Minerva's Wisdom | Nelson Mandela

Notes by Minerva on Nelson Mandela image -

Google introduces another of its creative images – this time in a video celebrating the birthday of Nelson Mandela . Nelson Mandela in his struggle from activism to imprisonment to President of South Africa is truly one of the world’s greatest heroes . Google has been vocal lately in its support of diversity and struggles of people of color . Dorothy M. Hartman who alleges that she is the true inventor of Internet 2 which is the modern day Internet that debuted after 1990 and contributed to the huge success that technology and commerce have become says , ” It’s marvelous that Google acknowledges the worth of people of African descent such as heroes like Nelson Mandela who are larger than life personalities. What about African – Americans right here in this nation who are still suffering discrimination and injustice ? Google should put its money where its mouth is and lobby in favor of my rights as I have contributed to the tremendous expansion of technology and those billions of dollars now generated by the industry .”Read here “http://www.smartphoneselectronicsaccessories.com/black-female-claims-invention-internet/”

    What are the concepts and ideas involved in Net Neutrality ? | wireless

    TV / cable / Internet /phone

    TV / cable / Internet /phone

    Wireless or wired ? Is the Internet a public utility ? More giveaways or exploitation ? What ideas and concepts are being discussed regarding Internet Neutrality ? Read the following article for information . Article source url is listed for further information . Also check out youtube video for a comedic perspective …

    Title: Obama’s Wireless Stimulus Package

    Plan Details: The Money

    Broadcast Spectrum Auction: One of the key parts of the proposal was the 500 MHz broadcast spectrum auction, currently held by television and radio broadcasters, and would be sold off specifically for licensed mobile access providers. The total cost of the program is currently estimated at $18 billion, and total revenue is $27.8 billion over 10 years, hence the Obama wireless plan will realize a $9.6 billion net gain. Some will go to the current holders of the spectrum to be sold off in exchange for voluntary surrender of the spectrum.

    Infrastructure: The next major part of the plan is the investment of $10.7 billion to build a public safety wireless infrastructure. This will provide police, fire, and other public services high-speed wireless access, allowing them to �share video and exchange email.� While a little vague, the scope of the plan is extensive and would involve dedicating the �D Block� of broadcast spectrum for public safety. Much of the cash would be spent on towers and infrastructure to support the use of the spectrum. The recent buyback of the �Wireless Philadelphia,� a multimillion-dollar effort to provide free wireless and its re-tasking to fire and police use is an example of the goal of this phase of the plan.

    Other Funding: $5 billion would go to fund an expansion of the Universal Service Fund, ensuring low-income families access to wireless services, and to support companies that invest money in building private infrastructure in areas traditionally too costly to develop profitably. Safelink wireless is an example of this initiative, providing cell phones and monthly airtime to low-income American.

    An additional $3 billion would be invested in research and development of wireless technologies in the education, health care, and energy sectors, which would dovetail with existing health care technology initiatives. Additional funds are already allocated in the Commerce and Agriculture Departments through the Recovery Act and will be used to fund wireless development in rural areas.

    Effects of the Plan

    With the deployment of DTV and the end of analog broadcast television, a starting gun was sounded and the race was on. Much of the news, beginning with Google’s attempt to enter the most recent spectrum auction and the recent FCC Net Neutrality Act has been the pole positions of the race. For many years, the federal government has supported efforts to bring telephone service to outlying areas of the country. Now the government will assist in the expansion of wireless access to replace the existing infrastructure and create a wireless broadband future.

    The plan intends to be a win-win effort with commercial entities benefiting from the creation of a much larger market base, and lower cost of wireless access and America benefiting from a major step forward in technological development. Consumers will benefit by having mobile access nearly everywhere. Finally, the taxpayers will realize 9 billion dollars in revenue over the next ten years. It is rare that any federal program is this balanced and universally accepted. [Read more...]

    Black Female Claims Invention of the Internet

    Where is Justice ?

    Where is Justice ?

    A Black female inventor who claims invention of the Internet in probably what is an unprecedented move in history files two Writs with the United States Supreme Court . The CEO of ABFY SELLERS GROUP, an Inventor and Entrepreneur alleges that she is the inventor of the changes in telecom which resulted in the development of the modern day Internet which debuted in the 1990′s and contributes to the World Wide Web.These changes introduced in her business method proposal(s) to the federal government entitled “Accessing Accessibility “ is what created the Information Superhighway later referred to some as the new Internet or Internet 2 which debuted in the early ‘90’s leading to use today by billions of people online .You will not find her name listed in the History of the Internet . The article found here athttp://www.history.com/topics/inventions/invention-of-the-internet “title= “History.com” contains some important omissions alleges Hartman .

    The Inventor who states that she has been fighting for her intellectual property rights from the very beginning alleges that because of her race which is African – American and a handicap that evidence and facts have been suppressed and her intellectual property rights “steamrolled over “ to maintain the status quo- leaving all of the credit for the Internet and its success to the fields of Technology and ECommerce . The images below this along with time stamped , notarized documents from the Inventor as well as the timeline of documented history show that the Internet took off or changed after Commercialization in 1991 and are among evidence which Hartman claims illustrates the true time line for these changes. Below you will find images of publications that indicate the changes in the Internet and the time line that these occurred. Users then were relatively few in 100’s of thousands as opposed to the billions online now .



    Hartman alleges this occurred during the illegal confiscation of her proprietary information in 1990 , the application of the ideas in 1991 by Merit Networks under the direction of the National Science Foundation and then the subsequent training by Merit and others to teach online users how to use the new Internet – see publication from 1993 . Data transfer on the telecom networks was practically flat until after 1990 and the changeover wrought by Commercialization , see graph below . As businesses and consumers rushed to get online – the Internet mushroomed and grew .


    Dorothy M. Hartman’s ideas showed the government how to meld commerce with business by placing transactions online using computers – this created an alternate marketplace in cyberspace which is latent in computers . This creation came from Hartman and is responsible for the billions of customers now online . “ The Internet took more than technology , creativity was also needed ,” says Hartman. ” It took my insight into understanding the nature of cyberspace that it could be used for potentially infinite transactions . That is why now there are billions of people with technology and ecommerce able to sell their gadgets to them all – enabling the fields to prosper . Technology as far as the telecom networks were concerned had been around for 30 years , but only after 1990 and the ideas introduced by this inventor did the Internet spread and become a success .

      This changeover of using the computer as the focal point and taking businesses online conducting transactions in cyberspace was her (ideas) says Hartman and brought the Internet which now consists of billions of people online . “Technology may have built it and the federal government funded it , but my ideas created it.”


