Patents”), and Calypso agreed to pay for the Patents by issuing to Voice to Phone 5,000,000 free trading S-8 shares of Calypso stock, 4,000,000
of which were to be delivered within fifteen days of the date of the Patent Agreement, and 1,000,000 of which were to be delivered on or before November 1, 2007.
14. Calypso’s Board never authorized Turrini to enter into the Patent Agreement, and had no knowledge that he had done so.
15. Upon information and belief, Turrini and Brennan are the controlling shareholders and alter egos of Voice to Phone. Upon information and belief, Turrini organized Voice
to Phone with the intent and purpose of diverting assets and corporate opportunities of Calypso to Voice to Phone and Turrini and Brennan.
How do you know they own the patents?
Please give us the scoop.
The unresolved issues of the Baxter patents will remain a hot topic until full disclosure is released. Did Baxter receive full payment from CT and Voice to Phone, Inc.? Were the shares sold? Did Baxter return the shares? Ect....
No statement has been made regarding this fiasco. Time to let us know what happenned.
*****************
Upon information and belief, Turrini and Brennan are the controlling shareholders and alter egos of Voice to Phone. Upon information and belief, Turrini organized Voice to Phone with the intent and purpose of diverting assets and corporate opportunities of Calypso to Voice to Phone and Turrini and Brennan.
3
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
16. In order to accomplish these fraudulent purposes, Turrini did not provide a copy of the Patent Agreement with Voice to Phone to Calypso. As a result, among other things, Calypso could not make timely disclosure in its SEC filing.
17. Moreover, unbeknownst to Calypso, Turrini, on behalf of Voice to Phone had obtained the Patents from Baxter Technologies PTE LTD (“Baxter Technologies”) and agreed to a payment to Baxter Technologies of 1,000,000 free trading shares of Calypso stock and $75,000. Upon information and belief, Turrini subsequently agreed to pay Baxter Technologies a total of 1,200,000 free trading shares of Calypso stock.
18. On or about April 30, 2007, Baxter Technologies assigned the Patents to Voice to Phone. Turrini, acting on behalf of Voice to Phone, then assigned the Patents to Calypso for 5,000,000 shares of free trading Calypso stock, pursuant to the Patent Agreement into which he had entered on behalf of Calypso.
19. In connection with the Patent Agreement, on May 22, 2007, Voice to Phone executed an Assignment of Patent Rights (the “Assignment”), selling, assigning and transferring to Calypso its rights in and to Patents.
20. On August 31, 2007, in furtherance of the Patent Agreement, Turrini, without Board authorization, and without the knowledge of the Board, improperly authorized and directed Calypso’s transfer agent, Continental Stock Transfer & Trust Company to issue 1,200,000 of the free trading shares to Baxter Technologies PTE LTD (“Baxter Technologies”), and the other 2,800,000 free trading shares to Voice to Phone. (the “Shares”).
4
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
21. Turrini induced Continental to issue the Shares by providing falsified documents on which he forged Dotson’s signature. In these documents, Turrini falsely represented in writing to Continental that Calypso had filed a Form S-8 Registration Statement with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), when, in truth and in fact, no such Form S-8 had been filed and submitted false documents. Moreover, Turrini knew that an S-8 Registration Statement could not be utilized for the purchase of patents or to register shares owned by a corporation, such as Voice to Phone or Baxter Technologies.
22. At the time he made this representation, Turrini knew that a Form S-8 Registration Statement had not in fact, been filed with the SEC . Turrini also knew that pursuant to the SEC Rules, a Form S-8 Registration Statement is required to permit the Shares to be issued as free trading shares. Absent the filing of the Form S-8, the Shares could not be freely traded in the public market.
23. All of the shares issued to Baxter Technologies have been sold in the public market and the proceeds from the sale of the shares remitted to Baxter Technologies and/or Jack Baxter.
24. The 2,800,000 shares issued to Voice to Phone were deposited into an account at Scottrade maintained by Voice to Phone, and were sold soon thereafter.
25. Upon information and belief, Turrini received all or a portion of the proceeds of the sales of the 2,800,000 Shares issued to Voice to Phone, thereby benefitting himself to the detriment of Calypso.
26. Because no Registration Statement was in effect, Turrini and Voice to Phone made an illegal distribution of the Shares in violation of Section 5 of the Securities Act of 1933.
5
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
27. On or about November 15, 2007, Calypso learned that Turrini had wrongfully entered into the Patent Agreement and wrongfully issued and sold the Shares. In addition, Calypso learned that Turrini had personally profited from the assignment of the Patents to Calypso.
28. Upon learning of Turrini’s wrongful acts against Calypso, on November 16, 2007, Calypso’s Board passed a resolution authorizing its Chief Financial Officer, Cheryl Dotson, to close Calypso’s account that it maintained at Bank of America, bearing account number 003764184269, on which both Turrini and Ms. Dotson were signatories, and to open a new account at Bank of America, for which Ms. Dotson would be the sole signatory for all checks and debit card transactions.
29. On November 16, 2007, Calypso closed the Bank of America account, and transferred all of Calypso’s funds from the old account to a new account that it opened with Ms. Dotson as the sole signatory on the account (the “BOA Account”).
30. On November 18, 2007, Turrini was advised by Calypso’s Board of Directors that Calypso had began an internal investigation into his wrongful activities. As a result, Turrini, at the same time, was expressly advised that he was no longer authorized to take any action on behalf of Calypso.
