1990 Internet 2 , The Beginning

The modern day Internet has now been in existence for approximately 25 years as the WEB which is the Internet across borders celebrates its 25th year

Black female inventor alleges her claims go back to the beginning of the modern day Internet , first called the Information Superhighway by Al Gore

This website is not to be confused with “Web 2.0″ .
Web 1.0 being referred to in Wikipedia as a retronym referring to the first stage of the World Wide Web’s evolution. Nor is it to be confused with Internet 2 which has a copyrighted logo and is listed as a not for profit corporation , Formation in 1997 (as University Corporation for Advanced Internet Development). It’s Purpose Research and testing network , Headquarters Ann Arbor, Michigan, US , Website internet2.edu . There are many names and technicians involved in the development of the Internet .

05-21-2015 05;53;27PM

Certified Delivery of Hartman's letter to the SBA in November 1990
Certified Delivery of Hartman’s letter to the SBA in November 1990

“Technology built it , the federal government funded it , but it was my imagination that created it “, alleges the inventor . Dorothy M. Hartman whose name is no where mentioned in the written history or development of the Internet claims that she played a major role in its development in that her conception(s) were used and are the reasons why the Internet as we know it exists . Her involvement in Internet 2 which some view as the Internet that debuted after 1990 started before the Internet 2 was created . The commercialization of the telecom networks 1990-1993 is what produced Internet 2 or the modern day Internet . Her ideas were used to create the transformation from an Internet (1) based on the ARPANET to the modern day Internet .

The NSFNET which was the precursor to the modern day Internet as it was the place where the previous telecom structures based on the ARPANET had been parked when the ‘Internet 1′ previously referred to as the internetting projects were retired . This inventor presented her proposals the first one submitted in March 1990 to the U.S. Small Business Administration or SBA– showing how telecom was underutilized and on how commercializing telecom would change the U.S. economy and the world .

Hartman who alleges that the transformation from the previous structures of the Internet to the ever evolving Internet of today which is able to expand and cross borders as long as Internet Service Providers can carry the data packets is the direct result of ideas which she submitted to the federal government’s funding programs. The NSF or National Science Foundation is the ultimate recipient of such proposals to determine whether funding will be awarded .

Hartman alleges that she knew that her ideas were good and the amount of wealth that could be generated by commercializing the telecom networks . After her proposals were reviewed by a number of federal government employees in the Small Business Innovation Research [ SBIR] program(s) – they all declined giving her any grants or loans [ see document below from the Benjamin Franklin Technology Center] , but she alleges that they began using her information almost immediately . She wrote a letter to the U.S. Small Business Administration asking that her proprietary information not be given to others for their profit and gain because she sensed that she was being discriminated against . She wrote the letter because she felt as though if she would not be given a chance then others should not be given the opportunity to profit from her proprietary information .

12-09-2014 04;29;07PM

“It was just plain wrong what they did and it is still wrong “Hartman says that is exactly what was done . That is after her letter was received – the decision was made by the National Science Foundation to claim credit for the ideas and to apply them to the NSFNET or what was left of Internet 1 or the Internetting Projects. They literally took my ideas and gave credit and opportunity to those already in the field to prosper There was just one thing wrong with that , she was and has been completely omitted from the process . She was aware of the growing interest in her ideas but she alleges for the usual reasons that a government based on oppressive and institutionalized racism towards Blacks refused to grant her funding even as the SBA published her proprietary information in its new business ideas manuals and the NSF rushed to commercialize the networks . The critical change to transform the networks and make them commercial was made here , spearheaded by Merit Network of Ann Arbor , Michigan the recognized home of Internet 2

NSF Commercializes Telecom in 1990-1991
NSF Commercializes Telecom in 1990-1991

However the National Science Foundation very much aware of the profit potential and especially alleges Hartman after her letter to the SBA financial officer – that it essentially stole her ideas to transform and revitalize the prior telecom structure(s).

Above you will find documents of Hartman’s Certified Letter delivered to the SBA on November 13 , 1990 ( a copy of this letter as well as other documents can be found on the USPTO.gov website in the Image File Wrapper showing various steps in the prosecution of the patent application No. 11003123 , the Accessing Accessibility Process ). When reduced to practice this process comprises the modern day Internet . Today’s Internet is not the same as the pre -1990 version of the Internet .

Whether you call it the Information Superhighway , Internet 2 , or just plain Internet – today’s version is very different from the version based on the Arpanet which came before . Further you see here copies of documents taken directly from minutes of a meeting by the Science Committee Meeting in the U.S. House of Representatives- March 12 , 1992 ( See excerpt from that meeting quoted in Hartman’s Brief before the USPTO ).

The documents above show DECISION C and DECISION D announcing that the NSFNET through its formation of the ANS consortium consisting of Merit Networks of Ann Arbor , Michigan , IBM , MCI and others “in essence , we have privatized the NSFnet”. A few paragraphs above on that same page 5 , under Conclusion – you will see that this was done without disclosing it to the public .