    Facts about the Internet are all over the place and it seems that since the filing of this black female inventor’s patent application in 2004 – official filing date March 7 , 2005 that there has been an explosion of information regarding the Internet and its alleged inventors – some of it false and not well documented .Here the Inventor shares personal information about her backgroundhttp://www.smartphoneselectronicsaccessories.com/internet-inventor-shares-personal-biography/

    Although she could not stop the illegal confiscation of what had been proprietary information because she had wanted to start her own telecommunications services company which is why she had submitted her proposals to the government about taking businesses online and the benefit and effect of using cyberspace in computers to create an alternate marketplace – she attempted to recover by filing for a patent application . Although she filed 5 years after Business Methods became patentable as the Inventor’s Act of 1999 for the first time allowed the patenting of business methods – nevertheless she was the First to Invent and the First To File – so that should have preserved her intellectual property rights . However due to the overwhelming success of the Internet after 1990 and the wealth and power that it produced , the Inventor alleges that the federal government has broken its own laws to deny her the patent and that her constitutional and civil rights are still being violated to maintain the Status Quo.

    Although she was FIRST TO INVENT and FIRST TO FILE , she says that the United States Patent and Trademark Office by fraud and malfeasance has denied her patent application . Proper crediting and acknowledgement of her contributions , she alleges could have preempted this . That was all she ever wanted – to be treated with respect and in a just manner . However , institutionalized racism is still the prevailing fabric of the country – therefore at this point it is a matter of justice . The federal government funded it .
    Internet founded by technology starting with ARPA but Internet created by a humble black female whose imagination furnished the creativity that has made it successful and useful by billions . Although without her creative ideas , the telecom networks would still be defunct as they were in 1989 , her rights are being “steamrolled over “ by the power of the government and the wealth of corporations that have grown rich and powerful because of her contributions to the invention of the Internet .

    The Billions of people online and the successful transformation resulting in the boom in the 1990′s and its continued expansion are the results of Hartman’s ideas being reduced to practice by the National Science Foundation working through Merit Networks and others . The Internet before 1990 would not have been capable of such growth and expansion . Justice is long overdue . See below :

    1987 Internet

    1987 Internet

    The black female inventor Dorothy M. Hartman alleges that her Patent Application No. 11003123 was illegally denied and that she is being deliberately discriminated against to maintain the status quo because she is a minority . She is being deliberately exploited . Therefore she is petitioning the U.S. Supreme Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit to reopen her case , Dorothy M. Hartman vs. U.S. Patent and Trademark Office as she alleges the Opinion to uphold the ruling by the Patent Board of Appeals and Interferences was flawed . The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit Opinion can be found here http://www.smartphoneselectronicsaccessories.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/13-1070.opinion.3-6-2013.1.pdf . The modern day Internet is not the result of the natural progress of the original telecom networks started by Arpa in 1969 but is a Transformation of the original telecom networks that was accomplished when the National Science Foundation applied concepts regarding Commercialization which alleges Hartman were ideas submitted by her . Go to http://www.TelecomStraightTalk.com to learn more .

    Hartman , who is CEO of ABFY SELLERS GROUP alleges that even as the Web celebrates its 25th birthday and the FCC is deciding on how the portions of the Internet should be meted out amongst powerful corporations – the true inventor of the modern day Internet rights go ignored and she suffers abuse and her business online suffers from lack of funding and censure . Even if by law , a patent is not granted she should still be compensated for the theft of her intellectual property .The government is still in illegal possession of the property- never having acknowledged her or declaring Eminent Domain of the Internet for Public Good . The government although one of the most powerful , if not the most powerful in the world “ should not have the right to take one’s property be it tangible or intangible without appropriate compensation . As U.S. citizens we are supposed to be protected from such abuses by the Amendment XIV and Amendment V of the United States Constitution …..Due Process .

    Further , the inventor who lives in Philadelphia alleges that she has been targeted by a powerful group of racists with ties to local government who have carried out a campaign to harass and damage her by destruction of her finances and real estate property
    http://www.smartphoneselectronicsaccessories.com/black-internet-inventors-home-vandalized/ . A federal judge in Philadelphia has even refused her a jury trial involving the perpetrators that continue to damage her . A trial by jury is supposed to be inviolate . She alleges that her civil rights are being violated in the court (s) in the continued effort to suppress the truth – in an effort to discredit her and prevent awarding her damages for the violation of her property rights as a citizen of this country because she is speaking out against such abuses and standing up for her property rights. This is unconstitutional . She has filed the Writ of Mandamus as she alleges that she is being deliberately discriminated against because of her vulnerability as a minority and handicapped individual – which constitutes violations of Civil Rights under Title XI and Title IX of the 1964 Civil Rights Act . She has also filed a Petition for a Writ of Certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court in reference to rulings by the U.S. Court of Appeals 3rd Circuit to deny a jury trial , as she alleges that her constitutional rights under Amendments 1 , the right to Free Speech , Amendment 7 , the right to a jury trial are also being violated in reference to the destruction of her home and finances . This she alleges in an effort by the rich and powerful to continue to oppress her rights and suppress the truth about this horrible injustice .

    The Petitioner/ Inventor is hoping for a just outcome in both cases as she says that her inventions were meant to serve the people – not hurt anyone . Although the Internet “ keeps on giving “ that it is she, the inventor who has suffered and been hurt the most . “ I am being penalized for being Black and having no money to fight back against the power and wealth that has come from the ideas that I shared with the government and those who have gotten rich because of ideas that I shared with the government . This is unethical , immoral and unjust .”

    Her ideas, alleges the inventor have proven to be worth trillions of dollars to the American economy – yet her rights continue to be violated . She was 46 years old when she went to the government with her ideas for improving telecom – she is now 70 years old and hopes that justice will come swiftly to stem the tide of ridicule and abuse that she is still suffering.

    “ If I had it to do all over again . I would leave things as they were. Not that there is anything wrong with innovation , but evil always finds a way to corrupt everything – especially where money is involved. In this case , the three evils are racism , greed , and hypocritical politics .” If the invention is too large to be patented , then that should be stipulated by law as currently there is no legal reason(s) alleges the inventor that a patent should be denied . “Even so , the government should either declare Eminent Domain for the public good or compensate me appropriately for losses . It should not ignore my rights .” She is still hoping that this is a nation of laws and that the highest Court in the land will uphold both constitutional and civil law in these case(s) . “ I believe I am owed both justice and an apology , says the inventor . The color of my skin should not deny me credit for my invention – which some remark is the most important invention of the 20th Century ”

    For more bookmark these blogs at http://www.smartphoneselectronicsaccessories.com and http://www.telecomstraighttalk.com and join her in Justice Watch

    Google Gets It Almost Right says Inventor | diversity

    Celebrating Harriet Tubman

    Celebrating Harriet Tubman

    Dorothy M. Hartman says,”Google’s almost right” when referring to the following article about diversity. The self proclaimed inventor of the concepts that led to the modern day Internet is still fighting for justice in the Supreme Court . “True more African- Americans are needed in technical fields as well as Science , Medicine , and Engineering . However for the African Americans who have been or are already in those fields , it is still a steep and difficult climb for advancement because of the barriers of discrimination , and the arrogance and taking of credit by other groups stills remain .”

