Sunday, September 28, 2008

Chuck Manning may help produce settlement monies for VSTC claimants

Seems like Chuck Manning has gotten off of Annette long enough (and maybe Keri too) to file a new patent application.

Scary part is this is eerily similar to the MUST transport system and file transfer function both patented by Rick Stefanik and marketed by Gatelinx. So what you ask?

Well, in all the shenanigans of transfer of assets in the Gatelinx to GTX Global to VSTC (Vision Tehnology Corp) life cycle. And all of the filings associated with the VSTC bankruptcy. And, all the case issues with the Rick Stefanik patent lawsuit (where Rick named everyone individually and the company, and then settled for ~$1M), there is a little question of worth, value and who owns the ideas.

If Chuck started work on this idea during his tenure with Gatelinx (before jetting off to bop Annette while she gets more ink) then those IP assets transfered to the surviving entity. As in from Gatelinx to GTX Global to VSTC.

"So what?" you ask.

Well, if Chucks patent ever gets off the ground and produces a product which in turn produces revenue, it is very likely that the revenue could be claimed by the creditors of VSTC.

Now do you get it?

This is like the recent Mattel "Barbie v Bratz" lawsuit, except with the added specter of bankruptcy fraud, stock fraud, money laundering, conspiracy, with all the sex, drugs and rock and roll you could want. With a heavy dose of sarcasm and David Hagen screaming "mommy" for his cell mate as he's punked up the ass for an extra jello cup.


Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hi, How do I become a claimant? I guess you would call me a victim of the scam. I bought 500 shares of GTX stock in 2005, thinking it was a good investment. I really could use the money now. I heard an analyst on TV recommend this stock and took the leap. Is their a class action law suit? Can you refer me somewhere? - Thanks.

10:05 AM  
Blogger ex-GTX said...

you should, first, read through the entire blog to see how stupid you were for buying the stock initially and not doing your research.

And second for holding onto the stock for so long after all the information (presented in the blog) was available to you. Ever hear of a "stop loss"?

Second, read the post from Monday, July 21, 2008 "JUSTICE FOR ALL" which details the way and whom to contact.

Third, and last, don't ever buy stock again if you can't do some basic research. If you don't understand the business, don't invest. You didn't, you shouldn't have.

2:34 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Stupid bitch. You think you're 500 share "investment" makes any difference to anyone? What did you invest? Cookie jar money? Save up from the $5 BJ's you give to the local HS footbal players? Sheesh, 500 shares? What was that, like $1500 dollars?

10:33 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You think you're 500 share "investment" makes any difference to anyone?

Real classy dip shit. What did this person ever do to you? Does it make you feel like the big man on campus to call someone names? In reality it just makes you look small, mean and ignorant.

Carol, follow the resources on the post that ex-gtx mentioned and ignore people like this.

I wish you the best of luck in recouping some of your losses.

4:17 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well, EX-GTX, for the first time I really find your answer offensive. This person is as important in this matter as anyone else. Who knows what his/her investment capabilities were? Maybe that money meant a lot of hard work or a second job. And regardless ones "savvy" in the investment arena, it is/was his/her money. Nobody else's. ADD that
"(s)he heard it from an analyst on TV" means even more . Don't forget, Jim Cramer made more than one bad call!! And as YOU know, GTX Global etc, was well disguised/sheltered by and through the sham with BIG companies/organizations. The Yadio merger; adding McKittrick as a financial nugget. Ask and other VERY credible investment Houses/Brokers. Yahoo etc ranked those bastards well after they were exposed as did Ameritrade, Equitrade and Toronto Dominion Bank to named a few. And remember, it has been the efforts of many little investors that took down big scams when the big money really didn't miss a few dollars or thousands of dollars, for that matter. WE all have learned a lot from the participants at this blog, and you have been invaluable, but to berate a person who stands for the American dream and who has been taught that credibility IS THE NORM when the Big Houses appear to promote investment(s)opportunities. Take a look at WaMU!! Or Lehman or AIG. Sure not scams, but what about EMRON losses?