Decision C . NSF to commercialize or privatize networks. November 1990
Decision C . NSF to commercialize or privatize networks. November 1990
Decision D . Announced in November 1990 - Nsfnet to be upgraded to carry commercial traffic
Decision D . Announced in November 1990 – Nsfnet to be upgraded to carry commercial traffic

Hartman alleges that was the first time the seized her intellectual property regarding the Internet, the second when it denied what should have been a prima facie case for a patent .

In the paragraph at the bottom of that page 5 , you will find a paragraph that begins with ‘In November of 1990 , ANS’s president claimed in a public talk at a Harvard workshop …. Hartman says that those ideas came more from University of Pennsylvania (as she is a Penn graduate ) than Harvard . She alleges that this November 1990 announcement came from the ANS an organization formed by the NSF on the heels of her letter to the Small Business Administration which put into writing that her ideas were not to be shared after being denied funding herself .

Excerpts from the minutes of the Science Committee Meeting
Excerpts from the minutes of the Science Committee Meeting

“The government through the National Science Foundation walked all over my rights and has continued to do ever since .” Before her ideas were reviewed by the government Commerce had been banned on the majority of the telecom networks . On the page showing excerpts from the SCIENCE , SPACE , AND TECHNOLOGY -U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES- you can read comments by attendees regarding the 1 to 2 percent traffic of commercial traffic that was allowed at the time and the meeting itself occurred in March 1992 . The new Internet or Internet 2 did not make its real debut until around 1993-1994 and even then was called the Information Superhighway .

Hartman alleges that it was no coincidence that the NSF/ANS announcement about commercializing the telecom networks came in November 1990 , about the same time as Hartman’s letter to the SBA asking them not to share her proprietary information to others for their profit and gain . Hartman alleges, “They were no fools . They saw the wealth potential in my proposals and how this would enhance the economy . They took the ideas and applied them directly to the NSFNET transforming what had become failed networks into a seamlessly integrated stucture like the Internet of today based on the concepts that I presented but they were too prejudiced to provide me with the $25,000-$35,000 that I asked for to start my telecom services business . They were too accustomed to holding back the advancement of colored people(s) is why I wrote the letter to the SBA asking that my intellectual property not be shared or given to others for their credit and prosperity . That is precisely what was done after my November 1990 letter to the Small Business Administration . The NSF used the ideas to revitalize the NSFNET which was nothing more than a holding place for the retired network(s) based on the ARPANET. ”

The government declared ‘commercialization of the internet’ as its own idea(s) in Decision C and Decision D as recorded in the minutes of that Science Committee meeting in the House of Representatives in March 1992.

The Inventor says to this day the federal government has never funded my small business or any of my inventions or projects . Additionally other inventions for which I filed patent applications in the USPTO have gone down the “rabbit hole” . ” Exploiting my small entity status which in this case is synonymous with black , female , disabled and financial hardship – they have continously exploited my creativity – by enabling the theft of my intellectual property by the U.S. government and rich corporations without compensating me . I am black and disabled and therefore not good enough to earn millions or perhaps billions of dollars from my own intellectual property – but I an apparently good enough for them to steal my intellectual property and call it theirs . There is a paper trail of over a two year correspondence between those in the Small Business Innovation Research Program and myself. Yet now that the Internet has proven an overwhelming success which has made those already in the field very rich and the government exceedingly powerful – they pretend I do not exist. It is not only unjust but blasphemous .”

Race and Intellectual Property Law

Today “Pistol” and ” Boo” lit up social media .

Kudos to Australia for enforcing the law .

The popular film star , Johnny Depp made news today when the Minister of Agriculture threatened to put down his pet terriers Pistol and Boo if Depp did not take them from Australia . It appears Depp bypassed having his animals subjected to a mandatory quarantine period by flying his pet terriers Pistol and Boo in on his private plane . Whatever you think about that you have to give Kudos to the Agriculture Minister of Australia for following its laws.

Following the rule of law is not necessarily popular these days when it comes to applying it to the elites and what has become the royal class of Oligarchs in the United States . The Banks , Energy companies , and Tech corporations seem to be able to side step a large number of regulations .

Bankers, corporations , and those making up the elite 1% appear to have an easier time when it comes to answering the justice system than the 99% . Not more than a week ago , the Department of Justice supposedly did not give approval to a deal that was a merger between Time Warner and Comcast supposedly because of monopolistic concerns . Or perhaps it was Comcast that changed its mind about the deal .But then within the last two days Verizon has announced its acquisition of Time Warner for 4 billion dollars . It is rumored that T.Mobile is considering partnering with the Dish Network .

Depp will most likely remove Pistol and Boo from Australia rather than allow them to be sacrificed by what may have simply been an oversight on his part regarding the animal quarantine rules but following the rule of law is becoming more scarce in the United States of America depending on your class and circumstances . The law seems to favor the haves more than the have- nots which is nothing new but is more pronounced today than it has ever been because of the huge income disparity . As concerns the rights of African- Americans the rule of law is downright inconvenient when it is applied to black men caught in the justice system as it is oft misapplied or used to ramp up huge prison terms .