    The article is below and for more information , go to the following link or paste link into your browser http://www.foxbusiness.com/technology/2014/05/29/google-report-highlights-silicon-valley-big-diversity-problem/

    Google: It’s Time to Tackle Silicon Valley’s Diversity ProblemHave you heard? White men dominate the Google (GOOGL) workforce.
    New diversity numbers released by the tech giant on Thursday show a not terribly surprising but nevertheless striking lack-of-diversity in the technology sector. Silicon Valley has long been a white man’s world, but Google is hoping these blunt figures spark a much needed change.
    Just 30% of Google’s close to 46,000-person global workforce are women. Just 2% are black, 3% Hispanic and 4% a mix of two or more races. Asians make up 30% of the team, but white people more than double that.
    The unprecedented and first-ever diversity report, which follows pressure from civil rights activists, shines light on a stigma that has long haunted the world’s largest tech center, from its billionaire founders to its talented developers.
    Google said it published the numbers to tackle diversity challenges in an effort to improve those numbers heading forward, saying the time has come to be “candid about the issues.”
    “We’ve always been reluctant to publish numbers about the diversity of our workforce at Google,” said Laszlo Bock, senior vice president of people operations at Google, in a blog post. “We now realize we were wrong … Google is not where we want to be when it comes to diversity.”
    To be fair, the numbers don’t diverge too far from overall U.S. employment data. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, 80% of all employees are white. Google says this speaks to striking gaps in the U.S. education system that need to be addressed.
    For example, women earn just 18% of all computer science degrees in the U.S. Blacks and Hispanics make up less than 10% of all U.S. college grads, and collect fewer than 5% of CS degrees, according to data cited by the Mountain View, Calif.-based tech giant.
    Google says this has triggered it to invest heavily in education, including giving more than $40 million since 2010 to organizations working to bring computer science education to women and girls.
    It also works with historically black colleges to elevate coursework and attendance in computer science, including having Google engineer Charles Pratt serve as in-residence at Washington D.C.-based Howard University this year, where he led the revamping of the university’s CS curriculum.
    However, Google admits that it is “miles” from where it wants to be, and pledged to improve the way it recruits new talent. Google claims to not just want the most talented but also the most diverse people, though it did not provide specifics on how it will do this.
    “Having a diversity of perspectives leads to better decision-making, more relevant products, and makes work a whole lot more interesting,” Google said. “It is hard to address these kinds of challenges if you’re not prepared to discuss them openly, and with the facts.”
    The report comes amid pressure from civil rights activist Rev. Jesse Jackson who has urged Silicon Valley, including Facebook (FB) and Hewlett-Packard (HPQ), to release diversity stats. So far, Google is the only one to do so.
    Follow Jennifer Booton on Twitter at @Jbooton

      Inventor's Personal Bio re Internet Intellectual Property

      Even as she fights for Intellectual Property rights View video of Inventor’s humble beginnings at the link below .

      Dorothy M. Hartman who is fighting for justice in the courts for her claims asking for recognition and compensation for her intellectual property which contributed to the development of the Internet shares some personal information about her background . See here the damages to her home as she states that she has been subjected to abuses while fighting for her property rights http://www.smartphoneselectronicsaccessories.com/black-internet-inventors-home-vandalized/ The inventor who says that her home has been vandalized by local bigots , but that she is being denied a jury trial against the perpetrators . She says this allows the perpetrators no accountability and to continue their abuses . This further keeps her case out of the public and main stream media so that this high jacking of her intellectual property can continue. The Inventor has had to file a Writ of Certiorari with the Supreme Court in order to get a jury trial which should be a constitutional right for every American. Additionally she says that she has endured years of abuse and distress while her invention(s) bring trillions of dollars into the American economy .

      The Inventor says that because those who would oppress her cannot overcome evidence and facts which represent the truth , that instead she has become a target for slander , lies , and defamation . The number “13″ linked to her name implying that her lack of being compensated for her intellectual property and the blatant and overt vandalism to her personal property are incidents of ” bad luck ” . The truth of the matter is that the rich and the powerful have simply ” steamrolled over her rights” . Her financial hardship and handicap used as reasons to exploit her – while she claims the overwhelming motivation is her skin color and race . She deserves credit and compensation – not abuse .

      The Inventor says that these are instead incidents of institutionalized racism and having her rights oppressed by greedy and powerful people who do not want to grant an African-American woman credit due to her for her achievements . Her inventions have proven profitable and literally stolen from her . This is why she is now fighting the Herculean task of trying to recover her property rights .

      The modern day Internet is recognized as the greatest invention of the 20th century ,yet no one knows the name of the true inventor . Hartman says her inventions including the Internet were never about get rich quick schemes or any of that but just a natural progression and evolution of her life . She comes from humble beginnings and never imagined herself as ever having to be in this position . This has always been about respect , recognition , and fairness . Her rights should have been recognized long ago . There are laws that state that the government or no one else can just take property , even proprietary information or intellectual property , without compensating the individual from whom the property is seized . Hartman alleges that the federal government seized her intellectual property and accomplished it’s illegal but regulatory taking of her property by denying her a patent on the invention .

      If the government having declared itself the de facto owner of the Internet as it is now deciding whether to call it a utility or meting it out for the richest corporations to essentially run it – then it should first deal with the inventor . If the invention is too large – then that should be stipulated by law and not some make believe excuse of “indefiniteness” which in this case does not hold water because the Internet is not indefinite . Even if that were so , the Inventor is still owed compensation by the federal government because of its theft of her proprietary and legal information which it took to revamp a failing telecommunications industry – and fail to reward or compensate her in anyway . Contrarily , it discriminated against her then ( back in 1990 ) when she presented them with proposals and now by ignoring her claims in spite of evidence and proof .

      ” It is both an outrage and unconstitutional in the way that I am being treated . I am continuing to fight for justice , representing myself Pro Se and hoping that the highest Court in the land will make definitive rulings concerning the unjust treatment by the patent office of my patent application #11003123 ( Review at USPTO.gov ) regarding the Internet” , says Hartman . The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit can be found here. The inventor is asking the Supreme Court by a Petition for a Writ of Mandamus – that the case Dorothy M. Hartman vs.United States Patent and Trademark Office be reopened .

      If the Internet is too big to be patented , then that should be spelled out in the law and not just ignore the rights of the inventor . The Inventor claims that by all existing patent laws that her invention should have been patented and that the Patent Office violated patent laws , constitutional and civil statutes in order to deny her a patent .

      ” Indefiniteness is not the same as expandability – especially when the government has evidence and proof that I am the inventor .” The Internet is definite . It is bounded by hardware and software which access it . If the government is going to award the Internet to the public for the public good – then Eminent Domain should be declared and the Inventor rewarded accordingly .

      ” Technology is very definitely a major part of the building and the running of the Internet but it is the creative force of my ideas that are behind the Internet . Without which the Internet as we know it would not exist . While there are those who have become rich and powerful because of it , I have been left to suffer defamation , loss , and abuse . It is not only unethical , but immoral and illegal . I am still hopeful that the Courts will render just outcomes in both cases .”