And as for the BIG MOUTH piece of scum that shows up regulary and who hides behind his vagina/keyboard, I'd love to have ten minutes with you in any arena you choose. I would tear you apart, you rotten shitball, limb by limb. Then I would re-construct you the way you should look; Head up your ass with a wiggly tail.PIG!

Yea, still real and still here and still..

Richard Bennett MD PhD

PS: Thanks Carl. I will Email the blogger above.


9:02 AM  
Blogger ex-GTX said...

OK OK. Can I chalk up my less than patient answer to just having a bad day? And, a little bit of my impatience with the process to put David, Ed, Ivan, Curtis and the rest of them behind bars for good.

Carol, check out the post from July 21 called "Justice for All" for the details.

9:14 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Richard you're a tool. Get off ex-gtx's back. She was stupid. So were you. So were we all.

8:03 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Va. Ban On Spam Is Ruled Unlawful
E-Mail Restriction Called Violation of First Amendment

By Tom Jackman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, September 13, 2008; B01

The Virginia Supreme Court yesterday ruled that the state's anti-spam law, designed to prevent the sending of masses of unwanted e-mail, violates the First Amendment right to freedom of speech.

Virginia Attorney General Robert F. McDonnell (R) promptly said he would appeal the case to the U.S. Supreme Court. The law was one of the first enacted in the United States to stem the overwhelming tide of unwanted e-mail. The 2004 trial in Loudoun County of mass e-mailer Jeremy Jaynes resulted in the first felony conviction in the country for spamming.

But the state Supreme Court said the law doesn't make any distinction between types of e-mail or types of speech, and so it was unconstitutional. The ruling came on an appeal of Jaynes's conviction. Jaynes had sent the mass e-mails anonymously by using false Internet addresses, and the court said that speech is also protected by the First Amendment.

Justice G. Steven Agee, who has since moved to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit, wrote the unanimous opinion for the court. "The right to engage in anonymous speech, particularly anonymous political or religious speech, is 'an aspect of the freedom of speech protected by the First Amendment,' " Agee wrote, citing a 1995 U.S. Supreme Court case.

"By prohibiting false routing information in the dissemination of e-mails," the court ruled, Virginia's anti-spam law "infringes on that protected right."

Agee noted that "were the 'Federalist Papers' just being published today via e-mail, that transmission by 'Publius' would violate the [Virginia] statute." Publius was the pen name for James Madison, Alexander Hamilton and John Jay.

The court determined that the law does not limit its restrictions on spam to commercial or fraudulent e-mail or to such unprotected speech as obscenity or defamation. Many other states and the federal government drafted anti-spam laws after Virginia, but often specifically restricted the regulations to commercial e-mails, the court found. The ruling affects only the Virginia statute.

McDonnell called the law an innovative act that broke new ground in protecting citizens, and he noted that Jaynes was rated one of the most prolific spammers in the world. Loudoun Circuit Court Judge Thomas D. Horne sentenced Jaynes, of Raleigh, N.C., to nine years in prison but allowed Jaynes to remain free while his appeals were heard.

"The Supreme Court of Virginia," McDonnell said in a statement, "has erroneously ruled that one has a right to deceptively enter somebody else's private property for purposes of distributing his unsolicited fraudulent e-mails. . . . We will take this issue directly to the Supreme Court of the United States. The right of citizens to be free from unwanted fraudulent e-mails is one that I believe must be made secure."

The court's ruling was remarkable for another reason: It reversed its own ruling of six months ago, when the court upheld the anti-spam law by a 4 to 3 margin. But Jaynes's attorneys asked the court to reconsider, typically a long shot in appellate law, and the court not only reconsidered but changed its mind. Agee wrote both opinions.

"I think the decision is a sound one," said Rodney A. Smolla, dean of the Washington and Lee University Law School and a First Amendment scholar. "This is a case in which the spammer may have been doing things that a well-crafted law could make illegal. The problem with the Virginia law is it included e-mail communications that people have the right to make anonymously."

