Intel Shareholder Fraud over iViewit Technologies Still Undisclosed by Intel CEO Paul Otellini

"iViewit Technologis SEC COMPLAINT against INTEL CORPORATION

White Collar Crime Division and Any and All Compliance Division Heads and Related
Offices:

I, Eliot Bernstein, of .....
Street, Boca Raton, Florida 33434 as the
Original Owner and Inventor of key "backbone technologies" for video and imaging as
further described herein, am filing this Formal Complaint against Intel Corporation ( Intel ) with United States headquarters located at 2200 Mission College Blvd, Santa Clara, Ca,
95054-1459, and bring to your attention ongoing investigations involving multiple
federal offices around the country as well as International investigations pertinent in this
matter.

Intel is a primary wrongdoer as a named defendant in a presently Pending Trillion
Dollar international RICO Conspiracy Lawsuit involving the theft and fraud of my Intellectual Property rights as further set out herein.

In addition to liabilities claimed in this lawsuit, are separate direct primary liabilities and obligations from signed agreements including Non Disclosure’s, Strategic Partner Agreements and Licensing Agreements.

Further, on information and belief Intel corporate management including at least the
President, Paul S. Otellini and corporate counsel Bruce D. Sewell, and Stephen R.
Rodgers are also involved in an ongoing and undisclosed massive international Fraud
against the Intel shareholders and investors.

Upon information and belief, the frauds include but are not limited to the failure
to disclose both the lawsuit and the Intellectual Property Infringements in direct violation
of various SEC laws and rules including but not limited to FASB No. 5 requirements for
disclosing liabilities and more.

Merely one claim in this lawsuit involves the attempted Murder upon my family by an Iraqi style car bombing that blew up three vehicles in addition to mine during the early phases of the high stakes corporate theft and fraud of my Intellectual Property Rights.

Notably, federal Judge Shira Scheindlin referred to this as a case involving Murder that has also been marked as legally “related” by Scheindlin to an ongoing Federal Whistleblower Case

In summary, dating back to 1998-1999 at the time the inventions were discovered,

I had Signed Non Disclosure Agreements, Strategic Alliance Agreements and Licensing

Arrangements, including Agreements that were at the time in legal review for R3D

relating to the USE of my Proprietary Rights in inventions which were hailed as the "Holy

Grail" of the internet.

The technologies were deemed the “Holy Grail” by multiple experts under signed NDA’s as it permitted full screen full frame rate video previously thought impossible and zoom and pan imaging technologies which removed pixel distortion.

The stolen technologies are now commonly found on virtually all digital imaging and video hardware and software.

These Signed Agreements were amongst hundreds of signed agreements with many Fortune 1000 Companies.

After signing Agreements with Real 3D, Inc. ( R3D ), a company whose ownership was composed of Lockheed Martin ( 70% ), Intel ( 20% ) and Silicon Graphics Inc. ( 10% ), Intel later took over complete ownership of R3D of Orlando Florida.

In the subsequent months thereafter, a series of critical events occurred including

but not limited to the discovery of fraudulent patent applications and the discovery of

fraudulent corporations, the corporate frauds were discovered by Arthur Andersen during

an audit for the largest investor in the companies Crossbow Ventures of W. Palm Beach

Florida.

Nearly two-thirds of the Crossbow funds were secured through SBIC Loans from

the Small Business Administration making the SBA the largest investor in the

technologies and companies.

On information and belief, the SBA Inspector General’s office is conducting an ongoing investigation into these and other matters please refer to the SBA Inspector General’s office to obtain relevant information.

As you will see by the letter and petition to the 44

the US President, Barack Hussein Obama II, found @

http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/United%20States%20District%20Court%20Southern%20District%20NY/

20090213%20FINAL%20SIGNED%20LETTER%20OBAMA%20TO%20ENJOIN%20US%20ATTOR

NEY%20FINGERED%20ORIGINAL%20MAIL%20l.pdf

and also sent to US Attorney General Eric Holder, I was then directed by Harry I. Moatz,

Director of the United States Patent & Trademark Office, Office of Enrollment and

Discipline to file charges with the Commissioner of Patents claiming Fraud Upon the

USPTO, my companies and myself.