      At the very least , the inventor should be recognized and credited for her contributions which are an overwhelming achievement for herself and the nation. She should either have the patent which she deserves and which is hers by current and prevailing law or she should be compensated for the theft of her intellectual property .Either way she is owed compensation . She should not be subjected to the tremendous losses and attacks by racists and oppressors that she is currently suffering because she is standing up for her rights http://www.smartphoneselectronicsaccessories.com/file-writ-certiorari-right-jury-trial/. Billions of people online today including yourself are there because of her ideas concerning the use of cyberspace as an alternative marketplace . Learn more at this blog and also the blog at a href=”http://www.telecomstraighttalk.com” target=”_blank”

        FCC to cripple the Internet

        Article by John R. Quain

        John R. Quain is a personal tech columnist for FoxNews.com. Follow him on Twitter @jqontech or find more tech coverage at J-Q.com to learn more .

        The Federal Communications Commission thinks the Internet in the United States can be run at two speeds. Backtracking from an earlier proposal, the FCC now believes it will be just fine to let Internet service providers (ISPs) control what you access online, with a few exceptions that the FCC would police.

        While this new proposal might not kill the Internet, as it exists now, it would certainly cripple it – at least for American consumers and businesses.

        Multiple leaks about FCC chairman Tom Wheeler’s proposal to the commission, which will be presented on Thursday, indicate that the agency would not allow ISPs to give preferential treatment – faster Internet access – to their own subsidiaries. But it would allow other companies to pay for faster, more reliable access. (No matter that such a similar restriction has already failed in the case of Comcast giving preferential treatment to its own Golf Channel.)

        If the Internet does not maintain net neutrality, wherein all digital data is treated the same, countless businesses will suffer.

        Unfortunately, there is no halfway approach to how data should flow over the Internet. It’s a binary proposition: Either access to the Internet is equal, no matter the type or size of the business, or it is not. Letting Amazon have better access because it can pay and because it is not owned by AT&T will not make the situation more equal.

        If the Internet does not maintain net neutrality, wherein all digital data is treated the same, countless businesses – tech companies in Silicon Valley, auto companies in Detroit, health care providers in Houston, startups in New York – will suffer. And, of course, you and I will pay for diminishing service and be denied the option of choosing what we want to read, view and listen to at faster speeds.

        Representatives of the country’s largest ISPs are claiming that the one solution to preserving net neutrality in the U.S. – legally classifying broadband Internet utilities as utilities – “would threaten new investment in broadband infrastructure and jeopardize the spread of broadband technology across America, holding back Internet speeds and ultimately deepening the digital divide.” That’s according to a press release attached to a letter signed by Verizon CEO Lowell McAdam, AT&T CEO Randall Stephenson, Time Warner Cable CEO Robert Marcus and Comcast CEO Brian Roberts.

        Nothing could be further from the truth.

        In the first place, those companies are proposing to introduce their own digital divide, in which consumers would have no choice. Faster, more reliable Internet access would be granted only to those companies that would pay AT&T, Time Warner, et al. Want better access to your child’s school website? Too bad, Verizon will say no – unless the school can fork over the kind of fees that an Amazon or Facebook would pay. Thus, the digital divide would grow exponentially if these CEOs have their way.

        Secondly, there is no “threat to new investment in broadband.” Indeed, the situation is quite the opposite. There is constant improvement in optical switches, which increase speeds. And there is plenty of motivation for ISPs to upgrade: It’s called competition (can you say Google Fiber?). You and I pay dearly for these services every month, but if it’s not enough to run their businesses properly, then AT&T, Time Warner and Verizon should start charging subscribers more up front and providing better service. Crippling the Internet for their own profit, with no promise of improvement, is not a solution. It’s a disincentive for ISPs to upgrade.

        Moreover, access to and the flexibility of the Internet have done nothing but improve under the de facto standard of net neutrality since the early ’90s. Suddenly handing over control of how reliably and how fast certain content gets sent to a few companies would kneecap the U.S. economy.

        It would stall such initiatives such as autonomous cars, which will save lives by preventing deaths on American highways but which require high-speed Internet connections. Allowing ISPs to charge more for that access would stymie such innovation and, to put it bluntly, ultimately cost lives. The idea that Comcast or Time Warner might give YouTube better online access than a doctor sending critical diagnostic information to a hospital is frightening.

        Failure to support net neutrality and to reclassify broadband Internet service as a utility will also handcuff American businesses that have to compete on a global stage. Companies in other countries would have a marked advantage with full and equal Web access. Consider how many startups would move just a few miles from Seattle to Vancouver to get a Canadian Internet advantage. Meanwhile, the burgeoning startup scene in cities such as London and Berlin would also be given a boost.

        The big ISPs like Verizon and Comcast are right about one thing: The FCC cannot micromanage how every content provider gets information onto the Web. Provisions established when Comcast purchased NBC Universal have already failed. And even if such restrictions could withstand legal challenges, enforcement would take years in each case, by which time businesses would be shut and innovation squelched.

        When President Obama was running for office, he said on multiple occasions: “I will take a back seat to no one in my commitment to network neutrality.” This week, it’s time the president got into the front seat.

        So what can you do? Email your members of Congress, email the White House … and email the FCC – if, that is, you can get through.John R. Quain is a personal tech columnist for FoxNews.com. Follow him on Twitter @jqontech or find more tech coverage at J-Q.com.


        Why File a Writ of Certiorari For Right to a Jury Trial ? | Court

        The woman who alleges that she is an inventor with claims to the Internet files   Writs in court. She  says that she has been under attack by race haters and oppressors  associated with corruption in Philadelphia city government for the past 15 years . Some of these attacks had been misdemeanors but were allowed to escalate to vandalistic attacks on her automobiles and home . Recently the case has been filed in court because of the toll of damages and the alleged involvement of some city employees and participation of others in fraud and vandalism . For damages to her home , go here http://www.smartphoneselectronicsaccessories.com/black-internet-inventors-home-vandalized/

        The case now in federal court has been carried out with what the inventor alleges has been prejudicial rulings – not even allowing a trial by jury which is supposed to be everyone’s  constitutional right .  ” These bigots are of a particular group of white collar criminals having the official capacity to do what they want and using city organizations to do it .”  One particularly nasty thing that they have done for the past 10 or more years is have their minions  stalk her around to whatever part of the city that she is in and have them “trash”  the area she is in or the neighborhood  around her home .  This constant harassment is only a part of the particularly hateful persecution that she has had to endure since standing up for her property rights and filing complaints . What kind of system do we have where because of the color of the victim’s skin – the evidence is overlooked and things are the way they are because THEY SAID SO and not because of facts and evidence . That is why trials or hearings are necessary and both these cases deserve their day in court .

        “These are hateful and arrogant people who think they are above the law . I have had to file a Writ of Certiorari with the Supreme Court because with all of the lawlessness that has been done by these individuals – thus far I have been denied a jury trial. Something is very wrong with the justice system for Blacks if in the light of the evidence and merits of the case , I have to file a Writ to the Supreme Court just to get a jury trial . I am also filing a Writ of Mandamus with the Court as I have every right to petition my case regarding the Internet in the Courts . Essentially my life is being ruined by hateful people who feel as though they should persecute me as a scapegoat for their crimes . They are the ones meddling into my life to deliberately do harm yet they feel as though they should not be held accountable.”

        Internet Inventor’s Comments Before the FCC

        Where is Justice ?

