This is why absolutely no one involved in global banking 1% ROBBER BARON frauds was brought to justice.
There are TWO defining legal precedents in our Western history------MAGNA CARTA was a medieval legal standing giving 'nobles' ----ergo, lower family members of OLD WORLD KINGS AND QUEENS rights under law to be free from global banking 1% OLD WORLD KINGS just coming and taking all their wealth and property. It was the AGE OF ENLIGHTENMENT AND COMMON LAW that gave those legal protections to 99% of WE THE PEOPLE.
Humanities › History & Culture
Importance of the Magna Carta to the US Constitution
by Martin Kelly
Updated March 04, 2018
The Magna Carta, meaning “Great Charter,” is one of the most impactful documents ever written. Originally issued in 1215 by King John of England as a way of dealing with his own political crisis, the Magna Carta was the first governmental decree establishing the principle that all people — including the king — were equally subject to the law.
Seen by many political scientists as the founding document for modern western constitutional government, the Magna Carta had a significant impact on the American Declaration of Independence, the U.S. Constitution, and the constitutions of various U.S. states. To a large degree, its influence is reflected in the beliefs held by eighteenth-century Americans that the Magna Carta affirmed their rights against oppressive rulers.
In keeping with colonial Americans general distrust of sovereign authority, most early state constitutions included declarations of rights retained by individual citizens and lists of protections and immunities from the powers of the state government. Due in part to this conviction to individual liberty first embodied in the Magna Carta, the newly-formed United States also adopted the Bill of Rights.
Several of the natural rights and legal protections enumerated in both the state declarations of rights and the United States Bill of Rights descend from rights protected by Magna Carta. A few of these include:
- Freedom from unlawful searches and seizures
- The right to a speedy trial
- A right to a jury trial in both criminal and civil cases
- Protection from loss of life, liberty, or property without due process of law
In addition, many broader constitutional principles and doctrines have their roots in America ’s eighteenth-century interpretation of the Magna Carta, such as the theory of representative government, the idea of a supreme law, a government based on a clear separation of powers, and the doctrine of judicial review of legislative and executive acts.
Today, evidence of the influence of the Magna Carta on the American system of government can be found in several key documents.
Journal of the Continental Congress
In September and October 1774, the delegates to the first Continental Congress drafted a Declaration of Rights and Grievances, in which the colonists demanded the same liberties guaranteed to them under “the principles of the English constitution, and the several charters or compacts.” They demanded self-government, freedom from taxation without representation, the right to a trial by a jury of their own countrymen, and their enjoyment of “life, liberty, and property” free from interference from the English crown. At the bottom of this document, the delegates cite the “Magna Carta” as a source.
The Federalist Papers
Written by James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and John Jay, and published anonymously between October 1787 and May 1788, the Federalist Papers were a series of eighty-five articles intended to build support for adoption of the U.S. Constitution. Despite the widespread adoption of declarations of individual rights in state constitutions, several members of the Constitutional Convention generally opposed adding a bill of rights to the federal Constitution. In Federalist No. 84, Hamilton, argued against the inclusion of a bill of rights, stating: “Here, in strictness, the people surrender nothing; and as they retain everything they have no need of particular reservations.” In the end, however, the Anti-Federalists prevailed and the Bill of Rights — based largely on the Magna Carta — was appended to the Constitution in order to secure its final ratification by the states.
The Bill of Rights as Proposed
The first twelve, rather than ten, amendments to the Constitution originally proposed by Congress in 1791were strongly influenced by the state of Virginia’s Declaration of Rights of 1776, which incorporated a number of the protections of the Magna Carta. The fourth through eighth articles of the Bill of Rights as ratified most directly reflect these protections, ensuring speedy trials by juries, proportionate humane punishment, and due process of law.
Creating the Magna Carta
In 1215, King John was on the British throne. After a falling out with the Pope over who should be the archbishop of Canterbury was excommunicated.
In order to get back in the Pope's good graces, he was required to pay money to the Pope. Further, King John desired to lands he had lost in present-day France. In order to pay the fees and wage war, King John imposed heavy taxes on his subjects. The English barons fought back, forcing a meeting with the King at Runnymede near Windsor. At this meeting, King John was coerced into signing the Charter which protected some of their basic rights against royal actions.
Key Provisions of the Magna Carta
Following are some of the key items that were included in the Magna Carta:
- Habeas Corpus or the right to due process was first written down in the Charter. It only allowed free men to be imprisoned and punished upon lawful judgment by a jury of their peers.
- Justice could not be sold, denied, or delayed.
- Civil lawsuits did not have to be held in the king's court.
