Higher offers are considered to be not Fair, Reasonable, And Non-Discriminatory, As well as Customary (FRANDAC), and therefore these offers are our last offers, which will not be improved.
What is negotiable are for example the management positions of the resulting subsidiaries, though we do not intend to change anything.
The advantages for the shareholders and stockholders of these companies should be crystal clear and therefore do not demand for further elaboration in detail. A quick view on their charts of development and the insight that these developments will not continue without us anymore should be self-explaining and convincing.

The suggested plan is that we will continue simultaneously with the

• royalties for the reproduction of our Ontologic System Components (OSC) and Ontoscope Components (OsC), and also the performance of our Ontologic Applications and Ontologic Services (OAOS) collected by our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR),
• upfront payments as lease bonus and royalties for our digital rights collected by the SOPR, and
• other profits made by our business unit Ontonics

until we reached the majority control or controlling (ownership) interest respectively majority of voting shares of a company. Obviously, the amount of a dividend payout will be reduced subsequently in the course of our activities.
After we reached a majority control we will submit the offer to shareholders and stockholders of a company taken over respectively a new subsidiary of our corporation to change the shares and stocks of one of these companies into shares of Ontonics for participating in the overall business success, which we highly recommend due to the positive effects of restructuring and optimizing the internal structures and processes of our corporation.

In addition, persons and companies also have the chance to invest in our new subsidiaries included in the OntoLab Vision Fund and Blitz Fund investment programs of Ontonics.

02:19 UTC+1
SOPR #243

*** Work in progress ***
The main topic of this issue is about legal matter related to the following subtopics:

Non-aggression agreement
The non-aggression agreement suggested and mentioned several times by us is not in effect anymore since around February 2019 for all companies, who declared or proved to continue with a fierce competition even by utilizing our original and unique, iconic works of art titled Ontologic System and Ontoscope, and created by C.S..
In the course of handling this rejection of external entities, we

Indeed, one could say that due to our pervasive and ubiquitous, all-encompassing

• Ontologic Net (ON),
• Ontologic Web (OW), and
• Ontologic uniVerse (OV), and also
• Ontologic Applications and Ontologic Services (OAOS),

and

as well as

the non-aggression agreement virtually has become obsolete.

As already noted in the issue #241 of the 29th of October 2019, "we got the impression that the so-called clear cut is preferred now, though this is still colliding with our credo "All or nothing at all. Now and not in the future.""
The reason why we said we got the impression and not we made the observation is that the suspected clear cut is not done properly by still crossing the white, yellow, or red line, for sure as usual, because it is already too late for getting out of the dependency with us, as can be seen easily with for example the militaries of the Five Eyes member states and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) member states, and also the vehicle manufacturers.

Digital rights
Also, we observed that more companies are trying to manufacturer both the hardware and the software, specifically the operating system, to improve their position of negotiation and claim the related digital rights/data rights.
But in the issue #242 of the 31st of October 2019 we explained once again that in virtually all cases the hardware or the software or both are reproductions of our Ontologic System Components (OSC) and Ontoscope Components (OsC), and therefore our digital rights/data rights are effective, which demand full access to the raw data.

The F.R.German government is also sounding out how far it can go in other fields than blockchain, digital currency, and Grid, Cloud, and Edge Computing (GCEC), that is user data, specifically patient records of health insurances.
But this activities interfere again with the AoA and the ToS of our SOPR, specifically with our digital rights, digital interest, or digital estate. They give the data away to a group of entities that belong to its clique and ban all companies including ours.
In general, what we observe in this case again is that the way shows it is not working together with us but against us.

We would like to make clear that all these activities are strengthing only our legal position and negotiation position, and therefore we would also like to give the recommendation not to worsen the social, legal, and economical situation even more.

National security
Another aspect is national security. We added the following provision to our AoA:

{something like this} then a third entity (e.g. administrator or operator), that is commissioned to ensure national security demands, is not allowed to make a higher profit on the basis of our OS than our SOPR with this work.

04.November.2019
Ontonics Further steps
Based on the final assesment in relation to digital rights/data rights (see the note above) we had to make a revision of our

We do apologize for any confusions.

We offer the corrected true enterprise values, which we set to 50% of the reported wrong enterprise values, and even add the related shares based on the ratio between the estimated enterprise value of 40,000 bn USD of our corporation and the corrected enterprise values of these companies:

We consider these offers as made under Fair, Reasonable, And Non-Discriminatory, As well as Customary (FRANDAC) terms and conditions, and our last offers, which will not be improved.