This led to the Suspension of certain Intellectual Properties while investigations remain ongoing; please refer to Moatz and the Commissioner of Patents office to obtain relevant information.

In addition, Moatz directed me to seek Congressional Legislation to obtain an Act of Congress to correct the falsified Oaths on my Intellectual Properties submitted by my former legal counsel at the law firms of Meltzer, Lippe, Goldstein & Schlissel, Foley & Lardner and Proskauer Rose.

An Act of Congress is necessary to make the changes in inventors, owners and assignees

that are fraudulent, for which we have sought aid from The Honorable Senator Dianne

Feinstein who remains working through her offices regarding such.

These backbone technologies which were stolen in 1998-1999 have since been

used throughout the United States and across the globe throughout the entire value chain

of content creation and distribution of video and images for both software and hardware

in the transmission of Digital Video and Imaging across ALL Spectrums, including, the

Internet, Television, DVD, HD DVD, Micro Processing Chips, as well as, a mass of

applications for Defense, Flight & Space Simulation, including on the Hubble Space

Telescope (providing a deeper view into time) and on virtually all Medical Imaging

Devices, and more.

In fact, members of R3D and Intel were some of the earliest champions of the value of the technologies claiming they were “Priceless” and were valued in the hundreds of billions to trillions of dollars over the life of the Intellectual Properties, having transformed the world of Digital Imaging and Video that now are considered part of daily life.

Intel was one of the earliest players in this scheme and has continued to not only

defraud myself and the other rightful owners of the technologies, including Ellen

DeGeneres and Alanis Morissette, but has simultaneously defrauded the Intel's

shareholders and investors for years by failing to report and disclose the liabilities with

full knowledge of their Binding Obligations regarding the technologies.

These frauds and failures by the Intel management team have continued despite multiple communications over several years that have gone directly to the President of Intel, Mr. Paul S. Otellini and their Corporate Counsel Mr. Bruce D. Sewell and Steven R. Rodgers and continue despite the knowledge of the signed Agreements.

At this time, however, as noted in my Feb. 2009 letter to the Office of the US

President Barack Hussein Obama II and the US Attorney General Eric Holder, I wish to

bring to your direct attention the identities of several federal offices already involved in

this ongoing national and international Intellectual Properties theft and fraud.

Investigations that will aid and facilitate the SEC with background information for the

proper performance of complete investigations by the SEC allowing for information

sharing with these agencies, some of the key offices are as follows:

1. Glenn A. Fine, Office of Inspector General of the US Department of Justice

2. Harry Moatz, Director, OED of the USPTO

3. H. Marshall Jarrett, Office of Professional Responsibility of the FBI

4. A complete list of Federal, State & International Actions can be found @

http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/INVESTIGATIONS%20MASTER.htm. ..."

Source of Post and Full Document on Intel Corp. Stealing
the iViewit Digital Video and Imaging Patent Pending Technologies.

http://www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/United%20States%20District%20Court%20Southern%20District%20NY
/20090325%20FINAL%20Intel%20SEC%20Complaint%20SIGNED2073.pdf


Posted here by

Investigative Blogger Crystal Cox

Crystal@CrystalCox.com

Intel Corporation is a Crime Ring, a Deliberate Fraud on Consumers, Wiping OUT all Competition with Brute Force and Bribes.

"FTC Docket 9288, May 1998.. So How Long has the FTC, SEC, DOJ Protected Intel Corp.?"

Beginning Docket 9288, May 1998..
So How Long has the FTC, SEC, DOJ Protected Intel Corp.?

Over a Decade. And Consumers are Still Paying the Price, Shareholders are Paying for Intel's Crimes and Will SOON pay Billions More.. Tax Payers pay for the Over Looking by Your Governement Agent's of Intel's Crimes..

Prior Reports IGNORED by those Paid to Protect YOU???
when is ENOUGH - Enough with Intel...??

"" Beginning Docket 9288, May 1998, various reports and analysis are submitted by this analyst to FTC now operating in voluntary civic service capacity under Department of Labor Code 3363.5.