        Where is Justice ?

        As the FCC and debate rages about who should own what portions of the INTERNET and how much – one very important person continues to be overlooked , the inventor . Who invented the Internet ? It was not invented by ISP’s ( Internet Service Providers , search engines , phone and computer makers , social networks , ecommerce sites , etc. ) . These are the corporations that have grown wealthy because of their use of the Internet – but they did not invent it . The creative ideas for the invention can be found here at .

        Although it may be of little to no concern to you that the modern day Internet that has expanded all over the world – was founded by an African American – rights concerning intellectual property should be the concern of all Americans . What is done to the least of us is done to all . If the government seizes the intellectual property of one person and declares or does not declare Eminent Domain for the public good – it is essentially the violation of constitutional rights for us all . Hartman made comments to the FCC in 2008 .

        If the federal government practices tyranny over one individual by “steamrolling over her rights “ then it essentially violates the Bill of Rights and the Constitution on which this country was founded . This woman , Dorothy M. Hartman , CEO of ABFY SELLERS GROUP continues to fight for her rights as an inventor and a human being . The country has become so engrossed with oligarchy that the right of the people – especially a minority woman with a handicap is completely overlooked . But should that be ? Are we better off ? Look for her comments to the FCC and Read the following articles on the inventor’s blog : http://www.smartphoneselectronicsaccessories.com/support-african-american-female-inventors/ and http://www.smartphoneselectronicsaccessories.com/why-you-should-care-about-an-african-american-internet-inventor/

        The government is well aware of the validity of Hartman’s claims and of the persecution and suffering that she is enduring because of it . Her home and automobiles have been vandalized , her credit rating and other things deliberately destroyed . Yet the government has been aware since 1990 when it used her proprietary information to transform and revitalize what was a dying telecom industry that she is the inventor of the process that commercialized telecom creating the INTERNET . She applied for a patent in 2004 and made comments to the FCC in 2008 . Hartman alleges that this is intentional discrimination and tyranny over one individual . Yet there has been no “ Thank You “ , acknowledgment , compensation , or apology of any kind . “I have contributed too much to his country as a patriotic and concerned citizen to be treated as a scapegoat for arrogance and greed , says inventor .If it is not my race and or sex and handicap , then what is it as they have the evidence .”

        One would have to wonder whether or not the economy would be in a downward spiral – if the intellectual property of this great invention had been handled in a different way . The world is diverse for a reason – to present different perspectives and views . The inventor alleges that the down turn has been brought on by racism , oppression , and runaway greed .Read the comments by Hartman before the FCC referenced below to understand what the dynamics are behind the scenes even as the public battle rages regarding the Internet . Many of the references in the search engines reflect confusing and misinformation about the inventor .For one of Hartman’s Ex Parte Comments before the FCC on 07/22/2008 , go here

        If the link does not work  , paste it in your browser or  google Dorothy M. Hartman filings (FCC) or go to FCC.gov website and view Filer :  Dorothy M. Hartman , Proceeding Number 03-67 , file date 07/21/2008.
        While the argument continues regarding Net Neutrality and the constant debates surrounding the Internet – the inventor continues to be unrecognized .  Not exactly constitutional and the inventor is still seeking justice through the court(s) . The inventor is still seeking justice through the court(s).

        What is the Net Neutrality Debate ?

        TV / cable / Internet /phone

        TV / cable / Internet /phone

        What is Net Neutrality ? How does that effect you ? Why you should care . Check out the articles below . The following is an interesting quote:
        …But, as Eric Schmidt once said –

        “The Internet is the first thing that humanity has built that humanity doesn’t understand, the largest experiment in anarchy that we have ever had.”
        The inventor understands the creative concept of the INTERNET , but then the world does not know who she is . Read more on this blog to understand the woman behind the invention , still suffering injustice for an invention that has enriched the nation .

        What Is Net Neutrality?

        From its inception, the promise of the Internet has been parity. The Internet is fundamentally democratic, its most idealistic users tell us: It does not discriminate between packets of information. The Internet allows you to access the website of that tiny independent bookstore around the corner just as quickly as you access Amazon.com; it does not filter out access to digital forums where unpopular ideas or opinions are expressed; it does not transmit MSNBC content any more efficiently than it relays content from Fox News.
        The doctrine behind this functionality is called net neutrality. Simply put, net neutrality means that the connectivity infrastructure – the servers, Internet service providers (ISPs) and transmission lines that make up the Internet’s backbone – must provide the same level of connectivity to all its users.
        The principle of neutrality has become so much a part of our notion of what the Internet is that most Internet users never question it. Yet net neutrality is not enforced by law, and in September, 2010 the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) – the body charged with overseeing the Internet in the United States – abruptly called off talks that aimed to get the big players in the Internet arena to sign off on enforceable net neutrality rules.
        Proponents of neutrality maintain that unless the unwritten law is codified into a federal law or regulation, the big telecom companies who provide Internet connectivity will try to impose tiered service models on Internet users, similar to those used by wireless companies in the early days of cell phones, that will create artificial scarcity in the pipeline as a way to weed out competition, ultimately ensuring their monopolistic control of the Internet. [Read more...]

        The United States and Internet Access

        Did the Internet originate in the United States ? Is it a public or government utility ? There is a lot of history to be learned about the Internet and its access . For more information read the following articles as every administration since Clinton’s seems to assume ownership of this utility . For more , see the Blog at http://www.smartphoneselectronicsaccessories.com


        Title: United States Eyes Broader And More Affordable Internet Access

        The United States government is reinforcing its plans to make high-speed Internet access more available and affordable to every citizen of the country. A $787 billion economic stimulus bill the federal government has signed for 2009 would include a $7.2 billion budget to fund the national broadband initiative. The Federal Communications Commission, the agency tasked to take responsibility in spearheading the project, is all set to implement efforts for the project.
        US President elect Barrack Obama has made the broadband nationalization project part of his priorities, as promised during the presidential campaign of 2008. This way, the government is hoping Internet access would be made more possible, more affordable, and more convenient even across underserved areas in the country. Affordable and reliable high-speed Internet seems to be part of a more important economic platform the Obama administration is gearing for.
        The US government looks at high-speed Internet access as a successful and potential driver of the country’s economic growth in the short- to long-term. When the US Congress assigned the FCC to develop a national broadband plan, it emphasized that the action is aimed at accelerating economic growth. It is hopeful and is certain that a more developed broadband Internet infrastructure in the US could help create more good-paying jobs, spur better and more useful innovations, and effectively connect small businesses to make them even more competitive and progressive.
        A well-developed Internet facility across the nation is also seen as essential for improvement of educational opportunities, better delivery of healthcare, and further revamping of basic operations of fire fighters and police, who could rely on improved communications for better implementation and enforcement of overall public safety and orderliness. At the same time, cleaner energy at basically lower costs could also be made more possible.
        US citizens are expected to get involved in the national broadband rolling out and development process. In the third to last quarter of 2009, FCC is set to host national discussions and forums to tackle the design of the national Internet access plan. Such talks would be open for the public participation through actual meetings in designated centers and even online.
        The government is expecting the public to describe the broadband needs and requirements of their communities. They are also expected to air aspirations and hopes for the improvement and better implementation of the National Broadband plan. This way, the US government is helping itself make sure that no sector or communities in the country would be left behind prior to rolling out of effective broadband infrastructure.
        For its part, FCC as a bureau is tasked of taking a pivotal role for the promotion of competition, innovation, investment, and job creation across the national wireless sector. The agency has set up its own specialized team to provide expertise and additional support for seizing the opportunity as the US aims to take the lead in global mobile communications. Throughout the year, and prior to actual launch and implementation of the project, FCC is set to conduct more preparatory initiatives to further set the stage for the national broadband effort.
        It is expected that the US government would succeed in creating a more reliable and better online infrastructure. Soon, Internet access anywhere in the country would not be a problem anymore. It could only take several months. [Read more...]

