Curtis Lu, Senior Vice President and Deputy General Counsel and Chief Ethics and Compliance Officer Time Warner Inc.

A Stunning New Development in the Trillion Dollar Iviewit Stolen Patent Case.

After a Decade of Warner Bros., Time Warner Inc. and AOL seemingly ignoring the Blatant Fraud and Shareholder Liability from violating non-compete agreements and basically disregarding Legally Binding agreements that put Shareholders Liable for Billions... well last week Lorie Coulombe - Executive Director - Time Warner Inc. Investor Relations emails Eliot Bernstein of Iviewit Technologies.

And it almost seemed like Warner Bros. was going to actually start "Risk Management" and to come clean with the Massive Shareholder Fraud that They have known about for a Decade... but wait.. then...

Ok well.. Lorie Coulombe - Executive Director - Time Warner Inc. Investor Relations emails Eliot Bernstein of Iviewit Technologies Says:

" Dear Mr. Bernstein,

This is to acknowledge that Time Warner Inc. received your email of March 17, 2010 sent to the Investor Relations email address.

In the event of furture correspondence regarding the subject of your email, we request that you contact Mr. Curtis Lu, Senior Vice President and Deputy General Counsel and Chief Ethics and Compliance Officer of Time Warner, with whom we understand you have already been in contact.

Sincerely,
Lorie Coulombe
Executive Director
Time Warner Inc. Investor Relations
One Time Warner Center
New York, NY 10019
T: 212-484-8972 ""

After this Curtis Lu, Eliot Bernstein and Eliot's Attorney had a Talk..

It is My Understanding that Curtis Lu Curtis Lu, Senior Vice President and Deputy General Counsel and Chief Ethics and Compliance Officer Time Warner Inc. has spoke with *Iviewit's Eliot Bernstein... apparently some Savvy, Smart Time Warner Inc. , Warner Bros. Investors are calling Curtis Lu, Senior Vice President and Deputy General Counsel and Chief Ethics and Compliance Officer Time Warner Inc. and asking about their risk with this Iviewit Thing..

and well you see though there are 1200 documents online and the Iviewit Patent was Stolen a Decade ago and is used on pretty much all TV's, Phones, Video Cameras, and much .. MUCH more.. well apparently Curtis Lu did not look into the Evidence, the Agreements, and though Curtil Lu is paid to assess Risk for shareholders and is a Compliance officer ... well Curtis Lu does not seem to know how to Google, to Read Documents and to do his homework in assessing the Billions in Risk to the Shareholders he is Paid to Protect...

So Curtis Lu, Senior Vice President and Deputy General Counsel and Chief Ethics and Compliance Officer Time Warner Inc. thought he would save himself the time of researching contracts, reading blogs - documents and proof and instead he would just ask One Dumbass Question to Eliot Bernstein - Iviewit owner and one of the Iviewit Technologies Inventors....

Curtis Lu, Senior Vice President and Deputy General Counsel and Chief Ethics and Compliance Officer Time Warner Inc. asked

"What is My Risk Here" ??????

Years of Stress, Family Threatened, Car Bombed.. and been through hell and some VP calls a decade later and asks... uh .. gee.. mr. bernstein.. uh what is my risk here.. duh..???

Wouldn't you agree that this move, increased the "Exposure" - the "Risk" for Curtis Lu, Senior Vice President and Deputy General Counsel and Chief Ethics and Compliance Officer Time Warner Inc. ?

I mean for a decade Warner Bros. had managed to simply ignore their blatant non-disclosure of Massive Shareholder Fraud. In this they had seemed to dance around and to avoid legal issues, avoid SEC Complaints and Pretty much Commit Silent Fraud that had, well gone unnoticed by many - MANY shareholders... for nearly a decade...

And in one Dumb Ass Move Curtis Lu, Senior Vice President and Deputy General Counsel and Chief Ethics and Compliance Officer Time Warner Inc. Publicly Displays, Admits the HUGE Error that Warner Bros. Made, admits that Warner Bros. had ignored it, asks Eliot Bernstein of Iviewit Technologies what the risk is for Time Warner Inc. - Warner Bros. and then after this opening of a Dialogue with Iviewit Technologies after nearly a decade ...

well Curtis Lu, Senior Vice President and Deputy General Counsel and Chief Ethics and Compliance Officer Time Warner Inc. simply disappears.. after Curtis Lu - Time Warner Inc. has a detailed conversation with Eliot Bernstein of Iview Technologies and Fully grasps the Billions in Shareholder Liability and the MAJOR Fraud and Liability to insurance companies and bond holders for not disclosing this liability for a decade.. well then Curtis Lu of Time Warner Inc. Simply Does Nothing..

so Why did Curtis Lu, Senior Vice President and Deputy General Counsel and Chief Ethics and Compliance Officer Time Warner Inc. initiate a half ass risk management conversation with Eliot Bernstein of Iviewit Technologies?

Well so that Curtis Lu could manage the Risk of the Shareholders being Concerned, Mad and all those pesky shareholder questions... you see apparently the Smart Literate Shareholders of Time Warner Inc. , Warner Bros and AOL are VERY Concerned about the millions of dollars of risk and liability that they will have to encure when the Iviewit Financial Bomb drops and .. this will be retroactive..

another words this will be a massive mess and over the last decade.. the Shareholders are calling Curtis Lu and Complaining, they are worried about this Iviewit Thing and what it means to them and to their heirs... and well rightfully so as it is a VERY Big Deal..

The kind of Big Deal that the CEO Jeffrey Bewkes and the VP Curtis Lu can simply brush off and the kind of Big Deal that YOU and your Heirs will pay millions upon millions for..

Curtis Lu can now say... oh yes I have spoke with Mr. Bernstein of Iviewit and I have successful assessed the risk .. no worries Mr. and Mrs. Shareholder all is well..

Now of Course the Share holders have Brains, Can Read and Can think for themselves and easily see that one day all this will come to light as the Truth tends to do that... Jeffrey Bewkes CEO of Time Warner seems to be completely blind as to what is going here..

However the Email from Lorie Coulombe - Executive Director - Time Warner Inc. Investor Relations and the Conversation that Curtis Lu had with Eliot Bernstein of Iviewit Technologies and his attorney WELL that pretty much admits that Time Warner Inc. , Warner Bros. knows of this massive fraud and always has... Shareholders need to be aware as you are the ones who will pay the price...

It Seems that Curtis Lu, Senior Vice President and Deputy General Counsel and Chief Ethics and Compliance Officer Time Warner Inc. is soon to be attending a major Compliance Officer meeting.. this would be the perfect opportunity for Curtis Lu of Time Warner Inc. to get his Oh Shit Plan Ready... as NOW the Liability has doubled for the intent, the blatant fraud... and the major Shareholder Corruption has just been admitted to AGAIN...

Time Warner (NYSE:TWX)
SVP, Deputy CG, Chief Compliance Officer
Curtis Lu
Will Be Attending Compliance Week 2010
Check Out the List of People he will be around
http://www.complianceweek.com/page/758/2010-conference-speakers
I wonder if Curtis Lu - Time Warner will Tell any of this folks of the MAJOR Shareholder Fraud he is aware of and Deliberately Keeping from Shareholders?


Links to More on the Iviewit - Warner Bros., Time Warner Inc., Jeffrey Bewkes, Curtis Lu and AOL Connection.

http://docs.google.com/View?id=dgvpzjzw_9ghxg4km9
SEC Complaint

http://www.iviewit.tv/
iViewit Website

http://www.deniedpatent.com/
My Blog on the Iviewit Stolen Patent

http://www.deniedpatent.com/2010/01/letter-from-aol-time-warner-regarding.html
David Colter Emails, John Caulkins Emails, Chuck Dages, and Alan Bell

http://www.deniedpatent.com/search/label/Warner%20Bros.
Warner Bros. Posts on my Iviewit Blog

Links from Iviewit Web Page about Warner Bros.

http://www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/20010822%20-%20SIGNED%20Warner%20Bros%20Agreement%20AOL.pdf

http://www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/colter%20letter%20to%20Calkins.pdf

http://www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/2003%2004%2011%20-%20Rubenstein%20repsonse%20KRANE%20CONFLICT%20AUTHORED%20to%20N.pdf

http://www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/proskauer%20client%20infringers.pdf

http://www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/2004%2011%2015%20SC%2004-1078%20IVIEWIT%20REBUTTAL%20TO%20FLORIDA%20BAR%20RESP(1).pdf







SEC CRIMINAL COMPLAINT AGAINST AOL, TIME WARNER & WARNER BROS. SHAREHOLDER FRAUD! IVIEWIT PRESS RELEASE




Curtis Lu

Eliot Bernstein of Iviewit Technologies files SEC and FBI Complaint with Mary Schapiro, against Warner Bros., AOL Inc., Time Warner, Intel, SGI, and .

