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.
Mr Murphy beckons...... have at it
Anyone who only had the most basic understanding of the full value available to an owner of the patents, would immediately realize that:
#1...vplm, who was supposedly a voip service provider when they obtained (bought) the patents, would most likely hang on to such a bottomless well of treasure for years to come. Duh. By now, around 12 yrs later, they wobe SOOOO rich and powerful, they would practically own the internet and the govt would already be in the middle of litigation to break them up as a monopoly. With such a patent suite there would've been nothing to stop them!
#2... IF....for some reason vplm decided to sell regardless of #1, how could it be possible that every single one of the 60 or so named (then unnamed, lol) big dog voice service providers, plus the additional voip companies that weren't named (many)........could and would and HAVE......all decided, as if in some borg assimilated trance, that they would simply allow any and all of their competition to step up at an moment and grab this fabulous treasure out from under them, causing them to lose all that treasure chest full of riches for years to come, and to be stopped by the new owners from offering any voip services (unless of course they bought licenses) and to be subject to the INEVITABLE meteors with their names on them, hurtling in from space and straight towards them with huge infringement damages, possibly and likely to be as much as tripled???
UNLESS.......UNLESS......UNLESS......UNLESS....... UNLESS.....
of course..............
they had the knowledge....
That they indeed were NOT infringers.........and
that the patents simply were NOT "ALL THAT" as vplm has been on a tear to convince them THEY ARE........
for all these years......
Ahh.....just ignore above.. Means nothing. Not even logical....
It DESERVES.... to recognized for what it is...
To me, all indicators are a share printing, insider ATM and world class fiction writing and share selling scheme that was so well put together and/or developed over time, that yes, it deserves recognition as such..........thus be very careful with very high risk as shown over time, on avg and in general. I don't think it's very flippable these days. While anything in this life is possible, I wouldn't invest in the kazillion dollar buyout, settlements or licensing concepts unless one has money to blow. But if they're that rich, maybe charity would be nice. It'll take alot to get this to pop anymore.
Looks like it held pretty steady to me.
See how they're holding the price like I said...
He seemed to be the most knowledgeable person on this board. I had a few exchanges with him and remember thanking him for his knowledge and sharing info. But at some point, I thought that I had caught him in a contradiction where he seemed to play both sides of a certain issue that I can't recall exactly what it was. Normally he vehemently pro vplm no matter what the issue. Anyway, my memory is I took him to task on this one thing I saw as a conflict but then he disappeared. Seems like that was something like 7 or 8 yrs ago but maybe not that long. I always had the feeling that he simply knew too much about vplm like an encyclopedia. Wonder if that's actually true about being the Rich "inYA pockets" Inya, IR poster boy for failed pennystocks, or so it's been reported anyway.
Hey, why does the pps keep going down? Did it not hear me say that it'll most likely hang around 2 to 2.5 cent range?
I heard that Emil Madgi Malak, CEO and largest shareholder of VPLM stated that name callers are guilty 100% of the time, of being exactly what they name call. The significance of this is it's the 1st and one and only thing he's ever been truthful about. I'll call it "The Gift of the Madgi". Thanx where thanx is due. Can't deny. No truer thing has ever been said.
"Blackout periods", "Aussie mandates", "Whitepaper tenants", "overwhelming interest from ceos of fortune 500 and S&P 500 companies", "imminent offers on the table", "tens of millions of new subscribers", "tens to hundreds of millions of dollars coming immed in royalties", "PRs about PRs about southbank", "the leader of the voip industry", "foundational patents that are required for the use of voip", "every voip service provider out there IS an infringer", "we had nothing to do with the sawyer letters", "Oops, ok, we DID collaborate with sawyer on the letters." Whoops. "I (Emu) will see this trail (avatar) thru to the end (then walks out and concedes on 1st day...... TWICE!", "website puts up some stranger guy picture and claims it's one of the BOD, lol), "Emu now claims in writing that vplm created the patents, except he didn't", "Ran Granville hotel into bk, "Emu claims to be co-founder in cancer research company but there is no mention of it anywhere online except another company by the same exact name that has zero to do with him".
So much more but my fingers say uh-uh.
Interesting that you made the comparison to pyramid schemes aka multi level marketing. While different, I still see some of the same elements and same results. It's more the same than most would think. Also I've described it as something madoff would be proud of. Yep, combo ponzi/pyramid thing that was well thought out and designed to last much longer, which it IS and I give it at least another 7 yrs.
