Make your own free website on
Blog Tools
Edit your Blog
Build a Blog
View Profile
« September 2019 »
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30
You are not logged in. Log in
Entries by Topic
All topics
Apple Fritters
Chinadotcom and VCSY
DD to da RR
Microsoft and VCSY
Nobody Can Be That Stupid
Notable Opinions
Off the Wall Speculation
Pervasive Computing
The Sneaky Runarounds
VCSY / Baseline
VCSY / Bashed  «
VCSY / Infotech
VCSY / MLE (Emily)
VCSY / NOW Solutions
VCSY - A Laughing Place #2
Tuesday, 10 April 2007
Badump bump bump
Mood:  accident prone
Topic: VCSY / Bashed

 Doing some housework trying to make the place easier to navigate and all. I should be running a swufter over the bathroom tiles. I knocked over a glass of cranberry juice in there late last night. Do you know how sticky that stuff is? I know I know 'What were you doing with a glass of cranberry juice at the john?'. Fair question. Ratsamuffin has been shall we say socially intercollating recently and now it hurts to p. Must of come in contact with a bad toilet seat. Hurts bad like 10000 gonutzas getting the collapsed compactibles in a communal conjugal visit. Corn nibblets and chowder but that's another story about the spooky spuds and the antediluvian tater hole. Remind me to tell that one some night.

 Anywhos hurts to p and I would much rather be snoozing on the divan than channeling cranberry juice through the filters, as it were.

 And by the way ain't none of this is code.


By: danfl_11
27 Mar 2007, 01:00 PM EDT
    Msg. 199250 of 199305
(This msg. is a reply to 199242 by lucky_limey.)
Jump to msg. # 

lucky_lime that is interesting. Desktops are headed toward think clients (thin clients with access to intelligence) and that means there's a foreseeable end to operating systems like what Apple and Microsoft make.

Jobs sees this and is migrating and evolving toward the iphone concept with the Apple pcs becoming servers for interconnective interoperability for the user/owner.

Others will hook their iphones as they choose to web services and never need a computer at home have more power than what can fit on a pc and do it for less and is spent on the 'home server' concept.

Funny Apple is headed outward from the PC with the iPhone and Microsoft is headed in the closet. Could it be that somebody knew the day of reckoning would soon be upon them and they knew to flee early? The one who flees late gets fleas and has to scratch out in the open.

That would be a brilliant tactical move on the early guy's part would it not? In one swell foop you avoid being caught out in the open where all your products will be torn apart in the newspapers looking for the offending IP and you will have prepared yourself a cave in which to hide so you may use the offending IP beyond scrutiny as you apply a 'proprietary' tag. If you think about it it's the perfect setup.

Imagine if you will this scenario. Dates are given as a dipstick indicator to demonstrate the time scale inherent in this type of caper.

Let's just say:

1. Exhibit A owns intellectual property under development (circa 2001).

2. Exhibit B knows about Exhibit A methods and starts duplicating development.

3. Exhibit C sees the development effort by Exhibit B and 'reverse engineers' the methods.

4. Exhibit C searches
a. does not see any Exhibit B intellectual property material
b. does not know about Exhibit A
c. assumes property is out there for the taking due to prior art

5. Exhibit B competes with Exhibit A in development work required to build out the property assuming Exhibit A will not survive the climb to maturity inherent in any startup life-cycle.

6. Exhibit D (patents) are granted giving Exhibit A legal ownership of significant architectural segments of technology.

7. Exhibit B upon hearing the Exhibit D news halts production and proceeds to extract offending intellectual property.

8. Exhibit C does not see or regard the Exhibit D news and continues competition with Exhibit B using methods copied from now Exhibit D elements.

8. Time passes (circa 1 year)

9. Exhibit E (the market) matures and Exhibit C begins preparing product for sale unaware of Exhibit A's intellectual property ownership granted in Exhibit D.

10. Exhibit B is notified by Exhibit A Counsel and begins negotiations with Exhibit A.

11. Exhibit C is notified by Exhibit A Counsel and begins negotiations with Exhibit A.

12. Exhibit C upon being notified by Exhibit A Counsel halts production and proceeds to extract Exhibit D property if negotiations with Exhibit A are not successful.

14. What should be evident is that:

15. Exhibit A is not responsible for the lead regardless the length in time and knowledge advancement Exhibit B took over Exhibit C.

16. Exhibit A furthermore is not responsible for financial losses and business image losses incurred by Exhibit C due to Exhibit D involvement as the burden of due diligence in the discovery of like prior art or claimed property falls on Exhibit C and is not mitigated by:
a. the smallness of Exhibit A
b. the early petition for patent status by Exhibit A
c. the 'unknowable' natures of technology intellectual property development

17. Exhibit A expects Exhibit B and Exhibit C to find some means of circumventing the licensing process further expecting legal opinion to respect the competitive nature of business and the difficult nature of roof in 'intent'.

18. Exhibit A would thus be concerned by prior and continuing reported and recorded efforts at purloining intellectual properties within both Exhibit B and Exhibit C and would petition to have activities by both Exhibit B and Exhibit C examined for both intellectual property infringements and the levels of early knowledge evidenced.

19. Exhibit A would per proper governance petition to facilitate discovery toward civil and possible criminal events and natures concerning the parties and the properties.