Understanding the deal.
Patents went to Daic. Daic swapped the patents to CLYW in exchange for $20 million. He then buys the stock from the Latins.
Why or how would the Baxter patents not be covered in resolution of the conflict. The patents appear to be valuable. Wouldn't Diac cover his interest with another deal with Baxter? A lot of smart business people did this deal and dropping the Baxter patents would be grounds for action or some sort of measure.
I do not buy this miscue on the part of management or majority owners.
***************
WHEREAS, pursuant to the terms of the Assignment Agreement, the Daic Parties were obligated to reconvey the Patent Ownership Interest to Calypso upon receipt of $20,000,000 in cash pursuant to the Assignment Agreement and, simultaneous with the reconveyance of such interest, the Daic Parties and Calypso were to enter into this Patent Proceeds Assignment;
WHEREAS, the Daic Parties have received $20,000,000 in cash pursuant to the Assignment Agreement and simultaneous with the execution of this Patent Proceeds Assignment, the Daic Parties have reconveyed the Patent Ownership Interest to Calypso;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the payments set forth herein, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are acknowledged herewith by the Parties, and the mutual covenants and promises hereinafter made, it is mutually agreed by and between the parties, as follows:
COVENANTS AND WARRANTIES. Debtor represents, warrants to, and covenants and agrees with Secured Party, as follows:
(a) Except as set forth in the Assignment Agreement or in this Security Agreement, Debtor is and will continue to be the sole and exclusive owner of the entire legal and beneficial right, title and interest in and to the ASNAP Patent and the Baxter Patents, free and clear of any lien, charge, security interest or other encumbrance, except for the security interest and assignment created by this Security Agreement and the Assignment Agreement. Debtor will defend its right, title and interests in and to the ASNAP Patent, the Baxter Patents and the Collateral against claims of any third parties;
(b) Performance of this Security Agreement does not conflict with or result in a breach of any agreement to which Debtor is a party or by which Debtor is bound;
(c) Debtor shall take any and all such actions (including but not limited to institution and maintenance of suits, proceedings or actions) as are necessary and appropriate to properly maintain, protect, preserve, care for and enforce the ASNAP Patent, the Baxter Patents and the Collateral. However, Debtor shall not be required to incur costs or take other actions when, in the exercise of its reasonable business judgment, such costs or other actions would not be advisable. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, Debtor shall pay when due such fees, taxes and other expenses which shall be incurred, which shall accrue, and/or which shall come due with respect to any of the Collateral, including but not limited to all prosecution, maintenance, and annuity fees related to the ASNAP Patent or the Baxter Patents. Debtor shall not abandon or dedicate to the public any of the ASNAP Patent or Baxter Patents or related patent rights, nor do any act nor omit to do any act if such act or omission is of a character that tends to cause or contribute to the abandonment or dedication to the public of the ASNAP Patent or Baxter Patents or related patent right or loss of or adverse effect on any rights in the ASNAP Patent or Baxter Patents or related patent right;
(d) Debtor shall in the future use statutory and other appropriate symbols, notices or legends of the ASNAP Patent or Baxter Patents pending or issued consistent with notice practice;
3
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(e) Debtor shall do all things which are necessary and appropriate to insure that each licensee of any portion of the ASNAP Patent or Baxter Patents, in its use of any or all of the Collateral in its business, shall: (a) comply fully with all applicable license agreements; and (b) satisfy and perform all the same obligations set forth herein (with respect to Debtor’s use of the Collateral) as fully as though such obligations were set forth with respect to such licensee’s use of the licensed Collateral;
(f) To the knowledge of Debtor, there is at present no infringement or unauthorized or improper use of the ASNAP Patent or Baxter Patents or the patent rights related thereto. In the event any such infringement or unauthorized or improper use by any third party has been made and/or reasonably established by Debtor, Debtor shall promptly notify Secured Party and Debtor shall take action against such infringement or unauthorized or improper use. However, Debtor shall not be required to incur costs or take other actions when, in the exercise of its reasonable business judgment, such costs or other actions would not be advisable;
(g) Debtor hereby authorizes Secured Party to cause this Security Agreement to be recorded with the United States Patent and Trademark Office and appropriate state agencies;
(h) During the term of this Security Agreement, Debtor will not sell, transfer, assign or otherwise encumber any interest in the Collateral, except (i) licenses or other assignments granted by Debtor in the ordinary and normal course of its business or as set forth in this Security Agreement or that do not, in the aggregate, impair the Collateral and, provided, further, that any such licenses or other assignments are made in a manner permitted by the Assignment Agreement, and (ii) subject to Debtor's execution of appropriate documents, in form acceptable to Secured Party, to perfect or continue the perfection of Secured Party’s interest in the Collateral as well as any other interest held by Secured Party, transfers to Affiliates (as defined in the Assignment Agreement) of Debtor; and
(i) Debtor shall not enter into any agreement that would materially impair or conflict with Debtor's obligations hereunder without Secured Party’s prior written consent. For purposes of this subsection, Debtor's entering into license or assignment agreements in the ordinary course of business shall not be deemed to materially impair or conflict with Debtor's obligations hereunder, provided the foregoing is entered into in a manner permitted by the Assignment Agreement.