In the following, we turn the focus to our other endeavours in the field of electric energy.
We do not need 1 million charging stations but maybe a 10th, because we even do not need more charging stations with plugs than gasoline stations with nozzles.
And ... No, no, we will not give more informations than required for others, who are not investors of our Blitz Fund investment program. :D

02:32, 05:36, 09:31, and 10:30 UTC+1
SOPR #244

*** Work in progress ***
topics:

Legal matter
The attempted expropriation of our Ontologic System (OS) and the annexation of our OntoVerse (OV), aka. OntoLand, has failed.
The attempt of the state U.S.A., the member states of the European Union, as well as other states alone or together to

another part of our properties has also failed, because their national and international

give us right by simply

even without having to make a subjective or poor judgement. :)

Indeed, there is a demand by the worldwide community, but the related legal matter and resulting legal scope of this demand remain the same, as discussed in detail in the past.
Specifically, one cannot take our iconic work of art titled Ontologic System, also abbreviated or titled as OS, with its Ontologic uniVerse (OntoVerse or OV) and New Reality (NR) based on our Calibre/Caliber to redefine the notional environment, which was defined and described as cyberspace before. If at all, then this is the sole right of the creators of the

Simply said, in and on our properties we do make the rules, for sure.
Correspondingly, we addressed said demand of the worldwide community very generously, well balanced, and harmoniously with

• joint ventures established together with states,

and

• property rights in general and
• mineral rights in particular,

which are much more than sufficient.

As we said before in the last past, virtual and digital signal and data rights but also sovereingties in this virtual and digital domain, and virtual and digital states are becoming quite interesting, specifically due to the reason that

• scope of our all-encompassing OS,
• domain of our New Reality (NR) respectively
• sovereign space of our OntoVerse (OV), also known as OntoLand (OL),

and

We have the impression, that eventually we have learned and understood the intention of others at least so far, but we can already feel that there are further intentions based on what was said so far, which we still have to learn and handle thoroughly, as we did all the spacetime before.
We are finalizing the related issues of our SOPR series, though not all potentially confusing matter has been removed or clarified now, but this foundational constellation can already be recognized.

In addition, we are

• a fierce competition in general and
• our OntoLand in particular.

Furthermore, we are considering to only take real sovereign territory as damage compensation from a state in the case it thought to be clever when mimicking our SOPR and stealing parts of our Intellectual Properties (IPs), specifically of the infrastructure of our SOPR, but later found out that trick did not work.

Core
Now, we got everything together again after all the years not looking at the matters, including

The discussion about digital signal and data rights, cyber sovereingty, data sovereignty, and so on has misled us to focus only on them.
The SOPR gets full access to the raw data. But

• Cybernetics,
• Ontologics, and
• SoftBionics (SB), including
  • Artificial Intelligence (AI),
  • Machine Learning (ML),
  • Computer Vision (CV),
  • Simultaneous Localization And Mapping (SLAM),
  • Cognitive Vision (CogV),
  • Cognitive Agent System (CAS),
  • Cognitive Computing (CogC),
  • Emotional Intelligence (EI),
  • Multi-Agent System (MAS),
  • Swarm Intelligence (SI) or Swarm Computing (SC),
  • Evolutionary Computing (EC),
  • Semantic (World Wide) Web (SWWW),
  • etc.,
• Big Data Processing (BDP),
• and so on.

The SOPR has the right to process all raw signals and data as long as the signal and data rights of a member of the SOPR are not infringed.
A holder of a signal and data right has also the power of control about the way the own signals and data are captured and handled in the all-encompassing OS.
In this way, we

• information and knowledge contained in the raw signals and data, and
• protection of the signal and data rights, including signal and data sovereingty,

and

It's not a trick. It's Ontologics.

06.November.2019
Comment of the Day
Superunicorn™

Ontonics OntoLab Vision Fund I #3
We have confirmed the first 7 Superunicorns included in our OntoLab Vision Fund I (see also the issue OntoLab Vision Fund I #2 of the 31st of July 2019) and some of them are totally beyond the common state of the art.

It will be interesting to see, when we have to follow the latest activities in relation to our Blitz Fund investment program and set up our OntoLab Vision Fund II. This cannot take very long.

The perfect disruption has a name: Ontonics.

Ontonics Blitz Fund I #5
We have confirmed all 10 winners or better said bolts or flash-ups included in our Blitz Fund I (see also the issue Blitz Fund I #2 of the 31st of July 2019).

Ontonics Blitz Fund II #1
Because we got the impression somehow that other projects are highly fascinating and matured as well, we have to set up our Blitz Fund II. Yeah.

