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.
Not necessarily.. If there turns out to be no value and/or buyers, then you have to realize that as long as there are believers, in vein or not...they will take advantage of the "buying opportunities", (and "they can feed off each others' confirmation bias") and any strategically timed & worded Pr's, both, will keep the pps artificially propped, much as has been, in my estimation, ever since it broke the subs. It's a fairly common occurrence that this sort of dynamic can and does go on for yrs. And it doesn't have to be an actual scam either.. It can just be lack of value due to no demand. Since what the faithful are believing will happen is highly unlikely in the pinks, to occur, then the smart way to work plays like this are to swing trade. I've learned it before, from experience, and done it before, but they "got me" this time, hook, line & sinker, or so it seems anyway. I'll learn... But anyway, I doubt highly this will tank sub penny anytime soon. There's too much "magic" surrounding it & easily levitated. Then again, that's just my take..
I didn't have any trouble understanding your post. It was plenty clear. You asked for some answer sharing from someone who apparently had better luck than you getting answers & then you ended by saying "imagine if...?" Indignation segues diplomatic. Cool!
"...but up to this point we have heard nothing about the progress, if any, being made by them."
_______
It is vplm, I believe the oh so venerated Sawyer, who PROMISED to update us on 'Southpark's' progress. Where is that promised update? And if I'm not mistaken, weren't we also told that they, Southbank, had a buyer who represented the best offer on the table. And that, along w/other such statements made by the board, over time, indicated several "offers" have been made. Obviously, if true (big if), they all were turned down by vplm. Shouldn't we be told how much the offers were for? If nothing else that would help to validate that they indeed did occur, but w/o such disclosure, and much else considered, I don't believe there are any offers at all (at least not of any import). Why aren't banks and investment houses & big dog teleco's lining up around the block to gain the touted 'control' over all that's voip, for yrs to come? Why in this age of lightning fast communication, is there no answer to or resolution to the question of the 100mil shares? I know, I know...it takes time (so much time until the questions are forgotten...).
"So say I"??... You seem to misunderstand. My main statement in the post is below. It is not what "I" think, or I, who is identified as who holds these thoughts... I bought my share of the company & the patents. "I", am not important here. It is clearly noted as "the thriving & booming world of voip" who don't seem to believe or give a hoot about vplm. The point is that there are many voip companies, large, med & small... been in existence for a long time, generating much revenue, many billions of dollars. That's known fact, not opinion. And also, as fairly recently delineated in at least one post on this board, a host of companies engaged in one way or another, in legal/lawful intercept, for profit. Many if them were listed here, I believe w/some particulars. And yet, in spite of above, I have not seen ever a shred of evidence that any of these companies, of both types, have (outside of the words of the ppl running vplm, as well as msg board posters) shown any interest whatsoever in vplm or its portfolio. That is not mere skepticism, doubt or disagreement.. it is a pretty powerful statement (unless someone can show to the contrary) that in all these yrs, and in the 2+ yrs of patents in the bag, there's been no known interest shown or action taken with regard to obtaining or licensing the patents (except words from BOD & msg board promulgaters). That's not faith or folly, it's hard fact to the best of my knowledge & as such, holds weight.
.
_________________
"The thriving & booming world of voip doesn't seem to care one bit about what "the company" said was "foundational" (can't exist, operate or stand without)".
_________________
.
And what makes this fact even more important is that this lack of demonstration of any interest, is not just for some garden variety voip patents or highly innovative voip apps...but for what we've been told is the actual foundation of the use of voip & most ancillary forms of internet communications, worldwide, for many yrs to come and that voip cannot do without it (our patents). So it's not exactly my personal opinions or trivial musings I'm making. Nor does any of it say vplm is a scam or cannot possibly pull out the rabbit..... but it sure doesn't look good, unless one ignores alot or doesn't accept these facts.
Seems that vplm has crossed into the realm of forgone conclusion, that they are highly responsible for significant amounts of doublethink/doublespeak (essentially the same thing) & we (the skeptics), the Winston Smith's of vplm world, may be coming to realize that 2+2 = 5. The thriving & booming world of voip doesn't seem to care one bit about what "the company" said was "foundational" (can't exist, operate or stand without).
CALEA is 20 yrs old. It includes voip & mandates the implementation of LI by all teleco's in this country AND similar laws have been in place for some time throughout numerous other countries. In some cases (India?) voip is supposedly not allowed to operate w/o LI in place. So the question is: how then, are all the voip teleco's able to continue to operate? I can only think of 3 possible answers: 1) they have ignored the law & been allowed to do so, which would reveal the law to be a joke, or 2) they are using vplm LI technology freely and w/o any impediment from vplm, which would be another sad joke, or 3) they have some other form of LI, not owned by vplm, which does the job, which if true, renders vplm LI a joke... A 4th possibility, but does seem too likely to me, would be under the table deals made, by insiders, that provide the technology to the teleco's.
.
Or its something else I haven't thought of...?
.
Which is it?? Thoughts? Opinions? Guesses?
"To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just as long as it is needed, to deny the existence of objective reality and all the while to take account of the reality which one denies...
______________
Brings to mind something sun said...
.
"they can feed off each others' confirmation bias."