- The Common Council had to approve the amount of money that vassals had to pay instead of having to serve in the military (called scutage) along with any aid that could be requested from them with only three exceptions, but in all cases, the aid had to be reasonable. This basically meant that John could no longer tax without the agreement of his Council.
- If the King wanted to call the Common Council, he had to give the barons, church officials, landowners, sheriffs, and bailiffs 40 days notice with a stated purpose for why it was being called.
- For commoners, all fines had to be reasonable so that their livelihood could not be taken away. Further, any offense that a commoner was said to have committed had to be sworn to by "good men from the neighborhood."
- Bailiffs and constables could not appropriate possessions.
- London and other cities were given the right to collect customs.
- The king would not be allowed to have a mercenary army. In feudalism, the barons were the army. If the king had his own army, he would have the power to do what he wanted against the barons.
- Inheritances were guaranteed to individuals with the amount of what today we would call inheritance tax being set in advance.
- As stated previously, the king himself was placed under the law of the land.
Up until the Magna Carta’s creation, monarchs enjoyed supreme rule. With the Magna Carta, the king, for the first time, was not allowed to be above the law. Instead, he had to respect the rule of law and not abuse his position of power.
Location of Documents Today
There are four known copies of the Magna Carta in existence today. In 2009, all four copies were granted UN World Heritage status. Of these, two are located at the British Library, one is at Lincoln Cathedral, and the last is at Salisbury Cathedral.
Official copies of the Magna Carta were reissued in later years. Four were issued in 1297 which King Edward I of England affixed with a wax seal. One of these is currently located in the United States. Conservation efforts were recently completed to help preserve this key document. It can be seen at the National Archives in Washington, D.C., along with the Declaration of Independence, Constitution, and Bill of Rights.
As we see in this THOUGHT CO article---there is absolutely no mention of AGE OF ENLIGHTENMENT COMMON LAW ----it's focus was entirely on MAGNA CARTA----and it creates the impression COMMONERS----that would be our US 99% WE THE PEOPLE had some legal protections against having everything taken away----identifying 'GOOD PEOPLE' as the DECIDERS.
Below we see what resulted from MAGNA CARTA-----this council of BARONS-----having rights and protections against OLD WORLD KINGS----ergo, today's ROBBER BARONS able to sack and loot our US sovereign nation with IMPUNITY. They are not held accountable to US RULE OF LAW.
'Many later documents such as the US Constitution were based upon the Magna Carta.
First drafted by the Archbishop of Canterbury to make peace between the unpopular King and a group of rebel barons, it promised the protection of church rights, protection for the barons from illegal imprisonment, access to swift justice, and limitations on feudal payments to the Crown,
to be implemented through a council of 25 barons'.
'The Magna Carta meant that
1) the nobles (the barons) could not be imprisoned without a fair trial (restricting the power of the king to imprison)
2) the king could not raise new taxes without a council of baron's approval (restricting the power of the king to raise new taxes)'
This is why we discuss often how these few decades of ROBBER BARON FRAUDS----have happened because those allowed to win US elections are global banking 1% ROBBER BARONS----OLD WORLD KINGS AND QUEENS
ONE WOULD THINK FROM ALL THIS DISCUSSION OF MAGNA CARTA-----THIS DOCUMENT IS FROM WHERE OUR US CONSTITUTION GUARANTEED OUR 99% WE THE PEOPLE HUMAN RIGHTS......THAT WOULD BE WRONG.
Since the US has NO 'NOBILITY' -----OLD WORLD KINGS AND QUEENS are illegal in US------there are no BARONS included in US 99% WE THE PEOPLE.
Below we see THE NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR THE ARTS--------EDUCATION SITE telling us MAGNA CARTA was cornerstone of US Constitution when in fact AGE OF ENLIGHTENMENT COMMON LAW and US BILL OF RIGHTS is the cornerstone of US Constitution.
Magna Carta: Cornerstone of the U.S. Constitution
We will sell to no man, we will not deny or defer to any man either justice or right.
—Magna Carta (1225)
The "Great Charter" drawn up on the field at Runnymede on June 15, 1215 between King John and his feudal barons failed to resolve the crisis that had been brewing in England ever since the death of John's brother King Richard I. Over the long term, however, Magna Carta served to lay the foundation for the evolution of parliamentary government and subsequent declarations of rights in Great Britain and the United States. In attempting to establish checks on the king's powers, this document asserted the right of "due process" of law. By the end of the 13th century, it provided the basis for the idea of a "higher law," one that could not be altered either by executive mandate or legislative acts. This concept, embraced by the leaders of the American Revolution, is embedded in the supremacy clause of the United States Constitution and enforced by the Supreme Court.