SEC Complaint Filed, is the SEC Listening .. It Does not sound like it. The SEC must be covering up for Favors owed, covering and protecting billionair tech companies and Above the Law Law Firms Like Foley and Lardner and Proskauer Rose.

Eliot Bernstein of Iviewit Technologies files SEC & FBI Complaint with Mary Schapiro & Others against Warner Bros., AOL Inc., Time Warner, Intel, SGI, Lockheed Martin, Proskauer Rose, Foley & Lardner.

"" March 14, 2010 --

FORMAL CRIMINAL COMPLAINT TO SEC & FBI
RE SHAREHOLDER FRAUD BY LEADING BLUE CHIPS

Corp Management of Time Warner (NYSE: TWX), Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc., AOL Inc. (NYSE: AOL), Intel Corporation (NASDAQ: INTC), Silicon Graphics, Inc. (delisted NYSE: SGI) & successor Silicon Graphics International (NASDAQ: SGI), Sony Corporation (NYSE/ADR: SNE) , Lockheed Martin Corporation (NYSE: LMT), Ernst & Young Global Limited have known about the Trillion Dollar Iviewit Liabilities for years & allegedly have concealed the liabilities from Shareholders & in some instances reorganized to the detriment of Shareholders in alleged fraudulent transactions, which may lead to Shareholder Rescissory Rights & catastrophic damage to the companies as complained of to Fed Officials.FEB 12, 2010 CRIMINAL COMPLAINTThe SEC Complaint filed Feb 12, 2010,

“Iviewit & Eliot I. Bernstein Official Formal Complaint…against Warner Bros. Entertainment, Inc., AOL Inc. & Time Warner, regarding Trillion Dollar alleged Fraud on Shareholders; FASB No. 5 & other SEC accounting violations & violations of State, Federal & Int’l Laws; Rescissory Rights of Shareholders; Evidence & Important Info for the SEC regarding ongoing SEC Investigations of Bernard L. Madoff, Marc S. Dreier, Sir Robert Allen Stanford, Proskauer Rose, Galleon, Enron Broadband, Enron, Arthur Andersen & more”

http://www.iviewit.tv/wordpress/?p=274

and

http://www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/20100206%20FINAL%20SEC%20FBI%20and%20more%20COMPLAINT%20Against%20Warner%20Bros%20Time%20Warner%20AOL176238nscolorlow.pdf

SEC COMPLAINT INTEL, LOCKHEED MARTIN & SGIA SEC complaint also was filed by Iviewit against Intel, SGI & Lockheed & similar allegations were levied against these corps for Patent Theft, knowing infringement & Shareholder Fraud.

The March 29th 2009 SEC Complaint to Shapiro titled “Complaint Regarding Intel Corp & Possible Trillion Dollar Fraud on Intel Shareholders & Others”http://www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/United%20States%20District%20Court%20Southern%20District%20NY/20090325%20FINAL%20Intel%20SEC%20Complaint%20SIGNED2073.pdf

12 COUNT 12 TRILLION DOLLAR FED RICO & ANTITRUST SUIT LEGALLY MARKED “RELATED” TO NY SUPREME COURT WHISTLEBLOWER SUIT

Liabilities for the complained of companies centers on both knowing technology infringements & liabilities from failure to report the Fed RICO & ANTITRUST filed by Iviewit & now legally marked “RELATED” to the Whistleblower suit of Christine C. Anderson, a former staff attorney for the NY Supreme Court Appellate Division. Anderson gave riveting testimony of systemic corruption to the NY State Senate Judiciary & in sworn testimony in before Judge Shira Scheindlin of Whitewashing & Criminal Obstruction by Court Officials for “Favored Lawyers & Law Firms, the US Attorney in New York, the DA and Asst DA” or words to that effect. Anderson further fingered one of the “CLEANERS” of ATTORNEY MISCONDUCT COMPLAINTS at the NY Supreme Court as Naomi Goldstein.A “CLEANER” at the ETHICS department of NY responsible for attorney regulation in Manhattan & the WallStreet financial district, perhaps the reason the country is suffering from a lack of attorney regulation in the heart of the financial district that has led to lax or complicit regulators and prosecutors and a worldwide economic meltdown.

Anderson’s testimony http://www.iviewit.tv/20090608nysjudiciaryhearing/index.htmhttp://www.iviewit.tv/wordpress/?p=205

Bernstein testimony before the NY Senate Judiciary of systemic corruption that has blocked due process & procedure via corrupt infiltration of the NY Courts @http://www.iviewit.tv/wordpress/?p=189http://www.iviewit.tv/wordpress/?p=165

HOUSE OF CARD COLLAPSING ON NY CRIME SYNDICATE INSIDE NY COURTS, ETHICS DEPARTMENTS, PUBLIC OFFICES & REGULATORY AGENCIES BY CRIMINAL LAW FIRMS & LAWYERSThe House of Cards is Crumbling on Key Players in the Iviewit Scandal as the NY Corruption Scandal Elevates to Senior NY Political Figures including Cuomo & members of the NY Supreme Court & US Fed Courts in NY. Proskauer Rose.

Proskauer, mastermind of the bungled attempt to steal the Iviewit patents through Fraud on the US Patent Office & further bungled attempts to cover up the crimes in the NY Courts is under further scrutiny with Proskauer’s direct involvement in the Stanford Financial Ponzi & subsequent resignation of partner Thomas Sjoblom, a former SEC enforcement officer, allegedly found coaching Stanford employees on how to lie to SEC & FBI investigators at a Miami Airport Hanger preceding the arrest of Stanford & his employees.

Proskauer also sued in a Class Action suit for the entire 7 billion dollar Stanford losses & sued by an arrested Stanford employee. Proskauer has further direct ties to both the Madoff & Dreier Ponzis.NY Attorney General CuomoFollowing the illegal representation by the NY AG in the Iviewit RICO & ANTITRUST suit & Anderson’s Whistleblower suit under Spitzer as NY AG, the Cuomo Admin continues to represent illegally State Defendants in both cases left over by Spitzer (a named Defendant in the RICO and Antitrust).

As the Iviewit & Anderson claims are further investigated & litigated these present the largest liability to Cuomo’s run for any office as the largest scandal brewing in NY begins to unravel with his offices dead center.

Anderson’s filing http://www.frankbrady.org/TammanyHall/Documents_files/Anderson%20111609%20Filing.pdf

Iviewit filings of Illegal rep by Cuomo @http://www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/United%20States%20District%20Court%20Southern%20District%20NY/20080305%20Final%20Plaintiff%20Oposition%20to%20AG%20Cuomo%20letter%20email%20copy.pdfhttp://www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/United%20States%20District%20Court%20Southern%20District%20NY/20090129%20Final%20Extension%20of%20Time%202%20SIGNED%20low.pdf

The US District CourtWith Anderson’s revelations in the US District Court & the Jury finding that her 1st Amendment Rights to Free Speech regarding Whistleblower Allegations had been violated, the whole case has been called into question & further questioned due to the ILLEGAL REPRESENTATION of the NY AG Cuomo’s office. Based on Cuomo’s illegal representation of State Officials, Anderson filed for an entirely new hearing based on the Cuomo’s mass conflicts. Iviewit alleges that NY AG Cuomo’s illegal representation of State Defendants, Officially & Personally, violates his office duties & obligations of honest services to NY, public office rules and violates state & federal laws, whereby the Conflicts of Interest act to block investigation of the State Defendants fingered by Whistleblower Anderson & in Iviewit’s suit, causing Obstruction of Justice through Fraud on the Court. Serious allegations for Cuomo who continues to illegally represent State Officials on public funds, while failing to investigate those same public officials, including former NY Chief Judge Judith Kaye.