Today a decade of analysis delivers tens of
Docket 9341
discovery proofs or pointers to proofs.

Many of which this audience are familiar from prior reports by this analyst submitted to U.S. Senate, Congress, State AGs and U.S. Attorneys.

Under Docket 9341 discovery rules, work from this analyst is passed by FTC Bureau of Competition to Intel for legal rebuttal.

Three Components of Monopoly Recovery

Monopoly recovery is a worldwide financial value having three main components:

1) Consumer recovery is based on the system costs of Intel Inside tied charge back for routing Intel microprocessors across state lines and inter nation boundaries inside a computer chassis.

See prior analyst submissions for specific details covering the illegal aspects of this market rigging rebate fee scheme.

2) Consumer recovery from monopoly price premium associated with some Intel microprocessor and PC product introductions.

3) Industrial harms which include predatory product dumping, Intel selling at a price less then average total cost, measures of variable down to average fixed cost.

Finally, estimation of the marginal cost for Intel to produce a single x86 microprocessor in relation to price sought with variable cost cross check.

Where price is within or lower then average fixed cost, variable or marginal cost, revenues from those quantities are recorded as an industrial monopolization recovery value for FTC discovery.

Consumer Recovery Subset 1; kick back, in violation of Sherman Act Section 1, Section 2, Clayton Act Section 2, 3, 4, 5, 13e, 13c, 13d, Title 48, 1986 anti kickback act

Of the $26.442 billion subset of consumer recovery documented from Intel production estimates (where $42 billion total set is documented by contract), $22.657 billion or 85% is associated with Intel Inside tied charge back sum misrepresented in Intel and PC Dealer financials.

That sum is split between Intel and PC Companies 50:50 for the purpose of this analysis based on the Intel Inside monopoly system metric.

Yet Intel’s portion is known to increase, and PC Companies decrease, over the 15 year duration of this Intel Insider operation.

Intel financials associate Intel Inside as a marketing cost credited to PC Company micro- processor sales. When this commissionable sales value is actually an accrued Dealer rebate passed through Intel as a sales reward for Media Sales Agents taken as their fee, to sustain the supply chain’s product distribution ties between Intel, PC Dealers and Media Agent’s sales channels.

Sales Channels include PC Week, PC Magazine, Computer Shopper, Family Computing, PC World, Windows Magazine, other PC and some general media.

Rebate Values are Sustained from back in time with
forward time purchase agreements.

Production short run to short run, Dealer’s microprocessor purchases are unnaturally weighted to benefit them guiding Media Agents sales preferences.

Intel 1st tier Dealers purchase microprocessors in excess of end demand solely to strip margin values, including consumer transport charge, prior to reselling overage into secondary broker channels.

PC Dealers who are Intel’s 1st tier brokers monopolize majority of Intel margin values, including tied charge back, sustaining their Media Sales Agent artificial attractor and the cross industry distribution tie in total.

This relationship is a financially driven one, planned and implemented for Media Sales Agents to register, meter, report level’s of Intel microprocessor flows through PC dealer channels back to Intel.

That is the nature of the charge back;
for media registering and reporting back channel sales flows
through PC Companies to Intel.

Over time the system evolved into one which accelerated Dealer Product Flows artificially from one Intel product generation to the next, on the weight of Intel kickback placements meant to discharge certain Dealer inventory, to end market buyers, on an Intel time schedule. ""
Source of Post
Document the FTC, DOJ, SEC, State Attorney Generals, FBI and more know of and seem to be ignoring.. Go to www.CEOpaulOtellini.com document at top of blog...

Above Report by Mike Bruzzone
Camp Marketing Consultancy


Crystal L. Cox
Investigative Blogger
Crystal@CrystalCox.com

Do You Have an Intel Corruption Tip?
Email Me...
Time to Tell the Truth about Intel Corp.
and ALL their "Corrupt Fraternity"..

This is Not Intel Nation
this is "We the People" and Intel Corp.
is Robbing Consumers, Governments and
paying Off everyone who gets in their way...
or Worse... and this is in Many Countries..

www.InvestigativeBlogger.com