Amongst those same philosophers, I think, Plato or maybe it was Klaatu...was formed the basis for original "doublespeak". All I was asking was an opinion on market value (significant) or not. In my way of thinking, you can't both have value & not have value, based on the angle or philosophical view. Nor would I consider value, only based on some prerequisite that negates a value if that prerequisite is or isn't in place. It's gotta be one way or the other in my view, ie, it (the vplm patent portfolio as we know it) has a very significant (along the lines of what's been bandied about on this board for so long) market value...including all the "side considerations" that have been noted, or it doesn't have said value, due to any and/or all of those considerations. In other words, da bottom line, yea or nay... Personally I'm not able to conclusively answer the question, but I am very strongly leaning nay. But I used to believe wholeheartedly in it.
If you don't me asking, what is your opinion on the current value of the portfolio?
I looked thru the Pr's that I recently posted & could not find the filings from digi-phony-ca, that I spoke of in last post, but I saved the pertinent excerpt from that filing & by the way, it was indeed filed in 2009, tho it took several more yrs for the merger w/vplm. Here is a copy/paste from the filing:
___________________
BE IT RESOLVED THAT a special resolution to change the name of the Corporation to a name selected by the directors and accepted by the regulatory authorities and to consolidate the 38,771,975 issued and outstanding shares on a ratio of one New Common Share for up to ten common shares currently issued and outstanding, the final ratio to be determined at the sole discretion of the directors; and that any one director or officer of the Corporation be and is hereby authorized and directed to do such things and to execute and deliver all such instruments, deeds and documents as in his opinion may be necessary or advisable in order to give effect to the foregoing resolutions be and are hereby approved." To be effective, such resolution must be passed by a majority of the votes cast thereon by Shareholders present in person or by proxy at the Meeting. Unless instructed otherwise, the management designees in the accompanying Instrument of Proxy intend to vote "FOR" the resolution. 1. Notwithstanding that this resolution has been duly passed by the shareholders of the Corporation, without further resolution of shareholders, approval is hereby given to the board of directors of the Corporation, in their sole discretion, to revoke this resolution at any time and to refrain from implementing the share consolidation and name change. 2. Unless instructed otherwise, the management designees in the accompanying Instrument of Proxy intend to vote "FOR" the resolution. Change of Business and Undertaking of the Company The Corporation has spent four years developing a VoIP network and a number of partners sales and self management tools. It was looking for Partners in its technology and / or to sell its Patents. On February 1, 2009, the Company vacated its rental premises. The Leasehold improvements and Furniture & Fixtures were disposed of and written down to Nil and a loss from disposition of property and equipment of $48,917 was recognized in the nine months ended September 30, 2009. On December 31, 2009, the Company wrote down its Property and equipment to its estimated recoverable amount of $nil. The Company recognized a loss from disposition of property of equipment of $290,752, for a total loss from disposition of $339,669. The only remaining asset of any value is the patents with a value of $381,179 which the Corporation would like to sell. Management plans to sell, transfer, license and otherwise dispose of the patents (“Disposition”) which are the sole undertaking of the Corporation (the “Undertaking”) and enter into a new business unrelated to the prior business which may be a change of business (“COB”) or a reverse takeover (RTO) as defined by the Exchange. “Change of Business” or “COB” means a transaction or series of transactions which will redirect an Issuer’s resources and which changes the nature of its business, for example, through the acquisition of an interest in another business which represents a material amount of the issuer’s market value, assets or operations, or which becomes the principal enterprise of the issuer. “Reverse Takeover” or “RTO” means a transaction or series of transactions, involving an acquisition by the Issuer or of the Issuer, and a securities issuance by an Issuer that results in:
What $36 mil in assets? Back then or shortly after, going by their own filings I read, digi-phony had "apparently" (?) made a go of being a teleco (using the same sort of flowery "world leading edge technology" (paraphrased, but some along those lines) & had not done well or (or not done anything for all I could find out - - these companies are very secretive about actualities) & had decided they wanted to completely get out of the voip business (and make yet another name change, lol). At that time, they listed "no assets" except for the patent applications & they put a value of approx $381k on them. I noted that they had previously reported having spent a total of $281k on the process so far, so it looks like they wanted ONLY that + a 100k profit. That is what they listed as the value of the patents at that time. So then, apparently, they could not even sell them for that amt & after some time (I think a couple more yrs..) they made this deal w/vplm. To me, for all intents & purposes, it looks like it was simply a merger or a transformation which allowed the play to keep playing. I think it took the form of a shares swap. I'm not at all savvy about such goings on, but it was along those lines. I think more or less a way for mostly the same ppl (several same BOD continued on from digi to vplm) to keep the operations going, legit or not. I'm not sure if I recently posted all the filings that show this or not, but I read it all & digi had nothing except debt & the patent apps & wanted out & they wanted 381k for them. A far cry from the gazillions we've been told they're worth, esp from the company that actually had the developers who (supposedly) created the technology (the same or similar technology had been written, developed & spoken of many times previous to the digi applications so I'm not sure what level of "development" actually took place, but they put the apps in that eventually got approved so that's what counts I guess...at least for now...). But also noteworthy is that they also "so believed I the technology", and used to use some of the same hype descriptions about it, yet they put such a low value on those same patent applications & wanted out & couldn't even accomplish that for a couple yrs (maybe 3 - 4) until making this merger deal w/vplm, for a bunch of their stock, which I don't think was worth a whole heck of a lot either, but I could be wrong about that. Personally, I don't see where either company, separately or together, ever amounted to a hill if beans. Fast fwd to now & there isn't any interest whatsoever, that can be ACTUALLY shown (just alot of blah, blah, blah) or any deal made. Just continual weird pr's & promises, but no beef, long after patents came to fruition.