Where in the scheme of things is the little guy in all of this or minority females. Well when it comes to black female inventors especially of expensive inventions – the rule of law appears to be nonexistent. Although the Internet is immense and is continuing to make millions and billions of dollars for those who have profited greatly since its [ the Internet] inception in 1990 – the humble inventor has been left out completely . Where is the rule of law when it comes to her compensation ? There are laws on the books when it comes to intellectual property and there are rules and regulations . Yes , they are supposed to apply to African-Americans as well . However whether or not they are enforced is another matter . That’s why one has to give kudos to the Australian Minister of Agriculture because he basically stated with his firm handling of Mr. Depp’s situation that ‘the law is the law ‘ . Obviously in this case the rule of law prevailed .

So many African- Americans have been robbed of intellectual property rights . Ms. Hartman who is the true inventor of modern day Internet – the Internet now worth trillions of dollars in the U.S. and other economies all over the world has been left out – even as intellectual property law is being selectively practiced according to what fits the government and the administration . Now that the Internet is supposedly being considered as a Public Utility , will the government declare Eminent Domain of the invention and compensate the inventor ?
Hartman alleges that the USPTO fraudulently denied her a patent. What does the story about Boo and Pistol tell us about law ? How likely is the rule of law to be applied when it comes to justice for Blacks ?

This is not the Internet of today ,

Internet Beginning

nor this ,

800px-Arpanet_logical_map,_march_1977

or this ,

There was no Internet in 1990
There was no Internet in 1990

but this ,

Computer Generation by Peer 1 of the millions of websites now a part of the modern day Internet
Computer Generation by Peer 1 of the millions of websites now a part of the modern day Internet

FCC , Declaration of Eminent Domain?

The Internet has been declared a public utility , will Eminent Domain be declared and Inventor compensated for the illegal confiscation of her intellectual property ?

,

Should the inventor of the Internet, an invention now used all over the world be denied intellectual property rights without Due Process ?

The inventor who is African-American and female alleges that is what is happening because of blatant institutionalized racism and oppression – both of which are supposed to be illegal in this country . In spite of the U.S. Supreme Court rulings on Feb 23 , 2015 to affirm the U.S. Patent Office decision not to grant a patent – Hartman alleges that the intellectual property is still hers and that the federal government remains in violation of her constitutional and civil rights . She has not been acknowledged or compensated for her contributions which the government has taken from her without Due Process .

Hartman alleges that her method was used by the Federal Government in 1990- 1991 to Commercialize or upgrade the previous structure to produce the “Information Superhighway” or what we know today as only one name , the INTERNET. Although her ideas were used to revolutionize the way the world does business and are responsible for what has become a highly successful telecom industry that rivals no other – Ms. Hartman has never been recognized or compensated for the major role she has played in the success of ecommerce and telecommunications . To the contrary thus far her right to Due Process regarding the use of her intellectual property without recognition or compensation is being violated .

After confiscating her intellectual property 25 years ago and refusing to even acknowledge her , the government used her ideas to invent a better internet .Building a better internet is just like building a better mousetrap or any other kind of invention . Does the government have the right to transfer credit of the invention to others and grant the opportunity to prosper to others without compensating her for the loss of her property ? These are constitutional questions . For the 8 years that the United States Patent and Trademark Office held the patent application of the Inventor – it tried 7 times to change its own patenting laws and the U.S. Congress tried at least 3 times to change laws such as to deny this patent . Finally changing the law from First to Invent to First To File which did not bar Hartman’s patent rights as she satisfied both criteria . The Patent Office became more creative in using manipulation to break patent laws by using malfeasance and fraud alleges the Inventor .

The reason of “Indefiniteness” used as a red herring to detract from the truth that the Internet is just to great . The Inventor states that this is no excuse to disrespect her rights . She is not responsible for the fact that the world’s most powerful government has steamrolled over the rights of a disabled minority for 25 years while the Internet grew to enormous proportions . She had asked for $35,000 twenty-five years ago to jump start her own telecommunications company .

” I have had other inventions go down the “rabbit hole” in the Patent Office and end up going from me to massive corporations , alleges Inventor . I did what I was supposed to do and that is take steps to protect my intellectual property . It is the government taking the property without compensating me . Fraud , among other things is the new Jim Crow . Had I been another color or ethnicity , there is no way this blasphemy would be occurring . The fight for justice will go on . ”

The Supreme Court recently upheld on February 23 , 2015 the Federal Appeals Court May 2013 decision which appears here .13-1070.opinion.3-6-2013.1

“Claims a novel business method whereby the computer with its communicable devices is the focal point of the business and transactions occur online or in cyberspace. Herein cyberspace is referred to as that virtual space within which transactions and exchanges occur and that exists between the interconnections of the communicable devices with remote websites . Cyberspace is infinite and thus an infinite number of transactions is possible. A website (W) is herein referred to as pages that are received from the host or recipient computer and that display the monitor of the user’s computer once the connection is established . See Figs[.] 1-6 .”
Drawings_doc.

