e.g. "IBM Eclipse Foundation" or "racketeering"
IBM stole from Leader Technologies; gave to Facebook, SAP, Ericsson, Tsinghua, JPMorgan . . .
(Jun. 23, 2015)—Further investigation into IBM’s Wizard of Oz control over the NSA spy machine points to 2001-2002 as the critical years when the company solidified its hegemony.
IBM’s conduct, if criminal, begs the question:
How can America’s core Constitutional values of respect for property, privacy and honesty be supported by such morally bankrupt people and their morally broken technology infrastructure?
IBM funded The Eclipse Foundation on Nov. 29, 2001. Eclipse advocated “open source.” IBM Open Source is an oxymoron. IBM, the largest holder of patents on the planet, suddenly got religion about free software? Not likely.
Who's ideas did IBM give away?
Who’s inventions was IBM really giving away? New evidence uncovered by AFI proves unmistakably that they were the inventions of Columbus innovator Leader Technologies. They were NOT IBM's property to be given away.
The whole tech world became members of Eclipse subsequently. The give away of Leader Technologies's innovations was irresistible. Zuckerberg's 28 hard drives will no doubt reveal that he launched Facebook using Eclipse Version 3.0 and that he was coached by IBM and their cronies.
pact with the devil
Eclipse's Integrated Development Environment (IDE) tools have essentially defined the operating environment for mobile devices. For IBM, Chandler and the NSA, this ubiquity insured a universal backdoor key to the social Internet. It enabled the NSA to spy on Americans. It was a pact with the devil.
Leader Technologies' invention described the IDE web approach in its U.S. Patent No. 7,139,761, long before IBM stole it and claimed it as their copyright. Experts familiar with IBM's culture know well that this was not in their cultural DNA. To the contrary, IBM was committed to closed, proprietary approaches like AIX and its failed OS/2 operating system. See Fig. 2.
IBM's bogus copyright claims
The table below traces IBM's theft. It gives hard evidence of IBM's fraud in claiming copyrights to Leader's social networking innovations in Eclipse Version 2.0.1 that was released on Aug. 29, 2002. The claim begs the question: "How can IBM claim authorship of code in 2000 that it only first created in 2002 from Leader Technologies already copyrighted ideas?"
Leader Technologies' patent counsel. He is also trade secrets and economic espionage counsel to IBM, Patent Office, Congress, the White House, Kappos, Holder, Fenwick & West LLP, NSA, DOE, FBI, Justice Department, Judiciary.
All roads in this misappropriation lead to IBM’s and NSA's chief outside counsel, Professor James P. Chandler. Coincidentally, after learning about Leader Technologies’ innovations in 1999, Chandler agreed to become Leader's director and intellectual property counsel in 2000.
While Chandler pretended to represent Leader's interests, he was secretly feeding Leader's ideas to his deep-pocket clients—IBM and the NSA—as well as crony law firms and their favored clients. This quagmire collusion is unprecedented.
White House Collusion to propel NSA syping on Americans and feed "The Internet of Things" cronies
Two of Chandler's intellectual property law cohorts were IBM's inside counsel, David J. Kappos, and Assistant Attorney General, Eric H. Holder, Jr. Magically, in the 2009 Obama White House, Kappos became director of the Patent Office, and Holder became Attorney General. In addition, Chandler's cronies at the FISA Court granted Holder almost dictatorial powers to the NSA to spy on Americans without oversight—just months before Holder was appointed.
U.S. Copyright Officer records show that Chandler filed copyrights for Leader on August 07, 2001. Patent experts have been baffled by this action since Chandler had not yet filed Leader's patents. Hindsight shows Chandler was attempting to introduce Leader's innovations into the public domain, thus destroying Leader' patent claims and making them "open source" by default.
Curiously, on the same day (Aug. 07, 2002), newly uncovered evidence reveals that Chandler quietly joined the board of Eurotech. Eurotech (Ltd., SpA) and its progeny are closely allied with IBM, Microsoft, Cisco and Wind River around "The Internet of Things (IoT)" and the NSA spy platform. Much of this activity takes place in Italy, out of the reach of U.S. law. A managing director of JPMorgan in Italy, and a Fenwick & West client, have been prime movers in Eurotech SpA. Eurotech Ltd.'s successor company, The White Oak Group, currently has over $1 billion in homeland security contracts—all based on Leader's 2001 business plans, copies of which were in Chandler's possession.
Invention Theft, Plan B
However, review of those copyright filings do not reveal any of Leader's secret sauce, which is probably what Chandler was hoping for. So curiously, two days later, Chandler proposed to Leader that they team with his friends at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) in Livermore, CA, managed by the University of California Regents.