In what respects did Magna Carta provide the justification for American independence from Great Britain?
To what extent did the principles and provisions of the Great Charter find expression in the U.S. Constitution?
On completion of this lesson, students should be able to: Explain what is meant by the rule of law and why it is necessary in a free and democratic society.
Explain what is meant by higher law and the relationship between Magna Carta and the evolution of constitutional government.
Describe the role of Magna Carta in shaping the thinking of American colonists and explain how this document was used to justify independence from Great Britain.
Define the concept of due process of law, list the constitutional provisions that guarantee due process, and explain their importance in assuring a just society.
'The Age of the Enlightenment
The real moment of birth for the idea of human rights, however, is the Age of the Enlightenment'.
So, MAGNA CARTA protects you if you are a BARON-----but there are no BARONS in US----that is an OLD WORLD KINGS AND QUEENS title.
When someone tells me our US Constitution is based on HUMAN RIGHTS ----they are speaking of AGE OF ENLIGHTENMENT--------this was when COMMON LAW regarding property rights -------due process expanded from those BARONS-----to more and more population groups not defined by 'NOBILITY'. Our US Constitution and US Federal laws are based on COMMON LAW----not MAGNA CARTA.
Because our US Constitution is based on COMMON LAW------300 years of US history allowed for CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS expanding those population groups protected by DUE PROCESS AND PROPERTY RIGHTS to all US 99% WE THE PEOPLE black, white, and brown citizens.
Just as an example----- white men without property, women, black citizens all won the right to vote---to own property---to justice DUE PROCESS/RIGHT TO FACE YOUR ACCUSER------from AGE OF ENLIGHTENMENT------not MAGNA CARTA.
The Age of the Enlightenment
The real moment of birth for the idea of human rights, however, is the Age of the Enlightenment. Between the 16th and the 18th Centuries, the legitimization of political rule underwent fundamental changes:
• Humanity becomes individualized as a result of the Renaissance and Humanism.
• Religion becomes personalized and privatized in the wake of the division of Christianity through the Reformation and Counterreformation.
• The decline of feudalism and the rise of royal absolutism gave birth to a new appreciation of the state as a polity organized by estates, i.e. nobility, clergy and commoners.
• The former primacy of theology is replaced by natural and human sciences.
This radically changed understanding of legitimate rule gave rise to revolutionary movements in Europe and North America, which claim legitimization through ideas deriving from Christianity and ancient philosophy.
The human rights, as we know them today, thus arose in a period of political upheaval, revolution and social re-orientation. The do not mark the end of an organic process of development, but rather they mark a sharp break within the history of Europe.
Let's get back to discussing public policy tied to NDAA------and NDAA being the constitution of global banking 1% OLD WORLD KINGS----KNIGHTS OF MALTA.
KNIGHTS OF MALTA work for OLD WORLD KINGS AND QUEENS-----global 1% who want to END AGE OF ENLIGHTENMENT----who want to end MAGNA CARTA-----and who want to end US SOVEREIGNTY-----
What we call global 2% are those 'NOBLES/BISHOPS' being family members related to those OLD WORLD KINGS AND QUEENS. Those are the BEOWULFS----CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA----NOW TRUMP allowed to gain wealth and power-----now afraid they will lose it all because global banking 1% OLD WORLD KINGS have a goal of KILLING MAGNA CARTA. Ending MAGNA CARTA allows global 1% LD WORLD KINGS AND QUEENS to throw global 2% under the bus and take all their wealth and property with NO DUE PROCESS.
So, the global 2% are all aboard on ending AGE OF ENLIGHTENMENT----of ending US SOVEREIGNTY ----they are simply fighting for MAGNA CARTA. This is what we call the global banking 1% OUR REVOLUTION people. They will throw our US 99% of WE THE PEOPLE under the bus---while fighting to protect their own MAGNA CARTA rights.
THIS IS WHY OUR US NATIONAL MEDIA HIGHLIGHTS FIGHTS AGAINST DUE PROCESS AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS BUT IS SILENT OVER NDAA, US FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES----AND GOALS OF ONE WORLD ONE GOVERNANCE.
Age of Enlightenment: Social Contract and Natural Rights
The Enlightenment can be most conveniently defined as the principal intellectual event of eighteenth-century Europe, at once the cause and effect of a dramatic and sweeping rethinking of the nature and aims of philosophy, politics, and religion.
Predominately Western European in its scope (from Scandinavia on the north to the Mediterranean on the south, and from the British Isles on the west to Russia on the east) and eighteenth century in its period (from the 1680s of the English Glorious Revolution to the 1790s and the French Revolution), the Enlightenment has been largely defined in scholarly and popular imaginations as an “age of reason,” its many strains unified by a core commitment to the use of reason for the promotion of happiness via the amelioration and improvement of the practical conditions of human life.