Another criticism is that there is no distinction between where the inventor’s invention begins and the “other” ends . This is simply not true as the Internet based on the Arpanet and other “nets” before 1990 is distinctly different from today’s Internet . Generally when an invention is tied to the use of machinery as this invention is as hardware , software , and an Internet Service Provider is necessary to use the invention – this precludes “indefiniteness” in patent language. The fact that Cyberspace is potentially infinite does not mean that the Internet is infinite or an indefinite invention . It is defined – if not confined . It is limited by the availability of the hardware and accessories in order to operate . This argument by the Patent Office does not make sense , argues Hartman . Further hers is a domestic patent application not an international one . The government has already given away this intellectual property which originated in this country to others so that a relatively few who had already become rich could become richer. Giving away for free what could have been sold would have placed the country on par with energy producing nations and may have circumvented the trade imbalances and other problems now plaguing the economy. Having access to Information and access to consumers would almost have been as precious as energy .

Hartman alleges that this intellectual property was misappropriated from the start with racism , greed, and oppression playing lead roles from the start . The Internet now having morphed into the World Wide Web is now separated by geographical and political boundaries with other countries now having their own , period . She also alleges that she was put through undue pressures and that her original claims and disclosure were altered without her permission . In 8 years within the Patent Office , she was not given the opportunity to properly amend or edit her claims .Additionally evidence that she was the true and valid inventor in the form of original documents signed by government employees was simply ignored Learn more at her Blog at http://www.TelecomStraightTalk.com and http://www.abfyjewelers.net . Further legal action has not been ruled out as this is major injustice which should have been corrected by the Commerce Department which is the parent of these government programs long ago .

Selma Alabama History 50 years Beyond

The Civil Rights Laws are on the books , they just are not being enforced as Selma Alabama history is recreated

As the 50th Year Anniversary of the March on Selma , Alabama history is being remembered with some dignitaries recreating Dr.Martin Luther King and his brave followers march on “Bloody Sunday” – progress has not been fast enough . The Internet 2 inventor suffers terrible injustice and because of her race is expected to be satisfied with intellectual rape and the awarding of credit for her invention which is considered by most to be the greatest invention of the 20th Century to those considered ‘exceptional’ and ‘superior’ because of their race , ethnic group or class status .

There are laws in the country that protect the rights of minorities but they are not being enforced – instead injustice and ad hoc rationales and excuses instead of justice inside of a courtroom are being practiced as another shooting of a black man occurs in Madison , Wisconsin apparently with impunity . The facts are not yet known but there appears to be an epidemic of injustice to blacks with no real accountability . Even as the symbolic march in Selma is being held in 2015 over the same bridge where many suffered injury on Bloody Sunday to have the right to vote , the Voting Rights act of 1965 is under siege after recent actions by the Supreme Court to undo some of the provisions of the 1965 Act enabling some states to disenfranchise Black voters from their rolls.

There are many to thank for the progress that has been made in the African- American transition from Slavery in the 18th century to 2nd and 3rd class citizenship in the 21st Century . Although there has been a great deal of advancement – things have not advanced enough. Yet too much oppression and discrimination still remain in the form of institutionalized racism. From the Selma Alabama History of the 1960’s to the Ferguson , Missouri of 2015 there are still miles to travel in making justice for black people an equal opportunity affair . Blacks are still too much cast in demeaning roles and stereotypes – their achievements and humanity deferred to others . African- American inventors although some are now being listed in history books but for the most part were not credited or compensated for their inventions .We Did it , they hid it

Although America has not yet reached the point where Dr. Martin Luther King’s dream has become a reality and Blacks are still for the most part not judged as much for the ‘content of their character’ as for the ‘color of their skin ‘ there has been considerable progress . That progress has been contributed to and participated in by many . Malcolm X who spoke ‘by any means necessary’ died for the struggle. Not only did courageous Blacks ordinary people including sanitation workers with Dr.King in Memphis sacrifice themselves to maltreatment and being jailed – but others from different walks of life involved themselves in the struggle for liberty . Andrew Goodman and Micky Schwerner who were of Jewish descent died right along with James Chaney another freedom fighter , but African American in Mississippi during the CORE Freedom Summer Project in 1964 .

William Lloyd Garrison a white printer through his newspaper the Liberator began the Abolitionist Movement against slavery . Frederick Douglas later joined this group. John Brown who led an armed rebellion against slavery was also a white man . The Founding Fathers of the U.S. Constitution were white men who saw fit to view enslaved blacks as human beings added the 13th Amendment to the Constitution and ratified it – later adding the 14th Amendment .

It was Robert Kennedy who sent the Feds into Alabama in reference to the terrible and inhumane treatment of the Blacks marching and protesting in the South . The move towards civil rights legislation was initiated with the Kennedys and later the voting act and other landmark legislation was signed into law by President Lyndon Johnson following the assassination of Pres. John Kennedy .

Not to mention the lives lost during the Civil War – the Country has overcome and been though so much conflict in reference to RACE in this country . Yet in spite of the progress , there are those who would take the country back to the 18th century if they could . People of all classes , races , and walks of life have participated in the march and struggle for racial equality within this country .