Also of concern is if these massive liabilities have been reported to State Auditors by Cuomo?The US 2nd CircuitIn the US Second Circuit, Iviewit filed a “Motion to Compel” compelling that court to follow law, as with Anderson’s revelations exposing court members, that court has tried to ILLEGALLY Dismiss all the legally “related” cases to Anderson in attempts to bury them & keep the lids on the scandal that may lead them to exchange their legal robes for prison garb. Motion to Compel

http://www.iviewit.tv/wordpress/?p=78http://www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/United%20States%20District%20Court%20Southern%20District%20NY/20090908%20FINAL%20Emergency%20Motion%20to%20Compel%20SIGNED44948.pdf ""

"Addressed to:
SEC Chair Mary Shapiro
SEC IG, H. David Kotz
IG OF THE US DOJ, Glenn Fine
FBI
HOUSE & SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
NY SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
US AG, Eric Holder

Treasury IG, David Gouvaia
SBA IG, Peggy Gustafson & Daniel O’Rourke

US DEP OF COMMERCE IG, Todd Zinser
Under Sec of Commerce for Intellectual Property & Dir of the USPTO, David Kappos
Deputy Under Sec of Commerce for Intellectual Property & Deputy Dir of the USPTO, Sharon Barner

USPTO - OFFICE OF ENROLLMENT & DISCIPLINE DIR, Harry I. Moatz
US PRESIDENT, Hon President of the US, Barack H. Obama II
FILED AGAINST
Warner Bros. Entertainment, Inc.
Chair & CEO: Barry Meyer

Pres & COO: Alan Horn
EVP & CFO: Edward Romano
VP & Chief Patent Counsel: Wayne Smith
AOL, Inc.
Chair & CEO: Tim Armstrong
GC & EVP: Ira Parker
Counsel - Patent Lit, Prosecution & Licensing: Christopher Day
Exec Escalation Team: Jerry McKinley

Time Warner, Inc.
Chair & CEO: Jeffrey Bewkes
EVP & GC: Paul Cappuccio
MARCH 29, 2009 SEC COMPLAINT INTEL, LOCKHEED MARTIN & SGI "

Press Release for Immediate Release

AOL, Intel, Lockheed, Mary Schapiro, SEC Complaints, SGI, Time Warner, Warner Bros.

Eliot Bernstein, Iviewit Technologies Filed a Detailed Complaint with the SEC, with Mary Schapiro Against Corporate Management of Time Warner (NYSE: TWX) and Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc., AOL Inc. (NYSE: AOL), , Intel Corporation (NASDAQ: INTC), Silicon Graphics, Inc. (delisted NYSE: SGI) & successor Silicon Graphics International (NASDAQ: SGI), Sony Corporation (NYSE/ADR: SNE) , Lockheed Martin Corporation (NYSE: LMT), Ernst & Young Global Limited (Ernst & Young refers to one or more of the member firms of Ernst & Young Global Limited (EYG), a UK private company limited by guarantee) have known about the Iviewit Liabilities for years and they are alleged to have concealed the liabilities from Shareholders and in some instances reorganized to the detriment of Shareholders in alleged fraudulent transactions which may lead to Shareholder Rescissory Rights and catastrophic damage to the companies.

Mary Schapiro and the SEC have been Warned in Great Detail of Major Shareholder Fraud. If you are a Shareholder of Warner Bros., AOL, Time Warner,Intel, SGI, Sony Corporation, Lockheed Martin YOU need to be aware of the Eliot Bernstein Iviewit Complaint.

The Corporate Management of Warner Bros., AOL, Time Warner,Intel, SGI, Sony Corporation, Lockheed Martin have known about this Liability for years and they are hiding it from you. Many of your investment firms now know of this SEC Complaint to Mary Schapiro - I have seen them on my site and Clicking through to the Enormous Amount of Details and proof in the SEC Complaint itself and at the Iviewit Technologies Website on this Iviewit Technologies Stolen Patent, www.iViewit.tv.

The SEC Complaint proves without a doubt of what will Soon be Trillion Dollar Liability to the Shareholders of Warner Bros.,AOL, Time Warner,Intel, SGI, Sony Corporation, Lockheed Martin. This will be in the Billions for Each Company, and the Shareholders of Warner Brothers, AOL, Time Warner,Intel, SGI, Sony Corporation, Lockheed Martin as well as Mary Schapiro of the SEC and the Major Law Firms involved in this Trillion Dollar Shareholder Fraud, well they will NOT be able to say they did not know, for there are well over a Thousand Documents at www.iViewit.tv that proves they have known for years.

How long will this game go on? No one can really be sure how long that Mary Schapiro of the SEC, the USPTO, the US Courts will let this continue to drag out at the expense of the shareholders of Warner Bros., AOL, Time Warner,Intel, SGI, Sony Corporation, Lockheed Martin. What we can see is Blatant Obvious Fraud, Obstruction of Justice and a Covering up for folks like Intel CEO Paul Otellini, Ex-General Counsel of Warner Bruce Sewell - Now the General Counsel at Apple, Jeffrey Bewkes of Warner Bros., Proskauer Rose Law Firm, Foley and Lardner Law Firm, and Many more in the SEC Complaint filed by Iviewit Technologies Eliot Bernstein.

These High Profile Law Firm and the United States Securities and Exchange Commission Keeping this information from shareholders if Unethical at best, it is Fraud and the shareholders will pay for all of this with their hard earned money as the years pile on.

Click here to Read Details of this SEC Complaint.

Eliot Bernstein of Iviewit Technologies has Filed an SEC Complaint and YOU need to Know about. Click Here for the Official SEC Complaint and Great Detail and Proof of Shareholder Fraud and Shareholder Liability cause by Neglect, Fraud and Blatantly Violations of Contracts by Warner Bros., AOL, Time Warner,Intel, SGI, Sony Corporation, Lockheed Martin and more carry Trillions in Liability that they have seemingly reported to No One.

Eliot Bernstein SEC Complaint

posted here by

Investigative Blogger
Crystal L. Cox

Warner Bros. Signed Non Disclosure Agreements with Iviewit, Warner Violated those Agreements. Warner Signed License and Service Agreements.. .

Warner Bros. - has broke the Law and in the process put shareholders at HUGE risk, why is Jeffrey Bewkes ignoring this blatant proof of Fraud.

Warner Bros signed multiple Iviewit Non Disclosure Agreements and Warner Bros. Signed License and Service Agreements with the Iviewit Company. 9 years have passed and Warner Bros. Blatantly and Illegally Violated those agreements long ago, why?

And Now Eliot Bernstein Founder and one of the Inventors it the Iviewit Stolen Patent has filed a very informative, incredibly detailed SEC Complaint. One that for Now Mary Schapiro and the SEC seems to be ignoring... I am not sure why just yet.. but hope to get tips on this soon...

Some of the Warner Bros' Iviewit Timeline and more details
of the Warner Bros. Relationship with the Iviewit Company.

" " TIMELINE OF WARNER BROS ET AL. RELATIONSHIP WITH IVIEWIT

The following Timelines are presented to give a factual timeline to the allegations herein, the exhibits are linked online and all Uniform Resource Locators (“URL”) and Exhibited Links throughout this document are hereby incorporated, in entirety by reference herein, including over 1000 evidentiary links on the homepage at www.iviewit.tv with exhibits that contain thousands of pages of factual evidence[5].

The timeline will also reveal facts regarding the relationships between many of the Defendants in my Federal RICO and ANTITRUST Lawsuit and Warner Bros et al., including relations to the main perpetrator of the alleged crimes, the law firm Proskauer Rose.

*Note Warner Bros et al. relevant mergers, acquisitions and breakups to these matters in the timeline below are in bold italics.

1998-2002
Relevant Communications Between Iviewit and Warner Bros et al.

