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.
Congrats on the new board! Glad to be a part of it!
OWCP! UBQU! SFOR!
Holy YELLING! Seriously, online etiquette please. We hear ya! :)
OWCP!
Perhaps he was referring to this slide in a presentation to NBBI
www.nbbihome.com/pahcom/20161011.pdf#page=4
National Benefit Builders, Inc. (NBBI) is a national innovator and
marketer of healthcare and technology related programs for consumers,
employers, and healthcare practices. Since 2001, NBBI has maintained an
A+ rating from the Better Business Bureau.
Not to steal his thunder...but better!
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=125671145
LOL. Right!
A little off-topic, but reminds me of those days when I had AuctionSniper set to 3 secs to crush an eBay bid.
The stock market is open on Columbus Day
http://www.profitconfidential.com/nyse-holidays-schedule-calendar/
wait til the 2-minute drill!
WOW! OWCP!
2-minute drill
If it acts like it did yesterday with less than two minutes... .04+
Go $OWCP!
VISUAL PROCESS Diagram
I'd like to see (read opinions here) how the patent infringement is being circumvented and Duo, Centrify and Trustwave are not on the hook?
Go ahead and read the Compliant.
https://search.rpxcorp.com/litigation_documents/12021127#page=5
Someone yesterday was bold enough to throw in the word "appeal"... ok, on what grounds?
Go $SFOR!
AGREED! That's the PAY UP list!!! :)
$SFOR
That's a "pay-to-play" list.
Look, this recent run of Cyber Security Inc., smells like typical misdirection. We've all done our DD here and like PennyDream said, when it starts trading, you can come back any time.
There isn't much on CS, Inc., because there isn't much
http://www.bloomberg.com/research/stocks/private/snapshot.asp?privcapid=617314
Long for $SFOR
Agreed different cases...BUT...
again, I have to direct you to the Complaint.
https://search.rpxcorp.com/litigation_documents/12021127
Please tell me how any one of these companies are NOT directly infringing on claims 53 and 54 (3 counts)???
The compliant has made it easy for EVERYONE to understand with a visual process diagram. (I made the this take you to the graphic)
https://search.rpxcorp.com/litigation_documents/12021127#page=5
Where do you think they are skirting the patent and on what grounds would there be an appeal?
Not Spec.
Have you read the the INFRINGEMENT?
I have. Here, you can now, too.
https://search.rpxcorp.com/litigation_documents/12021127
Please tell me how any one of these companies are NOT directly infringing on claims 53 and 54 (3 counts)???
Where do you think they are skirting the patent?
Thank you, I'm glad a handful of us has!
GLTY, Go $SFOR
Have You Read the 698 patent?
I have.
It's a VERY LONG and esoteric read, but very interesting nonetheless.
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=8&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=PTXT&s1=8,484,698&OS=8,484,698&RS=8,484,698
DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENT
I like this specific part (talk about covering your AUTHentication bases !!!)
This is in contradistinction to present authentication processes as the out-of-band security network 40 is isolated from the corporate network 38 and does not depend thereon for validating data. The first shows a biometric validation which, in this case, is in the form of voice recognition and is within voice network 42. While voice recognition is used herein, it is merely exemplary of many forms of recognizing or identifying an individual person. Others include, but are not limited to fingerprint identification, iris recognition, retina identification, palms recognition, and face recognition. Each of these are similar to the first embodiment in that these are a requirement for monitoring the particular parameter of the individual person; including the parameter to a mathematical representation or algorithm therefore; retrieving a previously stored sample (biometric data), thereof from a database and comparing the stored sample with the input of the accessor.
WHITE LABELING.
It's probably similar to the SaaS (Software as a Service) reseller methodology.
Take for example a marketing automation software company called Hubspot. Great software platform that any mom-and-pop to large, even enterprise level, company can use at their discretion, budget notwithstanding. Of course there are tiered pricing depending on level of usage, etc.