Nowhere is that more obvious than in the recent protests from the past six months of people -so many of them millenials protesting the slayings of Michael Brown of Ferguson and Eric Garner of New York City in the “Black Lives Matter” and ” I can’t Breathe” protests . African Americans must be careful not to segregate themselves . There was so much jealousy and mayhem indoctrinated into the African psyche by slave masters separating ‘field workers’ and ‘house workers’ . Also separating them by skin hues and assigning castes as often the ‘light skins’ were of the house and presumed as better ( more often than not as a result of siring by the master ) were separate from the ‘dark skins’ . This divide and conquer strategy is still being used , but African Americans must not fall victim to it . They are not a monolithic people as they are as different as any other race in terms of personalities , experiences , skills and talents . Even their looks vary from blue-eyed and fair to very dark skin . There is however the shared and common experience(s) of institutionalized racism, prejudice and oppression .

The inventor who alleges that she invented the Internet 2 did not achieve all by herself . Most she attributes to the Almighty working through supportive people , hard work and scholarship leading to a good education. “Although I am grateful for the contributions of our Black leaders like the marchers to Selma Alabama history – we must not just rely on marches and fiery speeches . We must be ever vigilant and look to the government to uphold and reinforce laws that protect minority rights ” , says the Inventor . She spent most of her employment career teaching Science . She tries to give back through her skills and to lead by example .

What is FREE OPEN Internet ?

When was there a free and open Internet ?

If you think that the recent FCC vote will make the Internet more free and open – perhaps you may be interested in purchasing Time Share on the planet Pluto ( which by the way is no longer even considered a planet in this solar system ) . See the following excerpt from the Inventor’s remarks to the FCC Commission in 2008 regarding a free and open internet :

…. Ms . Hartman alleges that the federal government has made a monumental decisions to remove any rights that she might have to claiming the INTERNET as her intellectual property by the “rush” to declare the spectrum open for licenses , auctions , “giveaways”, etc. The United States Patent and Trademark Office under the Department of Commerce has delayed the processing of Ms. Hartman’s patent application for almost four (4) years essentially holding the patent application “hostage”while the government through the FCC has made its moves to strip Ms. Hartman of any proprietary or ownership rights by seeking even now to give away ‘ free access to all Americans ‘ and is apparently going around the world to give ‘free access to everyone .’ While on the face of it -it may seem “free access” – upon closer inspection it really is not ,as the tech companies which received government funding to build it in the first place will still be allowed to prosper for they will continue to charge fees for their services and costs for technology gadgets that customers will need to access the so called “free” internet ……

The difference is that the INTERNET is bundled in and therefore any ownership or property rights by the inventor are made null and void. As altruistic as the acts appear to be on the face of it “broadband to all Americans “ or ‘free access to everyone ‘ – indeed it may simply be a ruse to cover a very unjust act– of racism and oppression . All indication is that the service is not free per se but bundled in with fee packages from various telecom and other tech companies and now even car companies and hotel packages- some of
this bundling already begun and on the market using “free internet” as a ‘hook’ or ‘draw.’

The only thing supposedly non fee is the internet which is bundled in and Ms. Hartman contends that this arrangement is designed to strip her of any residual rights that she might have even if awarded a patent and of any proprietary rights , such as ownership and
management of the property .Therefore , -not only for her protection as an inventor , but for the protection of other inventors and for the prevention of ad hoc laws and rules made on the basis of prejudice , suspicion , and fear and not jurisprudence and sound judgment- she hopes that the FCC will be very thorough in the evaluation of its acts and the facts .Being thus , perhaps it will not seek to hurt rules governing proprietary information , patent laws and intellectual property laws . This would be acting arbitrarily , capriciously , and not in accordance with law.

You may view the entire document for Hartman’s Comments before the FCC in 2008 here :

FCC Opposition to Petitions by Hartman

‘If it ain’t broke , don’t fix it’ . Meddling , racial injustice and oppression are not the answer when it comes to a free open internet. For free open internet , what is wrong with the one we have ? What is needed is justice and Commissions to study and adopt rules and regulations to address those who do abuse the system .

There Was No Internet 2 in 1990

Internet 2 did not exist . For all of those now trying to “hog” the Internet , there was no Internet in 1990 . What was left of the Arpanet and the prior “Internetting Projects” [ see image to the left ] had been retired and were parked in a structure called the NSFnet under the auspices of the National Science Foundation.

Internet 2 debuted after 1990 . The above diagram shows the Internet in 1987 , its structure based on the Arpanet . Internet 1 was permanently retired by 1989 and parked in a structure called the NSFnet . This black female internet inventor presented to the federal government through its Small Business Innovation Programs , SBIR ideas entitled The Feasibility of Accessing Accessibility. The inventor disclosed in these proposals ideas how to improve telecommunications by commercializing it – making it available to businesses and consumers . Although Dorothy M. Hartman asked the government for only $25,000 to $35,000 to launch her own prototype telecommunications services company – she was denied funding and support . Her ideas were stolen by the National Science Foundation and used to revive and transform the telecom networks . This inventor was the single most responsible person for difference between no internet and the presence of a successful internet of today . Yet she has not been credited nor compensated.

