[Libre-soc-dev] Crowell & Moring U.K. LLP / Luke Leighton

[Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton]

WITHOUT PREJUDICE,

Robert: how are you getting on with ensuring that your client is fully
aware, and has acknowledged, that they have been repeatedly informed via
multiple channels since February 2024, that they are stealing Trademarked
technology through claiming to have ownership of my Trademark Simple-V by
aliasing to VISC, that the theft is by way of violent assault, and that
furthermore the stolen technology is Weapons-Grade Export Restricted under
the UK Export Control Order 2008, US BXPA Munitions Control and the EU GEA?

My hardware-focussed trademarked techniqu,e, named Simple-V, was first
applied to RISC-V. The second variant of the hardware extension technique
was applied to the Trademarked POWER ISA, owned by IBM, whose customers and
investors include the CIA and the NSA.

Your client is fully legally trained and taught me the law regarding
Trademark theft and its evasion. Ordinarily that would be a civil matter.
However when stealing Weapons-grade munitions, where my Trademark is on
being able to extend any hardware instruction set to become hyper-efficient
*as advertised on their website as being a hundred times more effective at
cryptographic algorithms* when that is based directly on stealing my
Research Programme and my Trademarked technology, that is when your client
oversteps boundaries that could place you - personally - into a difficult
position.

You will be aware of the Export Control Order's exemptions for Research
Programmes: this meant that my research team, as personal individuals, did
not have to get involved with or even be informed of the Export Controls on
the technology they were helping to develop.

QUIETLY I explicitly requested the Board of the first company to instruct
LEWIS to seek and obtain a Grant from the MOD, as with my 20 years
expertise in cryptography I had explicitly designed my Trademarked hardware
instruction set technology to be particularly good at it, whilst also still
remaining a *general-purpose* system: an important requirement of Dual-use
products.

The strategy would have allowed - QUIETLY - for my hardware Research
Programme to transition, under License from me, to a hardware product,
where my Trademark would be licensed to your client's (new) company, and
the company then obtain the required OGEL with the help of the MOD as a
sponsor, as it would be the company creating the Weapons-grade product, not
my research team.

LEWIS disobeyed the explicit expressed instructions of the Board to seek
out that grant, then invented the VISC alias as a means of stealing my
Trademark without a License from me.

after violently assaulting me on 25th January 2024  when chronic medical
conditions *WHICH THEY KNEW ABOUT* had already brought me very close to
death, CALDERWOOD and LEWIS then falsely claimed that the old company was a
software-only company, committing fraud in the process by having originally
applied to the UK ChipStart Programme for funding of hardware development,
and *after the fact* claiming to be a software-only company.

The level of criminality and evasion of responsibility by your client is
just absolutely breathtaking in the extreme.

they even attempted to seize control of evidence of their criminal
activity, through a third party, and have it destroyed.

as they are legally trained, they will know full well that they are legally
obliged to notify VCs, terminating all possibility of investment pending
resolution of the Legal Notice.

it was CALDERWOOD himself who informed me of this when we were faced around
2020/2021 with the possibility of becoming involved as 3rd parties in a
Trademark aliasing case: his knowledge of Law allowed us to evade that
potentiality, and in the process he had to educate me very rapidly on
Trademarks and aliasing.

* hence why they have refused to acknowledge my Legal Notices;
* hence why I have published the existence of the Legal Notices;
* hence why they attempted to seize control of and destroy the public
records through a third party.

if I do not hear from you I will assume that you have made your client
aware of the Trademark theft, and that they are on Legal Notice.

personally I trust that you have heeded my advice that *you* seek the
counsel of a Criminal Law expert, with a view to checking that you - and
Justin - are not exposed to being charged under multiple counts of aiding
and abetting very serious criminal activity, for which your Legal Indemnity
Insurance is unlikely to pay out.

l.



-- 
---
geometry: without it life is pointless
the fibonacci series: easy as 1 1 2 3
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.libre-soc.org/pipermail/libre-soc-dev/attachments/20260330/2e2c2ee2/attachment.html>