3. SECURED PARTY'S RIGHTS. Secured Party shall have the right, but not the obligation, to take, at Debtor's sole expense, any actions that Debtor is required under this Security Agreement to take but which Debtor fails to take, after fifteen (15) days' notice to Debtor. Debtor shall reimburse and indemnify Secured Party for all reasonable costs and reasonable expenses incurred in the reasonable exercise of its rights under this provision.
4. INSPECTION RIGHTS. Debtor hereby grants to Secured Party and its employees, representatives and agents the right to visit, during reasonable hours upon prior reasonable and no less than three business days advance written notice to Debtor, any of Debtor's plants and facilities that manufacture, install or store products (or that have done so during the prior six-month period) utilizing, in whole or in part, any of the ASNAP Collateral or Baxter Collateral, and to inspect the products and quality control records relating thereto upon reasonable written notice to Debtor and as often as may be reasonably requested.
4
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. FURTHER ASSURANCES; ATTORNEY IN FACT.
(a) On a continuing basis for the purpose of perfecting and maintaining the perfection of Secured Party's security interest in the Collateral, Debtor will make, execute, acknowledge and deliver, and file and record in the proper filing and recording places in the United States, all such instruments, including appropriate financing and continuation statements, and take all such action as may reasonably be necessary or advisable, or as reasonably requested by Secured Party, which Secured Party reasonably identifies as material to the operation of Debtor's business on an on-going basis or the value of the Collateral, and otherwise to carry out the intent and purposes of this Security Agreement, or for assuring and confirming to Secured Party the grant or perfection of a security interest in the Collateral.
(b) Debtor hereby irrevocably appoints Secured Party as Debtor's attorney-in-fact, with full authority in the place and stead of Debtor and in the name of Debtor, from time to time in Secured Party’s discretion, to take any action and to execute any instrument which Secured Party may reasonably deem necessary or advisable to accomplish the purposes of this Security Agreement, including (i) to file, in its reasonable discretion, one or more financing or continuation statements and amendments thereto, relative to the Collateral without the signature of Debtor where permitted by law and (ii) to transfer the Collateral into the name of Secured Party or a third party to the extent permitted under the UCC provided that Secured Party agrees that it shall not exercise its powers as attorney-in-fact under this Section except upon the occurrence and during the continuation of an Event of Default (as hereinafter defined).
6. EVENTS OF DEFAULT. The occurrence of any of the following shall constitute an "Event of Default" under this Security Agreement:
(a) Debtor breaches any warranty or agreement made by Debtor in this Security Agreement or breaches any other provision of this Security Agreement and, as to any breach that is capable of immediate cure, Debtor fails to cure such breach within thirty (20) days after written notice of such breach is given to Debtor (it being understood and agreed that no such notice and opportunity to cure shall be provided with respect to any breach that is not capable of immediate cure);
(b) Debtor fails to pay the Promissory Note when same (or any portion thereof) becomes due and owing; and
(c) Debtor fails to make any payments due under the terms of the Assignment Agreement or any other agreement (other than the Promissory Note) executed pursuant to the terms of the Settlement Agreement and fails to cure such monetary default within ten (10) days from the date of written notice of same, or if Debtor breaches any non-monetary provision of the Assignment Agreement or any other agreement executed pursuant to the terms of the Settlement Agreement and fails to (i) cure such monetary default within twenty (20) days from the date of the written notice of same or (ii) if such non-monetary default is not of the nature than can reasonably be cured within twenty (20) days and promptly commences to cure the default within twenty (20) days and promptly completes such cure thereafter.
5
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
7. REMEDIES. Upon the occurrence and during the continuance of an Event of Default:
(a) Secured Party shall have the right to exercise all the remedies of a secured party under the UCC, including, without limitation, the right to require Debtor to assemble the Collateral and any tangible property in which Secured Party has a security interest and to make it available to Secured Party at a place designated by Secured Party. Secured Party shall have a nonexclusive, royalty free license or other right, solely pursuant to the provisions of this Section, to use, without charge, the Collateral, to the extent reasonably necessary to permit Secured Party to exercise its rights and remedies pursuant to this Section, including, without limitation, the completion of production, advertising for sale and the sale of the Collateral and, in connection with Secured Party's exercise of its rights hereunder, Debtor's rights under all licenses and all franchise agreements which constitute Collateral shall inure to the benefit of Secured Party. Debtor will pay any expenses (including reasonable attorneys' fees) incurred by Secured Party in connection with the exercise of any of Secured Party’s rights hereunder, including, without limitation, any expense incurred in disposing of the Collateral. All of Secured Party’s rights and remedies with respect to the Collateral shall be cumulative.
(b) Secured Party may notify any obligors with respect to the Collateral of Secured Party’s security interest and that such obligors are to make payments directly to Secured Party. Secured Party may send this notice in Debtor’s name or in Secured Party’s name, and, at Secured Party’s request, Debtor will join in Secured Party’s notice, provide written confirmation of Secured Party’s security interest and request that payment be sent to Secured Party. Secured Party may enforce this obligation by specific performance. Secured Party may collect all amounts due from such obligors. Upon and after notification by Secured Party to Debtor, Debtor shall hold any proceeds and collections of any of the Collateral in trust for Secured Party and shall not commingle such proceeds or collections with any other of Debtor’s funds, and Debtor shall deliver all such proceeds to Secured Party immediately upon Debtor’s receipt thereof in the identical form received and duly endorsed or assigned to Secured Party.