The advantage of this definition is that it provides us with a place to begin as we attempt to understand what the Enlightenment was (and is) and why it matters. Yet, recent years have also seen many attempts to reassess the nature and aims of the Enlightenment and its legacy. Many such efforts are inextricable from methodological questions of how the Enlightenment is best studied.
For brevity's sake, we might divide the debate into two camps: the monolithic and the pluralistic. In the former are those who tend to adhere to the view of Enlightenment set out in our introduction. This camp takes its cue from the most influential contemporary definition of the Enlightenment.
In 1784, Immanuel Kant published a newspaper piece as a contribution to a debate on the Enlightenment's meaning. Pithily summarizing its creed as Sapere aude!—“Dare to be wise!”—and defining the task of enlightened intellect as liberation from its self-imposed immaturity, Kant's definition achieved iconographic status as a result of its brevity and clarity, its rhetorical appeal, and its author's credentials. The unified or monistic view of an Enlightenment project thus took both optimistic and pessimistic forms.
Yet, in time, debate shifted from the question of optimism versus pessimism to the question of the sufficiency of the monistic definition itself. On this front, a second diverse group of scholars challenged what came to be seen as a reductive definition of Enlightenment, which in fact was neither quite as unified nor quite as reason-obsessed as the monistic view suggested.
Rightly reminding us that the English language lacked even the word enlightenment until it was invented in the nineteenth century as an equivalent for terms in other European languages; skeptics to the monistic view have encouraged us to take a much broader perspective. This call was driven in part by new methodological approaches to the history of ideas.
Social contract theory is an approach to questions of political legitimacy and obligation that seeks to ground claims to sovereignty on an agreement among people to form a political community. Social contract theory was the dominant approach to such questions in early modern Europe, ...
When our US elections were captured to systematic fraud and rigging----CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA gave us POLITICIANS FOR LIFE-----we have US Congressional pols in office for 30-35 years ---we have state assembly pols in office for 30-35 years------here in Maryland our assembly leaders MIKE AND MIKE have been in place the entirety of ROBBER BARON few decades of sacking and looting our US government coffers and people's pockets MOVING FORWARD ONE WORLD ONE GOVERNANCE ending our US sovereignty.
Now, the CONSTITUTION OF KNIGHTS OF MALTA is too long to post here ----but this is the NDAA------Trans Pacific Trade Pact----and other global trade deals capture our US sovereign economy to global corporations which are the only entity having RIGHTS.
THAT WAS THE US SUPREME COURT'S RULING THAT CORPORATIONS ARE PEOPLE---THEY HAVE HUMAN RIGHTS.
'The Constitutional Reform of the Sovereign Order of Malta
The reform process for the Sovereign Order of Malta’s Constitutional Charter and Code was launched few months ago. Ambassador Mauro Bertero Gutiérrez, member of the Government Council, is coordinating the work of the Reform Steering Committee. We met with him in the Magistral Palace, Rome'.
The Order of Malta’s system of governance
The government of the Sovereign Order of Malta has a similar structure to state governments. However, it also includes specific features associated with its nature as a lay religious order, as well as particular terminology evolved from nine centuries of history.
The head of the Order of Malta is the Grand Master who governs both as sovereign and as religious superior, and is assisted by the Sovereign Council, which he chairs.
The Sovereign Council is elected for a term of five years and is made up of the Grand Commander (the religious superior of the Order’s religious members); Grand Chancellor (Minister for Foreign Affairs and Minister of the Interior); Grand Hospitaller (Minister for Humanitarian Affairs & International Cooperation); Receiver of the Common Treasure (Minister of Finance), together with six other members, all elected by the Chapter General.
Although these titles reflect centuries of tradition they are also roles consistent with 21st century needs. In its unique nature as sovereign and humanitarian institution the Order of Malta, led by its government, continuously intervenes in new areas, responding to requests for humanitarian aid.
Through its diplomatic missions, the Sovereign Order’s government works towards the establishment of new cooperation agreements with other states in the healthcare and humanitarian field.
The Order of Malta’s system of governance is divided into three powers: legislative power rests with the Grand Master and Sovereign Council for non-constitutional matters; with the Chapter General – a representative body of members – as far as constitutional rules are concerned, executive power, which resides with the Sovereign Council; and judicial power, which is in the hands of the Courts of the Order.