· 1998-2001
Inventions in Imaging and Video Discovered and Intellectual Property Filings begin in 1998. Proskauer Rose was retained Intellectual Property counsel for Iviewit for filing of Intellectual Properties.

· 2000-2002
Warner Bros et al. signs multiple Iviewit Non Disclosure Agreements.

Non-Disclosure Agreements @
http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/Patents/Confidentialities/confidentialities%20total.pdf
Pages 1-5, 10, 61-62, 80, 108-109, 234

· November 02, 2000 ~ Letter to GS regarding Warner Bros. Technological Calls to Iviewit Investors by Warner Bros. employees, describing the efficacy of the Inventions and the results of the review by Warner Bros., including the anticipated uses by Warner Bros et al.

http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/20001101%20Goldman%20Friedstein%20Letter%20from%20Buchsbaum%20re%20AOLTW%20Colter%20meetings.pdf

· January 11, 2001 ~ America Online and Time Warner Complete Merger to Create AOL Time Warner
http://www.timewarner.com/corp/newsroom/pr/0,20812,668364,00.html

· February 08, 2001 ~ Letter from David J. Colter (“Colter”) ~ Vice President Technology - Technological Operations Warner Bros. to Founder of AOL, Ted Leonsis (“Leonsis”), regarding the efficacy of the Iviewit technologies.

http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/20010208%20Colter%20to%20Leonsis%20Warner%20Bros%20AOL.pdf

· February 15, 2001 EFFECTIVE DATE - Signed Warner Bros. License And Service Agreement @
http://www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/20010822%20-%20SIGNED%20Warner%20Bros%20Agreement%20AOL.pdf

August 15, 2001 Irell & Manella LLP Bills for Services for Warner Bros et al. and Sony Licensing Agreements @

http://www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/Patents/Paul%20Allen/old%20patent/LEGAL/Irell%20&%20Manella/Bills/2001%2008%2029%20-%20Irell%20Bill.pdf

It is imperative for the SEC to note that after the Signed Licensing and Service Agreement, Iviewit opened a California Office inside a Warner Bros. building, in order to take over encoding operations for their online content, and more.

Iviewit began billing according to the Licensing and Service agreement. Please note the language in the Licensing and Service agreement pertaining to the Proprietary nature and Confidentiality of the Iviewit inventions.

Suddenly, after the agreements were signed and operations were underway, Wayne M. Smith ~ Vice President and Chief Patent Counsel at Warner Bros. began seeking a re-review of Proskauer Partner Kenneth Rubenstein ’s (“Rubenstein”) prior patent opinions regarding the Iviewit inventions to Warner Bros. employees.

Smith then claimed to Colter that he found problems while reviewing Rubenstein’s opinion with the patents on file at the US Patent Office[6]. At this point, allegedly, a coordinated conspiratorial effort between Smith, Rubenstein and others began to derail the already signed Iviewit agreements with Warner Bros et al.

Allegedly, former “Acting CEO” of Iviewit, P. Stephen Lamont, (a referral emanating from AOL’s Leonsis) Smith and Rubenstein then worked to derail the Licensing and Service Agreement. Warner Bros. then further attempted to deny the existence of this BINDING CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATION as further evidenced in letters exhibited herein, whereby the Signed and Binding agreement is wholly denied.

The amount owed in service fees since the signing of the contracts would be an enormous amount over the almost 10 years of use and where Warner Bros et al. have never notified Iviewit they were cancelling such contract, it may still be considered effective. Yet, it would difficult to cancel what one tries to deny the existence of and perhaps the reason no cancellation was formally completed.

o The emails forward from this point in the timeline begin to attempt to hide from the fact that Licensing and Service Agreements were already in place while also hiding these facts and liabilities from Shareholders and Auditors.

The alleged fraud may again have catastrophic effect on these highly traded stocks, reaching back to this point in time and possibly further back.

· April 04, 2001 Letter from Colter to William J. "Bill" Raduchel (“Raduchel”) ~ Chief Technology Officer and Executive Vice President at AOL. AOL’s Leonsis referred Raduchel to do further due diligence for an investment in the Iviewit companies, in addition to the Licensing and Encoding deal already signed.

http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/20010404%20Colter%20to%20Raduchel%20Leonsis%20referral%20AOL%20Warner%20Bros.pdf

· May 25, 2001 Letters to and from Douglas Chey (“Chey”), Senior Vice President of Technology for Sony Pictures Digital Entertainment and Divisional CIO, Motion Pictures and Television Productions of Sony Pictures Entertainment. Chey, formerly with Warner Bros. was working with Iviewit at Sony (also under Signed Agreements) together with Warner to do a Five Studio Movie Download Project, Movielink, where the Iviewit inventions were to be the backbone enabling technologies to make digital download and streaming possible as a commercial endeavor.

Since that time, Warner Bros et al. and Sony have both done similar digital downloading projects, in violation of Signed Agreements with Iviewit.

http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/20010525%20Sony%20Doug%20Chey%20Endorsement%20of%20Tech%20and%20Advisory%20Board%20Option%20letter.pdf

http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/20100120%20Douglas%20Chey%20Sony%20Bio.pdf

The SEC should also begin FORMAL INVESTIGATION of Sony’s involvement in these matters. Similar calls to those described herein to Warner Bros et al. for sound business discussions to attempt to alleviate shareholder liabilities have gone wholly ignored by Sony’s In House Counsel, Executives and Auditors.

I will be filing a more formal complaint shortly with the SEC but this should not delay immediate investigation by the SEC, in order to preclude Massive Liabilities to Shareholders of Sony.

The SEC and all other investigators and committees addressed herein, can take this Formal Complaint additionally as a FORMAL COMPLAINT AGAINST SONY. ""

Source of Post and of Warner Bros SEC Complaint

Does Mary Shapiro SEC Boss, Know about the Iviewit Stolen Patent Case and Its HUGE Implications to Shareholders?

YOU Bet She Does...

How Will She Explain what She has Let Happen
in a Trillion Dollar Liability to Shareholders...???

It seems from Many documents at www.Iviewit.TV That Mary Shapiro of the SEC had knowledgle long ago about what Proskauer Rose was up to and yet .. what ?? the Standford affair is some NEW Shocker of a Story, yet Mary Shapiro had been given notice by Eliot Bernstein and the Iviewit Company years before the Billion Dollar Scandal hit the Main Stream Media.

Does Mary Shapiro or the SEC have ANY Liability to the Shareholders when they had advance knowledge of the Players and did nothing to prevent the Standford Affair?

$65 Billion in the Bernie Madoff Scheme is NOT all that Mary Shapiro and the SEC missed... What about the Standford Affair - Billions and Connected to Proskauer Rose. What About Enron and Proskauer Connections - and what about all the Players, Shareholder Fraud, and Liability that the Eliot Bernstein of the Iviewit Technologies Company has brought to Mary Shapiro and the SEC's Attention ?

What do they say, I just did not know or see this coming? So Sorry you Lost Billions - I had no Way of Knowing... well Crystal L. Cox, Investigative Blogger says.. "BULL, Mary Shapiro and the SEC knew" and they IGNORED leads, had no one seemingly watching websites, reading documents, scouring blogs or even looking into leads that led to BILLIONS of Innocent Investors losing their Money.

The SEC has no purpose that is really beneficial and in my Opinion is just as susceptible as being Bought Off as anyone other Corrupt Government Agent, Attorney, CEO or Judge" .

Won't it be Amusing when Warner Brothers, Intel Corp., Sony, AOL, and all those Billion Dollar Tech Companies go Belly up and take the Shareholders to Bankruptcy because of the Contracts they signed and did not fulfill with the Iviewit Technologies Company that puts them in Connection and at least in part Liable for a Trillion Dollar Liability that they SEEM to have overlooked on their Books with all their bragging of Profits this quarter... blah .. blah.. blah.. and what Does Mary Shapiro Say? Is she even Acknowledging any of it?

