Wed, Jan 28, 2015, 11:43 AM EST - U.S. Markets close in 4 hrs 17 mins


% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Vringo, Inc. Message Board

you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the posts
  • shadow_rook shadow_rook Feb 1, 2013 5:45 PM Flag

    VRNG: corporate CODE OF CONDUCT and ethics

    he is a conspiracy nut bro

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • if so is this something common ?
      could this be the reason or is it a comon thing to do?

      A. Insider Trading Policy

      The company expressly forbids any associate from trading on material non-public information or communicating material non-public information to others in violation of the law. This conduct is frequently referred to as "insider trading." This policy applies to every associate of the company and extends to activities both within and outside their duties to the company, including trading for a personal account.

      The concept of who is an "insider" is broad. It includes officers, directors and employees of a company. In addition, a person can be a "temporary insider" if he or she enters into a special confidential relationship in the conduct of a company's affairs and as a result is given access to information solely for the company's purpose. A temporary insider can include, among others, a company's investment advisors, agents, attorneys, accountants and lending institutions, as well as the employees of such organizations. An associate may also become a temporary insider of another company with which our company has a contractual relationship, to which it has made a loan, to which it provides advice or for which it performs other services. Accordingly, restrictions on insider trading apply with equal force to information relating to any other company, including our customers or suppliers, obtained by our associates during the course of their service to or employment by the company. No associates who, in the course of work on behalf of the company, learn of material non-public information about a company with which the company does business may trade in the other company's securities until the information becomes public or is no longer material.

      Trading on inside information is not a basis for liability unless the information is material. This is information that a reasonable investor would consider important in making his or her investment decisions, or information that is likely to have a significant effect on the price of a company's securities.

      Information is non-public until it has been effectively communicated to the marketplace. Tangible evidence of such dissemination is the best indication that the information is public. For example, information found in a report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission or appearing in a national newspaper would be considered public.

      • 1 Reply to mystocks24
      • Here I am not going to give you regular ON2 example, I'll bring different case to everyone attenion to make it clear why Vringo might be talking about "Code." of conduct one might say. Sorry about the lengthy story but this for Vringo Execs who have points to make but can NOT say it openly to SCARE those who might be involved

        Re: Matt Frost Tech Stealing Lawyer
        casp321 by casp321 . Mar 25, 2010 11:00 PM

        Is Bankoski ANOTHER Orkut? 1-Dec-09 02:36 am

        Google sued over alleged Orkut code theft
        Social networking software company Affinity Engines is suing Google, accusing them of stealing code which is used in their orkut social-networking venture. Google denies the allegations, but will the suit harm them as they prepare for their IPO?

        By Eric Bangeman | Last updated June 30, 2004

        Lawsuit: Google Stole Orkut Code

        Daniel Terdiman 06.30.04
        A small social-networking software company has filed suit against Google, claiming that much of the source code behind orkut[dotcom], the search engine's popular social service, was stolen by a former engineer.

        In its lawsuit, Affinity Engines, based in Palo Alto, California, said engineer Orkut Buyukkokten illegally took the code that he had written for the company -- which he co-founded -- with him when he joined Google. Affinity Engines also claimed that Buyukkokten promised Affinity Engines that he wouldn't develop a competing social-network service for Google. Affinity Engines, which filed the claim on May 25 in Santa Clara Superior Court, is seeking unspecified damages and royalties.

        In addition to nearly identical text found in similar features in orkut[dotcom] and Affinity Engine's social-networking products, the suit cited several identical software problems in each company's service.

        "In its initial investigation, AEI (Affinity Engines) uncovered a total of nine unique software bugs ... in AEI's inCircle product that were also present in orkut[dotcom]," according to the lawsuit. "The presence of these bugs in both products is highly indicative of a common source code.... orkut[dotcom] contains software and source code copied, developed or derived from AEI's inCircle software or source code."

        After graduating from Stanford in 2001, Buyukkokten and fellow graduate Tyler Ziemann built a social-networking service called Club Nexus, which they sold to Stanford for use by the university's undergraduates, according to the lawsuit. Club Nexus was a success, and Buyukkokten and Ziemann subsequently decided to form Affinity Engines and design a product for the Stanford Alumni Association called inCircle.

        As a developer of social-networking software for university students and alumni, Affinity Engines was among the first players in what has become a very crowded field. Today, social-networking services like Friendster, Tribe, LinkedIn and orkut attract millions of users by giving them a way to easily connect to friends and friends' networks of friends.

        Meanwhile, for Google, the suit comes at an awkward time. The company is currently in the process of an initial public offering, which is expected to be one of the biggest ever. But Affinity Engines isn't the only company suing Google. Among others, the company faces a patent-infringement suit from Overture regarding auctioning placement in search-engine results.

        For its part, Google shrugged off Affinity Engines' allegations.

        "Affinity Engines has not provided any evidence to Google that their source code was used in the development of orkut[dotcom]," wrote David Krane, the company's director of corporate communications, in a statement to Wired News. "We have repeatedly offered to allow a neutral expert to compare the codes in the two programs and evaluate Affinity's claims, but Affinity has rejected that offer. We have investigated the claims ... thoroughly and concluded that the allegations are without merit."

        The origins of the orkut code dispute arose, the lawsuit claimed, when Buyukkokten, a Turkish citizen, decided to take a job with Google to solve his visa problems. He continued to work on inCircle, however, and signed agreements in 2002 and 2003 stating that any social-networking technology he created belonged to Affinity Engines, the company said.

        But, the suit alleged, Google soon became interested in owning a social-networking service. When its $30 million offer to buy Friendster was spurned, it turned to Buyukkokten.

        "In July 2003, based on oral statements and written assurances from ... Buyukkokten, AEI was led to believe that Buyukkokten was not involved in any software development efforts related to social networking at Google," the company claimed in the lawsuit. "Buyukkokten copied and otherwise used inCircle source code still in his possession," Affinity Engines claims. "At no time during his communications with AEI prior to Jan. 22, 2004, did Buyukkokten reveal that he was developing ... orkut[dotcom]."

        The suit also provided anecdotal detail about why it believes Buyukkokten broke his agreement. On Jan. 24, Google threw a launch party for orkut[dotcom]. As the party was going on, Ziemann, who didn't know about the new site, called Buyukkokten on his cell phone. "Apparently assuming that Ziemann had just learned of the website, Buyukkokten's first comment to Ziemann was, 'I hope you aren't mad at me,' to which Ziemann replied, 'Why would I be mad at you?'" the lawsuit said.

        Affinity Engines chief executive Brian Samuels said that just days later, his company let Google know there was a problem. After several months of little or no relief from Google, Affinity Engines decided to file its suit. But it decided to lay low in hopes that it wouldn't "inflame Google," said Samuels.

        Regardless, Affinity Engines said in the filing that it hopes for compensatory and punitive damages from Google, as well as royalties for revenue earned by orkut. It argued that Google's access to the intellectual property Buyukkokten brought from Affinity Engines helped get orkut quickly and unfairly to market.

    • look at every other post of his about the ON2 stuff

0.5395-0.0149(-2.69%)11:42 AMEST

Trending Tickers

Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.