Exactly... its not me saying it, it's the stuff THEY say & never follow thru with, going back to the beginnings of digi-phony-ca
Don't get me wrong, lol... I barely give a rats petoot if they report anything. In fact, based on their history, the less they say the more believable they are... (you know..."if their lips are moving... "), but it's just that whatever I posted in this regard, if I remember right, was simply pointing out (and so many other things) what they themselves have spoken to & promised they were gonna do. All I care about is if the patents are even partially as uber valuable as been touted, regardless of anything they say...and as that realm doesn't seem to be shaking out, it seems appropriate & deserving to point out & add up the fallacious stuff. It really does seem to be a carbon copy of THE PLAYBOOK...
.
andhuckfinnknightofmaltaandmilitaryorderistheilluminati?
"nuthin' left to do but smile, smile, smile....
(is Sawyer the Illuminati?)
"Voip-Pal.com Inc. (“Voip-Pal”, “Company”) (OTC Pink: VPLM) announced that due to personal reasons Dr. Thomas Sawyer has stepped down as Chairman and CEO of Voip-Pal. Dr. Sawyer will remain with the Company as a Director and will oversee specific projects. Vice-Chairman Colin Tucker has been appointed Chairman of the Board. Majority shareholder and Special Advisor to the Board of Directors Emil Malak has been appointed to the Board of Directors and named CEO."
_______
* who woulda thunk...that such an insanely accomplished man, when the whole ball o wax is so close, after workin it for so many yrs...would now step up, er, ah, I mean step down & not even be able to disclose why (considering lifetime of public service which generally means disclosure to your benefactors). But anyway, he's still a director so I hope that means he's ok health wise.
.
And what an utter "surprise" thst the man w/all the marbles, gets the job... It very comforting that after his 11 year quest, that he winds up w/the helm, near half the shares, and most of all, he has "hope" for us shareholders. (maybe even more hope that he had whooping Cameron) It's so good to have the goodies...
Regarding the 100 mm shares...
"Dr. Thomas Sawyer who initiated this investigation on
behalf of Voip-Pal and its shareholders will continue to interface with regulatory agency representatives and oversee this matter to its conclusion."
_____________
* So how's that regulatory "interFACETIME" goin'? No biggy.. easy to hand over 10% of the company w/o proper documentation...to the former boss guy kipping..., lol...and not state who did it. Happens all the time (pink is good, right?)... And obviously a whole gov't ofc fully of regulatory suits need many months of hard man hours to determine who signed off & if legit or not. These things take time...lots of time...and conferences & flights & hotels & encourages & in depth studies & lunches & and dinners and...and...
By: Voip-Pal.Com, Inc. via Business Wire News Releases
September 16, 2014 at 05:00 AM EDT
Voip-Pal.com, Inc. Signs Engagement Letter with International Corporate Advisory and Investment Firm, Southbank Capital, to Assist in the Sale of the Company Voip-Pal.com Inc. ("Voip-Pal", "Company") (OTC Pink: VPLM) and its Board of Directors are pleased to announce that they have executed a non-exclusive agreement with Southbank Capital Pty Ltd,(Southbank) to assist
in the sale of Voip-Pal. Southbank is an international corporate advisory and investment firm authorized to present Voip-Pal.com as a prospect for acquisition, merger or investment to existing relationships that have expressed interest in Voip-Pal’s technology. The Company is hopeful of completing a transaction for an amount consistent with previous estimates of Voip-Pal’s internally developed valuation.
Dr. Thomas Sawyer, Chairman and CEO of Voip-Pal stated, "Of the current offers that have been presented to Voip-Pal, this may be the most rewarding to our loyal shareholders."
____________
* cool! Best offer of a bunch! So how's that "mandate" workin out?
By: Voip-Pal.com Inc. via Business Wire News Releases
July 07, 2014 at 05:00 AM EDT
Voip-Pal.com, Inc. Receives an Offer to Monetize its Technology;
Discussions for Potential Acquisition and or Joint Venture Partnerships are Ongoing as Blackout Period Comes to an End
"Voip-Pal.com Inc. ("Voip-Pal", "Company") (OTC Pink: VPLM) announced today that a written offer has been received to monetize its telephony technology. Discussions conducted during the recent blackout period, which ended at the close of the market on July 3, 2014, resulted in a written offer to license and/or purchase Voip-pal's patent portfolio.
Negotiations with respect to this offer and discussions with other
prospective purchasers, licensees and partners continue to be conducted in order to assure the best possible outcome for Voip-Pal shareholders.
(((((Unfortunately, Voip-Pal cannot disclose additional details at this time, due to non-disclosure/confidentiality agreements.)))))