NO COMPANY..... NO VOIP CEO WITH HALF A BRAIN WOULD EVER ALLOW SUCH AN IMMENSELY VALUABLE AND POWERFUL COMPANY OR SET OF PATENTS SIT THERE IN THE MIDDLE OF THE ROAD TO LET ANY OF THEIR COMPETITION TO GRAB OUT FROM UNDER THEM, THEREBY LOSING AN IMMENSE FORTUNE AND LETTING THEMSELVES BECOME THE SLAVES TO WHOEVER BUYS THEM............... IF THE PATENTS WERE TRULY ALL THEY'VE BEEN CRACKED UP TO BE.........AND KNEW THEY WERE BIG INFRINGERS. DOES NOT ADD UP. DOES NOT MAKE SENSE. DOTS DON'T CONNECT.
For the record.... Vplm has been near the bottom for it's entire 3 ring circus life. During that love em/hate em 23 yrs there were 3 significant spike ups, significant only in their amplitude but each lasting about 20 seconds before doing what vplm does best, which is go down, and it ALWAYS starts the inevitable downtrend just as soon as one of the peaks occur. I should mention the presence on the market, as far as being charted, goes back to 2004 which most ppl don't know. Another thing most don't know is even tho they had different names before Voip-pal, they still were in the voip business almost from day one. Some will dispute that but I have records of voip business going back before 2000.
Anyway, when they 1st appeared on the charts, it was around a dime and then shot straight up to near .40 and thus began their 1st big slide to the bottom where they pretty much stayed for close to 10 yrs when the 2nd big spike happened due to speculation and it hit about 35 cents for a couple seconds, lol, then straight back to the bottom again (for the most part, there's always little ups and downs naturally). The the big one in 2017 I think it was when it hit 45 cents based on the 8 IPR "wins" along with heavy duty pumping. Then was a 5 yr long downtrend to the bottom again. When I say the bottom, their avg price is around 2 cents but they've been sub penny often.
I agree with the characterization of a shell. Might not be technically but to think that a 23 yr old "company" has as their only "product"...... shares, is in my opinion indicative of scaminess ESPECIALLY in light of all the shenanigans that are connected with this company that those with an open mind can see.
Oh, and anyone who tries to tell you that you should "curtail your opinions about vplm" or about ANYTHING for that matter, should themselves not be here.
Ok well then pardon me while I extract from that, lol, a NO vote on buy/no buy, the company. Maybe no one will give me a direct reply and a vote........so, hahaha..... I will TAKE the damn votes, extraction style, based on their OBVIOUS vote, if they weren't so stubborn about it. The TRUTH will not be denied OR veiled. Each AND every shareholder either would or wouldnt buy the company IF THEY HAD THE MONEY and if they WOULD that means something very wrong with the fact no companies HAVE. Can you guess what that "something very wrong" MIGHT BE??? (like maybe bogus patents and zero infringement…?????)........and if they WOULDN'T........considering the vast and untold riches and power that would come with the buy if the patents were "ALL THAT".......shows they already realize, like me, that the patents AIN'T "ALL THAT".
So thankyou for your cooperation! You've been most helpful with your proxy by proxy votes! Ve dun need no stinking ballot box! Your votes are obvious even if you're too shy to vote openly.
So...............thats 2 no votes. You and my vote is easy. And I dare anyone to deny their vote. Lolol. Vplm msg board.... the most entertainment hooman beings should be allowed to have.
Alot to chew on there. More than I bargained for I think, but I'll see what I can digest. One thing I noticed in the 10k was that excerpt I posted earlier, apparently WAS copied from a filing rather than a PR, as it looks like an exact copy of what I posted, but I remember you said the data reported is often just BS that winds up sliding, so what's the point, if you can't believe anything contained therein?
I'll try to extract what may explain my confusion about fiduciary. So far I understand you don't mean in a moral sense but in some legal sense. So far I think it's due to technical reasons... I doubt there's too many shareholders of any stock on any sort of exchange, regardless if technically called a market or not, who aren't pretty certain that the company they buy stock from doesn't have any fiduciary duty, but if it's true that they (the company) does not have said duty due to highly technical rules language, then I guess the recent lawsuit supposedly filed by shareholders, against vplm, is a moot exercise in futility (if even real to begin with, as it could not be found anywhere on the net, aside from some subscription only Bloomberg site, so who knows?
