John Calkins, David Colter, Chuck Dages Continued to IGNORE Notices of Confidentiality Breach

"‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐

> From: P. Stephen Lamont

> Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2002 8:10 AM

> To: john.calkins@warnerbros.com

> Cc: Eliot I. Bernstein; Chuck N. Brunelas; david.colter@warnerbros.com; Mpegcto@aol.com;

chuck.dages@warnerbros.com; sbrower@sortlaw.com

> Subject: Your Response of February 20 ‐‐ Final Proposal

> Importance: High

<

> Dear John:

<

> Thank you, finally, for your recent reply to my inquiries. Moreover, I would have hoped

that your read of my email message sent on February 8 at 3:37 PM EST was a little more

diligent than it appears at present, so to refresh your memory, I have stated that Iviewit is

of a different opinion pertaining to unauthorized uses of Iviewit techniques by Warner Bros. and that differing view is evidenced by the numerous and documented executed contracts, memos, emails, meeting notes, and parole evidence currently in the company's possession, all of which I have had the opportunity to review at this point; hopefully, you had the support of your Board before you knowingly filled your response with misinformation, the nature of which can only astound one of comparable mind.

> Factually, any one of a number of present and past Iviewit employees, and any one of a

number of present or former Warner Bros. employees, whether by subpoena or cross examination at trial, would attest, lest they perjure themselves, that since February 2000, the

Iviewit/Warner Bros. dialogues were lessons in:

(i) disclosing patent pending techniques under that certain NDA dated August 14, 2000; (ii) instructing how to make the patent pending techniques disclosed under that NDA;

(iii) instructing how to use the patent pending techniques under that certain NDA; and (iv) that no, I repeat, no such video techniques existed on any Warner Bros. or affiliated sites prior to the dissemination of this information, and not orally with a wink and a nod I lastly remind you, but under NDA, an NDA executed by a Warner Bros. executive.

> Furthermore, presently I am surrounded by draft after draft of subsequently executed

documents, Warner Bros. authored memo after memo, Warner Bros. authored email after email,

meeting note after meeting note authored by both parties, and not the least compelling of

all, parole evidence that is in diametric opposition to your misinformed response of February

20. With this said, John, I ask you, and as we say in NY, "do you think I just fell off the

turnip truck?"

> Now therefore, and on behalf of Iviewit, I attach what amounts to a Final Proposal. Mind

you, Iviewit requires execution of said Final Proposal no later than Wednesday, March 6, 2002

at 5:00 PM EST, and should execution of said Final Proposal not be forthcoming Iviewit must

and shall, regretfully, seek its adequate remedy at law or in equity in protection of its

intellectual property at which time we shall allege that Warner Bros. has, inter alia,

misappropriated said intellectual property, conducted the prior unauthorized use, conducted the present unauthorized use, and plans the future unauthorized use, knowingly and willfully, in material breach of that certain NDA dated August 14, 2000.

> > <>

<

> Best regards,

<

> P. Stephen Lamont

> Chief Executive Officer, Director

> I View It Technologies, Inc."

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

To John Calkins SONY - Sony Executives and MPEG LA Knew All Along they were Breaking the Law and Violating iViewit's Rights.

To: John Calkins then at Warner Bros - Now at Sony - From iViewit

" -----Original Message-----

From: P. Stephen Lamont

Sent: Friday, February 08, 2002 12:41 PM

To: John.Calkins@WarnerBros.com

Cc: Eliot I. Bernstein; Chuck N. Brunelas; David.Colter@WarnerBros.com; Mpegcto@aol.com; Chuck.Dages@WarnerBros.com

Subject: Your Facsimile of Thursday, February 7, 2002

"John,

I am in receipt of your facsimile and, truthfully, I am quite perplexed as to exactly what I View It is claiming that is untrue.

Moreover, it is relatively early in my tenure, and I have had only a short time to assess the situation, thusly, I would like to understand which parts of the Background section of the proposed Advanced Royalty Agreement "surprise" you, "disturb" you, and what prior dealings between the companies have been "so grossly mischaracterized," as I am equally "disturbed" by an allegation of untruth both to me personally, and to the company I represent in these correspondences.

Furthermore, I have had several conversations with our Advisory Board members, Mr. Greg Thagard and Mr. David Colter, and a proposed member, Mr. Ken Rubenstein.

While not explicitly mentioned in these conversations, but as evidenced by the numerous and documented executed contracts, memos, emails, meeting notes, and parole evidence currently in the company's possession some of which I have reviewed, though not all, it is my understanding that:

(i) As to Mr. Thagard, while in the employ of Warner Bros., Mr. Thagard had conversations with a previous consultant, Aidan Foley, and that these conversations were centered upon current use by Warner Bros. of I View It techniques and the future deployment by Warner Bros. of I View It techniques in projects including, but not limited, to the URL at www.warnerbros.com, Entertaindom, MovieFly (now MovieLink, I understand), and other projects; and

(ii) As to Mr. Colter, currently very much in the employ of Warner Bros., the Company possesses numerous correspondence leading me to the presumption that Warner Bros. was using, now uses, and intends for the future use of I View It processes, in whole or part.