__________
* "...cannot disclose at this time..."???....or tomorrow or next week or next month or next year..... (even tho it was turned down, lol)
By: Voip-Pal.com Inc. via Business Wire News Releases
April 29, 2014 at 05:00 AM EDT
"Voip-Pal.com Inc. Produces a White Paper Declaring Its Patent Suite as Disruptive Technology"
____________
* no bout-adout-it... Sure as shootin'... it has disrupted all those who got in over 9 cents or so, listening to these pr's & a lot of "dreams" past couple yrs
By: Voip-Pal.com, Inc. via Business Wire News Releases
August 14, 2013 at 05:00 AM EDT
Voip-Pal.com Discusses United States Government’s Proposed Reforms to
NSA Surveillance Program with Respect to its Lawful Intercept Technology
"Voip-Pal.com Inc. (“Voip-Pal”) (OTC Pink: VPLM) would like to provide comments on the U.S. Government’s recent proposed reforms to the current National Security Agency’s domestic surveillance program with regards to its Lawful Intercept technology. In the aftermath of the September 11, 2001, attacks, the US Legislature passed the Patriot Act which significantly broadened the government’s powers to gather intelligence and information within the United States. In 2011, an extension to key provisions of the Patriot Act involving surveillance was signed into law. Recent revelation of the vast NSA Surveillance Program has caused growing concern among privacy advocates and the public at large. Last week, in an effort to restore the publics’ confidence in the Government, President Obama announced plans to reform the current surveillance program and create greater oversight and transparency.
At a time when the internet and social media has made us more vulnerable to invasions of privacy, Voip-Pal agrees that the United States should take the lead in reforms that will provide greater protection to the privacy of its citizens. Broad and blanketed surveillance undermines confidence in the government and weakens its standing abroad. Voip-Pal’s Lawful Intercept Technology (U.S. Patent No. 8,422,507) was designed to provide an option to such broad, untargeted surveillance. With Lawful Intercept, law enforcement agencies can use targeted, selective surveillance aimed specifically at terrorist and criminal suspects. Lawful Intercept is the first technology of its kind that will intercept any type of VoIP communications including VoIP to landline calls in a completely stealth manner. Lawful Interception of VoIP communications is a vital tool for law enforcement and is crucial to national security. Use of Voip-Pal’s Lawful Intercept with all forms of internet telephony can prevent terrible tragedies and save countless lives when used by the appropriate government and law enforcement agencies within the proper bounds of the law. Making Lawful Intercept capability mandatory for all VoIP providers would offer an effective solution and protect people’s privacy.
Additionally, Voip-Pal Directors Colin Tucker, Thomas Sawyer, and
Digifonica Co-founder Emil Malak conducted a Q&A session where they answered some of the most frequently asked questions by Voip-Pal shareholders. The audio file of the Q&A session is available at www.voip-pal.com
_____________
* and OBVIOUSLY, the gov has been "all over it" since, to get this toll from us. I think they're about to offer us Montana or Wyoming
By: Voip-Pal.Com Inc. via PR Newswire
March 20, 2013 at 11:21 AM EDT
Voip-Pal.Com Inc. Addresses Recent Discussion on Blogs and Bulletin
Boards
BELLEVUE, Wash., March 20, 2013 /PRNewswire/ --
"Voip-Pal.Com Inc.
("Voip-Pal", "Company") (OTC Pink: VPLM) addresses the recent
discussions on various blogs and bulletin boards. Recent discussion and posts on online Blogs and Bulletin Boards have reported false allegations about and against Voip-Pal.
Voip-Pal emphatically denies and disagrees with all these false allegations reported on the internet blogs and bulletin boards."
____________
Nahhh...this one can't be true...the enlightened ones have told us that the BOD doesn't read the msg board, care about it or have the slightest interest in it...
By: Voip-Pal.Com Inc. via PR Newswire
January 14, 2013 at 08:30 AM EST
Voip-Pal.Com Inc. Engaged in Acquisition Talks
BELLEVUE, Wash., Jan. 14, 2013 /PRNewswire/ --
"Voip-Pal.Com Inc.'s ("Voip-Pal") (OTC Pink Sheets: VPLM) newly acquired subsidiary, Digifonica (International) Limited ("Digifonica, Gibraltar") has been approached by several interested parties representing Fortune 500 companies who are interested in acquiring Voip-Pal/Digifonica patent applications and patents, once the patents have been issued. These early stage discussions are in the verbal stages.
(((((Details of these talks cannot be disclosed nor the outcome of them can be determined at this time.")))))
* but soon, right? No? How but a year? No? How but 2 yrs. No? Damn
By: Voip-Pal.Com Inc. via PR Newswire
July 11, 2012 at 13:15 PM EDT
Voip-Pal.Com Inc. Prepares to Diversify Revenue Stream with Patent
Portfolio Licensing
BELLEVUE, Wash., July 11, 2012 /PRNewswire/ -- Voip-Pal.Com Inc.