(c) Secured Party will give to Debtor reasonable notice of the time and place of any public sale of Collateral, or part thereof, or of the time after which any private sale or other intended disposition thereof is to be made. Such requirement of reasonable notice shall be met if such notice is delivered to the address of Debtor set forth in this Security Agreement at least fifteen (15) calendar days before the time of the proposed sale or disposition. Any such sale may take place from Debtor’s location or such other location as Secured Party may designate. Debtor shall remain liable for any deficiency in payment of the Indebtedness after any such sale.
(d) Nothing herein shall be construed as obligating Secured Party to take any of the foregoing actions at any time.
All issued and outstanding shares, excluding the shares issued to Voice to Phone and Baxter Technologies, are legally issued, fully paid, and non-assessable and not issued in violation of the preemptive or other rights of any person. The Company has not amended its Articles of Incorporation or Bylaws. The information contained in the Company’s previously filed periodic reports, as amended, on EDGAR (including historical financial information) is accurate and correct as of the date of this Agreement, and does not contain any misrepresentations nor do such reports fail to disclose any information available to current management excluding bank statements and other information not available which could include malfeasance not currently known to management which could make such reports materially misleading or false.
****************
Maybe the new Articles and authorized shares have something to do with the restructure of the payment to Baxter? Lots of work went into this settlement and it is hard to except Baxter not being included in the deal.
Think you know everthing? Maybe you are right but then the whole deal would kinda be stupid with Baxter having a sledgehammer.
United States of America (Press Release) November 14, 2007 -- Singapore ,and USA 14.11.2007
Baxter Technologies PTE LTD Singapore and Calypso Wireless Inc.. USA
Have agreed to to build the next generation of Voice Prompt and Command technology for VoIP and Voice 2Text.
John F Baxter Jr has sold the 4 patents for voice over Internet call Audio File Transmission Method for embedding messages with voice to command many features for users.
Mr..Baxter of Baxter Technologies PTE LTD and Mr. Turrini have the first phase of sale of 4 US patent completed to CLYW and are now placing an agreement to build out the prototype together in Miami Florida .
The patents that were sold to CLYW are
US PATENTS Reference :. #6839412 .... #6385306 .... #6765996 .... #7031439.
Mr. Baxter holds a new generation of VoIP ,as our Tele2net , Voice 2 Text ,F2E , www.forward2email.com and will expect the issuance from the USPTO in March or April of 2008.
Mr Baxter and Mr. Turrini are in talks about the patents being sold to Calypso Wireless and the CLYW will have a portfolio total of 9 US Patents to offer many features to telecoms and ISP along with VoIP operators.
John F Baxter Jr. our founder is very happy to working with Mr Turrini and CLYW and looks to develop and build the next generation for end users.
Demo will be on line in April for free to anyone to beta the network on a limited use. at www.vim2.com when opened to the public.mid April 2008
Calypso and Baxter plan to bring on the digital download from Radio to the CLYW towards the 2 quarter if all works out well
The system is called Music On Command and all mobile phone providers will have a new feature to offer the users.
Bringing radio tunes to your home pc and mobile phone for download as you hear it played on the radio, with MOC Mobile .
Since featured on CBS, CNN and PC World in Music On Command did not stopped delivering new content and features to the users for the beta for over 30 months with out problems.
Music On Command has just implemented new software for downloading songs to your mobile phone, called: MOC Mobile.
MOC Mobile allows users to SMS and have songs delivered to their mobile unit for download directly to their mobile device through our server network.
. We are the only provider with patent pending , and notice of allowance for issuance for technologies to provide real time radio play for download as you hear it, through your computer and/or your hand held phone.
Just recently Baxter has entered talks with radio station providers and advertisement providers in the media broadcast industry. He will announce the signing of CLYW and BT PTE LTD new partnership for Music On Command when it is completed.
Finally, you hear it you can get it, with MOC Mobile.
Arne de Graaff
CEO
Baxter Technologies PTE LTD
*****************
I would think the litigation issues may provide a window of opportunity to keep the patents with Calypso. Friendships are important and the past troubles are in the past. Where will Baxter go? Will he press a legal case? Too many unknowns for now to speculate. Maybe the shareholder meeting will answer these questions.
Alexander Resources- Jerry A. Kaufman
15455 Dallas Pkwy
Suite 600
Addison, TX 75001
Telephone: 972-818-8225
Facsimile: 214-432-6632
Appears he has a lot of experience in litigation of patents.
I wonder if he may be interested in Calypso's future.
We may have to give up a little to get a lot.
The BOD could use a another member for respectability.
Jerry A. Kaufman
This training course is taught by Mr. Jerry A. Kaufman, president of Alexander Resources. Mr. Kaufman is a noted author, technologist, educator, product developer, consultant, patent analyst, and expert witness specializing in cellular and wireless technologies, networks, phones, standards, services, and systems. As a senior executive for major telecommunications manufacturing and consulting firms, he has been responsible for the planning, design, development, sales, and marketing of numerous next generation private and public telecommunications networks and services.
