We have been silent here for a while, and it is now time for an overdue update.
The reason we stopped publishing the blow-by-blow is because on July 13, we had a court-ordered mediation with Intel Corporation. It is always best to approach these matters with clear eyes in good faith, and so we wanted to static as low as possible.
Time to turn the volume back up. Mediation failed. We did not accept any settlement.
The case will move forward now, as Judge Charles Breyer has elected to give Intel Corporation its day in court, and so many months still lie ahead.
Intel Corporation has made it clear that they despise this blog. They think it improper, indecorous, outside the bounds of civilized courtroom battles.
But the fact is that Intel Corporation wields disproportionate advantage on the legal terrain. Its pockets are bottomless. Its legal army is the largest and most battle-hardened on the planet, at least in the private sector. It "polices its brand" like the Gestapo policed Germany.
So this blog is a vital tool in our effort to win justice for our cause and also to prevent Intel Corporation from obliterating small private individuals in its zeal to enhance its balance sheet. Sure, intellectual property protection, but the 'shoot-first-ask-questions-later' doctrine is vile and impermissible in a free and fair society.
This blog not only has the mission of shedding light on the process and providing guidance for others that may be facing a legal harassment campaign by Intel Corporation or any other large entity. It also has the mission of raising money to finance the campaign.
Our lawyers are representing us pro bono and it is because they believe in our cause, in our eventual triumph, and in the basic tenets of justice. Intel Corporation has told ANIP that it is "lucky" to have pro bono representation.
We are lucky to have Ron Coleman and Colby Spring on our side, of that there be no doubt. They are among the top lawyers in their field in the United States.
But it is not a matter of luck. It is our hard, tireless work to secure pro bono representation, to raise money to fund out-of-pocket legal expenses, and to publicize the affair via this blog that has enabled us to struggle against Goliath.
If you have read this far, please consider donating to this cause. You may donate via PayPal at donate@intelfortheintelligent.com or through the link at the right.
We are only using the money for necessary expenses, and much of the battle continues to be funded as much as possible by ANIP owner Jeffrey Wright, whose company was dragged under in part by Intel Corporation's legal abuses.
We pledge that we will use the money fairly and prudently, and that we will return any unused funds to donors when this case concludes.
So please, donate now; even an amount as small as $1 will be appreciated and wisely employed.
Thursday, July 15, 2010
No Deal
On July 13, 2010, Jeffrey Wright, the owner of Americas News Intel Publishing LLC, traveled to San Francisco at his own expense to attend a court-ordered mediation with Intel Corporation and their lawyers.
The fact of this mediation is public record, but everything about it is confidential, according to the law.
Mr. Wright cannot, therefore, discuss whether or not Intel Corporation offered him a settlement payment. And if they were to have done so, he could not reveal just how large it was.
But there was no settlement agreement reached, no deal, no backing down. The matter will be decided in the courts.
Intel Corporation has vowed that "there will be no shelter" for Americas News Intel Publishing LLC. It has threatened to sue not only the company, but Mr. Wright personally, for damages, legal fees, and all the other avaricious relief it can obtain.
This a risk that Mr. Wright is clearly ready to assume. We invite you to stand with us!
The fact of this mediation is public record, but everything about it is confidential, according to the law.
Mr. Wright cannot, therefore, discuss whether or not Intel Corporation offered him a settlement payment. And if they were to have done so, he could not reveal just how large it was.
But there was no settlement agreement reached, no deal, no backing down. The matter will be decided in the courts.
Intel Corporation has vowed that "there will be no shelter" for Americas News Intel Publishing LLC. It has threatened to sue not only the company, but Mr. Wright personally, for damages, legal fees, and all the other avaricious relief it can obtain.
This a risk that Mr. Wright is clearly ready to assume. We invite you to stand with us!
Judge Declines To Dismiss
On July 12, 2010, the Honorable US Federal Judge Charles Breyer issued an order denying our motion to dismiss the 8-count complaint that Intel Corporation has lodged against our company.
This is, obviously, unfortunate news. It cannot alter the outcome and our ultimate, inescapable triumph. But it means that more time, more funds, more grating Intel verbiage, and more taxpayer resources will be spilled down the drain before it is all over.
In the first hearing, readers recall, Breyer did indeed dismiss all charges except for the cybersquatting charge, which is the most disingenuous of the complaints, and which only survived because our lawyers had not specifically addressed it in our first motion to dismiss.
A complete reversal now of his earlier position simply means that the trial will plod forward. But there is ample room for optimism within Breyer's order.