When we discuss the WORLD BANK/WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION/UNITED NATIONS and the policies tied to ONE WORLD ONE GOVERNANCE the term INTERNET OF EVERYTHING enshrined in our NDAA------making all that is US economy tied to global private military corporations-----has as a partner----KNIGHTS OF MALTA.
All of what the UNITED NATIONS calls SUSTAINABILITY-----is the SUSTAINABILITY of wealth and power of those global 1% OLD WORLD KINGS AND QUEENS. SUSTAINABILITY has been made ENVIRONMENTAL/SOCIAL BENEFIT even as we know it is DEEP, DEEP, REALLY DEEP STATE.
Of course, DEEP STATE has no basis in our US Constitution. It is very much tied to OLD WORLD KNIGHTS OF MALTA ergo, tons of secret societies.
This is the problem for all US 99% WE THE PEOPLE whether black, white, or brown citizens--whether men or women----whether 99% of real CATHOLIC, PROTESTANT, JEWISH, MUSLIM citizens-----the solution is simple------the NDAA is an illegal document assaulting our US sovereignty-----the designation defined during CLINTON ERA of US FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES is illegal and an assault on our US sovereignty.
RATHER THAN ALLOW OUR US ELECTIONS TO BE CAPTURED TO ONLY GLOBAL BANKING 1% KNIGHTS OF MALTA WANNABES-----LET'S JUST STAND UP AND BE 99% WE THE PEOPLE CITIZENS.
NO ONE WINS IN DARK AGES OLD WORLD KINGS AND QUEENS CONTROLLED BY PRE-CHRISTIAN NERO/CATO/SENECA.
The Role of the Holy See and Catholic Organizations at the United Nations,
by Josef KleeJosef Klee, 29/June/2017
The Role of the Holy See and Catholic Organizations at the United Nations
The Holy See as the “Government” of the Catholic Church, as well as the international Catholic organizations are strong supporters of the United Nations Organization (UN) and actively participate in the deliberations and activities of this world body.
The scope and the nature of the involvement of the Holy See and the Catholic organizations in the work of the United Nations is determined by the mandates and the programmes carried out by the UN Organization.
As a worldwide organization with a unique global mission, the Charter of the United Nations outlines the four major goals and areas of its programmes andactivities, namely:
- Maintenance of peace and security
- Protection of Human Rights
- Development of International Law
- Advancement of Economic and Social Progress
In accordance with these overall goals and the related needs of the world community, the United Nations and its subsidiary organizations have undertaken activities in various global fields, such as: international disputes, economic and social development, commerce and trade law, human rights, migration, peacekeeping, humanitarian assistance, health services, protection of the environment, as well as the technical coordination of international air, postal and communicationsservices, and the registration of international patent rights and the classification of drugs and chemicals, etc.
An indication of the heavy UN workload is the extensive number of agenda items reviewed and debated yearly by the UN General Assembly. This year, the General Assembly will address 135 main agenda items, which regularly include a number of sub-items on the execution of related matters.
In order to carry out the diverse mandates and functions, the UN - since its inception - has gradually established a large number of specializedorganizational entities which now comprise the so called United Nations Family of Organizations.
The copy of the organizational chart - added at the endof this paper- provides a respective overview of the many legislative bodies and administrative and operational entities of the United Nations System. It particularly shows that the UN has experienced a dramatic increase in peacekeeping operations since 1990. Today, the UN manages 15 peacekeeping missions with a total number of more than 110.000 personnel, consisting of 95.000 military and police forces and 15.000 civilian support staff; - while the annual peacekeeping budget has reached more than $8 billion. (See Footnote 1)
The UN is often blamed for not being able to resolve international political crisis and for being a very costly and ineffective bureaucratic organization. Some of the criticism is justified. However, one should be fair and acknowledge that the political decisions at the UN are exclusively taken by its member states; and if these do not agree on certain issues - as often is the case - the United Nations Secretary-General and his staff cannot act without the absolute authority and consent of the legislative bodies such as the General Assembly or the Security Council.
Likewise, the considerable expansion of UN mandates and activities over the years has also become a challenge for the Holy See and the Catholic organizations,
which are faced with a substantial increase in their efforts to respond to this expansion.
At the UN the Catholic Church is accredited under the historical diplomatic designation “Holy See” and not as often assumed under the title “Vatican’. However, the content and designation of both terms are based on the historical and judicial developments of the Catholic Church. As such, the “Holy See” is the universal government of the Catholic Church, and its headquarters are located in “Vatican City”.
The word “See” used in the term “Holy See” is derived from the Latin word “sedes” and embodies the “seat of St. Peter”. The Holy See as the seat of St. Peter has a history of 2000 years; and the denomination “Holy See” refers not only to the Pope in his position as the “head of church”, but also to the Roman Curia and thus to the central governance of the Catholic Church.