07.November.2019

06:24 and 19:28 UTC+1
SOPR #245

*** Work in progress ***
topics:

Legal matter

We have found out that responsible entities of the government of the Federal Republic of Germany (F.R.G.) still refuse to obey the reality, the constitution, and the law, and attempt to continue with their extremely dubious activities. But that will not work, because there is no more space to act and no possibility to circumvent anything in such unacceptable ways.
If the F.R.German government and other governments of member states of the European Union (EU) together with their industries, research communities, and also international partners do not stop those activities, then we will

In general, we demand once again that the politics focus on the management of the tasks of a state, that it must provide to its citizens, specifically the

of said task, but not on specific subject matters anymore. This means that the decision making should not be about what has to be done but how it has to be done in the limits given by the constitution and the laws.
In addition, we recall once again the related section Core principles of the issue #238 of the 18th of October 2019.
We would also like to give the hint that one should be a great model at first before demanding others to do the right thing.

Dissemination of patient records
As already noted in issue #243 of the 3rd of November 2019, the F.R.German government has introduced the so-called Digital-Versorgung-Gesetz==digital care law, which includes the dissemination of patient records of health insurances to research institutes exclusively.
This is not acceptable due to the following reasons:

• handled (e.g. captured, mined, and pumped) in our Ontologic Net (ON), Ontologic Web (OW), and Ontologic uniVerse (OV) respectively in the scope of digital signal and data rights, digital interest, or digital estate,
• handled with our Ontologic System Components (OSC), or
• handled with our Ontologic Applications and Ontologic Services (OAOS),

then the full access to the raw data has to be granted to our SOPR in accordance with the AoA and the ToS of our SOPR, specifically in relation to our digital rights, digital interest, or digital estate. In pratice, a joint venture has to be established if a statuary requirement is effective by law.

By the way, if the goal of the digital care law truly is to

then giving access to the anonymized data to all interested parties would be much more effective. Is not it?

National security
Another area where lawmakers and federal authorites and our works of art titled Ontologic System and Ontoscope have overlaps and interfaces is in the field of national security.
For example,

But the schizophrenia is that at least the same lawmakers

Ah, what ...?
Even more ridiculous are the facts that they

We have made crystal clear over the years that our Ontologic System and our Ontoscope

A statutory regulation is required either by local laws of states or common laws of state unions, that put it all in a formal procedure. The police or law enforcement has to ask a judge or court for allowance to listen to communication, observing the movement of a citizen, or act otherwise. Everything else is nothing else than the mass surveilance and despotic actions, which are critisized in other countries.

In general, we demand once again that the politics focus on

the tasks of a state, that it must provide to its citizens, but not on specific subject matters anymore. This means not what has to be done but how it has to be done in the limits given by the constitution and the laws.
In addition, we recall once again the related section Core principles of the issue #238 of the 18th of October 2019. So be an ideal before demanding other to do the right thing. This means that the decision making should not be about what has to be done but how it has to be done in the limits given by the constitution and the laws.
In addition, we recall once again the related section Core principles of the issue #238 of the 18th of October 2019.
So be an great model at first before demanding others to do the right thing.

Digital rights
We also called one of our specific regulations digital rights following the terminology of the mining law and the mineral rights, as well as property rights.
A closer look at the subject matter of digital rights already shows various

In this context, we have taken a look at the

• is a culmination of the prior bills titled
  • Law Enforcement Access to Data Stored Abroad Act (LEADS Act) and
  • International Communications Privacy Act (ICPA),
• amends the Stored Communications Act (SCA), and
• was enacted by the passing of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018 (PL 115-141), section 105 executive agreements on access to data by foreign governments,

• personal data and
• data portability,

Indeed, "digital rights are those human rights and legal rights that allow individuals to access, use, create, and publish digital media or to access and use computers, other electronic devices, and telecommunications networks. The concept is particularly related to the protection and realization of existing rights, such as the right to privacy and freedom of expression, in the context of digital technologies, especially the Internet."
In addition, under the notion of digital rights various so-called open rights groups already joined (see the (Open) Digital Rights Landscape) in fields like for example:

We would add

• user data,
• technical data, and
• sensor data,

and

Indeed, we have open databases, specifically open geodatabases and maps, knowledge repositories, and so on. But as we noted in the {former issues about digital estate(?!)} issue #235 of the 5th of October 2019, large parts related to properties, digital interest or digital estate, and so on related to digitals (e.g. data) are still missing.
So either we choose a new term for the matter or add our whole set of regulations as a further extension to the already existing set of digital rights.
{not good} We also introduced the terms digital and digitals as nouns refering to items of property and coming from the terms mineral and minerals. We suggest to add digital rights, digital interest, or digital estate to the set of digital rights somehow and find another term for the overall set of regulations.