20. Therefore a concerted effort to encourage Exhibit B and Exhibit C toward successful license negotiation regarding Exhibit D with Exhibit A would be to Exhibit B and Exhibit C benefit and could be considered an altruistic offer allowing Exhibit B and Exhibit C to avoid the possible 'absorption' level renderings in judgment possible and projected regarding indicated abusive intent against Exhibit A and Exhibit D per Exhibit E delays induced by unfair competition practices by Exhibit B against Exhibit A and Exhibit D.

21. Resolved: Knowing business mindsets these days in the technological industries we assume and expect a certain degree of hard contact competition. Prior events indicate small entities require various protections from much larger entities known to wait out or starve out competition. Increased diligence over Exhibit A and Exhibit D appears needed and Exhibit A would petition for various protections from various governmental and judicial agencies. As for the nature of early knowledge had by Exhibit B one can assume we're all adults and Exhibit B and Exhibit C can discuss amongst themselves how to resolve the early knowledge or 'skunking' issue.

Indications are they both need to get cleaned up and ready for the health inspector. Kind of like pickled pilfered property pork skins. Not necessarily a skins game. More like a never ending meal.

There's my twenty+ questions to Ray Ozzie and Steve Jobs both. I wonder how it will all get answered?

See how easy it is to 'sound' legal without actually 'being' legal? I know the law like I know jet engines. I don't. I can act like I do and sound like I do but like with every unfounded thing in this cold and getting colder Universe everything somebody like me says is classified in legal circles as a 'rumor'.

You guys know from 'rumor' right?

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- No Position)


Posted by Portuno Diamo at 1:15 PM EDT
Post Comment | Permalink
Monday, 9 April 2007
We are go for launch...
Mood:  loud
Topic: VCSY / Bashed


 Here is a sample of the kinds of things said against VCSY and shareholders by unknown operatives and agents working for someone in the background to dislodge VCSY support and scare away VCSY investors. This kind of language is what small cap companies face when trying to present their information to the public.

By: wadethief
09 Apr 2007, 03:42 PM EDT
Msg. 181171 of 181179

This bit of information for all of you who think you know what is going on. These guys are on the verge of going belly up. There is no cash, they owe former employees and are not paying them, which from what I am told is about to result in some employee lawsuits. The guy running this thing is incompetent. His background is as a restaurant owner, and now he's running a SW company. And best of all their technology is outdated by several generations. No new sales in over a year. They are staying alive in hopes of winning the lawsuit, which is a huge longshot. I am told the CEO (who is also a joke) has been summoned by Ross in the lawsuit. She apparently is scared stiff that she must now testify in the case. She was hiding out in Canada. As a holder of this dog, I would like to see some form of inquiry into the mismanagement of this company, and the deliberate bleeding of its resources. Anybody got some suggestions?�
- - - - -
View Replies »


 The above individual is likely a new hire by a market maker who knows nothing about the ecology at the RagingBull VCSY board. He's going to regret those words as there is a strong long base taking down every word said by operatives for later legal remedies.

 If you look behind the scenes and actually do read the company filings and PR you will find a strong company weighted down by the demands of secrecy imposed by their struggle with outside interests to bankrupt the company conceivably for the rich hold of intellectual property VCSY owns outright.

 If you look even further into the various clues and views about VCSY uncovered over the years  you will see a plan behind these various intellectual properties relationships and foresights that has been in place form the inception of Vertical Computers on through the worst of the worst technological years beginning with 2000.

 Information on this blog is only a very small sample of the kinds of information indicating VCSY holds a place as one of the top stocks of the early 21st century. Yes and it's only valued at pennies per share right now.

 Odd... isn't it? The above poster must have inside information to know whether a person is to be called as a witness, don't you think? I wonder where our phony baloney poster above got his information?

 There are very large archives of articles and information about VCSY dug up by energetic VCSY longs over the years that are available for the asking. Nobody needs to lie or cheat or mislead anyone and I will be posting archival information over the next few days to give a historic view on possible reasons why people in Chinadotcom (CDC) and Ross Systems and other large system houses have done so much to try to prevent VCSY technology from being used by VCSY.

 The posted article from today located below is the kind of misinformation about VCSY and their talent and operational course that has been put out about Vertical Computer Systems for years. Now, however, some posters are becoming much more bold as the trial resumes and the judgment is about to be rendered.

 If you want a lesson in how people with ulterior motives can use words (and lying words at that) to sink a company, watch this URL space in the days ahead:

 The jury is expected to be deliberating this Wednesday - Thursday. We expect a verdict this week.

 By the way, I thought it would be useful to post selected items to demonstrate just how think headed and ignorant people would have to be if they read about VCSY for any length of time:

By: tepe
09 Apr 2007, 05:00 PM EDT

Msg. 181188 of 181189
(This msg. is a reply to 181105 by danfl_11.)

Dan I think you have it backwards. SaaS is what VERIZON has, and that VCSY is using. VCSY contracted with Verizon to use their services to HOST emPath.

 If this reader would actually read the Verizon announcements he would find Verizon is not the one offering the SaaS capability in NOW Solution's case. NOW Solutions and VCSY have the kind of technology within their ownership to provide SOA and SaaS. When you come across posters such as this it's quite easy to see such people have genuine agendae.

 Please read their posting histories and come to your own conclusions.

Posted by Portuno Diamo at 4:30 PM EDT
Updated: Thursday, 12 April 2007 1:01 AM EDT
Post Comment | Permalink

Newer | Latest | Older