The text of the decision essentially says: Intel Corporation, your facts are porous and nescient, but you have piled on such a mountain of them that this court find itself in the tedious position of having to give you an audience.
To wit: "In this case, there is some force to ANIP's assertion that it is using the term 'itel' in connection with its generic meaning....Thus, ANIP's use of the term of 'intel' appears to be consistent with the term's common meaning...(defining 'intel' as 'information, news'). Despite the potential strength of ANIP's argument, the Court finds that dismissing Intel's Complaint on this ground would be premature."
And later: "Arguing to the contrary, ANIP maintains, in a repeat of a previous argument, that Intel's dilution claim fails because ANIP is using the term 'intel' in its generic sense. If ANIP's assertion is true, then Intel's dilution claim, like its infringement claim, is not cognizable."
So, Judge Breyer seems to be saying that if we can prove Americas News Intel Publishing and its latinintel.com website are in the intelligence business, offering news analysis and information, then Intel's infringement and dilution claims are patently bogus. The intelligence business is not that arcane, and it is pretty darn easy to see that ANIP and latinintel.com and Mexico Watch have been for years engaged in the very specialized but very straightforward business. This test resoundingly passes the 'moron in a hurry' test. Intel Corporation is wrong.
Indeed, everyone already knows this, including Intel Corporation, but legally the common understanding of this fact has not been codified or proven, so we all most go through the motions in order to put an end to Intel Corporation's multiple frivolous campaigns in this vein.
It bears consideration that dismissing a complaint is rather extraordinary. It means that the court deems the complaint to be so obviously lacking of merit, so flimsy and unfounded, that it is not even entitled to its day in court. The fact that the complaints were dismissed in the first hearing reflects just how vapid Intel Corporation's grievance is in terms of legal relevance.
Granting a hearing to the Plaintiff is almost a pro forma nod toward their civic rights. Rant incoherently, and you are just another madman upon a soapbox in the plaza. Furbish your rants with expert legal counsel, and a public magistrate will be compelled to sit and endure them.
This is, obviously, unfortunate news. It cannot alter the outcome and our ultimate, inescapable triumph. But it means that more time, more funds, more grating Intel verbiage, and more taxpayer resources will be spilled down the drain before it is all over.
In the first hearing, readers recall, Breyer did indeed dismiss all charges except for the cybersquatting charge, which is the most disingenuous of the complaints, and which only survived because our lawyers had not specifically addressed it in our first motion to dismiss.
A complete reversal now of his earlier position simply means that the trial will plod forward. But there is ample room for optimism within Breyer's order.
The text of the decision essentially says: Intel Corporation, your facts are porous and nescient, but you have piled on such a mountain of them that this court find itself in the tedious position of having to give you an audience.
To wit: "In this case, there is some force to ANIP's assertion that it is using the term 'itel' in connection with its generic meaning....Thus, ANIP's use of the term of 'intel' appears to be consistent with the term's common meaning...(defining 'intel' as 'information, news'). Despite the potential strength of ANIP's argument, the Court finds that dismissing Intel's Complaint on this ground would be premature."
And later: "Arguing to the contrary, ANIP maintains, in a repeat of a previous argument, that Intel's dilution claim fails because ANIP is using the term 'intel' in its generic sense. If ANIP's assertion is true, then Intel's dilution claim, like its infringement claim, is not cognizable."
So, Judge Breyer seems to be saying that if we can prove Americas News Intel Publishing and its latinintel.com website are in the intelligence business, offering news analysis and information, then Intel's infringement and dilution claims are patently bogus. The intelligence business is not that arcane, and it is pretty darn easy to see that ANIP and latinintel.com and Mexico Watch have been for years engaged in the very specialized but very straightforward business. This test resoundingly passes the 'moron in a hurry' test. Intel Corporation is wrong.
Indeed, everyone already knows this, including Intel Corporation, but legally the common understanding of this fact has not been codified or proven, so we all most go through the motions in order to put an end to Intel Corporation's multiple frivolous campaigns in this vein.
It bears consideration that dismissing a complaint is rather extraordinary. It means that the court deems the complaint to be so obviously lacking of merit, so flimsy and unfounded, that it is not even entitled to its day in court. The fact that the complaints were dismissed in the first hearing reflects just how vapid Intel Corporation's grievance is in terms of legal relevance.
Granting a hearing to the Plaintiff is almost a pro forma nod toward their civic rights. Rant incoherently, and you are just another madman upon a soapbox in the plaza. Furbish your rants with expert legal counsel, and a public magistrate will be compelled to sit and endure them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