The government has ignored and denied the inventor’s rights for the past 25 years while today’s Internet ( called Internet 2 as it is a distinguished structure from that of the previous Internet before 1990 ) has flourished and reaches practically every corner of the earth circulating trillions of dollars through the economy . In addition to the losses regarding the Internet , Inventor suffers other losses . Read more here about Other Inventions

Technology has been glorified and Ecommerce have been glorified because these fields have become exceedingly rich due to the ideas presented by Hartman to use computers and cyberspace as an alternate marketplace. Her ideas are the reasons why Internet 2 or the modern day Internet which grew out of the Commercializationof the Nsfnet can accommodate billions of people online . This expansion was impossible under the previous Internet(1) structure which was based on the Arpanet . Everyone from those who created email and website protocol , internet service providers , search engines , computer and phone manufacturers , and code writers have been given credit as being the inventors and founders of the Internet because they have made billions of dollars from sheer number of users being online . Because of the gross violations of her intellectual property rights alleges Hartman these corporations now huge because of her invention have been given the credit and the opportunity to prosper.Everyone but Ms. Hartman who is the true inventor of the Internet. Yet is treated as a pariah for standing up for her own right .

Hundreds perhaps thousands of various types of technicians are involved in maintaining the Internet and making it work . The government funds it – but its creation is by this inventor who is being deliberately ignored by the government . The government is breaking its own laws in violating the civil and constitutional rights of this inventor and “practicing fraud” , she remarks .

NSF Commercializes Telecom in 1990-1991
NSF Commercializes Telecom in 1990-1991
Internet becomes a conduit for Business and Education in 1990's
Internet becomes a conduit for Business and Education in 1990’s

The Internet begins to grow after the transformation in 1990
The Internet begins to grow after the transformation in 1990

The United States Patent and Trademark Office through fraud and deliberate discrimination of the inventor who is a minority and classified under several protected groups is violating her rights to a patent . Further the FCC under its powers is imposing government rules and regulations – steamrolling over the rights of this inventor . The Internet which over the past 25 years , we have all come to take for granted does truly have an inventor . One whose rights have been egregiously violated by corporations that have become rich because of the Internet and a government that has become very powerful because of same .FCC Opposition to Petitions by Hartman

Yet there has been shown no shred of lawfulness or decency by the federal government when it comes to the intellectual property rights of this woman . The inventor alleges that not only has her patent rights been abused by the Patent Office in reference to the Internet but that she has had other inventions find their way into the hands of rich corporations .

Will FCC Vote Smash Inventor’s Rights…

How will FCC Vote matter ? The world may have changed since the invention of the Internet , but the Internet has not. The Internet continues to do exactly what it was programmed to do in the invention – the Accessing Accessibility Process- and that is to expand .Computer makers , phone makers , and code writers did not invent the Internet – this inventor did- see Inventor’s 2008 comments to the FCC.Using telecommunications to lift the economy out of recession , access to ordinary consumers and businesses were the ideas of this inventor – not the FCC or the Federal Government .

Excerpts from Hartman 1990.thru.1991.Proposals

Be careful what you wish for you might get it . The Internet was made for consumers . Complete control of the government of the Internet as a Public Utility will produce more taxes , more fees , and worst of all more lack of privacy and loss of freedoms . It will be even Bigger Government on Steroids !

See Inventor’s Patent Application below . Also masked under this Trojan Horse is the complete destruction of the Internet Inventor’s rights just as the U.S. Supreme Court is supposed to rule on an Appeal by the inventor that was filed by the Inventor on December 30 , 2014 . The Court to review it in Conference on February 20 , 2015 . The Inventor who is an African- American female says that she has found this administration to be oppressive and weak when it comes to improving the status for Blacks in the country . Except for politics and photo-ops , there has been very little in the way of policy changing legislation or any other movement towards improving the continuing status of Blacks as second and third class citizens subjected to institutionalized injustice .

Accessing Accessibility Process Patent Application

One of the FCC Commissioners , Ajit Pai appeared on Larry King’s POLITICKING show . One of the topics covered is the upcoming FCC vote . In his interview he showed a 300+ page document that has not been shared with the public but will be voted upon by the FCC Commission within the coming days . Ajit Pai indicated that the vote will probably be a 3-2 Decision to approve .

FCC Opposition to Petitions by Hartman
Should the Public push to know exactly what it is that will be voted upon and approved by the FCC Commission ? The FCC Commission consists of 5 members . Why are the particulars of the FCC vote not being made known to the public . What is known about exactly what they will be voting on ? Net Neutrality may be a myth . What more invasions of privacy or restrictions of U.S. freedoms that populace may be subjected to ? Perhaps what is needed are regulations to improve the status of the Internet as it already is . The Internet appears to be working okay as is . A FCC vote to change that will be more problematic as presented thus far . For those of you with short memories , remember Sispa and Sopa and what constitutes internet freedom . The problem is not he Internet but those who use it . The problem is those who use it to accomplish negative results that upset the balance of things . Or when the legislation surrounding it is used to oppress or suppress constitutional rights and freedoms .

FCC Vote to Big Government ?