        Black Internet Inventor's Home Vandalized | intellectual property

        Inventor's Home Before Vandalism





        and More

        and More

        Black Internet Inventor’s Home Vandalized

        Dorothy M. Hartman , self proclaimed inventor of intellectual property which she says contributed to the devlopment of the Internet suffers vandalism of her home and automobiles …..

        As the Web which is the Internet across borders celebrates its 25th birthday and ISPs form mega conglomerates that consume Internet real estate – its true inventor of intellectual property which she says was used to create the template to commercialize telecom continues to suffer persecution and mega injustice .

        Hartman says that for the past 25 years the United States has practiced tyranny against her in stealing her intellectual property without compensating her – that her life has gone backwards . Hartman who is a retired science teacher and entrepreneur conceived the idea(s) of telecommunications services in a cyberspace marketplace back in the 1990’s . She is handicapped and devised the method(s) as a means of working from home . Her intent was to help herself and others and she realized the implications for commerce and the economy . The isolation caused by her handicap was the motivation for her design of the invention . “ Necessity is the father of invention , sometimes it is also the mother of invention “ , says Hartman . I regret that I shared my intellectual property with the government only to the extent that they dealt unfairly and unjustly with me .

        She went to the Federal Government seeking funding and support and the rest is history . The government- although in full possession of the inventor’s intellectual property having it fully reviewed by its employees in the Small Business Innovation Program , National Science Foundation and others did not fund Hartman or hire her as a contractor for the research on the new ideas . Instead , the National Science Foundation used her proprietary information and intellectual property without her authorization to revamp and transform what were failing prior telecom networks into the structure that emerged in the 1990’s . This structure first referred to as the Information Superhighway is what morphed into today’s modern day INTERNET.

        Although she was FIRST TO FILE and FIRST TO INVENT the intellectual property regarding commercializing the telecom networks – because of the overwhelming wealth and fortunes now enjoyed by those that were either already in the technology field(s) or entered soon after the Internet emerged – she alleges that the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office is and continues to be in violation of her constitutional rights and civil rights .

        Hartman says that although the U.S. Supreme Court denied her Writ of Certiorari on November 18 , 2013 without an Opinion – she is filing an Extraordinary Writ as this case deserves its day in Court to end the terrible injustice that she is suffering . She hopes that the Court will reopen this case .

        While her invention enables billions of people , she is being victimized by racism and oppression . Local bigots and oppressors have destroyed her automobiles – her home vandalized and she is being besieged by a fraudulent mortgage foreclosure and attacks on her credit rating . All designed to demean her and destroy her credibility . While some of this is occurring because of her standing up for her local property rights and fight against defamation, no doubt some is caused by her “ internet claims” . Those who have caused the problems locally by spreading fraud , lies and mayhem have apparently thrust themselves as being the center of the attention and cast themselves as “victims” . This makes their actions particularly offensive and despicable .

        It is a horrible injustice that the inventor of the greatest invention of the 20th century should be treated in such a manner . Hartman alleges that her story is being blacked out in the mainstream media – so that these abuses are taking place under the radar . The federal government knows and has proof that Hartman is the inventor of the Accessing Accessibility Process which led to the development of today’s Internet but is deliberately discriminating against her – a handicapped minority with no means to fight back against its power and the wealth of corporations . Therefore she will file asking the Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus to reopen the case as she says the suffering that she is enduring is not nor has it ever been deserved . This is purely about racism , hatred , and oppression of the advancement of people of color . She is being treated as a pariah for standing up for her own right to be treated justly .

        Hartman never claimed to have invented the ARPA or the original telecom networks , which are mostly attributed to Vinton Cerf and Robert Kahn who are already recognized for their worthwhile and notable contributions . She is a science teacher , not a technician . Nor did she ever claim to have invented computers or mobile phones or any of the components or methods that contribute to billions of people accessing and using the Internet .

        She did however invent a better way of using the telecommunications network – one which has made the industry successful . Her link to technology and ecommerce was a small one but vital . Her ideas initiated the transformation in telecom which changed the way the world interacts and created tremendous success for the industry . That is worth recognition and compensation . The document and graphs below show the effect on the industry due to the transformation caused by what she alleges were her ideas of Commercialization of the telecom networks . The graph is flat until after 1990 . The amount of data being moved on the networks show a dramatic increase . Today there are millions of websites and billions of users . The Internet has gone around the world becoming the WorldWide Web . This persecution is about oppression and to use the vernacular , “keeping the niggah in her place ” . Therefore her struggle for justice and truth will continue .

        Telecom is Commercialized by NSF in 1991 with Merit Networks taking the lead ..

        Telecom is Commercialized by NSF in 1991 with Merit Networks taking the lead ..

        Users increase dramatically after 1990 as businesses and consumers go "online".

        Users increase dramatically after 1990 as businesses and consumers go “online”.

          Information Superhighway and the Internet

          Highway to Information Sky

          Highway to
          Information Sky

          As we are still celebrating the 25th birthday of the web , looking back learn more about the Information Superhighway and its role in the development of the internet and web.

          Also check out the articles below :

          Title: Vehicle Technology Is Racing Towards The Information Superhighway!