("Voip-Pal") (OTC Pink sheets: VPLM) is pleased to announce that in
response to inquiries made by VoIP industry companies, it is preparing to
license several of the revolutionary proprietary digital voice technologies
contained in the patent portfolio recently acquired from Digifonica
International (Gibraltar) Limited. The VoIP industry has identified five
specific patents which contain competitive and licensable technologies:
1. Rating-Billing-Routing engine (RBR): (Producing routing messages for
VoIP communications);
2. Lawful Intercept (Intercepting VoIP communications and other data
communications);
3. Enhanced 911 ("Emergency Assistance calling for VoIP
communications);
4. Mobile Gateway;
5. Uninterrupted Transmission of Internet Protocol Transmissions during
Endpoint Changes.
Voip-Pal is currently beta testing these technologies with several major
VoIP industry providers in order to establish a monetary value for each
patent.
The licensing of these patents can create a highly profitable additional
revenue stream for Voip-Pal.Com. Dennis Chang, President of Voip-
Pal.Com, states: "I am pleasantly surprised at the level of interest shown
by major players in the VoIP industry with respect to the patents held by
our wholly owned subsidiary, Digifonica International (Gibraltar) Limited. As
the company finalizes integration of this technology with our retail site,
www.pointsphone.com , Voip-Pal.Com anticipates to be well positioned to
not only rapidly gain market share in the VoIP mobile phone market but in
a position to earn tens of millions of dollars per year in licensing fees. This
diversification of the revenue stream should be a substantial bonus to our
shareholders."
___________________
Alrighty then! Yeah baby! Sounds good! Sell them shares & build that "looooongs" confidence...saying all the "right stuff".... I know, I know... it takes the right stuff... oh yeah, and it takes time. Apparently, we couldn't licence the tech & we haven't been able to sell it, but we gotz the goodies, so no worries...
.
Incidentally, there's no news so I thought it prudent to create some... But you can't just "make stuff up" (well, least not unless you're vplm) and so I thought I would rehash some of the really cool sounding older news for "s & g's"... So no conjecture or bs, just the pure, unadulterated "truth"...as seen (read) thru the eyes (words) of the "horse's mouth"...(horses got "long noses too!)
Voip-Pal.Com Inc. Begins Process to Become Fully Reporting
BELLEVUE, Wash., May 29, 2012 /PRNewswire/ -- Voip-Pal.Com Inc.
("Voip-Pal" or "the Company") (OTC Pink sheets: VPLM) is proud to
announce its intent to become fully reporting with the SEC. The Company
has retained an SEC approved outside audit firm, RBSM LLP (Member of
Russell Bedford International), and commenced the requisite historical
audit. Voip-Pal's staff will be diligently assisting the auditors and legal
counsel by providing any requested materials and documents.
Upon completion of the audit, Voip-Pal intends to move expeditiously to file
a registration statement on Form 10 with the SEC and become a fully
reporting company. Once reporting status is achieved, Voip-Pal.Com will
seek to have its shares quoted on the OTC Bulletin Board.
_____________
The above announcement is going on 3 yrs old. How long does it take? Or was it just another bs story? Much, much later, in one of the CC's, someone asked about it and the great Oz, I mean Sawyer, said they were considering it. Hmmfff...funny how these things work. Oh I know..."it takes time "... These things always "sound good" at the time, and help to build the confidence of the faithful, lol...
.
note: by the way, in case anyone wonders, the previous post contains a PR w/dates & names redacted, is near 8 yrs old. Does the stuff said "sound familiar"??? Kind of" back to the future - deja-vu...
"SUN VALLEY, Calif., Xx.xxx /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- VoIP-PAL.com, Inc. (Pink Sheets: VPLM) is pleased to announce that the Company will be hosting a Nationwide Teleconference on xxxxxxxx 14, 20xx at 4:15 EST, to update shareholders on recent developments with the Company.
The Nationwide Teleconference will be hosted and
moderated by Xxxx Xxxx, President of Xxxxxxxxxx Solutions International, Inc., a subsidiary of Xxx Xxxxx Consulting USA, Inc. VoIP-PAL.com's CEO, Xxxx Xxxxx, will be discussing the Company's goals for 20xx, as well as recent developments with the Company that have the potential to significantly increase shareholder value. Additional speakers will be announced before the teleconference.
"We are excited to be able to have a forum to discuss some of the recent developments that have transpired for VoIP-PAL.com. It is important to us that we keep our shareholders in the loop and this teleconference is the perfect opportunity to do so," stated Xxxx Xxxx, CEO of VoIP-PAL.com.
There is expected to be a high demand for the call-in lines for this Nationwide Teleconference and space will be limited.
Please call 1-866-THE-xxxxxx today to reserve your place and receive the information that will enable you to participate in the conference.
VoIP-PAL.com recently announced that the Company has engaged a leading Xxx solution company, Xxxxxx, to upgrade VoIP-PAL.com's existing Xxx xxxx and create two additional xxxxxx xxxxx for the Company's VOIP pxxxxts. For more than a decade, Xxxxxxx Xxxxxxx's clients have ranged from small businesses to Fortune 100 companies, including Microsoft and Seagate software.
About VoIP-PAL.com, Inc.: VoIP-PAL.com, Inc.'s mission is to sell leading edge VoIP pxxxxts and xxxxxxces in order to help businesses and individuals around the world communicate more effectively, while providing the greatest cost savings possible. VoIP-PAL.com will continue to xxxxxx the xxxxxxx xxxxxxx, most xxxxxxxxxx, best xxxxxx and xxxxxxx available."