FCC Vote could lead to bigger government

Alleged Inventor of Internet 2 says , ” I do not wish to rule over the Internet- I am only a human being “.

I do wish to be credited for my invention which is considered by some to be the greatest invention of the 20th Century

My rights should not be steamrolled over by the FCC Commission or the Federal Government because of my skin color, says ABFY CEO

It was the Accessing Accessibility method proposed by the Inventor that made telecommunications accessible to businesses and ordinary consumers and created the Internet 2 or the modern day Internet . Read more at her blog http://www.TelecomStraightTalk.com

Excerpts from Hartman 1990.thru.1991.Proposals

Hartman 2008 Comments before FCC. 1st 5 pages

Be careful what you wish for . The Internet under full control of the government would be like Big Government on Steroids !!!! Is that really the answer ? Or some type of compromise position ? The CEO of ABFYSELLERS GROUP alleges that she is the Inventor of Internet 2 is skeptical of the impending FCC Decision to be made by the FCC vote by the Commission and announced by FCC Chairman Wheeler in a few days . One of the FCC Commissioners , Ajit Pai appeared on Larry King’s POLITICKING show . One of the topics covered is the upcoming FCC vote . In his interview he showed a 300+ page document that has not been shared with the public but will be voted upon by the FCC Commission within the coming days . Ajit Pai indicated that the vote will probably be a 3-2 Decision to approve .

Should the Public push to know exactly what it is that will be voted upon and approved by the FCC Commission ? The FCC Commission consists of 5 members . Why are the particulars of the FCC vote not being made known to the public . What is known about exactly what they will be voting on ? Net Neutrality may be a myth . What more invasions of privacy or restrictions of U.S. freedoms that populace may be subjected to ? Perhaps what is needed are regulations to improve the status of the Internet as it already is . The Internet appears to be working okay as is . The problem is not he Internet but those who use it . The problem is those who use it to accomplish negative results that upset the balance of things . Or when the legislation surrounding it is used to oppress or suppress constitutional rights and freedoms .

There is no particular expertise being expressed here – just observation and opinions based on observation . Net Neutrality is a good concept to keep the Internet accessible to businesses and consumers alike . Net Neutrality already exists to a large extent . The problems are by those that try to upset the apple cart by negative activity that either intrudes or extrudes excessively . Perhaps what is needed is a larger FCC Commission or more Commissions to ponder such huge problems . Problems that involve keeping the Internet open , but competitive and innovative at the same time . What is the status of the Internet when the rights of an inventor are involved ? The present status of the Internet has never been fully known or understood . Perhaps that is a good place to start .

FCC , Net Neutrality , Internet 2 Inventor

12-17-2014 12;00;16PMPresident Obama has stated that converting the Internet into a Public Utility would be an answer to Net Neutrality and keeping an open and free Internet . Some are endorsing this plan which is not popular with cable companies . The following excerpt is taken from THE FREEMAN article written OCTOBER 03, 2012 by STEVE FRITZINGER and mentions some of the history of the Internet :

In his now-famous “You didn’t build that” speech, President Obama said, “The Internet didn’t get invented on its own. Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet.”…… Obama’s claim is in line with the standard history of the Internet. That story goes something like this: In the 1960s the Department of Defense was worried about being able to communicate after a nuclear attack. So it directed the Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA) to design a network that would operate even if part of it was destroyed by an atomic blast. ARPA’s research led to the creation of the ARPANET in 1969. ………………………For civilian agencies and universities, NSFNET, operated by the National Science Foundation, replaced ARPANET in 1985. ARPANET was finally shut down in February 1990. NSFNET continued to operate until 1995, during which time it grew into an important backbone for the emerging Internet ….

The CEO of ABFY SELLERS GROUP who alleges that she is the true inventor of today’s Internet emphatically states that true Internet history is not known and that the FCC and President Obama are leaving her out . What is Internet Neutrality ? The Inventor’s contributions to the development of the Internet 2 are still being suppressed by the federal government which has awarded itself complete control of the Internet since its inception by ARPA in 1969 . However the Internet now visible and in use by billions did not become publicly known until around 1995 after the previous telecom network initially instituted by ARPA had phased out and a new structure was in place . That structure is commonly referred to as Internet 2 as the telecom structure based on the Arpanet model is referred to as Internet 1 .

Internet 2 exists because of the innovative concepts of an Inventor whose name has not been made a part of Internet history because she alleges that the government stole her ideas to successfully transform telecom structure into what we now refer to as the “Internet”. She alleges that credit was given to the National Science Foundation and to those already in the tech community which was commissioned by the NSF to implement the changes . Internet neutrality was built into the structure from the beginning as the Inventor presented proposals that for the first time gave ordinary consumers access to the Internet . This is the Internet 2 of today which serves billions of people . Internet 2 is drastically different from Internet 1 which was based on the Arpanet and phased out in 1990 . Her ideas were meant to help others as well as herself but she has not benefited it in the least . “That is what happens when you are black and have invented one of the world’s greatest inventions .” She continues to fight in Court because this is a huge injustice .