Since the times of King Charles the Great (742 – 814)and during the Middle Ages until the creation of the Italian State in the year 1870, the Holy See enjoyed the status and privileges of a sovereign state. It maintained a diplomatic corps to take care of the worldly interest of the so called Papal States and the ecclesial responsibilities for the Catholic Church.
THE NEW NAFTA is as we say a rebranding of TRANS PACIFIC TRADE PACT-----and the protests over INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS---COPYRIGHTS is of course not going away. THE INTERNET OF EVERYTHING meaning all US economic activity will be ONLINE----ties all US PATENTS to global banking 1%. These few decades of CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA has seen global corporations allowed to BUY ALL US PATENTS from over 300 years. This means all of the intellectual and inventions patented cannot be accessed by anyone other than global corporations. We discussed in detail the CORRUPTING of our US patent laws-----we discuss often how our once strong US IVY LEAGUE universities were brought down to simply being global corporate R AND D-----patent and product mills.
What this means is-----our US 99% WE THE PEOPLE attending as students what is slowly becoming the only route to a REAL 4 year university degree program --are all subject to THEIR IDEAS, TALENT/GENIUS being bought or controlled by those global hedge fund university corporations. Because these students are given a few million dollars for those patent rights----we are made to feel these talented people are given the choice of owning a PATENT.
MY IDEA BROUGHT A FEW MILLION DOLLARS IN SHAREHOLDER EQUITY SAY TODAY'S GLOBAL HEDGE FUND IVY LEAGUE CORPORATION STUDENTS---WE ARE WINNERS.
What is MOVING FORWARD is the END of US patent laws----being replaced by NDAA where NATIONAL SECURITY requires INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY tied to INTERNET be made PROPRIETARY. AKA-----only the global 1% OLD WORLD KINGS AND QUEENS will own those PATENTS.
Our global 2% CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA and all those figurehead CEOs of global corporations KNOW THIS. A BILL GATES having been sold PATENTED inventions leading to his MICROSOFT ----will not be legally protected without MAGNA CARTA-----and NDAA is tied to OLD WORLD KINGS KNIGHTS OF MALTA-----who will KILL MAGNA CARTA.
So, THE INTERNET OF EVERYTHING including global education intellectual property---global health care intellectual property-----global technology intellectual property---even global digital arts and culture intellectual property being tied to NDAA----operating under KNIGHTS OF MALTA CONSTITUTION-----makes all this owned by OLD WORLD KINGS AND QUEENS.
This is why we shout often that MOVING FORWARD ONE WORLD ONE GOVERNANCE will throw even those global 2% under the bus.
August 28, 2018 7:59 pm
New NAFTA could include tough intellectual property laws that Canada fought against in TPP
By Rebecca Joseph National Online Journalist, Breaking News Global News
The new trade deal reached between the U.S. and Mexico contains a myriad of rules and tariffs, and among them include tougher rules on copyright and intellectual property.
Canadian Foreign Affairs Minister Chrystia Freeland is currently in Washington to negotiate Canada’s part in the agreement, which could be the new form of the North American Free Trade Agreement.
Though the exact details of the agreement aren’t fully known, some of the digital rules outlined in the agreement include extending the minimum copyright term to 75 years from 50 years, and a notice-and-takedown regime for Intellectual Property violations.
The tougher rules are not necessarily new, as Canada fought against them during the renegotiation of the Trans-Pacific Partnership after the U.S. withdrew in 2017. (The copyright term argued for during the TPP negotiations was 70 years.)
And advocates say Canada should fight back against them again.
“We only know a fraction of what’s included in this deal,” Laura Tribe, executive director of OpenMedia told Global News.
“But it’s really concerning to see that we seem to be headed down the exact same road that we just spent five years fighting.”
According to the U.S. press release, the new agreement should “establish a notice-and-takedown system for copyright safe harbors for Internet service providers (ISPs) that provides protection for IP and predictability for legitimate technology enterprises who do not directly benefit from the infringement, consistent with United States law.”
Basically, that means content or websites must be taken down if they’re accused of copyright – even if it has not been proven the content is copyrighted.
“I think that’s the really big issue that we’ve seen in the states -- a lot of mistaken takedowns,” Tribe explained.
“The notice and take-down system is used as a way to take down content that people don’t like – instead of content that is actually a copyright infringement.
“It’s really an abusive system.”