______________
Could this be in the near future???
Is this what many are waiting for???
Is big stuff poised to happen???
Tune in this weekend - saaame Voip time! - saame Voip station!!
da-da da-da da-da da-da, da-da da-da da-da da-da.... VOIP-PAL!
Here is a lively discussion about Snowden, the nsa, privacy rights, etc. If you scroll down to the comments by: Nicholas.Epson, he brings up the whole thing about vplm & the LI patents & he leaves a link to the patent. What I find interesting is the same old thing of completely ignoring anything about vplm, lol, as tho they don't exist, including commentary regarding them. If you read the commentary that follows his remarks, there are alot of posts, and I didn't read every word but as far as I can see, not a single poster even so much as acknowledged or made any comment whatsoever about the "seemingly" very important post he injected into the conversation about the supposed "solution", lol, to everything these ppl are talking about in this blog...and yet no one notices.. That's pretty strange, is it not?
http://ideas.time.com/2013/06/10/edward-snowden-a-modern-day-daniel-ellsberg-except-for-one-key-difference/
I thought this was an interesting article. If you scroll down to the comments section you find where Tom Sawyers (member of VPLM BOD) name comes up in connection with the church connected "mandate", via his Knights templar membership, to procure, wait for it... up to 100,000 tonnes of pure gold, I believe for the Vatican. It's all kind of fuzzy & I've posted stuff related to this story here before. I got a kick out of the some of the remarks they made.
https://seeker401.wordpress.com/2012/03/13/how-wealthy-is-the-roman-catholic-church/
Init... I assure you, vplm is no secret. Their story & their pr's have been carried by all the major & lesser news services, financial sections, over the yrs. I have posted a number I them here before, such as WSJ, NYtimes, Washington post, etc etc. as well as international papers & feeds. The whole bs story about MS having had obtained the LI patent (a big lie) was carried by the "Register" (British I think) and that spread worldwide and has been reprinted complete w/the lie (and no retraction or addendum in majority if cases) thousands of times, to this day. Vplm's name is ubiquitously attached to LI in many places, and LI has been deeply discussed for many yrs. So vplm & their patents is no secret.
Your 1st link appears to be dead (I tried 3 different browsers). The 2nd link works & shows what you mean, but if I'm not mistaken, it appears as tho you are confusing "voip", which I have never seen anyone try to say it is "history", & the vplm patent portfolio, which is an entirely different thing.
.
* correction on the link. The url is ok but the live click able link, at least on my screen, was including more than the url, making it not work right.
I stand by my definition of "the patent process" (which refers to USPTO by default) as being from the date of application until grant. I went on in my post, to explain that I understood also, that the "development" process was more in line with the 10 yr thing, thus I gave the whole dual process, development & patent application, full credit for the time it took. And I also used that 10 yr time frame to lend itself to the idea that something that old (or, according to you, even older) and not updated to the "now" of the current state of voip, might be somewhat obsolete, and therefore might help explain why there does not seem to be the slightest interest in vplm's portfolio by the outside world, as we see it.
.
So I gave full credit to the time it took purportedly, to develop &
the techno & there really is no argument.
"To think, the people who post here know more than the brilliant minds that developed these patents."
.
It doesn't take a brilliant mind to be well aware that many patent applications, developed by smart people, never see the light of day or earn a nickel
"When Microsoft goes after an identical patent and gets denied..."
____________
Incorrect. MS did NOT apply for "an identical" patent. This is a fallacy I think been propagated here numerous times. And I have explained some of it before. 1) it would make absolutely nonsense for MS to apply for an identical patent 2 years after vplm applied for theirs, because to it would be an obvious prior art waste of their time. In fact that was one part of my logical basis, for my theory that the MS application was actually made for a different purpose than meets the eye. So, of the application was identical, obviously MS had no supposition it would be approved, thus ulterior motives... And if it was different, it would've had to be SUBSTANTUALLY different, to pass thru as not obvious prior art.
.
I have seen it said before that the MS application was 75% the same. I don't know if that is true or who said it, but if it was accurate, then a 25% difference, in my opinion, would be a huge difference. Imagine if 25% of the earth were suddenly gone. I recently read somewhere that there was a very significant difference in the MS application, but I can't remember where or what.. I think it had something to do with the all inclusiveness of how many platforms it encompassed, in its ability to record the voip communications. And if that is the case, that is a huge huge difference because, lol, if an "intercept technology" has loopholes or corners it doesn't cover, then all the criminals have to do is flock to exploit those loopholes or lack of coverage, which in effect, renders such a technology as a joke, useless, before it even gets started. And I think maybe that, not simply prior art, or "identical" techno, is what renders the MS application (if it indeed was a bona-fide attempt to pull the rug out from under the vplm application) as much, much more different than we have been led to believe, than the vplm patent...
.
The vplm LI patent has, apparently, it own problems, as it has been a patent for close to 2 yrs & no serious attempt, or any for that matter, as far as is known (and there's very little secrets left nowadays) has been made to obtain it.
"When Microsoft goes after an identical patent and gets denied..."