Furthermore, the company is in possession of numerous correspondence from varied memos
documenting that several Warner Bros. representatives have been in full possession of the I View It patents pending, and that prior to such disclosure under that certain Confidentiality Agreement ("NDA") dated August 14, 2000, no such video technique existed on any Warner Bros., AOL, or affiliated sites.

Lastly, and not entirely relevant to the issue at hand, it strikes me as strange why one current and one former Warner Bros. employee have accepted appointments to the company's Advisory Board, advised the company accordingly, and accepted warrant grants in the Company presently valued at more than $150,000 per annum, without the knowledge of the existence of such numerous executed contracts, memos, emails, meeting notes, and parole evidence currently in the possession of the company, as outlined above, all pointing to the compelling nature of the company's video techniques as it relates to Warner Bros. delivery of its proprietary content to varied end users.

Finally, and as a result of the above numerous executed contracts, memos, emails, meeting notes, and parole evidence currently in the possession of the company, I find it necessary to advise you, yet again, that, by the terms of that certain August 14, 2000 NDA, Warner Bros. shall:

(i) Paragraph 2, Sentence 1: "(b) not...use any of the Proprietary Information for any purpose without the prior written consent of...Eliot Bernstein, on behalf of the Company;

(ii) Paragraph 2, Sentence 1: "(c) not...disclose any of the Proprietary Information to...anyone...without the prior written consent of...Eliot Bernstein, on behalf of the Company;" 2

(iii) Paragraph 2, Sentence 1: "(d) not...reproduce, store or copy any Proprietary Information... without the prior written consent of...Eliot Bernstein, on behalf of the Company in the event that the parties do not proceed to an agreement;"

(iv) Paragraph 3, Sentence 1: "...the Company shall be entitled to equitable relief, including injunction, in the event of any Breach of this Confidentiality Agreement, that the granting of such relief shall not be opposed, and that such relief shall not be the exclusive remedy for such breach;"

(v) Paragraph 3, Sentence 2: "...defend and hold harmless the Company from any loss, cost, expense (including attorney's fees and litigation expenses), claim, liability, or damage arising from or related to a breach of this Confidentiality Agreement;" and

(vi) Paragraph 4: "This Agreement shall expire three (3) years from the date of execution."
In closing, John, please specifically educate me, particularly in light of the numerous executed contracts, memos, emails, meeting notes, and parole evidence currently in the possession of the company, the reasons for your "surprise", why the Background section of the aforementioned Advanced Royalty Agreement would "disturb" you, and what prior dealings between the companies have been "so grossly mischaracterized," and please document for me any and all prior unauthorized uses, unauthorized uses in progress, and any and all future planned unauthorized uses of I View It techniques covered under that certain NDA dated August 14, 2000.

I look forward to your earliest response.

Best regards,
P. Stephen Lamont
Chief Executive Officer, Director
I View It Technologies, Inc. "

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

Blockbuster Buys "Acquires" Movilink LLC, Are YOU Kidding ???

Blockbuster was in on Original Iviewit Technology Meetings Right? And Doug Chey knew right

http://www.metacafe.com/watch/759358/blockbuster_inc_acquires_movielink_llc/

"Deal Includes Content Agreements With Major Studios

Gives Blockbuster Access to One of the Largest Libraries of Downloadable Movies

In a move to further provide customers with even more convenient access to home entertainment, Blockbuster Inc. announced it has acquired Movielink, one of the nation's leading movie download services. The acquisition gives Blockbuster access to one of the largest libraries of downloadable movies and a ..."

"

Story Summary:

Through the acquisition of Movielink, in addition to the entertainment content Blockbuster provides through its thousands of stores and through the mail with its online DVD rental service, the Company has taken an important step toward being able to make movie downloading conveniently available to computers, portable devices and ultimately to the television at home."

more coming to this post soon...

Digital Download Fraud, this Digital Content WAS invented by Iviewit Inventors and they got NO Patent, No rights what so ever..

Wayne Huizenga (of Blockbuster)

Doug Chey, Hewlett Packard - Formerly of SONY Right? Formerly of Warner Bros. or ??

Doug Chey Claims he had nothing to Do with iViewit..

Tons more on this Matter Coming Soon..

Click Here for some Proof that Douglas Chey was Talking with iViewit.

Yes Coming Soon DouglasChey.com to Talk Lots About all this. .

Why now after a Decade is Doug Chey all in a Stir... ??

Crystal@CrystalCox.com

Doug Chey, Hewlett Packard - Formerly of SONY Right? Formerly of Warner Bros. or ??

Doug Chey Claims he had nothing to Do with iViewit..

Tons more on this Matter Coming Soon..

Click Here for some Proof that Douglas Chey was Talking with iViewit.

Yes Coming Soon DouglasChey.com to Talk Lots About all this. .

Why now after a Decade is Doug Chey all in a Stir... ??

Crystal@CrystalCox.com