However, are you aware of a couple years old lawsuit against vplm by Locksmith financial, in a civil suit, Malak and the rest of the then current BOD, was found guilty of breach of fiduciary duty and unjust enrichment?
Z, I need to add to last.. In rereading your post, I think I now get it, that you're saying Emu has no fiduciary duty because you see it as a shell. Ok, then I need to ask, and I know this may be a dumb question but is being a company whose only "product" is the shares they create in fiat and then sell, illegal in the 1st place?
Omg......"it's all inbred" remark blew my mind. Best description in 1 word I've ever heard about vplm or any similar kind of play... All I can say is damn, why didn't I think of that, lol.
Hey, don't duck out so fast....you have too much valuable insight.
Excuse me if I missed it, but would you help me to understand better why the CEO does not have said fiduciary duty. I have a real problem with that. Seems inherent and intuitive that he would have that duty to those that made the biggest contributions. And I don't mean from his own moral compass standpoint, I mean from a legal standpoint.
"cynical"??? On the contrary, I find your take of the shenanigans as "questionable" to be waaay overly generous on their behalf. The questions you raise are so close to a fair indictment, not even funny. That said, I have asked a couple peeps their opinion on this question and they seem to refuse to answer it, even tho they have lots to say about the subject. I strive to be as fair and balanced about all things so not that this would make the whole look change BUT........
Do you see evidence that the Babs entered into the selling on the basis of a 10b15-1 or no?
The so called offer from Gil Amelio was as phony as a 3 dollar bill. His (Emu) planned collaboration with Dr Gil, to find a way to boost the pps, was leaked and posted here 1 to 2 months BEFORE the phony announcement of the phony offer. Undeniable..
I agree 100% with all that. Mostly common sense. I believe also that there is a corrupt portion of the sec same as any govt agency that has the power to swoop and take whatever they deem to be appropriate. But as you or someone mentioned earlier today, tho vplm has been able to raise alot of cash, it may still not be what the sec considers worth the trouble. Just pondering...
At the moment, the only thing I have available is this excerpt from a old PR.
"The Company acquired Digifonica in December 2013. Pursuant to the terms in the Share Purchase Agreement (the “SPA”) the Company acquired 100% of Digifonica from the seller, the CEO of the Company (the “Seller”), for a cash payment of $800,000 and 389,023,561 common shares of the Company."
Apologies for the eye straining lack of paragraph breaks. Sometimes I just start with a single point I'd like to make and then it just "takes off" and I forget to insert the breaks. Other times remember to.
I wanted to comment on 1 part at a time here... 1st...
"Whew. Do us a favor and stick some paragraph breaks in there. But I would say you've covered it very very well. I think if you dig around in there too, you may find that no real monetary or 'cash' exchanged hands for pal.“
I gave the rough amt of cash and shares as was reported in the filings to the sec. What else can I go by? Everything mentioned and much more I have documentation for. Sometimes not easy for me to produce due to different drives etc. Standby and I'll take a look/see if I have that. I'm fairly certain I've seen the purchase price paid in both PRs, as you mentioned, and in filings but it's so long ago, now I'm not sure about the filing.
You're probably right as you know light years more than I about this end of things. But still I have a feeling they'll just keep printing more and more shares, nothing to stop them, and firesale-ing them to their support group via all the private placement sales. And then the usual MM "arrangements" are kept in place. So I think it's quite possible the pps will stay in the status quo range it's in now.
BWTFDIK?
I don't see how Barbara Emu is an officer in any capacity for vplm so how can her actions be construed as anything other than part of the scheme to make millions of dollars selling free or dirt cheap shares thru the Emu while at the same time say FU to shareholders.