Won't it be Hysterically when the SEC, when Mary Shapiro says to the Warner Brothers, AOL, Intel Corp, Sony ... Shareholders that Gee I just didn't see that Trillion Dollar HIT Coming.. We had no warning.. other then the years of complaints filed from the Iviewit Technologies Company in Which I IGNORED.. gee Sorry..

It is not Personal, it is Business,
Mary Schapiro - YOUR FIRED !!!..

posted By Investigative Blogger
Crystal L. Cox...
Crystal Cox
More on the Obvious, Blatant Shareholder Fraud among tons of Major Tech Companies.. and the Iviewit Stolen Patent Story at www.DeniedPatent.com and at www.Iviewit.TV over a thousand documents of Proof So Far.
Mary Shapiro
Research Links on Mary Shapiro and her Knowledge of possible Shareholder Fraud in which, to me it looks like she did nothing, and well Billions upon Billions are lost by innocent Investors. And the Potention of Trillions More...

http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/United%20States%20District%20Court%20Southern%20District%20NY/20090325%20SEC%20FAX%20Cover%20Page.pdf

http://www.trialbyblog.com/2010/01/eliot-i-bernstein-intel-corporation-sec.html

http://www.free-press-release.com/news-iviewit-trillion-fed-suit-defendant-proskauer-rose-sued-in-global-class-action-re-stanford-ponzi-1252249099.html

http://seekingalpha.com/user/478415/comments/highest-rated

http://www.stolenpatent.com/2010_01_01_archive.html


Gee Sorry ... NO One Brought it to My Attention: I just Did not See ANY sign of this COMING... What a Crock that Will BE..

Crystal Cox Blogger

P. Stephen Lamont - Friend or Foe of the Iviewit Shareholders?

Is P. Stephen Lamont working for or Against the Iviewit Shareholders and the best interest of the Iviewit Inventors?

******

Below is an excerpt from an SEC letter to be filed shortly regarding information regarding the fraudulent actions of P. Stephen Lamont in his continued representation of Iviewit, as CEO no less, at an address where no Iviewit company has ever been incorporated or listed with any agency.

P. Stephen Lamont was fired long ago and has no right to act in any capacity for Iviewit or Iviewit Shareholders.

P. Stephen Lamont also has been reported to the courts for his criminal activities in representing shareholders in my Federal RICO and Antitrust case when he is not a licensed attorney and never has passed the bar.

You will find other information below regarding the illegal activities of P. Stephen Lamont and he has been reported to State and Federal agencies regarding these crimes.

I advise anyone considering dealing with P. Stephen Lamont in any capacity to check with your legal counsel about the possible ramifications you may incur regarding any issues with Iviewit and Lamont. These latest assaults on my character etc. appear to be feeble attempts by a desperate man whose cover and misdeeds have been exposed.

P. Stephen Lamont also references filings with the US Second Circuit whereby his separate appeal has been dismissed but fails to mention that in my appeal he also was identified for illegally representing Iviewit Shareholders when he is not an attorney.

• FEBRUARY 15, 2001 EFFECTIVE DATE - SIGNED WARNER BROS. LICENSE AND SERVICE AGREEMENT @

http://www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/20010822%20-%20SIGNED%20Warner%20Bros%20Agreement%20AOL.pdf

• August 15, 2001 Irell & Manella LLP Bills for Services for Warner Bros et al. and Sony Licensing Agreements @

http://www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/Patents/Paul%20Allen/old%20patent/LEGAL/Irell%20&%20Manella/Bills/2001%2008%2029%20-%20Irell%20Bill.pdf

It is imperative for the SEC to note that after the Signed Licensing and Service Agreement, Iviewit opened a California Office inside a Warner Bros. building, in order to take over encoding operations for their online content, and more. Iviewit began billing according to the Licensing and Service agreement. Please note the language in the Licensing and Service agreement pertaining to the Proprietary nature and Confidentiality of the Iviewit inventions.

Suddenly, after the agreements were signed and operations were underway, Wayne M. Smith ~ Vice President and Chief Patent Counsel at Warner Bros. began seeking a re-review of Proskauer Partner Kenneth Rubenstein’s (“Rubenstein”) prior patent opinions regarding the Iviewit inventions to Warner Bros. employees. Smith then claimed to Colter that he found problems while reviewing Rubenstein’s opinion with the patents on file at the US Patent Office[1].

At this point, allegedly, a coordinated conspiratorial effort between Smith, Rubenstein and others began to derail the already signed Iviewit agreements with Warner Bros. et al.

o Whereby former Acting CEO of Iviewit P. Stephen Lamont, ( a referral emanating from AOL’s Leonsis ) Smith and Rubenstein then worked to derail the Licensing and Service Agreement. Warner Bros. then further attempted to deny the existence of this BINDING CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATION as further evidenced in letters exhibited herein, whereby the agreement is attempted to be wholly denied.

The amount owed in service fees since the signing of the contracts would be an enormous amount over the almost 10 years of use and where Warner Bros et al. have never notified Iviewit they were cancelling such contract, perhaps because they were denying its existence.

o The emails forward from this point in the timeline begin to attempt to hide from the fact that Licensing and Service Agreements were already in place while also hiding these facts and liabilities from Shareholders and Auditors. The alleged fraud may again have catastrophic effect on these highly traded stocks, reaching back to this point in time and possibly further back.

• April 04, 2001 Letter from Colter to William J. "Bill" Raduchel (“Raduchel”) ~ Chief Technology Officer and Executive Vice President at AOL.

AOL’s Leonsis referred Raduchel to do further due diligence for an investment in the Iviewit companies, in addition to the Licensing and Encoding deal already signed.

http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/20010404%20Colter%20to%20Raduchel%20Leonsis%20referral%20AOL%20Warner%20Bros.pdf

• May 25, 2001 Letters to and from Douglas Chey (“Chey”), Senior Vice President of Technology for Sony Pictures Digital Entertainment and Divisional CIO, Motion Pictures and Television Productions of Sony Pictures Entertainment.

Chey formerly with Warner Bros. was working with Iviewit at Sony ( also under Signed Agreements ) together with Warner to do a Five Studio Movie Download Project, Movielink, where the Iviewit inventions were to be the backbone enabling technologies to make digital download and streaming possible as a commercial endeavor.

Since that time, Warner Bros. and Sony have both done similar digital downloading projects, in violation of Signed Agreements with Iviewit.

http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/20010525%20Sony%20Doug%20Chey%20Endorsement%20of%20Tech%20and%20Advisory%20Board%20Option%20letter.pdf

http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/20100120%20Douglas%20Chey%20Sony%20Bio.pdf

The SEC should also begin FORMAL INVESTIGATION
of Sony’s involvement in these matters.

Similar calls to those described herein to Warner Bros. et al. for sound business discussions to attempt to alleviate shareholder liabilities have gone wholly ignored by Sony’s In House Counsel, Executives and Auditors. I will be filing a more formal complaint shortly with the SEC but this should not delay immediate investigation by the SEC, in order to preclude Massive Liabilities to Shareholders of Sony.

The SEC can take this Formal Complaint additionally
as a FORMAL COMPLAINT AGAINST SONY.

• December 20, 2001 ~ P. Stephen Lamont's letter to Kenneth Rubenstein regarding Smith and Rubenstein and the refusal of Rubenstein to RE-OPINE to Smith due to what he claims is a “CONFLICT”, which led further to the breakdown of relations between Iviewit and Warner Bros et al. Lamont later affirmed to Shareholders in a written communication that Microsoft had planted him in the Iviewit companies.

Later P. Stephen Lamont changed that story to AOL and Leonsis’ niece had planted him in Iviewit through AOL Founder Leonsis’ best friend Chuck Brunelas (“Brunelas”). Brunelas recruited under contract Lamont to the Iviewit companies on behalf of Leonsis. Lamont’s revelations of being planted at the company which came after he was hired led to the termination of Lamont at that time[2].