Since 1990, Jerry's professional activities and services have focused exclusively on the cellular and wireless industries and their technologies, standards, spectrum, regulations, networks and services. In these fields, he has authored numerous research reports on cellular carriers, emerging technologies, and markets. He has taught various public and private seminars on cellular and fixed wireless technologies, networks, and services. He has also served as a plaintiff and defendant expert witness on a wide spectrum of civil and business matters/litigation involving wireless communications products and services. As a business and market consultant, he has assisted clients in developing new products, evaluating new market opportunities and developing plans to capture them. As a patent analyst, he has assisted many leading law firms and corporate clients in defending against or asserting claims of patent infringement and patent validity. This work has encompassed nearly every second, third and fourth generation UMTS and CDMA2000 standard and technology
Mr. Kaufman is the author of:
"Sprint Wireless: A Critical Analysis of Key Financial and Market Performance Issues, Challenges and Successes"
"Opportunities In The U.S. Wireless In-Building Business Communications Market"
"Wireless Local Exchange Services: Opportunities, Competition and Strategies"
"Wireless Business Communications Systems: Customer Requirements and Marketing Strategies"
“Wireless Business Telephone Markets: 1998 to 2003"
"Customer Demand and Requirements for Mobile Internet and Third Generation Wireless Products and Services"
Mr. Kaufman has organized and produced conferences on emerging opportunities in mobile and wireless communications:
"PCS and Local Exchange Services Conference"
"Wireless Business Communications Systems Conference"
Mr. Kaufman has served as a business consultant to major manufacturers and service providers of mobile and wireless communication systems and services in the areas of:
Product planning and development
In-depth market analysis for new product opportunities
Marketing strategies and positioning
Distribution planning and development
Competitive analysis and strategies (product and company)
Business plan development
End-user/customer surveys using conjoint analysis
Mr. Kaufman has lectured on mobile and wireless communications at conferences sponsored by:
Tele-Communications Association
IEEE
Business Communications Review
International Communications Association
TRLabs
Association of Local Telecommunications Services
Multi Media Telecommunications Association.
His expert opinions and articles have appeared in such publications as: America's Network, Arizona Republic, Business Communications Review, BusinessWeek, CFO Magazine, Communications Daily, Dallas Morning News, Forbes, Fortune, Information Week, Investor's Business Daily, Los Angeles Times, Microwaves & RF Technology, RCR, Scientific American Newsletters, TR Wireless News, Telecommunications Alert, Teleconnect, Telephony, TotalTele.com, Wired Magazine, Wireless Data News, Wireless Week, Wireless World, USA Today and others.
Additional information regarding Mr. Kaufman's experience and expertise can be found in his biography.
Mobile Business VoIP - Moving Target?
Posted by Benjamin Ellis on Tuesday, August 26th 2008
Loading ...There is a fair amount of chatter in the Blogosphere about an apparent shift in Nokia’s VoIP strategy - take this one from GIGAOM: “No VoIP In New Nokia N-Series Phones? Is Nokia Turning Its Back on MobileVoIP?”
Nokia has been pushing the envelope on the Fixed-Mobile Convergence front for quite a whole. For those who’ve missed out on the wild excitement of FMC and UMA, it is a vision that would see fixed and mobile voice coming together. Something that would actually be an exciting development for office telephony. The architectures usually employ Wi-Fi to bridge the final gap between the fixed office LAN and the mobile handset - which also opens up the potential for using public Wi-Fi hotspots (QoS permitting).
Image seemlessly switching between a GSM Mobile call and the same call via Wi-Fi onto the office LAN. Of course there is a fly in the ointment: It is a touchy subject for both mobile operators and business users. Calls over the LAN to another user on the network are free, obviously. Calls over the GSM network aren’t. As is often the case, one person’s cost saving is another’s revenue loss. In this case, the mobile carrier, and that is one of the potential big issues with FMC. And the man in the middle? Well, unsurprisingly it is the handset vendors. Back to Nokia.
Handsets like Nokia’s N95 enable VoIP as well as GSM calls. It’s not as seemless as it could be yet, but there are some very interesting apps out there. Take Fring as an example, it also includes instant messaging capabilities and Skype. Before you it out of the window as too consumer, think about the cost savings of IM and VoIP against your business mobile bills.
However, it seems that new Nokia handsets, like the N78, are missing this functionality. Garrett Smith, VoIP insider picks up the story:
This is a sticky situation for Nokia (and other handset manufacturers) since both the carriers and the carriers customers are Nokia’s customers; each of whom want something different. Nokia obviously played it safe with this move, siding with the carrier…
Garrett posted a further update today, after Nokia’s PR company touched base with him. The whole situation is complicated further by the desktop telephony vendors, who will want a slide of the action too. Cisco has Wi-Fi handsets and others are making a play for the convergence space too. Somehow all of this has to glue together, and suddenly you are bumping into the world of unified communications. It’s a big piece of pie to swallow.
You can obviously still install 3rd party apps to give VoIP on the handset, providing the network operator doesn’t block VoIP, but that it far from an integrated solution. Ultimately, as a business user, minimum overall cost and complexity are key.
In Europe, especially in the scandinavian countries, mobile voice has existed in the office in the form of DECT phones for quite some time. Reduced wiring costs and increased mobility for users are just some of the benefits. The magic will happen when it all gets down to one handset. One that will work outside of the office as well as inside, giving the full deskphone experience.
That’s still a way off, and by the look of Nokia’s new handsets, it is potentially getting further away…
Nokia dropping Voip?
http://mobilecrunch.com/2008/08/25/no-voip-for-nokias-n78/
While Nokia has typically included VoIP functions in many of its smart phones—much to the chagrin of carriers—it looks like the top handset maker may be changing its stance, and removing VoIP on some of its new N-series handsets.