Wow. In one way or another, for the past over 10 yrs, I have made some mention of just about everything you did in your post. Just having a little trouble understanding how you've laid out some of it. The Emu has claimed many times that when he was with digifonica, raised many millions of dollars to pay allegedly, many voip engineers and code writers to create what he claims was his vision of the need for what the patents allegedly provide. I've read as much of them as I could before getting a headache. I understand a very small part of them but they seem to be overly repetitive gobbledygook. No doubt that because by no means am I qualified to understand something that took the better part of 20 mil and 25 engineers to create in the 1st place........ If indeed, that is what took place. You seem to see it in a somewhat different light...? He then, at some point, after he had been accumulating digi shares for some time as a director, became the ceo or the boss in some way of digi. Next thing you know after allegedly being able to raise all those millions.....now the company (digi) is so broke they can't even keep the lights on. He said at some point, that he and digi had been friends with vplm for a long time. So that leads me to believe he and certain elements from vplm, began to collaborate very early on, on an idea or a scheme. Both companies were identical in that they both were apparently trying to break into the voip arena which was a very up and coming and promising communications technology and business prospect. They both, as far as I understand, were just basically renting software and whatever business tools were needed but I have the impression that neither of them were having much, if any, success. At some point, and it's very fuzzy for me, they decided to merge but it almost seems like some kind of strong arm kind of thing because as soon as the deal was done, the next thing you know is that the entire digifonica team became the BOD of vplm. RK was ceo of vplm at the time and supposedly lent or paid alot of money to keep it all going...? I once had possession of a copy of a digifonica filing that no one else ever seems to have seen. I read it very carefully. It's from way back before the acquisition. In it, digifonica stated they no longer wished to be in the voip business and wanted to go in another direction and I guess the only potential asset they had at that point was the patent applications. They stated they wanted to sell them and get out. I can't remember the exact amount but they said they valued the patent applications at approx $600k+ and a subsequent filing had that amount increased by around 50k as I recall. It was something under $700k. Next thing was the merger or the acquisition or whatever it was that occurred. There was definitely a price paid by vplm to digi, which at that point I think digi was Malak. I believe the pymt was around $800+k and several millions of shares. For 2 to 3 yrs, vplm, via PRs authored by Dennis Chang, made many BS promises to shareholders and potential shareholders, stating they testing the patents and would be folding the technology into their own alleged voip services platform. There has been 2 different stories. 1 states that they built several nodal test points and successfully did the testing. The other story I recently saw, was they went to several existing telephony companies and made agreements with them to do the testing. In both cases, no test results have ever been made public to my knowledge. Meanwhile vplm oversaw the continuing uspto prosecution of the applications until they were all approved as patents. The PRs kept coming nonstop promising everything under the sun, such as the promotion of vplm to top of the voip service providing business, as well as the immed increase by the millions of new subscribers and the immed influx of tens to hundreds of $millions from royalties.. He (Chang) also reported that there was a surprising amount of immediate serious interest from ceos of several fortune 500 and S&P 500 companies in buying or licensing the patents. All of above UNDOUBTABLY garnered MANY NEW investors and shareholders and shares sold!!!!! And then, once THAT SETUP WAS I PLACE................out of nowhere, with no announcements, rhyme, reason or communication with shareholders.....KABOOM! Game over! It all was a fairy tale and next thing you know the company was for sale, period. 10 yrs fast fwd, no sales, no licenses, no settlements, no partnerships, no actual wins that result in money for the shareholders, just more talk, talk, talk, and promises promise promises as long as we have PATIENCE and that vplm is in its best position ever. Court dates come, go and pass away with no real positive results ever even tho thd pro side has a way, in their infinite wisdom, of turning any and every event into a pollyanna positive.
I forgot to ask you if you might elaborate on the stolen addendum you mentioned. Sounds very interesting.
Correctamundo once again! Wow, you're on the ball aren't you? I've also reported on that point how, contrary not only to what so many seem to believe about how vplm allegedly created the patents, which of course they did not.....oh, and by the way, did you notice how based on the Emu's posting on website, every financial publication out there now prints that vplm created the patents (blatant lie). I posted a whole bunch of those online financial papers with the incorrect claim here not too long ago and as usual, no one gave a rats ass. All these many many smaller facts of BS, reveal the underlying eminence front. All the dots connect.
And it's also true about the long ago alleged voip service provider business vplm was in. It and some of the features and instruments it had, were all turnkey rentals, which were all failures as we can see now. And all their rental partners wanted to sue them all the time. They also had a bunch of magic Jack's at some point. What happened to that? I heard they all sit in some warehouse. Point is tho, that while all that malarkey was going on, vplm kept claiming on their website to be the leader of the industry. What a freaking unreal joke. Yet peeps swallow it for years.
Just remember.....
Some $18 million and some 20 to 25 voip telephony engineers (those numbers change every time Emu tells the story), it allegedly took to create the patent technology....... So please tell me how in the heck is some patent lawyer, no matter how many super lawyer claims made by him or his peers, or the Emu or anyone on this board who have the utter nerve to claim they understand the patent language perfectly, able to? I call bullshit on that.