But say, I'm Ad Agency X and I have 20 clients that need this solution for their marketing needs. Well, Hubspot allows the agencies to white label their SaaS platform (i.e put Ad Agency X's name on it) for a fee (usually monthly, quarterly or even annually). The 20 clients don't know any better (or need to know for that matter), so long as their marketing needs are addressed.
$SFOR
Here's Levi's DD
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=125491620
Here is the link to the 8K showing the agreement for the "option to purchase" agreement for patent of the product that is NOT the focus of any of our lawsuits. Past or present.
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1285543/000147793215005633/sfor_8k.htm
On August 24, 2015, the Company entered into an asset purchase and licensing agreement with Cyber Safety, Inc., a New York corporation (“Cyber Safety”) to license and retain an option to purchase the patents and Intellectual Property related to the GuardedID and MobileTrust software (the “Asset Purchase Agreement”) for a purchase price of Nine Million Dollars ($9,000,000), which may be paid in the form of a promissory note due by and no later than September 30, 2020. Pursuant to the terms and conditions of the Asset Purchase Agreement, Cyber Safety will license and have the option to purchase the white label version of the “GuardedID” software for up to $120,000 of development and the MobileTrust software products. StrikeForce’s license granted to Cyber Safety does not affect or impact existing distributor relationships. StrikeForce, directly and through its distribution channel, will maintain the right to sell in the retail space in perpetuity.
As a condition of the Asset Purchase Agreement, Cyber Safety will license the Malware Suite (as defined in the Asset Purchase Agreement) up to and until September 30, 2020. Pursuant to this license, Cyber Safety shall compensate the Company with fifteen percent (15%) of the net amount Cyber Safety receives (defined as the amount received by Cyber Safety from the sale or licensing of the Malware Suite), which amount may be increased to twenty percent (20%) under certain conditions, and is subject to reduction for commissions and support costs Cyber Safety will pay StrikeForce. In conjunction with the licensing, the Company has executed a Distributor and Reseller Agreement with Cyber Safety, dated August 24, 2015 (the “Distributor and Reseller Agreement”).
[img]
investorshub.advfn.com/uimage/uploads/2016/9/16/grtpmnice-try.jpg[/img]
HA! Nice!
$SFOR!
Yup! Thanks!
Facetious in tone or not, my strategy is my own, like yours is, to which I really don't care about. It could be awesome, it could be sh#tty, or you don't even have one... it really doesn't bother me either way.
I broke my personal rule of wasting 60 secs of the 86,400 given to us everyday -- of which, tomorrow is not promised to any of us -- by responding to you.
GLTY and Go $SFOR
Really, well actually I am. But I'll be the first person on here to publicly admit I was wrong if you can find it.
Congrats!
I really hope this works out for you and your team, plus all of us here!!!
I have an LLC/S-Corp on the side, for non-health care projects... brother if we hit this big... I'll gladly work for my LLC and hire my kids! LOL
I'm sure you have your exit strategy all planned out :)
Good luck to you and all of us here!!!
$SFOR
Yes, SEO and SEM are just a few things I oversee.
Work of a large health care company and part of a tight digital marketing strategy team.
So ready to say C-YA... soon! for myself and everyone here!
Long for $SFOR!
Ha!
Not yet... maybe if I put quotes around it and search on the interwebs...
SFOR and GLTY!!
Especially when part of my job is search engine marketing.
Long for $SFOR
Since we don't know what's in the MSFT/SFOR NDA...
... and everything posted to date are juicy nuggets of hopium, I'll throw my two cents in...
SFOR and MSFT have an arrangement where if none of them settle, MSFT buys SFOR. Either settle with the little guy, or deal with MSFT next. MSFT could have an arrangement to skim off the top of each settlement.
Who knows? We never will.
Beyond the excellent DD, we have no idea what will happen between now and 11/9
SFOR!!!!
You may want to read up on SFOR lately...
Here...thanks to ScreenerBoy
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=125408211
**** The Bottom Line ****
All this chatter and new faces on here now can get things very confusing.