In this move, Chandler actually wrote himself into the Leader-LLNL source code custody clause in the agreement and provided a copy to Fenwick & West. He received Leader's code CD-ROM for supposed safekeeping on about Jun. 05, 2002. Those innovations were totally absent from all previous releases of Eclipse, and magically appeared just 11 weeks after Chandler took custody of Leader's source code.
Leader successfully argued at trial to the jury that its innovations were "novel and not obvious." The absence of Leader's innovations in IBM's Eclipse code further reinforces the uniqueness of Leader's invention (i.e., if they were obvious, then IBM would have implemented them).
The following timeline shows key Chandler actions with IBM, Eclipse and Leader source code developments. One unmistakable conclusion is that IBM falsely claimed copyrights on ideas that were clearly Leader Technologies' in its Eclipse 2.0.1 release. Those innovations were totally absent from all previous releases of Eclipse, and magically appeared just 11 weeks after Chandler took custody of Leader's source code.
See HIJACK OF THE CYBER WORLD TIMELINE AND DATABASE for supporting evidence. See also PDF version.
| Timeline of IBM’s Eclipse Foundation theft of Leader Technologies copyrights | |||
| Date | James P. Chandler Actions | Java functions | |
| Leader Technologies’ Invention Secret Sauce. Source: USCourts | IBM / Eclipse (containing Leader magic sauce) |
||
| Aug 07, 2001 | Filed Leader copyrights TXu001114757 and TX0005811257. | When Leader engaged Chandler’s counsel on Apr. 06, 2000, Leader had already invented:
None of these Leader innovations were present in versions of Eclipse prior to 2.0.1. They all magically appeared on Aug. 29, 2002—eleven weeks after Chandler took custody of Leader's source code.
|
None |
| Aug 07, 2001 | Joined Eurotech board | ||
| Aug 09, 2001 | Recommended Lawrence Livermore (LLNL) Smart Camera project | ||
| Aug 28, 2001 | Recommended Fenwick & West LLP | ||
| Eclipse version 1.0 (12.6 MB) None |
|||
| Nov 29, 2001 | Formed Eclipse with $40m IBM funds | ||
| Mar 21, 2002 | Received Leader-Harvard Initiative proposal | ||
| Jun 05, 2002 | Took custody of copyrighted Leader source code for LLNL project | ||
| Aug 09, 2002 | Chandler issued $30K fee blackmail ultimatum to Leader | Eclipse version 2.0 (1.12 MB) None |
|
| Aug 29, 2002 | (Eclipse introduced radical new version 2.0.1 code and false IBM copyright claims) | Eclipse version 2.0.1 (109 MB)
These java classes were added to Eclipse 2.0 just 11 weeks after Chandler took custody of Leader source code: Eclipse only slightly renamed Leader's innovative modules:
. . .yet described them as “initial API” implementations in version 2.0.1 (NOTES: "interim API that is still under development..." ). IBM failed to disclose Leader Technologies’ copyrights, that were filed by James P. Chandler. Chandler, as IBM’s counsel too, cannot claim ignorance of his client's actions. Chandler's Aug. 30, 2002 claims to Maryland officials show solicitation for IBM and the Patent Office. See also Fig. 4 below re. IBM's false claim of ownership to Leader Technologies copyrights. |
|
| Aug 30, 2002 | Chandler met secretly with Maryland officials re. IBM / Patent Office (Kappos) initiatives in conflict with his Leader representation | ||
| Sep 05, 2002 | Hewlett-Packard (HP) joined Eclipse, Carly Fiorina, CEO | ||
| Dec 09, 2002 | Hewlett-Packard (HP) and Microsoft issued joint press release to exploit Leader innovations in Visual Studio, just like IBM was working on for Websphere (later branded the "Eclipse IDE") | ||
| Dec 10, 2002 | Filed Leader provisional patent (without including full source code that had been in his custody since June 5, 2002) Chandler’s Eurotech progeny enjoy close NSA relationships and $1.2b homeland security contracts. Chandler's protégé Eric H. Holder, Jr. became Barack Obama's Attorney General. Chandler's protégé at IBM, David J. Kappos, became director of the Patent Office. Fenwick & West LLP represents Facebook in securities and patents. Neither Chandler nor Fenwick disclosed legal conflicts of interest to Leader as was their duty per the Rules of Professional Conduct and propriety. |
||
Conclusion—Have we built our Internet house on shifting sand?