I don't know..... .02 - .025 seems to be the most comfortable spot for this, the self proclaimed leader of the laundromat....oops,.sorry, senior moment.....leader of the voip industry. Also, I think the MMs have their digital algorithms punched in to keep it that way as they don't have the time for actually manually making a market.
Incidentally, sorry about the shorter posts, it's the heat we been having... but I feel like I'm somehow slighting the board and that's not fair, is it? Things are starting to cool down so hopefully the regular, in depth reporting will return.
Does anyone remember what the heck that 45 day thingy was supposed to be in relation to the awesome Amazon settlement we're all so happy is on its way in a year or 2. But I just can't seem to remember what that 45 days was supposed represent?
By the way..... Speaking of vplm....... If anyone wants or needs to bitch, holler, complain, fight, argue or just good ol' name calling for it's own sake, word is that management will be setting up a special room for y'all. The preliminary name is slated to be the "THBR" (toddlers head banging room). Unconfirmed reports say it will feature padded wall AND padded headbands, so that the kids can bang their heads against the walls OR each other!). Pablum, Melba toast and aminal (yes, aminal) crackers will be provided. Rumors the treats will be laced with paragoric are completely unfounded. Applications will be sent out as soon as there are a adequate supply printed up, as the majority of the printer resources are being used elsewhere.
Now......the question is.....whether or not this post will stand on its own as being about vplm. The answer should be yes, because it's a vplm exclusive thing and not available in other boards....... AND......the other question is.... How much will this action affect the daily price per share? They hope it will effect a general price rise by way of the separation of wheat and chaff as well as flotsam and jetsom.
Looks like it'll be another day, another tenth of a penny... To bad vplm (VoipPalLoseMoney) doesn't know which way is up anymore...
That another good point, Z. It's true as far as I know. I have referred to this many times as "fiat" shares. It's one thing to create the shares for the purpose of selling to support the ability of a NPE (#1troll) to operate temporarily, while they get their shit together and figure out if they're gonna be a real company with an actual product to sell or just spent decades being the poster child for patent trolls and another thing to use every excuse in the book (the patent laws, the govt, the ptab, the slow courts, the the huge big dog resources, etc etc etc, wah, wah, wah... WHILE FOR YEARS AND YEARS, IT BECOMES EVIDENT THAT THE REAL DEAL IS THE 2 STORY HIGH MONSTER PERSONAL ATM (it has a high grade, high output, printer on the bottom, that the insiders all have the password for. They call it the "Great Ol' Do it machine.
Bull. 23 yrs only way to make any money has been to flip it.
Also, let me add.... If vplm truly wanted to sell theirself, exactly where did they formally put themselves on the market. Did they advertise themselves? Did they ever once take their "WORLD CLASS, FOUNDATIONAL, NECESSARY TO THE VERY OPERATION OF VOIP SERVICE ITSELF, TECHNOLOGY, TO A TRADE SHOW TO SHOW THE WORLD WHAT THEY HAD?
Prolly a comicon would've been more appropriate. But have they ever actually put themselves out there to be known, commensurate to the billions and billions and more billions value the world leader in the voip arena has repeatedly said they are worth?
Keep in mind my belief that they never intended or wanted to sell the company. What they wanted....... And what they got....... And what they maintain......
is exactly what they shot for after developing the whole idea. You know, the personal ATM and the cabazillions of shares they keep selling and selling and selling no matter what the pounding down of the price results and the dilution despite the fact that the majority of their shareholders are quite peeved about it.
Emu the fiduciary!
I think the 3 mos, 6 mos and 1 year charts are far more demonstrative...
Oh wait I forgot..... price doesn't matter and trends don't matter either.
I think the best illustration is 23 yrs of zippidy do dah
or
Close to 20 yrs under the voip-pal name with zippidy do dah
or
Approx 12 yrs as the full blown patent troll path they chose to take after telling the biggest fibs I ever heard, mostly via Chang and his infamous big whopper PRs, with zippidy do dah......
Annnnnd.....