December 20, 2001 P. Stephen Lamont Letters to Kenneth Rubenstein ~

http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/20020611%20System%20and%20Method%20for%20Fraud%20on%20USPTO.pdf

Pages 455-462

o November 09, 2001 ~ Brunelas Employment Agreement

http://www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/20011109%20Chuck%20Brunelas%20Agreement%20re%20Warner%20Bros%20AOLTW.pdf

o Based on new information since that time, it is alleged that Rubenstein, Lamont, Leonsis and Smith operated together to sabotage Iviewit/Warner Bros. et al. relations and others, purposefully to breach the prior signed licensing agreements and avoid paying the royalties owed to the Iviewit companies, using the old “good guy / bad guy” routine.

The SEC should note here that Hall and I recently reported Lamont to Federal and State authorities for alleged collusion in the RICO activities claimed in my Federal RICO and Antitrust Lawsuit, including ongoing criminal activities[3].

Further, Lamont continues to represent himself and Iviewit Shareholders as the Iviewit CEO, when he is fully aware of his termination from employment and that he has no authorization from the Board of Directors, Management or Shareholders to represent their security interests in Iviewit companies, this securities fraud also should be subject for investigation by the SEC.

• P. Stephen Lamont claims to be CEO of Iviewit Technologies, Inc. in multiple correspondences and Federal court papers with an address at 175 King Street. Armonk, N.Y. 10504 and whereby no Iviewit offices were ever opened or authorized at this address. The office is directly across the street from Defendant in my Federal RICO and Antitrust Lawsuit IBM’s world headquarters.

o Additional Evidence for the SEC regarding P. Stephen Lamont is contained in a June 18, 2009 Letter to New York Attorney General Chief of Staff, Steven M. Cohen regarding fraudulent activities of Lamont @

http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/United%20States%20District%20Court%20Southern%20District%20NY/20090618%20FINAL%20NYAG%20Steven%20Cohen%20Letter%20Re%20Lamont%20Signed.pdf

o The SEC should note here that Lamont’s initial resume submitted by Iviewit contracted employment recruiter, Brunelas, is materially different and contradicts what Lamont himself recently claims regarding his past on the Iviewit Homepage, in multiple court filings and other letters to Iviewit shareholders.

• Original 2001 Resume Submitted to Iviewit on P. Stephen Lamont by Brunelas @

http://www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/Lamont%20Resume%20Given%20to%20Iviewit%20by%20Chuck%20Brunelas%20AOL%20Warner%20Bros.pdf

• 2001 Resume Claims the following:

Columbia University School of Law ~ J. D. in Commercial and Regulatory Law - May 1992

Columbia University Graduate School of Business ~ M.B.A. in Finance and Accounting - May 1981

State University of New York at Cortland ~ B.A. in Economics - June 1978

• 2009 Iviewit Homepage Statement written by P. Stephen Lamont claims:

“By way of introduction, I am P. Stephen Lamont, former Acting CEO of Iviewit (counsel advised all Iviewit executives to resign their posts and work along side Iviewit rather than within Iviewit, as the former Board of Directors, Counsel and Accountants, disbanded without requisite notice to Shareholders in violation of law, thereby leaving massive liability and exposure) and a significant shareholder in Iviewit.

With more than a fifteen year track record as a multimedia technology and consumer electronics licensing executive and holder of a J.D. in Intellectual Property Law from Columbia University, an M.B.A in Finance, and a B.S. in Industrial Engineering” Source www.iviewit.tv homepage.

• Whereby Lamont’s legal and other degrees claimed are wholly different and therefore false in one or both of his background accounts as they are materially different, again causation for further investigation of Lamont by the SEC and other investigators this letter has been copied or addressed to.

• Further, you will note that Lamont refers to himself as “former Acting CEO of Iviewit” and claims counsel advised him to resign any official role due to the potential for charges of fraud, and I advised Lamont to follow counsels’ advice and personally, I did not accept any official roles on counsels’ advice.

Yet, even in recent court documents and other illegally signed documents executed by Lamont to major Blue Chip companies, including Microsoft, Lamont now represents himself as CEO of Iviewit inapposite of counsels’ advice, at an address that is not registered to any company Lamont claims to be employed as CEO by.

• August 05, 2009 Lamont Letter to Microsoft http://www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/20090805%20Lamont%20Illegal%20Letter%20to%20Microsoft.pdf

• Lamont further now claims such executive role in my Federal RICO and Antitrust Lawsuit, claiming he is CEO of Iviewit, when no Board has ever put him in that position and when he is fully cognizant that he has no authority legally to represent Iviewit Shareholders. Lamont even attempts to represent Iviewit Shareholders and Companies currently in Federal Court, while not having ever passed the bar to practice law and therefore precluded from representing others in court. Again, cause for further investigation of Lamont.

• February 09, 2009 Lamont Court Filing

http://www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/United%20States%20District%20Court%20Southern%20District%20NY/20090209%20Lamont%20Attempt%20to%20Quash%20Bernstein%20Motion.pdf

• The SEC should note here that while the document claims service on February 09, 2008, it appears executed February 09, 2009.

Whereby the SEC should also note that Lamont does not represent himself individually in the Lawsuit but acts on behalf of Iviewit Shareholders of which he has no authorization from Shareholders to act on their behalf and also is not a lawyer, making it ILLEGAL for him to act on others behalf in a legal capacity.

The District Court and Second Circuit Court notified of this ILLEGAL representation and asked by me to force amendment of the complaint, instead continue to allow the ILLEGAL representation of Lamont to continue. This ILLEGAL representation of Shareholders is also a serious criminal act.

• Finally, at the company Digital Factory that Lamont lists as one of his former employers, in his resume previously exhibited herein, one of the company employees later disclosed that Lamont had been in stock trouble for securities fraud with the board of that company, of course Lamont’s resume failed to disclose this material fact.

• December 31, 2001 – Letter from Brunelas to Greg B. Thagard (“Thagard”) ~ Vice President Advanced Technology Technical Operations at Warner Bros. The letter is regarding Thagard’s acceptance of an Iviewit Advisory Board Position. Later both Thagard and Colter would receive Iviewit Stock options for their Board roles with approval of Warner Bros. and Sony executives.

o http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/20011231%20Brunelas%20to%20Thagard%20Regarding%20Joining%20Iviewit%20Advisory%20Board.pdf

• January 07, 2002 ~ Letters by Lamont regarding his meeting with Rubenstein regarding Warner Bros et al. Rubenstein was presented the exhibited document in draft form at his deposition, where he read it and then dodged questions regarding why his name is referenced in relation to opinions he gave to Warner Bros. et al. after denying he knew anything about Iviewit or the patents.

The letter wholly contradicts his prior denial of knowing of the Iviewit inventions or Eliot Bernstein, contradicting his sworn deposition statements and sworn letters to Judge Jorge Labarga constituting multiple instances of perjury and more.

January 07, 2002 and more P. Lamont letters to Kenneth Rubenstein

http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/2003%2006%2003%20Iviewit%20Rebuttal%20to%20Wheeler%202nd%20Response_Final.pdf

Pages 19-23

o November 20, 2002 Kenneth Rubenstein Deposition and Deposition Exhibits

http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/Depositions%20BOOKMARKED%20SEARCHABLE%20with%20hyperlink%20comments.pdf

Pages 1-100, the exhibits attached to the deposition show Kenneth Rubenstein’s denials.

• January 14, 2002 Warner Bros. employee Colter’s internal Warner Bros. document containing an ADMISSION OF USE OF IVIEWIT PROPRIETARY PROCESSES AND VIOLATION OF NON-DISCLOSURE AGREEMENTS by many Warner Bros. et al. employees. The letter also provides affirmation that Rubenstein ( MPEGLA LLC Patent Counsel, former Iviewit Proskauer Rose Patent Counsel and Warner Bros. counsel ) opined favorably to Warner Bros. The document again directly refutes Rubenstein’s statements in deposition and written communications to the Labarga court that he did not opine or even know of the Iviewit inventions.

o http://www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/2002%2001%2015%20AOLTW%20RUBENSTEIN%20OPINION%20comments.pdf

• February 17, 2002 – Eliot Bernstein letter to Brunelas Regarding Smith’s sudden request to have Rubenstein of Proskauer speak to him to re-opine on his former statements, already exhibited herein, regarding the efficacy and novelty of the patents.

