Hi,and thank you. The question of no standing for Max Sound absolutely exists. And the Appeal confirmed Judge Davila's finding: there was no Max Sound License Contract for any Vedanti patent, and none from a VSL Communications Ltd who did not have a license from Vedanti either, and none from anybody granting Sub-License rights to Max Sound. And no sub-licensing rights signed by me or from Vedanti Systems to any entity in those litigations.
The contract between Vedanti Licensing Limited and behind that TGO4 LLC, the deal with Max Sound Corporation is not actual ownership named on the patents. It is a private, but strong ties- matter. Unless Max Sound wants to publish it with their S.E.C. Q-10 or 8-K filings it is to remain private. However, Google lawyer in the Appeal raised the contract between Vedanti and Max Sound, they have a copy. There are cancellation clauses. But VLL doesn't want or need to exercise them.
Max Sound does not own-own the patents, nor is 50% or any large amount of rights or ownership or even profit-sharing of 22 Vedanti patents in that high value-region. They had no License, and don't have a license now. They are however,business allies; Vedanti and my former lawyers, and Vedanti's lawyers now, are in nullification proceedings in Germany, and IPR in February -as you all write about-in USPTO. Caused by Max Sound 2014 actions. But Vedanti also in 2016 sued the very same parties, and with Standing.
Isn't it better that water and old history should go under the bridge? That parties have settled? And get on with the issues at hand: Google, YouTube, On2 Technology, Adsense, and separately Netflix infringing my inventions and granted with no prior art status.
Beyond that, it is enough that the accomplished men from TGO4 and Boies Schiller Flexner, their lawyers who recommended the settlement of litigation and, to also work together via Ken Lustig to license within the industry, and to sign a partnership, not licensing.
I do not know whether IPR and Nullification will prevail, but I can't see how Google can prevail; I see a clear cut world of loss for Google and for Netflix, and fertile grounds to settle. They didn't invent anything in these patents. And neither did anybody else, no prior art. And yet they make a boatload of revenue while using my inventions, my millions and time I and my lawyers and my teams spent. Today, Vedanti owned for Vedanti Licensing Limited entity will prevail. And Max Sound will prevail too, due to their VLL contract.
I hope to help in the IPR, as I did in the Nullification, and to make sure that our lawyers win. Google did steal all of the inventions and they did make at last count, 22 divisions. Google and On2 do what with patents, and why they need patents even though Google touts 'OPEN SOURCE'. Patents are used to INDEMNIFY VENDTORS, PRODUCTs, TO PROTECT VENDORS FROM BEING SUED FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT BY A PARTY WHO HAD PRIOR ART.
And they produced with my inventions and our great lawyer's patent and claims, over a hundred patents not hundreds of US_to foreign including Conversions world-wide: remember the 2010 All Google Meeting between all executives and divisions discussing our trade secrets, codec, and immense impact for Google to build ad make products: they wrote of them -the visions -on the Yellow Post Its!!
One of the 32 Post Its, post Its that I still own, says, "go round patent, file our own.", while another says "try to destroy emails." They wrote of YouTube, metadata, music, storage, adsense and more: what Vedanti's thousand or so confidential information could do for Google's massive billions earned -since -in specifically mentioned expansion.
Those emails were breaches of the Google created NDA and too, a violation of the Uniform Trade Secrets Act, and the slightly tougher - California Uniform Trade Secrets Act.
Google's notes NAME parties not within Google companies, parties to whom they gave our trade secrets and confidential information. And they reminded themselves to be sure and destroy the incriminating and litigation-rights against recipients as per the UTSA- emails. Forgetting the notes.
These rare Notes are not Lawyer Work Notes, which Google lawyers Wilson Sonsini in August 2014 " sold as a "lawful -CA defense" to both Max Sound and their unlawful, litigation lawyers all of whom -and unknown to me, signed Sanctions from Google --against their collective selves IF THE POST ITS NOTES BECAME PUBLIC. The defense? California has a rule, not a law: "lawyer work notes" .
Greg Halpern knew I was in interviews with Post Its, he said that to me, Bob Newell, and Steve Hawkins -now TGO4, Greg said in 2014 September 2, when we met at his home office: "I will deny I gave permission to show the Notes. But go ahead, here is my biographer screenwriter Del Armstrong, he'll help you." Why did Greg do that? Because he didn't like that his lawyers didn't include the actual Post Its in the Complaints. They referred to them. Not smart move. I had no control, nor knowledge of any filing. I was to be kept in the dark, I didn't want IPR and global losses of Vedanti's rights to monetize.
Constance Nash