The upcoming 7 more yrs of zippidy do dah imho
Ok. Thanks. I get it now. It's a waste of time trying to hold a intelligent, fair and balanced conversation with you.... 1) you waste your time counting the number of words I use. You do that only to insult and show disrespect. I assure you I dnkf need your offhand comments like that, for me to know that I choose my words carefully and write well. I need neither compliments nor shade thrown to know that. I'm fully confident in that regard so if you wish to waste your time with that, have fun. 2) your next mistake is in concluding that my post was designed to "sway you". That's merely you attempting to flatter yourself. It took me the better part of about 15 seconds to see nothing anyone said, would sway you. My post like pretty much all of them is designed purely to make my case for my take. You're free to take it any way you choose. Unfortunately you keep taking things wrongly and making what I say, you-centric. Understand that contrary to many here, I do not have any need to sway or convince anyone of any of my beliefs, concepts, ideas, theories or facts and conclusions. Some agree and somd don't. I know that when it comes to the most controversial things, when I take a stand or a strong opinion, using the feedback of checks and balances, in the end, I usually turn out to be right. Just the way it is. Lastly, I told you ahead of time that I didn't want or need you trying to convince me of kohs alleged incompetence or allbrights righteousness, because that was not the crux of the discussion. I knew you would do that so I told you not to bother. It was not a point of contention on my part if you READ what I said and made clear instead of counting the words. You just continued talking about what YOU wanted to talk about instead of replying in-kind to the points I made. Oh, and you also totally ignored my request for you to kindly give a link or something that might provide some context to the cherry picked quote you used. Instead, you told me to look up stuff I don't have any need to look up. I gave both judges the respect they deserve. I have read a ton all about judge Allbright and his outlook on what's the right way to run his court and I happen to agree with it in general. So I dont need to read what you think I need to know. Again, you made the original points of the discussion to be only what you think and consider and have no room for anything outside those myopic views. Everything you said, had zero relation to what I said. So there's no further point in discussing. So you win and another day.
Don't get me wrong but I see also there is much controversy over things she's said. I'm not in any way trying to impune her integrity, just say major controversy about here I see. Apparently she had to undergo a competency test. Regardless, all I care about is seeing the surrounding talk that gives some context to the cherry picked quote offered. I am quite sure I have made a very good case for my take on the IPR question.
How about a link where I can hear it for myself or if not possible, the complete (relatively) surrounding verbiage (ie, not out of context..). It sound from that snippet that THAT judge maybe lent some amt of weight to it, but it may be out of the full context. I'll say this....there have been a very large number of IPRs. The way I view it, IPR losses would not be at all useful within my view because an IPR LOSS is most definitely a real loss of something of potential great value since it either invalidates the patent or at least some part of it, thus a real tangible loss. But a positive ruling is not a win in the same sense as there is nothing tangible to show for it. There is no added value above and beyond whatever value the patent had to begin with. I'll give that there may be a temporary value added, insofar as the bump up in price in some cases, which only lasts for a very short time. I'll also concede that some, maybe even a judge or 2, may perceive a false sense of value if they choose to look at it that way. But that's not based on any real, true or legal (to my knowledge) value. In other words and as I have already explained, VALIDITY does not even belong on the conversation because validity is a legal concept and zero validity is added in a positive IPR ruling. As opposed to a ruling against, where VALIDITY is lost. So it's not in any way shape or form an even Steven kind of thing. It's like if you lost your ring in the ocean, it's a straight up loss. But if you somehow found it, there's no net gain. You simply found it. You didn't "win" anything. So if you lost it then found it and said nothing to anyone, there is no effect or difference TO ANYBODY! Yet it's a good thing for your head..
I'd really like to hear the entire context around that judge you quoted.
Tia
R.I.P. and remembrance those lost lives and their families and friends....such a stupid waste. And nonstop applause to the first responders on that fateful terrible day.