Kenneth Rubenstein was acting Patent Counsel to Iviewit as indicated in the exhibited Wachovia Private Placement Memorandum that Proskauer billed to author and distribute to Iviewit potential investors when he opined to Warner Bros.

The links below provide information on Kenneth Rubenstein’s position as an Iviewit Board member and Iviewit Patent Counsel despite his statements to the contrary.

At the time Smith requested to speak with Kenneth Rubenstein, Proskauer Rose and Kenneth Rubenstein already were terminated by Iviewit and investigations were already underway regarding the patent thefts and more.

o February 17, 2002 Letter from Eliot Bernstein to Brunelas.

http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/20020117%20Bernstein%20letter%20to%20Brunelas%20Regarding%20Smith%20response%20to%20Colter%20to%20talk%20with%20Rubenstein%20Poskauer.pdf

o January 2001 Wachovia Private Placement Memorandum, whereby the SEC should note here that Kenneth Rubenstein is listed both as Iviewit Patent Counsel and an Iviewit Advisory Board member.

http://www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/Wachovia%20Private%20Placement%20Memorandum%20Bookmarked.pdf

Page 4 – “Company has retained Foley & Lardner to shepherd its patent development and procurement. In addition, the Company has retained Kenneth Rubenstein of Proskauer Rose, LLP to oversee its entire patent portfolio - Mr. Rubenstein is the head of the MPEG-2 patent pool.

Page 16 - “Strong and Experienced Board of Directors and Advisory Board.” iviewit's Board of Directors and Advisors consist of several well-established individuals from the technology, entertainment, and financial community.

Directors have extensive backgrounds with top-tier firms such as Goldman Sachs, Kidder Peabody, and McKinsey & Co. Crossbow Ventures has provided $3.0 million in funding and sits on the Board.

Technology and entertainment guidance comes from a partner at Armstrong Hirsch Jackoway & Wertheimer and from Kenneth Rubenstein, the head of the MPEG-2 patent pool.

Additionally on Page 16 - “The Company has retained Foley & Lardner to shepherd its patent development and procurement. In addition, the Company has retained Kenneth Rubenstein of Proskauer Rose, LLP to oversee its entire patent portfolio. The Company's strategy is to establish market precedence through licensing of trade secrets and know-how.

Page 38 – ADVISORY BOARD SECTION

“Kenneth Rubenstein Partner, Proskauer Rose LLP. Mr. Rubenstein is a partner at Proskauer Rose LLP law firm and is the patent attorney for iviewit. He is a registered patent attorney before the US. Patent & Trademark Office.

Mr. Rubenstein counsels his clients with respect to the validity and infringement of competitors' patents, as well as prosecutes patent applications. For the past several years he has worked on the formation of a patent pool, for MPEG-2 technology, involving large consumer electronics and entertainment companies.

He is also a former member of the legal staff at Bell Laboratories. Mr. Rubenstein received his law degree, cum laude, from New York Law School and his Ph.D. in physics from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology where he also graduated with a B.S. Degree.

The SEC should note here that Rubenstein’s attempt to claim he never heard of Iviewit, including at his deposition, allegedly is due to the massive conflicts of interest that Rubenstein had.

If Kenneth Rubenstein were patent counsel to Iviewit and simultaneously counsel to Warner Bros. et al. when he originally opined to Colter, without conflict waivers or disclosure, this obviously would have violated attorney conduct codes and law.

Additionally, Kenneth Rubenstein is conflicted with the patent pooling scheme and artifice to fraud inventors he has created, MPEGLA LLC, where again he acted as counsel and founder of MPEGLA LLC while also patent counsel to Iviewit.

The conflict here is again obvious where the Iviewit technologies were the single greatest threat to his pools as Iviewit has the dominant technology, which without, the MPEG license would be worthless.

The SEC should note that Rubenstein initially misrepresented himself and Joao as Proskauer Partners to Iviewit, when prior to learning of my inventions they were both with Meltzer.

Kenneth Rubenstein is counsel and sole patent evaluator for MPEGLA LLC now one of the largest infringers of the Iviewit technologies, licensing Warner Bros et al.

Proskauer, after learning of my technologies value, estimated at a trillion dollars to “priceless” by leading engineers at Real 3D, Inc. and without a patent department at the time in 1998, then rushed to acquire Rubenstein and his Meltzer patent group and the MPEGLA LLC pools.

When the acquisition was complete, Proskauer, my former patent counsel, directly began inuring benefits from the stolen technologies via their new client MPEGLA LLC in their new Intellectual Property department created after learning of my inventions.

MPEGLA has now tied and bundled my inventions to their pools licensing schemes, converting the royalties from the technologies from Iviewit and through other anticompetitive tactics have kept Iviewit from market in classic RICO and Antitrust violations, including violations of Sherman and Clayton, as further defined in my Federal RICO and Antitrust Lawsuit exhibited already herein.

The SEC should note here that Warner Bros. et al. and many of those involved directly in these matters are also involved in DVD patent pooling schemes, including but not limited to, DVD6C Patent Pool[4].

Whereby, similar to MPEGLA LLC’s illegal use of my technologies, DVD6C has similarly tied and bundled my technologies to their pools licenses, excluding me from royalties and then inuring royalties from others from my technologies directly from their membership in the pool.

o The SEC should note that the only Meltzer Intellectual Property attorney not to transfer to Proskauer at the time of acquisition was a one Raymond Joao, who initially with Rubenstein was represented as a Proskauer partner and who took initial patent disclosures with Rubenstein.

In 1999-2000 it was learned that Raymond Joao was putting patents into his own name while sabotaging the Iviewit patents. Upon leaving Iviewit, Joao claimed publically that he had 90+ patents in his name and then went to work for Marc S. Dreier, recently prosecuted and convicted by the SEC for an alleged Ponzi scheme, as further evidenced later herein.

February 08, 2002 – Lamont letter to John D. Calkins (“Calkins”) ~ Senior Vice President New Media Business Development of Warner Bros., regarding stock issued to Warner Bros. employees Colter and Thagard for Advisory Board roles they accepted and also regarding their about face and breach of contracts.

http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/20020208%20Lamont%20to%20Calkins%20Warner%20Bros%20Re%20Colter%20and%20Thagard%20Advisory%20Board%20Stock.pdf

• February 20, 2002 – Calkins Letter to Lamont denying IP infringement and contract violations in utter denial of the facts and evidence, including the Signed License and Service Agreement, Signed NDA’s, letters from Warner Bros. employees citing violations of the NDA’s and more, already presented herein.

The SEC should note that opposite of Warner Bros. claim in the letter that Iviewit is creating a false record, it is instead Warner Bros. that attempts to create a false and misleading record of fact in the letter.

o http://www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/20020220%20Calkins%20Letter%20to%20Lamont%20Warner%20Bros%20Wayne%20Smith.pdf

• February 27, 2002 – Lamont to Calkins about Warner Bros. Breach of Contracts, the SEC should note that while Lamont relies on the NDA, the February 15, 2001 SIGNED LICENSING AGREEMENT, illustrated above, also has strong language about IP rights concerning the Iviewit technologies that also are violated.

Also, take note, that at this time in 2002, Warner Bros. et al. knew of the breaches and formally was notified by Iviewit at that time of such breaches and therefore they should have begun accounting for the IP Liabilities at this time, if not earlier according to FASB accounting rules.

o http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/20020227%20Lamont%20to%20Calkins%20Warner%20Bros%20Breach%20more.pdf

• March 05, 2002 – Smith letter to Lamont denying IP infringement and contract violations in utter denial of the facts and evidence, including the Signed License and Service Agreement, Signed NDA’s, letters from Warner Bros. employees citing violations of the NDA’s and more, already presented herein.

o http://www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/20020305%20Wayne%20Smith%20Warner%20Bros%20Letter%20to%20Lamont%20Calkins.pdf

• November 20, 2002 - April 15, 2002 Letter by Lamont to Rubenstein Regarding Conversations with Warner Bros et al. presented to Rubenstein at his November 20, 2002 Deposition as already discussed herein.

o http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/Kenneth%20Rubenstein%20Deposition%20with%20Exhibits%20CERT.pdf

pages 3-9

Please note that the correspondence exhibited above refers to a notification issued to Warner Bros. at that time, which provided Warner Bros. et al. further notice at that time that Cease and Desist letters and threatened litigation would be forthcoming regarding the technology infringements.