Gigaom reported that the N78 is not VoIP compatible and when they asked Nokia why, the company replied:
“Nokia Nseries is committed VoIP services as part of its offering. That is why we have included SIP stack and improved the developer VoIP offering in S60 3rd Edition Feature Pack 2 by enhancing the VoIP APIs to improve the call quality…A Nokia VoIP client is not included with the Nokia N78 and the Nokia N96 and VoIP solutions based on this particular client such as Gizmo will not work. However, Forum Nokia will cooperate with third-party developers to support them in porting their applications from S60 3.0/3.1 releases to S60 3.2. One example is Fring, whose popular application will be offered via Nokia’s Download! service for the Nokia N96.”
The removal of VoIP brings into question Nokia’s new ‘openness’ platform, especially at a time when carriers are starting to explore the possibilities of fixed/mobile convergence, in services like T-Mobile’s HotSpot@Home offering.
But before we condemn, we’ll wait and see how Nokia’s ‘commitment’ to VoIP services shakes out.
*****************
Maybe Calypso's demo is making Nokia change positions. Let the operators deploy Voip programs. Unsure for now.
What conventions will Calypso be attending this fall?
September and October are busy months.
Events
IT Expo
CTIA Wireless IT & Entertainment
Fall VON
August 22, 2008
103 Million Consumer Fixed-Mobile Convergence Access Points In Service by 2013
The fixed-mobile convergence market (FMC) is on the brink of very interesting times, according to analysts at ABI Research. UMA-based Wi-Fi dual-mode solutions have seen some significant penetration in both Europe and North America thanks to successful market introductions by T-Mobile in the US (T-Mobile @Home) and Orange (unik) in France, Spain, and the United Kingdom.
The first real competitive solution that could rival Wi-Fi-based products has now appeared, in the form of Sprint’s nationwide (US) femtocell-based AIRAVE solution. The questions remain: is there room for both types of convergence in the market; and which solution is best placed to succeed?
ABI Research forecasts a total of 103 million access points of both types to be in service by 2013. Vice president and research director Stuart Carlaw says, “We expect cellular-based femtocells to have taken over the baton from UMA- and SiP-based Wi-Fi solutions by 2013, seizing 62% of the market.” He goes on to add that, “Although UMA-based Wi-Fi solutions have seen early gains in greenfield markets, these solutions have not proliferated much outside their current carrier footprints. This can be attributed partly to the carriers’ desire to assess femtocell developments, but also to lingering concerns regarding the concept of Wi-Fi based fixed-mobile convergence.”
ABI Research’s recent study “Fixed-Mobile Convergence” examines the opportunity for UMA and SIP in converged network services, dual-use handsets, Wi-Fi access points, picocells and femtocells. It includes a review of the current standards position and activities of the major vendors.
The study forms part of two of the firm’s subscription Research Services, Mobile Networks and Consumer Mobility, which also include Research Reports, other Research Briefs, Market Data, Online Databases, ABI Vendor Matrices, ABI Insights, and analyst inquiry support.
ABI Research is a leading market research firm focused on the impact of emerging technologies on global consumer and business markets. Utilizing a unique blend of market intelligence, primary research, and expert assessment from its worldwide team of industry analysts, ABI Research assists hundreds of clients each year with their strategic growth initiatives. For information, visit www.abiresearch.com, or call +1.516.624.2500.
Assignment: 4
Reel/Frame:
021291/0941 Recorded: 07/28/2008 Pages: 22
Conveyance:
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST (SEE DOCUMENT FOR DETAILS).
Assignor:
CALYPSO WIRELESS, INC.
Exec Dt: 07/28/2008
Assignee:
BAXTER, JOHN F., JR.
9201 COLLINS AVENUE
SUITE 924
SURFSIDE, FLORIDA 33154
Correspondent:
SMITH & HOPEN, P.A.
180 PINE AVENUE NORTH
OLDSMAR, FL 34677
I count 27 countries! Which ones were omitted in the press release? Utopia? Promiseland?
LOL
Very soon.
This news was known last week and can explain the volume trading at the end of last week. Whoever is selling is being generous. The dump is constant the past few weeks. The progress the company has been making is worth an uptick very soon.
They are executing the plan. Very good so far.
EUROPEAN PATENTS ARE IMPORTANT AND THE COST IS NOT CHEAP. EXPECT THE SOUTHERN AND FAR EASTERN COUNTRIES WILL COMPLETE THE GLOBAL REACH. GUESS THIS IS BEING WORKED OUT NOW.
CHINA AND JAPAN IS ESSENTIAL TO OUR SUCCESS. THE EUROPEAN PATENTS WILL GENERATE A LOT OF INTEREST. THEY HAVE A LIVING LOVE FOR THEIR CELL PHONES.
The Yahoo patent message was posted in order to promote discussion and to understand the technical differences. I am not an engineer and hoped some members might amplify the uniqueness of CLYW's patent in comparison.
Please explain your leap of doom from my posting? Sounds like you are shaking the tree for some free apples.
How often can you buy a stock with so much potential? The WiFi market is exploding currently and CLYW has a base patent of interest to many players. Deals have been framed in the past and now the details are being worked out. Diac could not get the deals done himself so he needs CLYW to benefit from the patents. He will wait until the deals are done regardless of the time frame. If he is not paid timely he will understand as he has no other options. He came into this venture with his eyes open so the talk of him leaving is another scare tactic to scoop up cheap shares.