____________
Incorrect. MS did NOT apply for "an identical" patent. This is a fallacy I think been propagated here numerous times. And I have explained some of it before. 1) it would make absolutely no sense for MS to apply for an identical patent 2 years after vplm applied for theirs, because to it would be an obvious prior art waste of their time. In fact that was one part of my logical basis, for my theory that the MS application was actually made for a different purpose than meets the eye. So, if the application was identical, obviously MS had no supposition it would be approved, thus ulterior motives... And if it was different, it would've had to be SUBSTANTIALLY different, to pass thru as not obvious prior art.
.
I have seen it said before that the MS application was 75% the same. I don't know if that is true or who said it, but if it was accurate, then a 25% difference, in my opinion, would be a huge difference. Imagine if 25% of the earth were suddenly gone. I recently read somewhere that there was a very significant difference in the MS application, but I can't remember where or what.. I think it had something to do with the all inclusiveness of how many platforms it encompassed, in its ability to record the voip communications. And if that is the case, that is a huge huge difference because, lol, if an "intercept technology" has loopholes or corners it doesn't cover, then all the criminals have to do is flock to exploit those loopholes or lack of coverage, which in effect, renders such a technology as a joke, useless, before it even gets started. And I think maybe that, not simply prior art, or "identical" techno, is what renders the MS application (if it indeed was a bona-fide attempt to pull the rug out from under the vplm application) is much, much more different than we have been led to believe, than the vplm patent is...
.
The vplm LI patent has, apparently, it own problems, as it has been a patent for close to 2 yrs & no serious attempt, or any for that matter, as far as is known (and there's very little secrets left nowadays) has been made to obtain it.
In regards to the "10 year patent process", I disagree that it took 10 yrs. It's simply not so. The 5 main patents application process began in 2007. It took approximately 4 & 1/2 to 5 & 1/2 yrs to complete. When it comes to the most important ones, LI & RBR, I think those were on the lower side of the time taken. So, on avg, it was more like 5 yrs, not 10 for the patent process.
.
Regards the idea & development of them into patent applications, I separate that time, from the time of application, because it's two different processes & not all ideas get patented.
.
That said, I do indeed include both processes when considering the age of the ideas & developed technology. And in that vein, I think maybe some of the ideas were 1st begun, by the digifonica dev team, closer to that 10 yr mark & as such, 10 yrs is indeed a very long, "ancient" if you will, time for technology to be "in sync" with today's current development status of technology such as voip itself. In fact, I posted here months ago, that the technology of LI was discussed & described, in detail, as a "real-time" technology, by others (I listed some of them at the time of my post) long before the 2007 date of our applications. If I'm not mistaken, those dated to approx 2002 or 2003 & those ideas, as I posted them or left links to them, we're written as tho to be patent applications, tho I don't know if they actually were applied for or not. If memory serves, there some big names involved, such as Verizon, etc.
.
So I thought this post might provide a bit more accurate perspective, about the "10 year" thing.
Someone here recently said that Malak was "an inventor" & the implication I got at the time was that he was as an inventor, responsible to some degree, for the creation of any or all of our 5 baseline patents. I checked the patents & I see his name nowhere listed in the inventors section. I also did not see in his resume', anything related to being an inventor. If by chance I'm confusing his name w/Chang's, he is also not listed. I will have to go back & try to find the recent post that said or implied he was the or "a" inventor and responsible in some way for our patents but I'm pretty sure it did so.
"you make it sound as though getting a patent is a trip to the mom & pop store."
=================
It's ludicrous to believe that anyone would actually think or believe that getting a patent is akin to going down to the corner store to pick one up. The very fact that there is such a plethora of misunderstanding, misconceptions & mischaracterizations, so often, speaks volumes about such a large spread between the difference in opinions.
.
Of course it's not that simple & no one has said anything to that effect. The fact that all it requires basically, to get a patent, is what I said a couple of posts back, was paraphrased directly from the words of the SEC. I specifically looked for what are the basic requirements for a patent, in my quest to find the answers to how this whole thing can be as it now is, which as I noted in my previous post, just CAN'T be (doesn't add up). So I was led to the USPTO quoted requirements & while those basic requirements were pretty simple even in the words of the USPTO itself, I further distilled it down to the most basic points w/o changing anything. I purposely did not attribute the words or the facts to THE USPTO, in my post, because I knew that if I didn't, that the 1st reaction to it, would be to shoot it down as crazy & that's exactly what happened. I wanted to illustrate how things get chewed up & spit out here. The actual paragraph, from the USPTO is below:
==========
"The patent law specifies that the subject matter must be “useful.” The term “useful” in this connection refers to the condition that the subject MATTER has a useful purpose and also includes operativeness, that is, a MACHINE which will not operate to perform the intended purpose would not be CALLED useful, and therefore would not be granted a patent."
==========
Pretty simple & I just posted the essence of it w/o changing the meaning & I did so to illustrate that's all that is required basically. That does not equate to going down to a mom & pop store to pick up a patent. It spoke only to the basic requirements & was intended to help validate my position that just getting a patent, contrary to what has been contended boucou times here, does in no way insure, validate, state, promise or guarantee...that said patent can & will do what it's progenitors swear up & down that it will do...and further, by the same token, it does not lend itself similarly, to the value or the so-called foundational aspects of said techno.