Indeed------they have been made WORTHLESS-------because PATENT TROLLS AKA global 1% OLD WORLD KINGS AND QUEENS corporations----have literally bought every PATENT IDEA and our global banking 5% freemason/Greek CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA have passed laws making it too expensive to protect patents------made it impossible to secure patent LAWYERS-----made it impossible to patent because it is labelled NATIONAL SECURITY.
So, this is a backdoor process being used by global banking 1% to assure that MAGNA CARTA property rights are eliminated---not only for our US 99% WE THE PEOPLE black, white, and brown citizens---but also all those global 2% BEOWULFS made BILLIONAIRES from all those few decades of ROBBER BARON fleecing of America.
The global banking 1% OUR REVOLUTION crowd are those global 2% BEOWULFS ---those relatives of OLD WORLD KINGS -----fighting only for their own MAGNA CARTA property and due process----
Oct 4, 2013, 12:57am
For Most Small Companies Patents Are Just About Worthless
Todd Hixon Contributor
I blog about entrepreneurs, their world, and the new, new thing.
Update (Oct 7, 2014): It looks like patents are often useless for big companies, too.
See the linked article on the wasteful smart phone patent litigation.
A widespread meme in the tech community holds that patents are a path to riches: an entrepreneur who solves a key technical problem and receives a patent can build a business on the technology and ride to glory. Xerox XRX -0.14% and Polaroid are celebrated examples (both now nearly extinct). But, IMHO, for most small companies today, patents are just about worthless. Many entrepreneurs misunderstand the value patents create, and how difficult they are to enforce.
A patent is a sword, not a shield. It gives you the right to attack a competitor who makes commercial use of ("infringes") your patented technology. Contrary to common belief, it does not give you the right to practice your technology free of interference.
Patents are often quite narrow and hence can be circumvented: they might apply to a specific design element or combination of characteristics. They have effect only in the jurisdiction of the patent-granting authority: effective world coverage requires six to ten patents in different geographies.
The patented intellectual property is usually not sufficient to deliver the product. Lots of other intellectual property is needed, too, and others often have patents on some of that.
And, frequently two issued patents arguably describe the same thing. I once encountered two electronic circuit design patents that were identical except for the way in which the components are laid out (which does not affect function). Each design had received a patent (and the same person at the patent office had awarded both patents).
A murky situation often results. Let's say a new company ("TechCo) solves a key technical problem that enables new value for customers and launches a new business. But, TechCo will need to use a lot of other technology to build and deliver a complete product, e.g., the product design might be protected by a patent, but the manufacturing process might be subject to another company's "blocking" patent. And it won't always be clear how effective that blocking patent is: perhaps it's been issued, but arguably it’s vague or not original (grounds for invalidation), and until now the patent holder has not enforced it. Does TechCo have a problem? That’s a “definite maybe". The choice is to just go ahead and see, or seek a license, which could well be denied and will definitely get the patent holder's attention.
Enforcing your patent in the courts is a nightmare. Plan on 3-5 years and $3-$5 million to get to a judgment. And then there is the appeal ... Usually the stakes and time frame will be too much for a start-up. One of my portfolio companies sued a big company for infringement, and the judge has ruled that infringement occurred, but there are many legal maneuvers available, and the litigation clock and meter tick on in year four. We think the big company wants to make a statement: "let this be a lesson to small companies that have the temerity to sue us for infringement ..." Patent litigation is the true sport of kings.
It costs $20k-$30k to file a final (“utility”) patent. Some small companies make dozens of filings, spending a good fraction of a million dollars. When might this investment pay off?
There are situations where patents pay off. Drugs are a good example. Drugs are based on unique molecules that sell mainly on technical merits: efficacy, side effects, etc. Once this data is in, most successful drug start-ups are bought by a big drug company that has sales and manufacturing capability and lots of lawyers. The patent is indeed the lynchpin of value.
In the information technology world, patents have the most value in the hands of big companies, as part of patent “portfolios” so large that any competitor is bound to infringe some of them. They use this weapon to attack competitors (usually smaller ones) that lack patent portfolios: e.g., the lawsuits against Google GOOG -0.81%’s Android operating system. To defend itself, Google acquired Motorola, which owned a large relevant patent portfolio. Now Google can counter-sue. The usual result among the big companies is a stand-off, reciprocal licensing, or a patent pool wherein the major competitors share their patents, and new entrants are out in the cold. Five of the top global producers of light emitting diodes, for example, have established a formidable patent pool.
So it’s true that patents will be worth something when a company is acquired, but in my experience the value here is often not large. E.g., a company that had about 100 patents, some of them significant, was sold recently. The offers received indicate that the value of the patents alone was on the order of $10 million: under $100,000 per patent, which pays for the lawyers but very little of the R&D.