The chart look like we may revisit the .085 mark as a backfill so wait for the smart players to lower the price even more as they will say it is the human nature to have rampant fear to shake the nonbelievers. Whatever they do it is useless as the news of the new officers and the shareholder meeting will bounce the stock right back up.
Expect to see the price over .20 by the end of June.
Until later, just coast and nibble.
CT is back. I spoke with him the other day. Everything is green. Just wait for the engine to get revved up. This whole operation was mothballed. Getting the office operational and paying the bills is the first priority. Next is the deal contacts and negotiations.
Since the structure of the company has changed with the automatic payouts to Diac the deals need to be adjusted.
Wait till June. This stock will be a firecracker in July for sure. For now small increases in the sp with the new officers and directors. The MM are playing the game for now.
Sit back and enjoy the show. If you sell now you will regret your lost profits.
Got Pattin's name wrong. I sure he will understand the slip was accidental and at least I did not lionize him with an "O" in his name instead of the "E".
After reviewing the details and the financial particulars I am very confident Humpty will turn into a golden egg for all the true believers.
Patten is leaving his brokerage job for Calypso!? He must see a bright future with this company to switch jobs.
A lot of folks have done an enormous amount of work to put Humpty Dumpty back together again. Let's hope the new company will be an eggsellent example of faith and teamwork producing a fairytale ending.
The ongoing auction of choice, 700 megahertz radio spectrum by the Federal Communications Commission is a game for high rollers, including telco giants and Google. One company will likely pay more than $4.6 billion for the rights to that realm. Through that space, the auction winner--and competitor--could eventually beam all kinds of signals, including voice, digital video, data, to your toaster.
But there is a cheaper way to get data through the airwaves. Just ask Google (nasdaq: GOOG - news - people ).
Google intends to be a big player in the airwaves. At the recent World Economic Conference in Davos, Chief Executive Eric Schmidt said that mobile devices with location-based advertising could spark a "huge revolution," more interesting than the personal computer.
But along with taking part in the FCC's auction, Google has also been trying to get into the so-called "white space"--slivers of unlicensed, unused spectrum that lie between television channels. And that makes the telcos nervous.
The white space channels were originally designed to prevent radio waves on adjoining channels from bleeding into each other. They're considered too narrow to be auctioned off. Even so, they're in a choice portion of the spectrum where analog television currently lives, an area that could be used for data services, much like the 700 MHz spectrum. Use--if approved--would begin in February 2009.
The idea of utilizing white space spectrum has bounced around for years, stymied by concerns of TV signal interference and the objections of the powerful broadcast lobby. Then anticipation surrounding the 700 MHz auction renewed interest in all areas of spectrum, says Scott Ellison, IDC's vice president of mobile and wireless communications. "People were looking at other things in the broadcast space … tech companies probably thought, 'Can't we start using this spectrum in a more efficient way?' "
Exactly what Google would do in the white space is a subject of debate. Is Google's zeal for white space a hedge against losing the auction? That seems a bit of a stretch, particularly since there has been widespread speculation that Google isn't worried about winning the auction--just about ensuring that anyone can send data through the spectrum. Last summer, Google nudged the FCC to adopt a provision that gets triggered if the auction price exceeds $4.6 billion. That provision ensures that networks built in the newly sold spectrum would be open to all third-party devices. By actively bidding, Google can make sure that the final price is north of that magic reserve number--and so make the spectrum open.
Google's interest could simply be a land grab for any available slice of spectrum. "Anything that provides a way to push ads while not benefiting existing carriers is beneficial for Google," says Rory Altman, director of telecom consulting firm Altman Vilandrie & Co. Or it could create a low-cost experimental playing field that lets technology companies try out new services without the added cost of spectrum access. Companies "could experiment with new devices and services away from the incumbents, then use the experience to expand into other [spectrum] areas," notes Phil Asmundson, U.S. Technology, Media & Telecom Industry Leader at Deloitte & Touche.
The vacant channels have also attracted other technology bigwigs, including Microsoft (nasdaq: MSFT - news - people ), Intel (nasdaq: INTC - news - people ), Dell (nasdaq: DELL - news - people ) and Hewlett-Packard (nyse: HPQ - news - people ). In late 2006, those companies joined with several other firms and organizations--and Google--to form the White Spaces Coalition, which advocates using the unlicensed space. In 2007, coalition members gave the FCC two portable wireless devices designed to operate in the white spaces without interfering with adjourning television broadcast channels. The FCC reported in July 2007 that a gadget built by Philips Electronics didn't consistently detect broadcast signals and one built by Microsoft had flunked the tests.
But a failed first attempt has never stopped a technologist. The companies regrouped and by January had resubmitted four coalition-made devices to the FCC for fresh testing. The process is expected to take two to three months.
A successful trial could usher in a new set of competitors for telcos, which are already battling cable providers and satellite TV companies for customers for data services. That's a big growth sector for telcos, which have been struggling to offset declining voice revenues.
That's spurred No. 3 and No. 4 operators Sprint and T-Mobile to ask the FCC to regulate use of white spaces and earmark it for established carriers. Google responded by requesting the FCC ignore the carriers' request, describing their proposal as "not the most efficient, or even marginal, use of the white spaces."
AT&T (nyse: T - news - people ) and Verizon (nyse: VZ - news - people ) haven't publicly opposed the use of white spaces, presumably because their larger networks better shield them from such competition. "They are so advantaged in the amount of spectrum they own, these small slivers aren't all that threatening to them," says Asmundson.