There was plenty of disagreement, particularly among those who provide Internet service or battle spam.

"Horrendous," said Jon Praed of the Internet Law Group, which has represented America Online, Verizon and other Internet providers. "The idea that someone can intrude on someone else's mail server, because they might be reciting the Gettysburg Address? I guess a burglar can break into your home as long as they are reciting the Gettysburg Address."

Praed noted that spam is not likely to increase in Virginia just because the law has been struck; federal law also prohibits spam, spam filters screen much of it and expert spammers often are out of the country. But spam does provide links to dangerous and illegal places on the Web, particularly for young users, as well as inject viruses and other bad software into computers, giving lawmakers a compelling reason to regulate it, Praed said.

The U.S. Internet Service Providers Association estimated that 90 percent of e-mail is spam. Internet service providers "should not be required to bear the cost of the abuse of their e-mail networks," said Kate Dean, executive director of the association, which filed briefs in support of the law.

Jaynes was convicted by a jury of sending tens of thousands of e-mails through America Online servers in Loudoun. Jaynes's e-mails were advertising products to help pick stocks, erase one's Internet search history and obtain refunds from FedEx and contained hyperlinks within the e-mail redirecting the recipient to those businesses. His attorney Thomas M. Wolf of Richmond noted that there was nothing fraudulent about the e-mails; Jaynes was prosecuted simply for sending them en masse.

"Everybody hates spam," Wolf said. "The point is, you don't have to trample the Constitution to regulate spam."

Virginia's anti-spam law made it a misdemeanor to send unsolicited bulk e-mail by using false transmission information, such as a phony domain name or Internet Protocol address. The domain name is the name of the Internet host or account, such as "" The Internet Protocol is a series of numbers, separated by periods, assigned to specific computers. The crime becomes a felony if more than 10,000 recipients are mailed in a 24-hour period.

Chris Thompson, a spokesman for Spamhaus, an international nonprofit group that tracks and combats spammers, pointed out that unlicensed radio stations may not broadcast, only the Postal Service can place mail in mailboxes and loud sound trucks may not troll neighborhoods with impunity.

"None of those minor restrictions appear to infringe on a citizen's ability to express themselves freely," Thompson said. "Why the court would deny basic protections for ISP servers and bandwidth escapes us."

© 2008 The Washington Post Company

12:09 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Richard you're a tool" So simple yet so true! PHd=Pretty huge dick.Would also add;Obnoxious,smug with an over inflated ego...

Sorry to highjack but it makes my skin crawl everytime I see his self rightious sign off.

Sure he'll come back with some pompous ,provocative,nasty response only further proving the above statement.

9:25 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Oh Ex- GTX you disrespectful, ignorant fucking pussy ass anonymous cunt.

Did you actually read the patent (which was obviously and no doubt well beyond your pathetic comprehension) or were you only capable of cutting and pasting a link punk?

And btw, all the other “Ex-GTX’s” know who you are. Geez did you get your “anonymous” tricks from a fuckin movie trailer you pathetic prick? Fuck me dude “BlogSpot”??? I’ve met the guy that sold it to Google you stupid insignificant pig dick wart. And He’s a fucking swinging 2 inch also, you guys should relate.

(I refrained from using your fucking real name AGAIN which is far more respect than you’ve EVER shown me. Your hard on for me is inexplicable (pause while you Google that term you fucking self righteous, no meat in this game twat))


Viva le RICHARD!!!; He doesn’t fucking hide and neither do I. Go Richard, call me if you need any info.

My only regret is being sucked into this ignorance (by you again boy and I know exactly who you are. You’re about as clever as a piss pot).

Again punk…

Chuck Manning
3032A Edward Court
Winterville NC, 28590
Cell: 252-717-9764

9:28 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Cooler head…

Ok that was harsh, I was pissed and sleep deprived.

Anyway, please stop this “Annette” whatever high school crap. Stick to the facts.


6:51 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home