          More than five years ago, one of the U.S. domestic automakers introduced a plan to bring Bluetooth-driven technology to the forefront of their vehicles. Since then almost all auto manufacturers are racing to introduce new vehicle technologies as fast as they can. Many consumers embrace the new technologies, while a sizable number have raised the question – has it gone too far?
          In early 2011, Consumer Reports, a widely read consumer magazine, actually gave a negative review of then new Ford 2011 Edge equipped with the new MyFord Touch technology. Their editorial staff claimed the vehicle’s technology was not “user-friendly.” They felt automakers were forcing technology down the throats of consumers.
          On the other side of the technology coin, cell phone companies have been competing for the consumer to adopt smartphone technology. There’s an App for this and an App for that, and it was inevitable that the demand for smartphone technologies would affect the sale of automobiles.
          Today, almost everyone uses a cellphone. It’s hard to find anyone who uses a cellphone just to “talk.” Most are checking e-mail, sending texts, listening to music, and playing videos or games.
          In the last century the ultimate goal for a teenager was to get a driver’s license and a car of their own. Today’s pre-teens want an unlimited talk and data plan and a smartphone!
          It’s to the point now, that consumers base their car-buying decision on the technology in the vehicle! In other words… “I don’t want the car if I can’t Bluetooth stream my music!”
          Ford Motor Company was on the forefront with its SYNC hands-free communications system that it introduced in 2007. This system uses voice commands and steering wheel mounted controls to make it easy for a driver to keep their concentration on the road while making and receiving phone calls.
          When it comes to technology, all manufacturers have something… GM has IntelliLink, Dodge and Chrysler have UConnect, Kia has its Uvo, Toyota has its BLU technology and the list goes on and on. The goal of automakers is to create hands-free technology to make and receive calls with Bluetooth enabled phones. However, that was just the start.
          Ford’s system evolved into the MyFord Touch system, first introduced on the 2011 Edge and Explorer models. These systems have an on-board computer similar to a laptop and they receive voice commands to control phone calls, text messaging, selecting audio entertainment, adjusting climate control and helping find destinations.
          The challenge for Ford was to create a system that worked with a multitude of phones, cell phone companies, different cell phone software systems, not to mention customers who spoke with a lisp or could not be understood by the system computer.
          Ford engineers, along with help from the system developers at Microsoft, are currently beta-testing a new operating system. This editor has used the beta-test and found it to be much improved. It’s easier to read, faster to navigate through its screens and it seems the computer can understand voice commands a little better. Within a few months Ford will roll out its new operating software for existing customers to “update” their system and Ford’s new vehicles will be based on this new software system.
          The history of the automobile is kind of strange isn’t it? It’s one thing to see the evolution of mechanical technologies such as engines, transmissions, and brakes. It’s a surprise to see auto manufacturers in the software and computer business. Next we’ll be hearing TV commercials for a powerful, fast new vehicle, but instead of horsepower they’ll be talking about computer megahertz speed! Or maybe, Dell Computers will start selling computers that seat seven and have awesome internet connections. Are vehicles being built for the highway or the information highway, or both?
          Consumers don’t really need to “kick the tires” on a new vehicle any more. They need to know what technology they can access in their vehicle. The internet has become a required tool for car shopping. Once they find a vehicle, then the customers have to learn how to use all of those features.
          Car dealerships better start looking for car salesmen from the Geek Squad! [Read more...]

          What Do You Know About The StockMarket And Investing ? | Nasdaq

          20003-13Perhaps this information from a few writers who have observed some aspects of the StockMarket can answer some of your questions about the history of the markets and more .

          Are Investment Bubbles Of This Millennium “The New Norm”?

          In my previous article, “The Paradigm Shift… That Altered the Odds of Investing,” I discussed the dynamic change over the past 20 years which has and continues to adversely impact every investor. As an investment coach, teacher, and mentor, I’m frequently asked questions regarding this bubble phenomenon: “Is this “The New Norm?” Is this the best we, as investors, can expect looking forward? How will I ever achieve my financial goals and objectives in this market environment?” Here are my short answers to those questions, respectively: “Who knows? Only if you choose. By learning to play a new game.” That is generally when I get the “Are you for real?” scowl while I’m nodding in the affirmative with a smile on my face.
          As I address the true significance of these questions, I take my audience on a brief history lesson before I offer suggestions on how investors can shift the odds of successful investing back in their favor.
          Someone’s poisoned the water-hole
          My history lesson always begins with a picture depicting two distinct investment landscapes over time and provides some valuable insights regarding the past, present, and perhaps future of investing. The picture I refer to is a daily linear chart of the S&P 500 Index from 1960 to December 24, 2013 (link at bottom of article). As one travels along the timeline of this chart, a dramatic change occurred relative to the shape of this index around 1995. The S&P 500 index is not alone as the DJIA and NASDAQ indexes depict a similar pattern, and most recently in global indices as well. I do not proclaim myself to know all there is about technical and fundamental indicators of the markets, but I firmly believe along about 1995, “someone’s poisoned the water-hole” where long-term investors had come for decades to invest, build, and preserve wealth.
          Many financial professionals, professors, and pundits will claim this is no “new norm” as markets have historically experienced similar massive run-ups and meltdowns. Perhaps so, but I would argue not with such regularity and almost predictability as the past 20 years have delivered. It’s almost as if the markets are being intentionally manipulated, and if so, by whom and why?
          Is this “the new norm”? [Read more...]

          Don't Believe a Word of it ! Inventors and Imposters | Internet

          Says , the real Internet Inventor .  As the World celebrates the 25th Birthday of the Internet/ Worldwide Web – inventors of the Internet range from soup to nuts ! Some articles date the Internet from 1989 and others from 1967 .  Internet inventors range from Brer Rabbit , Wylie Coyote to Mother Goose or Humpty Dumpty . These are cartoon characters of course and depending on what Internet History you read – it reads like a cartoon with so many different ones taking credit for its invention .

          No doubt , the technology field is quite crowded today with billions from around the world using the Internet and different innovations by major players are used to access it .  All kinds of people make it go from search engines , social networks , ecommerce sites , internet service providers , web hosts , web developers and planners , code writers , software and other programmers , chip and component makers and so on .  It’s a huge industry but its humble beginnings started with a retired teacher and entrepreneur – Dorothy M. Hartman .

          The Internet of today that has morphed into the WorldWide Web began in March 1990 when Hartman presented the following proposal(s) to the U.S. government through its Small Business Innovation Programs . She alleges that the National Science Foundation stole the ideas and applied them to a failing telecom industry based on the Arpanet that had phased out by 1989 . The NSFNet which essentially was a holding place for the telecom networks while the National Science Foundation sought answers and solutions for saving the networks adopted her ideas in November 1990 as witnessed by a congressional meeting report in April 1992 .

          Hartman’s Accessing Accessibility Process which was introduced to the National Science Foundation through the SBIR ( Small Business Innovation Research ) programs-interested the government because the ideas were darn good !  However, she alleges that because of the color of her skin , gender , and a handicap – she alleges that she was discriminated against and is still being discriminated against .  The National Science Foundation used the template of her business proposal , she alleges to revitalize and transform the preexisting Arpanet based telecom structure which was failing.  Following Commercialization , the industry took off resulting in a World Wide Web that today serves billions  .

          Others who really had nothing to do with inventing the process or the contributing ideas but are now making billions are doing so because they were already associated with the  industry . Now they had thousands and then millions of people to program for , build computers , mobile phones , retrieve information , etc.   The true inventor , Hartman was left out denied funding and now credit for her own ideas .

          Hartman never claimed to have invented the ARPA or the original telecom networks , which are mostly attributed to Vinton Cerf and Robert Kahn who are already recognized for their worthwhile and notable contributions . Nor did she ever claim to have invented computers or mobile phones or any of the components or methods that contribute to billions of people accessing and using the Internet .

          She did however invent a better way of using the telecommunications network – one which has made the industry successful .  That is worth recognition and compensation .  Therefore her struggle for justice and truth will continue .  ” It is a sadness for the country that it has allowed racism , oppression , and bad politics to send it racing in the wrong direction . At age 46 , being rich would probably have worked quite nicely – now it’s enough to be comfortable . At my age , my fight is less about money than it is about justice and dignity . Not only for myself but for a nation in which I was born and still it has not gotten itself together on race . It is truly sad.”