IBM lied to members of The Eclipse Foundation by claiming that critical components in version 2.0.1 introduced on Aug. 29, 2002 were owned by IBM, when in fact, they were provided to IBM by James P. Chandler and Fenwick & West LLP after Chandler took custody of Leader's source code 11 weeks earlier, on Jun. 05, 2002.
Note: JPMorgan's Eclipse membershio is notable given the bank's substantial financial involvements with Facebook, IBM et al. JPMorgan issued IBM a $10 billion line of credit prior to selling its PC Group to the Chinese See IBM sold out to Chinese in sale of PC Group in 2004. (See also PDF version). Goldman Sachs played the other side of that deal by extending a line of credit that Lenovo (Beijing) used to purchase the IBM unit—a Ponzi scheme of global proportions. Both JPMorgan and Goldman Sachs underwrote Facebook too—All in the (c r i m e national security) family.
The implications of IBM's fraud shake the very foundations of the entire Internet technology world. This returns us to the opening premise: where are we if we are "like a foolish man who built his house on sand." (Matthew 7:26).
IBM's software Copyright infringement conduct is equivalent to stealing an original melody in music
See previous post about Kappos / IBM / Patent Office corruption in Leader v. Facebook: Patent Office Director David Kappos convened rare secret court with IBM cronies to kill Leader's patent.
In intellectual property law, IBM's lies are fraud, sometimes called "inequitable conduct." IBM's claims in Eclipse version 2.0.1 are the equivalent to you stealing a musician's melody line, writing your own song using that melody line, and then claiming the melody as your original creation.
In Leader Technologies' case, Judicial and Executive Branches are complicit with Professor James P. Chandler and IBM in this theft. Therefore, it falls upon Congress to invoke the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment to restore Leader Technologies' property rights. See Request for Congressional Intervention.
* * *
Notice: This post may contain opinion. As with all opinion, it should not be relied upon without independent verification. Think for yourself.
Comment
Click "N comments:" on the line just below this instruction to comment on this post. Alternatively, send an email with your comment to amer4innov@gmail.com and we'll post it for you. We welcome and encourage anonymous comments, especially from whisteblowers.
Why not ask Congress to pay Leader (and everyone else the government has stolen software from)? Congress is currently thwarted by corrupt Justice and Executive Branches, but they have the POWER OF THE PURSE, without the need to consult the other two branches, which are currently working against the Republic and for entrenched oligarchies (not that some in Congress are not also... but hopefully not all of them!).
ReplyDeleteCoincidentally, the Supreme Court just affirmed the Fifth Amendment Taking Clause in a case last week where the government had confiscated raisins from a farmer without compensating him. Why is software different? Both are the fruit of hard work and freedom to create. Excuse the unavoidable reference to fruit.
Somin, I. (June 22, 2015). Property owners prevail in raisin takings case. The Washington Post.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2015/06/22/property-owners-prevail-in-raisin-takings-case/
Goldman Sachs, is a Facebook underwriter JPMorgan is also a Facebook underwriter William R. Brody, IBM director, T. Rowe Price director has (5.2% in Facebook an is a shareholder in, Baidu6.9%
ReplyDelete(China)facebook and baidu are all stolen ideas and the sauce cod Delaware District Court Judge Richard G. Andrews and Chief Judge Leonard P. Stark. hold mountains of investments in JPMorgan and the Facebook cartel, all appointment by Obama, Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley; consolodating control of ATM banking networks internationally JP Morgan Chase (received U.S. taxpayer bailout money along with Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley and State Street Corporation, but to get consolodating control of ATM banking networks internationally Lehman Brothers had to go the investment bank was forced to declare itself BANKRUPT On September 15, 2008, they say it was necessary for Lehman Brothers to go bankrupt to charm the markets??? fucking bullshit it was all about consolidating control of banking networks WHICH COST THE WORLD TENS OF TRILLION IN DOLLARS
WIKILEAKS WILL YOU exposes all the IMs and Emails on how facebook was stolen i know you got them
Great job AFI at sticking with this investigation despite the sickly growling of the Facebook hired liars, sorry, attorneys. The facts don't lie.
ReplyDeleteNow we need to find law enforcers who are not simply lining their pockets.
Whistle blowers at IBM are just what the doctor ordered.
From Sharyl Attkisson
ReplyDeleteNative Advertising: Corporate Influence in News
Posted: 28 Jun 2015 04:24 PM PDT
This is John Oliver’s comedic but effective treatment explaining “native advertising,” or the trend toward lack of separation between advertising and news. Keep in mind that native advertising incorporated in news stories is not always disclosed as an ad. I discuss some examples in my book Stonewalled.
Watch HBO’s John Oliver on Native Advertising
https://youtu.be/E_F5GxCwizc