As usual, misunderstood. The comment about judges fairness was not made from the viewpoint of a poster about a judge or judges. It was made from the viewpoint of a poster negative on vplm towards the pro vplm posters who are so obviously biased in the way they conveniently use or at least attempt to use, what has been said, and rewrite it to go against the OP. My intended meaning was not, whether a judges ruling is fair or not, but that WHEN the ruling is favorable to vplm, the pro side lauds how it's finally a fair judge or a fair ruling, but when rulings have gone against vplm, the same pro posters manipulate the conversation to say that it's an unfair judge, in some cases and in other cases they begin to make excuses for why the judge ruled seemingly against their sentiments as tho it was really, in afterthought, a blessing in disguise and/or they find way (seen it so many times here) to take what AT FIRST BLUSH, seems to be a hit against vplm and then craftily construct a more positive way of interpreting the judges ruling. The one exception to that is the koh rulings. But in that case it's kind of a reversal of above. All the pro vplm categorically swore she is a clueless idiot who knows nothing about patent law and who ruled strictly in favor of silicon valley companies. To be honest I don't look too deeply into the law in these aspects. So I would never pretend to say her rulings were good bad or indifferent. She may very well have made bad rulings about with respect to vplm. I don't know. However I DID do ALOT of DD about her as a judge and I don't give a shit about whatever you or all the others say about what a stupid and all the other childish name calling that was used so disrespectfully. She has an extremely achieved background and history. She holds a freakin doctorate in law from Harvard for cryin out loud and was accepted and welcomed by something like a 98-0 vote from the senate and was chosen by a POTUS! And governors as well. Those things alone are something I doubt you could even dream of having achieved, esp the Harvard law doctorate. As to her being unfairly biased in favor of silicon valley companies I gave a half hearted attempt to look at that but I wasn't able to determine if true or not. One thing, no 2 things I took notice of were in some cases, maybe even most cases, she presided over 2 companies who were BOTH silicon valley companies and if i recall correctly, the famous smoking Crack remark she made in open court was indeed about a silicon valley lawyer. Mightve even been the very company (I forget at the moment) whom she used to work for or lawyer for, that many here have often said she favors. Well, her most famous really negative remark was made against lawyer for her alleged pals.
Ive already stated I'm not arguing her fairness or lack thereof so I don't want to hear any of that. My only point was the MAJOR MAJOR UNFAIRNESS AND DISRESPECT SHOW TO HER HERE ONLY BY PRO VPLM POSTERS. But when something is said or done by someone on the side of vplm, but seems to be wrong, like all the inside wholesale selling or the dismissals by the Texas judge, THEN...... the pro side always quickly finds a way to turn it into a positive. And no wonder, their teacher is one of the biggest bullshitters of all time. Well, I better get off here now to give room for the name calling and ridiculing to inevitably come.
No one with a true legal understanding of IPR decisions, ever calls them IPR "wins" because they know the simple FACT that they are not wins at all. They are nothing more than successfully defending against claims of non validity. It's just a cheap and easy way for the defendants to try throwing shit against the wall hoping some will stick. They pick one of the claims made in the patents, one of the claims THAT ALREADY HAS BEEN CAREFULLY EXAMINED BEFORE BY THE USPTO EXAMINERS........... WHO........ ACCORDING TO MANY HERE, AS CAN EASILY BE LOOKED UP AND FOUND...........WHO OFTEN TOLD US HOW THE USPTO EXAMINERS ARE THE BEST AND BY FAR, MOST EXPERT AND KNOWLEDGEABLE ppl there are and how they leave no stone unturned in their investigation and procecution of ea and every patent! Yeah, they FORGET so easily what they said here, that is, when it's most convenient to forget or remember to support the agenda. So vplm gets up there and defends the challenges made against the patents. But the little secret that isn't so secret is that the patents and all their claims were thoroughly examined and deemed VALID already. That's why they are patents in the 1st place! So when the judge rules in their favor, they HAVE NOT WON A THING! THEY HAVE SIMPLY DEFENDED THE FACT THAT THE PATENT AND WHATEVER WAS CHALLENGED, WAS ALREADY FOUND TO BE VALID BEFORE the challenge was made. And the funny and ironic thing of it is.............that ever since sawyer threatened the ALREADY ESTABLISHED TO BE CORRUPT, PTAB, WITH FEDERAL RICO CHARGES........... EACH AND EVERY IPR HAS BEEN RULED IN FAVOR OF VPLM lololololol.
That's why no one has stepped fwd to meet my challenge that no lawyer would call them "wins" when they are nothing more than defended challenges. After the positive ruling, NOTHING HAS BEEN GAINED OR LOST. SAME VALID PATENT IT ALWAYS WAS FROM DAY ONE.
Or my challenge that no one can show any evidence that a judge has noted IPR "wins" in ANY ruling made!
Show me.....
Oh, and remember kids..... Judges are only fair when they rule in favor of vplm!
Haha bwa hahaha. Toooooo phony..... er, I mean funny!
Another poster who doesn't understand that posts are supposed to be about the company, not other posters. Afaic, the fact they only are here to put other poster's down, shows they got nothing, just like vplms got nothing except for themselves and not for shareholders in 23 yrs. And that is exactly why they (vplm) were found guilty of breach of fiduciary duty AND unjust personal enrichment
BY A JURY OF THEIR PEERS. The flock has always been mum about that too, haha. Watch how one will pop out of the woodwork and try to tell us it was a good thing....