Intellectual properties are both ‘embodiments’ and ‘representations’. by Ken Dost

Ken Dost

January 24 at 8:04pm ·

Intellectual properties are both ‘embodiments’ and ‘representations’. Embodiments consist of real-time human communications, stored and forwarded messaging, documents and collections, dynamic and persistent data structures and databases, scripts, source code, partially or fully compiled
programs and applications, all of which is generally referred to as ‘content.’ Embodiments also include theoretical and abstract concepts exemplified through patents and automated processes as a specific form of content thereto.
Legal rights, contracts, agreements, and other assertions are embodied in the form of content, but are not the embodiment of the intellectual property itself. Rather, these are representations of the intellectual property, such as a Deed of Trust or title, to a home, vehicle and representations of physical or real properties.
Embodiments and representations of intellectual properties are intangibles of virtual existence, but with direct connection possessive to the tangible and real. This is exemplified by the mandatory patentability rule, that in order for a process to be patentable it must produce a ‘concrete and tangible’ result.
The software and programming industry has embodiments of intellectual properties in program driven goods, services, and products, with representations of property rights in licenses, legal contracts and agreements, copyrights, trademarks, and patents.
Given the State Street v Signature Financial Group 1998 ruling, 2001 revisions to UCC9, various statutory acts, and various international treaties gives an entirely different meaning to word ‘value.’ The speed by which assets and properties accrues is much faster, and because it is all virtual around its base, the form upon which it takes has no quantum limit, and therefore extremely valuable to the base property owner’s principal stakeholder and beneficiary. Given the value with full faith and credit and inherent wealth, there is not a single person who would knowingly or willingly sign away all rights, title, and interest, along with any and all control over to third party others.
This though was the point of the intentionally concealed, secret and private, MERS/Nationsbank credit/security agreement, to take into private our intellectual properties and assets, through and by theft of identity, in name, signature, and entity. This was covered over by an agreement executed with reliance on blatant intentional misrepresentations and fabrications of a mortgage loan refinancing that with great preponderance, can easily be shown never ever existed.
MERS/Nationsbank is the veil: on one side is actual truth and fact and the other the greatest public deception and fraud in history.
MERS/Nationsbank is the veil: on one side resides undisclosed sophisticated automated business practices that are NOT ordinary course. On the other, sits a population deceived by false and fabricated representations that all is ordinary course, and a paradigm that has been dead for at least 15 years.
MERS/Nationsbank is the veil: on one side we are made to serve as the prostitute subject of patented processes, exploited for my credit and value, and trafficked throughout the world. On this side I am a slave serving to the pleasures and profits of legal representatives, subsidiaries, an affiliates. On the other side, I am the embodiment of the American Dream – a homeowner, and completely ignorant of the evil that hovers all around.
My scope of knowledge on intellectual properties way back in 2005, was not advanced, in fact rather limited and general, which was more by name association to an invention, and a label identifying of a product, and not much more. For instance, Alexander Graham Bell as the patented inventor of the telephone, and Thomas Edison as the inventor and patent owner of the lightbulb. On the trademark side, the labeling of goods and products serves as a means for consumers to identify a certain manufacturers’ goods and products, but also as legal protection of manufacturer from infringement.
So a transaction in real property with concrete attachment to patents and trademarks would seem to necessitate full disclosure and representation. I believe this is what is referred to as mutual assent, absent of this, denies a potential buyer from performing competent due diligence. I lack capacity to enter into a transaction that is far out of the realm of my knowledge base that ventures into the unknown, and absent truthful disclosure from the seller, renders me incompetent. Ownit’s deceptive trade practices and unlawful model, is rounded out by further fraudulent acts and misrepresentations, with execution of an ordinary course mortgage loan refinancing that is a descent into ignorance.
Other than Ownit’s tendered ignorance, public deception, and a rigged court, there is no evidence whatsoever to ever prove there was a mortgage loan of any sort or kind, except for false belief and BAR attorney fraud.