She alleges that it is the powerful and the greedy who have completely taken over completely because the invention turned out to be what she had predicted to the government and then some . Unfortunately power has steered the control to the oligarchs who now are trying to squeeze the small users out – just as she has been squeezed out of the entire process . Go to Public Pair on the USPTO.gov website and enter the application number .The modern day Internet is her invention . You can acquaint yourself with Hartman’s Patent Application , Number 11003123 here

<http://www.uspto.gov/

CEO and Inventor Dorothy M. Hartman conceived the ideas of using cyberspace which is latent in computers as an alternate marketplace shared among computer user networks and predicted that this application would revolutionize commerce and the industry. It has making the technology and ecommerce community millionaires and billionaires , but the inventor of the process goes without credit or compensation . The networks described in the FREEMAN article ended with the ARPANET which shut down by 1990 and was parked in a holding structure called the NSFNET . The prior networks had become defunct and were not profitable . The Inventor’s proposals submitted to the federal government in March 1990 demonstrated ways in which the telecom network(s) could be transformed making it both profitable and self-sustaining . She alleges that her ideas were used by the NSF to create Internet 2 . She is owed credit and compensation .

Net Neutrality can hardly be considered without knowing the status of the rights of the inventor . If the government assigns the entity for the public good as a utility – then according to the Constitution – Eminent Domain should be declared and the owner appropriately compensated . ” This is precisely why the Patent Office has been allowed thus far to violate my constitutional rights.” says the inventor . However it is not my fault that the government has not compensated me for 25 years while the Internet has expanded . That is exactly what it was designed to do with the ideas of my proposals reduced to practice . Now that it is an overwhelming success , I am supposed to suffer for that . This is the ugliness of institutionalized racism .”

Her contributions are of monumental importance because they made the difference between an Internet(1) that had essentially ended and the vibrant and expansive Internet(2) that exists today . More than any other person in the history today her intellectual property was the most crucial – because it made the difference between having an Internet and not having one . No one else has come forth to make that claim or to dispute it . Yet the Inventor’s rights have not been considered in any government decision be it by President Obama or Chairman Wheeler of the FCC when considering Net Neutrality .

These method, the Accessing Accessibility Process and the benefits as described by Hartman that would be derived from its application were used by the National Science Foundation which had the remnants of the Arpanet parked in its charge under the NSFNET. The National Science Foundation applied Hartman’s template to restructuring the NSFNET – producing what was first nicknamed by Vice President Al Gore as the “Information Superhighway”. The Information Superhighway morphed into today’s Internet which has expanded all over the world – creating the WorldWide Web which continues to evolve . It was the vision of this Inventor which created the Internet and the government is aware of her contributions but thus far has not acknowledged or credited her . She has placed her case , docketed IN RE DOROTHY M. HARTMAN before the United States Supreme Court An appeal was filed on December 30 , 2014 to be reviewed in Court Conference on February 20 , 2015 .

There are contributors to the Internet whose names have been included in the history of the Internet and the WorldWide Web. Presently their names and comments have been spread profusely over Google and the Internet speaking out on Net Neutrality now that Chairman Wheeler of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is supposed to make a decision in the coming weeks regarding Net Neutrality . That decision may decide whether or not the Internet might be reclassified as a Public Utility in answer to the question regarding a free and open Internet . Many seem to be in favor, while cable companies are not . However no comments have been made by President Obama or FCC Chairman Wheeler about what rights an inventor may have since thus far – she has been completely ignored .

Beware Bad Webhosts ; SEO Plugins !

If your website is missing , could bad web hosts or bad seo plugins be the answer…

Shop carefully for hosting and web development…

You are wondering why in spite of your effort to improve the ranking of your website – you are not making progress !!!! You have spent time , money , and effort . Is it a matter of effort or dollars ? Maybe its both or neither .

There is another Troll on the Internet – truly bad Web Hosts and SEO Plugins that are really not so ‘search engine friendly’ might be holding you back . Cable companies or ISP’s are sometimes given a bad rep because they are charged with providing service , but they are not always the bad guys . Underneath the service are the hosting companies and web developers .

Be careful of what you get . They are not all ethical . Some of them step outside of their professional niche which is always a mistake – putting themselves before their customers to make political statements. They may be touted by gurus as the ‘best plugins’ in the world but if they are loaded with bad code , your website will tank right to the bottom . Some of these sluggish companies put politics before professionalism . Be careful !!! So if your website is down when it should be up – make sure that you check all the parameters . Avoid HOT-BRAIN ; GOAT-GATOR ; ONE-AND-ONE = NONE , and UTTERLY-INCOMPETENT-COW. For better experiences , carefully research and go with better providers . Also watch plugins .

The FTC ( Federal Trade Commission ) is supposed to have jurisdiction over that , but has not been stringent enough in its enforcement of the law to prevent censuring and blocking . It should do more to monitor complaints and reign in renegade as well as truly bad companies .

This country was founded on debate . Transparency of content and open dialogue with different points of view expressed is what fosters a free and open Internet – fostering competition and innovation not stifling it with legalized ‘hacking’. Hiring companies less well known , but more ethical may be a solution .