.
Let's get something straight... there are patents.......and there are patents.. There are run of the mill patents, maybe useful, but ho-hum. And then there are very significant & valuable patents, that do much and earn much. But then, there are super duper patents.. what are being presented as baseline foundational patents, meaning that the service sector they are for, cannot even operate w/o them, because they are the root of it all, or they are afforded control of it all, by virtue of the supposed nature of the patents, at least as a whole pkg. Make no mistake, that is EXACTLY what we have been told they are. And that sets us and the portfolio FAR ABOVE & BEYOND most all other patents out there. Thus all the discussions that make comparisons of any aspects of what can be expected in patent development, effects on its industry & it's value, in terms sale and/or licencing & infringe....are simply not fair to compare because regular, normal patents don't dictate whether an application or a device or a whole company as a service provider, can even operate or survive, which is what we've been led to believe is indeed the case for our portfolio. That's what is meant by "foundational" & foundational is a whole 'nuther ball game. It's very close to "life & death" considerations, in fact it IS life & death, when it comes to LI & 911. The baseline requirement of the USPTO, to my understanding, does not insure these patents to be "ALL THAT". I noted when I went to the page that describes & delineated the requirements to become a patent, that after the paragraph I posted up above, it did not go on from there, to list more & more requirements. Rather it went on to describe other aspects of the patent process. I expected more but that was it for basic requirements & so THAT'S why got my attention as something that could help illustrate that being a patent only carries a certain weight. And remember, the main purpose of a patent is not to prove & guarantee it, but to protect the owner from others using it for their own personal gain.
"Your right, VOIP is on it's way out, good call."
___________
Nonsense to equate voip itself, which is possibly still in its infancy, (& that obvious, to any intelligent person) with patents that relate to voip. Gross mischaracterization of the significance of the post made about the age of the "associated technology", not THE technology itself.
If I were him, I would monitor the msg board (which there's not an ounce of doubt in my mind he does) and I would use it to filter my responses & indeed to whom I responded to & didn't, hence some speak of always getting responses & timely ones, while others, lol, may get none, and such filtering might wind up reflecting my possible agenda. So the "no reply" does indeed seem to reflect such an agenda, no?
"Connecting the dots...
VPLM, lawful intercept, mi5, Google
http://mobile.bloomberg.com/news/2015-01-13/clegg-resists-mi5-calls- for-snooping-powers-after-attacks.html?cmpid=yhoo
Certainly VPLM should be in this conversation given mi5 did the testing for lawful intercept..."
___________
You're right, they certainly SHOULD be.....so why AREN'T they?? That's the question. That they SHOULD, has been posed for a long time now... but they AREN'T, so why not?? It's not too far out for me to say that anti-terrorism is one of the top considerations in the world today, if not the number one. It also seems quite possible to me that vplm LI, as it's been presented to us and the rest of the world by the BOD, may very well be the absolute #1 tool with which to thwart terrorists, because w/o it (according to vplm & the pumpers) terrorists would have unfettered communications access to plot their evil. Obviously that, can never be allowed to be.. But with LI, (vplm, as presented) they would be never have that freedom to conspire. And also, that obviously means that the teleco's will individually, eventually be required to have this tool available to answer to the governments call. As we know its already a requirement to operate as a teleco, in numerous countries. So here's the thing.... that I've been saying in one way or another for a long time... I'm not gonna ask the question anymore as it's just downright ridiculous.. I'm categorically stating, in no uncertain terms...THAT THE ABOVE DESCRIBED AND ACTUAL SITUATUON CAN NOT POSSIBLY BE! ....along with the fact that vplm LI (or vplm itself) has not been acquired or been licenced (if indeed it IS as it's been touted to be...). I don't care what anybody says. It AIN'T POSSIBLE, no matter how you look at it, from whatever angle, along with all the excuses & explanations. It DOES NOT add up. It's (supposedly) too big, too important, too dire, too valuable, too needed et al. It just CAN NOT BE (as touted). The only way I would concede it to be even remotely POSSIBLE is if the name of vplm as the entity who owns the techno, and the ANSWER TO THIS NEAR #1 WORLD PROBLEM & NEED THAT CAN NOT & WILL NOT BE DENIED, was now a household name, well known to be THE HOLDER OF THE KEY!!!!!!! as a fight has gone on to determine who gets it. Except that doesn't seem too plausible, since any major player like MS, Google or Apple COULD HAVE HAD IT FOR A RELATIVE SONG BY NOW, compared to the wealth they have. I believe all above are INDISPUTEABLE FACTS.
.
Therefore there is only one possible answer as to why this has not come to fruition............
And that is that there must be a reality about vplm LI and/or the whole pkg, that, as hard as it is for some minds to accept the logic, it somehow is simply not what we have been led to believe, in one or more very important ways, and apparently, all those that would be concerned, esp the big dogs... KNOW THIS! that is the ONLY way to explain it. And it could be that someday soon the reason(s) will be revealed & it will be a bombshell dropped here. I sincerely hope I'm wrong but I cannot see how, in consideration of the above facts. Pure & simple. Sad but true.