          There is a name for it – rewriting and changing patent laws because you do not like the color of the inventor ,   theft of intellectual property or proprietary secrets or Racism .  Although she only requested a measly $25,000 – $35,000 when she went to the government with her business ideas , for the usual reasons of racism and oppression she was denied funding.  The National Science Foundation rushed to take credit for the ideas in 1990 and then gave the work and credit to others .  The National Science Foundation through its NSFnet led by Merit Networks formed the ANS consortium which consisted of Merit , IBM , and others . The NSF gave them the job of converting the telecom network(s)to a  COMMERCIALIZED  network and following Hartman’s template of using the computer to set up businesses and consumers online – creating an alternate marketplace in cyberspace where their accessibility would be increased . The Inventor has never been recognized but facts , evidence , and true history say different .

          Hartman says this transpiration of events is  what led to the transformation of the Internet or the production of the Information Superhighway where goods , information , and services could be obtained “online”.  From that grew the billions of users that are now online today that have enriched the internet service providers and the other participants that make up the Internet /  Worldwide Web of  today .

          Below is a synopsis of that history . It was not the Brer Rabbit , Wylie Coyote , some unknown brit , or Harvard professor or the host of characters and names associated with the so called invention of the Internet and Worldwide Web ( the Internet across borders ).  This  schoolteacher and inventor who continues to be robbed of her rights to recognition and compensation invented this invention which is now celebrating its 25th Birthday . Therefore the fight for both truth and justice about the INTERNET will continue .

          Below you will find the history according to this inventor in the  images below showing that the Network(s) were adapted for Commercialization in 1991 , after 1990 began the dramatic increase in the number of users , and by 1993 users were invited to surf the new Internet and learn how to use it .  These changes were brought about by the adoption of Hartman’s ideas to transform the NSFnet into the template introduced by Hartman and for which she has never been acknowledged or credited .  

          There is so much money now in the industry because of this transformation which has led into expansion into a WorldWide Web that any one can get on television and say anything as well as have the Internet Giants push such an agenda – but below is the truth .  Thus the fight for justice will continue .

          Telecom is Commercialized by NSF in 1991 with Merit Networks taking the lead ..

          Telecom is Commercialized by NSF in 1991 with Merit Networks taking the lead ..

          Users increase dramatically after 1990 as businesses and consumers go "online".

          Users increase dramatically after 1990 as businesses and consumers go “online”.


          These changes wrought by Hartman’s introduction of ideas to the federal government of the benefits of commercializing telecom and how it could be done simply by using a computer , modem or phone , dedicated phone lines , and a service provider is what revolutionized telecommunications . These expansive properties  as taught by her proposals to the government is what produced today’s Internet and Worldwide Web . The first 4 or 5 pages of the document below will give you some insight into her description of invention which was proposed as a new business idea :Hartman INTERNET Invention _ 2.doc

          Web 25th Birthday - No Kudos for Inventor

          A Digital World

          A Digital World

          Even as the World acknowledges that the INTERNET responsible for the Web 25th birthday is only 25 years old not a word about the origin of this brilliant idea(s) and its Inventor http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/web-turns-25-publish/ . This is not the same Internet begun in 1967 . Even as the world celebrates the 25th Birthday of the WorldWide Web which is simply the Internet being transmitted all over the world – the word from the U.S. government is still shhh !!! as regards its inventor .  Dorothy M.Hartman ,  alleges that billions of people are able to connect to the Internet because of her ideas which transformed the Internet from the structure that existed before 1990 based on the ARPANET into the seamless integrated structure which exists today . Today’s Internet resulting in the Web 25th Birthday is a structure that can reach all over the world as long as you have the equipment to access it . That equipment is generally a device such as a phone or modem , tablet , or personal computer and a service provider to transmit the data packets .

          The Internet has never been so good as it now accommodating billions from all over the world , but its inventor Dorothy M. Hartman who is the mind behind this creation which now consists of vast amounts of cyberspace – used by tech and ecommerce corporations to make billions of dollars has not fared so well . The seamless structure contributed to by the ideas of this inventor which results in waves of cyberspace transmitting different kinds of transactions simultaneously all over the world has not been associated with her at all . The industry which has  grown up around it keeps getting all the credit – however the ideas come from her who has never set foot in Silicon Valley .

          The government is keeping mum about it because it has declared itself by default to be the originator of this technology – which began in this country but starting with NAFTA and other international trade agreements has been propagated all over the world . She says that those who were building equipment and writing programs – struggling to innovate from their garages would still be doing so had it not been for the changes which have resulted in an expansiveness that can travel all around the globe . It was not done by just equipment makers and code writers .  Creativity played a huge role in the success of technology and ecommerce . There would be no Web 25th Birthday had it not been for the changes put in place by the ideas on Commercialization put in place by the National Science Foundation using the template submitted by Hartman .

          She alleges her contributions are too important to ignore and therefore will continue the fight for recognition and justice . The limited  telecom structure before 1990 which gets Kudos for its originality  and to which  some today still refer to as the Internet was phasing out before the National Science Foundation through its involvement via the NSFnet revived it using Hartman’s ideas so she alleges . Meanwhile she has received no credit and worse says that she has been demonized and her life going backwards . She is still hoping that the Court’s will straighten matters out .   At the very least , she hopes to be compensated for the theft of her ideas as her ideas are certainly felt and used all over the world .

          If you are going to rewrite patent laws simply because the people that you wanted did not come up with the ideas , then you should at least have enough integrity to compensate the person for their contributions , says  Hartman . if the government had done that in the first place , acknowledge her work and her contributions – a patent application would have never been necessary . As it is the fight for justice will go on .

          Her Patent Application #11003123 , the Accessing Accessibility Process – the process she alleges ushered in today’s modern Internet is a business method which showed how to meld business to technology in a seamlessly integrated structure built from a network of computers and modems or phones being linked by Internet Service Providers . Adding more communicable devices be it computers , modems or phones can be done using this simple , almost elementary model introduced by Hartman thereby giving the Internet the ability to grown and expand. See Hartman’s figures #1-6 shown in her patent application which can be referenced on the USPTO.gov website using the Patent Application #11003123 .

          These models give some understanding of how and why the Internet is both flexible and expansive. This creates a virtual cyberspace between the devices in which billions of virtual interactions can occur . Her simplified structures show how the communicable devices can be linked via internet service providers presenting an integrated unit capable of tremendous expansion . This is different from the rather rigid and complex structures that were created in earlier forms of the telecom structure which were based on the Arpanet . Although her invention has circulated trillions of dollars through the economy and has produced more jobs and innovation than any other invention in history – she alleges that the federal government is still disrespecting her and her contributions by violating her constitutional rights . You will find the Patent Office’s argument for denying a patent listed in the opinion of the Federal Circuit of Appeals opinion found here http://www.smartphoneselectronicsaccessories.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/13-1070.opinion.3-6-2013.1.pdf