1. SFOR is trading at @ 46 million market cap now. The interesting thing is that this company has one of the most coveted IP assets in the world. What is it worth? With all the cyber issues today and SFOR owning the rights to the process which controls the single most effective way to attack cyber hacks its hard to clearly figure out a valuation of it. Given that MSFT already paid up for its infringement @ 9 million dollars some will believe its not worth too much given the dollar amount. The one thing is most don't understand how legal issues work. In the legal world their settlement with MSFT was truly a proof of IP Asset and also a way to set precedence. After they were able to prove it they can now generate the true value of their asset. Some will question why not go after the 1,000 plus companies right away to generate as much damages and harm immediately? Think about it. They have a firm with good lawyers who know how to use the IP Asset and how to prove it is been infringed upon. In order to go after 1,000 all at the same time it would take a team of well over 300-400 people. The issue is trying to get them all up to speed on how to argue its legitimacy. They have that with their current team. They seem to be going after the next three to add to their portfolio some additional examples of its merit. They will indeed go after the others in due time. Google, Facebook, Amazon, Yahoo, AOL and the countless others will have their doors knocked on soon. When they start that process the only thing for companies the size of these to do is most likely buy out SFOR. Why BUYOUT. Well if they buy them out they really don't lose any money. They can then use the IP to their advantage and also do the same thing that SFOR has set out to do. The IP alone could be worth billions when its all said and done when you add in the royalties and license agreement which will be reached.
2. SFOR has a real products. This is not just a company shell with IP trying to play the IP card to get damages from infringers. They also have a proven track record of selling 4 million units of their initial version of the company product. Think about the $ in revenue that would be. Average price of $29.95 X 4 million units? Thats over $100,000,000 on the initial launch. These are real numbers. Earlier this past spring they started to execute on product sales campaigns for their new flagship products. They have many channels of distribution and the most exciting thing is the 4 million were sold in software form. They now have their products for sale with electronic downloads and soon to be on the Apple Store. They have proven they can sell and sell large unit numbers in the past. The sky is the limit now. Add their sales partners working on enterprise deals and the lid will come off.
3. 2 billion shares is nothing on the OS (Outstanding Shares). With everything going for this company it will only take a few great deals and distribution to kick in and the company revenue could hit 500 million in no time. Most public companies will trade for 2-3 times earnings and this is if that is the only thing it has going for it. When people say $1 a share in the future they are basing that on the future potential. The thing is the known vs the unknown. Yes we don't know what the sales will be or how fast and how many suits will be won this year or next but what we do know is both ends of their catalysts have been proven. They have proven their product sales and they now have proof of their IP Asset VS MSFT. They have only started. So now is the ground floor. There is no toxic debt. They have nothing to convert. They are very healthy and will continue to be this way.
4. Buyout is extremely likely. This is not a dream most are hoping for. Most large companies know what SFOR has and what they could do with it. Most also know that the price is going up and up by the day as cyber issues are coming more and more to light and most will need to take action ASAP to defend it.
5. If you look at the management and the credibility you will understand this is no regular penny stock. Look on their website for more information but it speaks volumes and the track record of the CEO is clean. Wow what a concept. You don't find this anywhere in the market except for the large companies trading on the major exchanges. This makes it ten times easier for the company to be taken seriously by investors and funds at the next level. Right now people are just hearing about this company and its amazing story. the more and more the word gets out the higher and higher the price will go.
I am not a pumper never have been and never will be. Check my profile. I have been in and holding my SFOR shares from the .0002 level. Why don't I post to talk great things about the story all the time? I don't need to. The company and its story speaks for itself.
Good luck to all. Just my take on SFOR.
Thanks.
===
Pulled this from Dun and Bradstreet
https://www.dandb.com/businessdirectory/duosecurityinc.-annarbor-mi-28425569.html
$SFOR
Hypothetical.
PREMISE
Because the PACER update today just posted saying the SFOR lawyers want to see all 3 defendants to reach settlement.
WHAT IF...
In the MSFT settlement agreement under NDA, SFOR and MSFT agreed to licensing, royalties, etc. but had to publicly disclosure some financial settlement to give "life" to SFOR for us shareholders and...
within that NDA, Microsoft offers to buyout SFOR if they can win these three cases. Which then opens the MSFT/SFOR relationship door to sue the remaining 100s of patent infringers, like Yahoo, Apple, Google, you name it.