Warner Bros. et al. already was given notice of Breach of Contracts regarding the Intellectual Properties in prior communiqués exhibited and these letters certainly cite specific liabilities Warner was aware of going forward.

Liabilities exist for Warner Bros et al. for their involvement in the alleged criminal RICO activities initially discovered from information partially uncovered by Warner Bros. et al. in 2001, as they were on the verge of pouring in $25 Million Dollars in investment capital to my companies.

When doing their due diligence on a $12 Million Dollar Private Placement with Wachovia Securities, corporate and intellectual property frauds were uncovered, including discoveries by Smith regarding the filed patents and Calkins regarding corporate fraud.

At that time, Warner Bros et al. employees and personnel became aware of fraud relating to both the patents filed with the US Patent Office and additional corporate fraud, additional to what Andersen had found on or about that time and this information was relayed to Iviewit by Colter on behalf of both Smith and Calkins.

Colter relayed that Warner Bros. et al. uncovered fraud, including fraudulent statements made by Proskauer Rose and Foley & Lardner, former Iviewit counsel, regarding statements made in the Wachovia Private Placement.

A Private Placement Memorandum that Proskauer circulated to potential Iviewit investors including Warner Bros. et al. These Securities Frauds contained in the Private Placement are also cause for further SEC investigation.

Per Colter, Warner Bros. et al. and Smith uncovered Intellectual Property Frauds involving fraudulent oaths to the US Patent Office and Worldwide Patent Authorities, which has in part led to suspension of my Intellectual Properties by the US Patent Commissioner pending investigations by the US Patent Office and the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

This series of events led to further uncovering Patent Fraud by my former counsel Proskauer Rose, Foley and Larder and Meltzer and others that are subject to several state, federal and international ongoing investigations and legal actions.

Investigations now include one by Harry I. Moatz (“Moatz”), Director of the United States Patent & Trademark Office – Office of Enrollment and Discipline (“OED”), charged with oversight of the Federal Patent Bar and patent attorney criminal issues.

Moatz confirmed that W. Palm Beach FBI Special Agent, Stephen Lucchesi had joined his investigation of FRAUD ON THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE.

Moatz also directed me to file claims of Fraud on the USPTO with the Commissioner of the US Patent Office which resulted in the exhibited herein patent suspensions.

Moatz assembled a team of Patent Office Officials to aid me in getting the Intellectual Properties ready for suspension while investigations proceeded, as he removed all prior counsel from access to the IP.

Per Colter, Calkin’s had found fraud involving a fraudulent billing lawsuit against the Iviewit companies by their counsel Proskauer Rose.

Prior to Calkin’s information Iviewit corporate officers, directors and management did not know about such lawsuit, except those now charged with the RICO crimes and therefore it was not disclosed by Proskauer Rose LLP or Iviewit Accountants to Wachovia Securities for their due diligence and therefore not reflected in the Private Placement.

It was later learned that the companies sued by Proskauer Rose were companies fraudulently set up by former counsel Proskauer Rose LLP and had Stolen Intellectual Properties in them, this was learned from information discovered directly from the US Patent Office OED Investigations.

Whereby, Arthur Andersen on or about this time, while auditing the Iviewit companies for the largest investor Crossbow Ventures of West Palm Beach Florida, whose investment funds were two-thirds SBA SBIC funds found identical and similarly named companies to the Iviewit companies.

The Fraud involving the stolen Small Business Administration Funds is under ongoing investigation with the SBA Inspector General’s office and others.

Per Colter, Smith discovered Fraud involving Kenneth Rubenstein, a Proskauer Rose law firm partner and sole patent evaluator for one of the largest infringers and criminal suspects in my Federal RICO and Antitrust Lawsuit.

Kenneth Rubenstein is under investigation with other attorneys by Moatz and was also ordered for investigation by unanimous consent of five justices of the New York Supreme Court Appellate Division First Department for Conflicts and the Appearance of Impropriety for violating public offices to block complaints I filed against him.

Where later, after discovery of the Intellectual Property fraudulent filings, it was learned that Smith, IP counsel for Warner Bros. was working with Kenneth Rubenstein ( Iviewit Patent Counsel, MPEGLA Counsel and Warner Bros. Counsel ) and that their relationship somehow now precluded Kenneth Rubenstein from re-opining on his prior opinion of the patents for Warner Bros. employees as already evidenced herein.

Whereby Warner Bros. then breached their contracts and began illegally using and licensing the technologies to others in violation of those binding signed agreements.

The MPEGLA LLC patent pooling scheme created and overseen by Counsel Rubenstein is merely an artifice to defraud inventors and has illegally precluded me from market in classic antitrust activities, including death threats and a car bomb.

Whereby the DVD Patent Pooling Schemes that Warner Bros. is directly involved in have also used the technologies in violation of signed contracts and agreements, admittedly, yet since that time they too have excluded Iviewit from market, again in classic antitrust activities and not only failed to pay Iviewit royalties but have failed to account for the 10 year Massive Liabilities.

The SEC should note that while there is a long gap in time between these prior Iviewit and Warner Bros et al., communications and contracts and the current contact to notify them again of liabilities resulting from the IP infringement and the newer Lawsuit liabilities, that during the gap I was actively pursuing my rights.

I have given similar information to several investigators and courts over the several years in between communications regarding Warner Bros. et al. involvement in the Iviewit allegations in my Federal RICO Lawsuit.

During the time, I was also forced to flee my home several times for my family’s safety, including from death threats from Mr. Brian Utley on behalf of the law firms Proskauer Rose and Foley & Lardner and then from actual Attempted Murder of my family. Attempted Murder through a Car Bombing of my family minivan in Del Ray Beach, FL., images of the Car Bombing can be found on the www.iviewit.tv [5] homepage.

Eliot Bernstein... Information to be found at http://www.iviewit.tv/

More Details on the Iviewit Case at www.Iviewit.TV

Time Warner - WBOL - Fraud Against Shareholders, Lies about Liability and NOT honoring Contracts, Why?

Why Did the SEC allow Warner Brothers to Split off Aol after they wre warned of a Trillion Dollar Liability that they would certainly be responsible for Some if not all the Damages?

So We have Bills that Show every Charge for the Entire Process of setting up and Supposedly Executing these Contracts such as the one Below.

2001 08 29 - Irell & Manella bill for AOL license agreement they drafted.

yet AOL was allowed to Split from WBOL, and Warner Bros. Is NOT being MADE to honor these Contracts, Why?

This is FRAUD against the Shareholders as AOL - Time Warner Inc. knew that this Major Liability was NOT accounted for on their Books. So why is Time Warner AOL still ignoring the Rights of the Iviewit Inventors, are they trying to hide assets... no matter how you look at it Time Warner - Time Warner, Warner Bros., WBOL,AOLTW, AOL, Time Warner Inc., Whatever name you have for them... they KNEW and did not share with shareholders a HUGE Debit on their Books.

There is Confidentiality Agreements, and So Much Evidence, All these Names and Players, Contracts, Bills and Still Warner Brothers acts like this Just Does NOT exist... hmmm...

There are BINDING term sheets from 2001 and Still WBOL ignores the rights of those they entered into contract with, WHY?

Warner Bros. Online Videos has NOT been honoring this Contract but using the Technology for around 8 Years now, and after Iviewit Sent them Disclosure of the Issue pending, they Split of AOL, and the SEC has no Issue with this?

Do Warner Brothers Shareholders have ANY issue with any of this ? I Guess they had better Start Considering it's Validity... any Time Now...

Click Here for Contracts and Information from 2001
that Seem to Have Slipped Warner Brothers Mind.


More Links to Research This Topic

http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/Book/index.htm

www.Iviewit.TV

www.DeniedPatent.com

AOL, Time Warner Inc, Iviewit, SEC Fraud, Andrew Y. Choung, IRELL and Manella LLP,WBOL, Warner Bros. Online, Stock Tips