They also know how complicated it is to build out a profitable service. Mobile data services generally require a good chunk of spectrum--say 20 MHz to 30 MHz--to support a business. "You could have some interesting applications in these little bands, but the technology is not at the point to do anything in a major way," says Ellison.
Still, the idea of Google wiggling into the white space as a cheap route to consumers has the carriers watching their back.
Adds Ellison, "Google has the heft, money and know-how to play all the fields and see what works."
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Can you see a use for ASNAP via Google's white play? I can.
Google-Skype
Need I say more!
The players want it to happen. Why would they keep the company alive if they did not see value in doing so?
How much value is debatable but at least the value is recognized. How long does it take to do such a deal. Should be done anytime now. That is why the speculation on the share price I guess.
Considering the situation not a bad hunch.
If the company stays afloat with new management then an immediate spike of ten cents! Double practically. .20
News of negotiating a deal. Another double. .40
Voice patents being used will double the stock again. .80
Signed deals will spike us over $3.50
What is the time period for this to happen? Within the year most likely.
Why not speculate a few dollars on a big payoff?
We are not talking investment like the investment group buying 75,000,000 shares. They are long term holders looking for big returns. I wonder what they are paying for the stock?
5 cents maybe. If so that is a big discount to todays value but not overly cheap considering the rewards.
I am totally confused how anyone can invest in this company without some sort of knowledge. I have bought shares and heard talk of Carlos being squeezed etc. but how is this acceptable?
I guess the you live and learn. I would be happy if this news came out while the shares were still cheap but from the recent blip up I suspect the cheap shares will vanish once the news is released. My support for CT is good if this happens but did he really dupe the company? What to believe is the problem when so many stories are floating around. You want to believe in the goodness of people naturally but is it smart to do so?
No denial from CT relating to the accusations that I know about.
A light bulb is useless after it is burned out. Has zero value.
How much longer will this bulb flicker before it burns out?
Raging Bull is not allowing me to access the board.
I think others have had the same experience. How is this possible? Do they have blockers on trouble makers? What gives?
My shares are held in my brokerage account under my name.
Hope this helps.
I suspect the number of shares outstanding may exceed the authorized shares. This vote will never happen as the houses have floated shares beyond the books total. This happens often and nobody ever reconciles the shares.
The stock ledger not used in the present day and houses will advance shares in order to continue business.
Calling a shareholder vote with proxy is going to expose the naked shorts if this is the case.
Beware of the fight to cover this dirty secret.
Timing is everything. Funny how the timing of this news came out when the stock price was down and the pending news of the settlement was imminent. Please explain to me why the obvious use of shares to pay for the patents was not noticed prior to the settlement.
I believe the BOD is wasting the assets of the company. The investigation into the shares for patents could be done with a phone call. No problem there. The news of the patents would give rise to the funding source. This does not add up properly.
My opinion is to request a shareholder meeting and bring the BOD together to question them. Minutes of the meetings are required. Resolutions to act on asset purchases should have been drafted and signed. Granted some steps may have been omitted the minutes would confirm the affirmation of the actions.
I believe CT acted in good faith and has documentation to cover his actions. The action of the Board to call an emergency meeting and take action against CT appears to be proper. Lacking full documentation in the dismissal of the president and granting stock to a new Board member is not the way the board should act. These actions alone require proper notices of the agenda to be filed with the secretary and timely notices sent out. I am not sure the rules of order have been complied with in order to take such actions.
Shareholders need to be aware of the games played with this company. Time to ousted the current board and audit the company’s books. This heavy handed tactic should have been avoided with an open discussion with CT and a determination posted thereafter. No improper actions appears to have been made as an advisor to value the patents would have been employed and his report on file. No vote could be authorized without proper notices unless a committee was appointed and authorized to conduct business regarding this action. No mention of a committee or other means to issue the stock.
My guess is that the vote was done or authority was granted via a telephone poll or some other means and now in order to shake the weak shareholders this action is being done to gain cheap shares.
Yes Isee… go ahead and sell but do stick around and convince others to sell with you. You are a shill and not a very good one at that. How lucky we are for your advice.
Case Settlement Agreement
No date on this release. Not very professional. I wonder why they did not date this release. How long does it take to complete the papers?
The deals were pending and the court was being asked to allow Acacia and to date no Acacia deal. I am curious about the delays.
Let the little ones play with the stock price as they will lose the shares and run for the bank to get more money.
This trading is a joke. No real selling on nonsense like Acacia. Many longs I suspect are shorts in sheepskins.
Keep ammo ready to pick up more shares as this game will continue until the real news comes out.
Enjoy the gifts.
I averaged DOWN and now have a profit on a boatload of shares.
The cheap shares were a blessing! Why they were sold is beyond my understanding. All the news was known and the future looked very promising. Whoever is selling is not in need of money and wants to spread their investments outside of Clyw or is in need to pay some bills. Whatever the reason I hope the shares keep trading in the range before the ACACIA deal as I have more ammo to accumulate.
I guess I should let the FUD drive the shares down so I can scoop up some more but the FUD is so simple minded that I could not help but expose it.
Many investors want to shake others out for their own greed.
I suspect the MMs are not doing so good with this stock as they have not kept tabs on the recent developments. Noticed that nobody is selling today.
MMs will be shy to dump more shares. We are in a hold pattern.