Ironically, patents can have more value to “patent trolls” than to small operating companies. Patent trolls buy up patents and use them to extract royalties from operating companies that have infringed them. They don’t sell any products, so they are not vulnerable to counter-suits. Patent trolls have had some notable successes, e.g., the $800m settlement RIM paid in its heyday.
My suggestions for a small technology companies*:
- Don’t base your business strategy on patents. And don’t try to raise money primarily on the basis of patents; most likely this will fail and you will appear naïve.
- It’s worthwhile to file patents for your key inventions in the U.S. (what patent-savvy universities do), but don’t go much beyond that.
- Pay close attention to patents that others hold which might enable competitors to block you. In my experience “freedom to operate” is more important when evaluating a business plan than patent ownership.
- It will rarely make sense for a small company to sue a big company for patent infringement. The lawyers will probably be the winners.
- Non-patent intellectual property strategies can hold off copycats effectively. Trade secrets (parts of the product or production technology that are hard for competitors to replicate), knowledge of customers, and superior rate of innovation work best.
- Build your business on real competitive advantages: product value-in-use, customer relationships, rapid innovation. Don’t count on patents to defend you from your competitors.
OH BOY----INFIGHTING BETWEEN THE GLOBAL 2% OLD WORLD KINGS AND QUEENS FAMILY RELATIONS. KEEP IN MIND---NONE OF THESE GROUPS ARE AMERICAN---THEY ARE FOREIGN SOVEREIGNTY OF MALTA.
It looks like global MITRE CORPORATION -----THE BISHOP'S HATS are OFF.
'This is the fourth blog post in a series of blogs analyzing the current draft of the 2018 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) as agreed-to by House and Senate negotiators on November 8, 2017. Stay tuned for additional blog posts covering additional topics in the near future from Holland & Knight’s Government Contracts Team'.
Holland & Knight Defends The Florida Priory of the Knights of Malta in Intellectual Property Dispute
October 7, 2011
West Palm Beach, Fla. – October 7, 2011
– Holland & Knight successfully defended client The Florida Priory of Knights Hospitallers of the Sovereign Order of St. John of Jerusalem, Knights of Malta, the Ecumenical Order against charges of trademark infringement, false advertising and unfair competition issues.
On September 29, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida ruled in favor of the firm's client, bringing to close an unusual case that featured testimony on the activities of Napoleon, Tsar Paul I of Russia and other historical figures.
The charges were brought by the Sovereign Military Hospitaller Order of Saint John of Jerusalem of Rhodes and of Malta (SMOM), a Catholic non-profit international organization that shares a similar background and mission with The Florida Priory. Both organizations trace their histories to the eleventh century and provide charitable and humanitarian services, however, The Florida Priory is a chapter of an ecumenical Christian organization not affiliated with the Catholic Church. Its headquarters is in West Palm Beach, Florida.
SMOM alleged that The Florida Priory had infringed on five of its registered trademarks including its cross and shield imagery. The organization also alleged that The Florida Priory engaged in false advertising by claiming a historical background that belongs to the SMOM. Tom Brooke, a partner in Holland & Knight's Washington, D.C. office, led a team of attorneys in the defense of The Florida Priory.
In the end, the District Court dismissed all of the claims against The Florida Priory and instead, found that SMOM had obtained four of its trademarks by engaging in fraud during the application process. The court ordered those trademarks, which include the phrases, "Knights of Malta," "Sovereign Military Hospitaller Order of Saint John of Jerusalem of Rhodes and of Malta, "Hospitallers of Saint John of Jerusalem," and "Order of Saint John of Jerusalem" cancelled.
The court found that SMOM ignored the rights of The Florida Priory and its parent international organization (which the court acknowledged had commenced operations in the U.S. 18 years before SMOM) in its PTO applications by stating that it knew of no other entity using the marks even though SMOM was aware of the parent organization and The Florida Priory. The court also found that since the two organizations share a common history prior to 1798, references to that history are appropriate and do not constitute false advertising under The Lanham Act.
GEORGE HARRISON THAT GLOBAL BANKING 1% FREEMASON STAR WAS SIMPLY LETTING US 99% WE THE PEOPLE KNOW THESE FEW DECADES OF CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA WAS ALL ABOUT THOSE GLOBAL BANKING 1% ROBBER BARONS.
George Harrison - My Sweet Lord
Listen & Buy more of George Harrison’s music here: https://lnk.to/GeorgeHarrisonEssentials Visit the official website and store http://www.georgeharrison.com...
What government body eventually formed from the council of 25 barons?
The council of 25 barons that the Magna Carta formed to watch over the king eventually became the Parliament of England