SFOR discloses "plan" to Centrify, Duo and Trustwave that MSFT plans buy them out and they'll have to deal with MSFT/SFOR going forward.
Fair enough, I can see your point. But who really cares when someone goes to WALMART.COM and buys GuardedID? In the end, it's a sale.
HAHAHA, nice! But...ummm, nope.
http://www.pjsgroup.com/aviation-news/charter-vs-fractional-jet-ownership/
LOL!
Long for $SFOR
Has anyone REALLY gone through the 698 patent?
It's a VERY LONG and esoteric read, but very interesting nonetheless.
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=8&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=PTXT&s1=8,484,698&OS=8,484,698&RS=8,484,698
DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENT
I like this specific part (talk about covering your AUTHentication bases !!!)
This is in contradistinction to present authentication processes as the out-of-band security network 40 is isolated from the corporate network 38 and does not depend thereon for validating data. The first shows a biometric validation which, in this case, is in the form of voice recognition and is within voice network 42. While voice recognition is used herein, it is merely exemplary of many forms of recognizing or identifying an individual person. Others include, but are not limited to fingerprint identification, iris recognition, retina identification, palms recognition, and face recognition. Each of these are similar to the first embodiment in that these are a requirement for monitoring the particular parameter of the individual person; including the parameter to a mathematical representation or algorithm therefore; retrieving a previously stored sample (biometric data), thereof from a database and comparing the stored sample with the input of the accessor.
Hmmm, I'm not so sure, how many different 2FA/OOBA are there? Tell me, I'll dig it up. But SFOR's is pretty rock solid.
And with the SCOTUS ruling on Nova v Pulse...
http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/halo-electronics-inc-v-pulse-electronics-inc/
From the SFOR patent itself...
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=8&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=PTXT&s1=8,484,698&OS=8,484,698&RS=8,484,698
Summary
In general terms, the invention disclosed hereby includes in the embodiments thereof, a unique combination of user and host authentication. The security system of the present invention is out-of-band with respect to the host computer and is configured to intercept requests for access. The first step in controlling the incoming access flow is a user authentication provided in response to prompts for a user identification and password. After verification at the security system, the system operating in an out-of-band mode, uses telephone dialup for location authentication and user authentication via a password entered using a telephone keypad. In addition and optionally the system provides further authentication using a biometric system. When voice recognition is employed for the biometric component, the user speaks a given phrase which the system authenticates before permitting access. Upon granting of access, the user now for the first time enters the in-band operating field of the host computer.
53. A software method for employing a multichannel security system to control access to a computer, comprising the steps of: receiving in a first channel a login identification demand to access a host computer also in the first channel; verifying the login identification; receiving at a security computer in a second channel the demand for access and the login identification; outputting from the security computer a prompt requesting a transmission of data; receiving the transmitted data at the security computer; comparing the transmitted data to predetermined data; and depending on the comparison of the transmitted and the predetermined data, outputting an instruction from the security computer to the host computer to grant access to the host computer or deny access thereto.
54. Apparatus for implementing a multichannel security system to control access to a computer, comprising: a device for receiving a login identification and demand to access a host computer, wherein the device and the host computer are in a first channel; and a security computer in a second channel for receiving the login identification and the access demand and outputting a prompt requesting a transmission of data once said login identification is verified by said security computer, wherein said security computer comprises a component for receiving the transmitted data and comparing said transmitted data to predetermined data, such that, depending on the comparison of the transmitted and the predetermined data, said security computer outputs an instruction to the host computer to grant access to the host computer or deny access thereto.
Let's make it official DD :)
http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/halo-electronics-inc-v-pulse-electronics-inc/
Long for SFOR
Excellent DD!!! Reading the SCOTUS blog now!
http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/halo-electronics-inc-v-pulse-electronics-inc/
OMG!
SFOR!!!
Long Term Cap Gains Calculator. Just plug in your numbers, etc.. very straightforward
http://www.moneychimp.com/features/capgain.htm