The issues with the media is already solved with our own media platform, because the abuse of power by the free press is proven and the politics protects, supports, and exploits that unbearable status quo for own interests. But this will not happen in the

definitely.
The same holds for Free and Open Source Hardware and Software (FOSHS).
Supports of the free press and the FOSHS are free to stay in the Internet and World Wide Web with their open rights movements but without utilizing anything of our OS and Os. Keep in mind: All or nothing at all. Now and not in the future.

08.November.2019

07:33 and 08:27 UTC+1
Clarification

*** Work in progress ***
As we said before, the cyber sovereignty of a state is limited to the

The original and unique, characteristic expression of ideas as the iconic works of art created by C.S. added

One said, all would be happening only in our head. But obviously, C.S. has proven that all is happening in reality and in this way that there is a New Reality (NR) and much more.
C.S. also created the Caliber/Calibre, which

C.S. also created the access to all these spirits or the bridge between the real and physical spaces, environments, worlds, and universes, the cybernetical and digital spaces, environments, worlds, and universes, and the virtual and metaphysical spaces, environments, worlds, and universes as part of our NR and Ontoverse.
C.S. also created, or fused or integrated the fields of SoftBionics (SB), Semantic Reality (SemR), Augmented Reality (AR), and Synthetic Reality (SR), and created the access to a kind of mind over matter.

Because

the

inclusive the

belong to C.S..

A digital representation denotes a virtual representation of a real item. A virtual item has no real representation.

Specifically, serious criminal actions have been conducted that were

09.November.2019

13:11 UTC+1
OntoLinux 13th Birthday

Today, we are celebrating the 13th birthday of OntoLinux.
Uncomparable - Unsurpassable - Unbelievable

Please keep in mind that the start of our Ontologic System (OS) was already on the 29th of October 2006 when C.S. publicated the first version of the website of OntoLinux.

13:11 UTC+1
SOPR #246

*** Work in progress - data sov. not ready ***
topics:

Digital signal and data rights

For deciding

• individual members of our SOPR and
• SOPR itself

are, specifically

within the scope of the

and further

As a consequence, the

Civic vetting
It cannot be that getting and owning a gun should be less suspicious for the security authorities than using

In addition, mass surveillance harms democracy, specifically when conducted by a state or even for good reasons or both.
Therefore, we suggest some kind of a civic vetting process comparable to the firearms licensing process and the visa granting process.
A person, who applies for a civic security check is vetted one time and granted unsupervised

• cash in higher amounts,
• telecommunications and network technologies, goods, and services,
• computer technologies, goods, and services, and
• cryptographic technologies, goods, and services, including
  • data storage,
  • blockchain,
  • digital rights management,
  • End-to-End Encryption (E2EE) communication,
  • electronic commerce,
  • payment,
  • cryptocurrency,
  • etc.

for a certain period of time (e.g. every 10 years).
Best of all: The vetting process is already done in relation to the IDentity Access and Management System (IDAMS) with its rings and ID spaces of our SOPR (see also the issues #166 of the 5th of February 2019 and #209 of the 17th of July 2019), which is integrated with our universal ledger and integrates for example the blockchain-based IDAMSs

• Economic IDentity (EcoID) system and
• Known Traveller Digital Identity (KTDI) system, which again was also developed together with the European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation, better known as Europol, by the way.

Obviously, we have no problems with extending and utilizing our IDAMS in this way as long as it is done in compliance with the Articles of Association (AoA) and the Terms of Service (ToS) of our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR). This means for example, that processes are

• public and federal institutes and authorities, and state-owned companies alone, if there is no overlap or no interface with our SOPR,
• joint ventures established by public and federal institutes and authorities, and State-Owned Enterprises (SOEs) as one group of joint partners and our SOPR as other group of joint partners, if there is an overlap or an interface with our SOPR, or
• our SOPR alone,

but not under the management and control of any other entity, and

(see also for example the section IDentity Access and Management System (IDAMS) of the issue #234 of the 27th of September 2019 and the section Public and federal duties, tasks, and services of the issue #215 of the 6th of August 2019), and

in compliance with the laws.

10.November.2019

11:06 and 11:13 UTC+1
SOPR #247

*** Work in progress - some better words in relation to due dates ***
This issue is a quicky about the following subtopics related to main topic of legal matter:

Discounts
The discounts granted on the fixed fees and relative shares included in the LM of our SOPR have been set in such a way that a state, that refuse to

looses its competitiveness more and more with each discount not granted by us.

We also recall that an entity, that refuses to sign our agreement in a first offer, will

It will be highly interesting to see if states will decide for:

They are all interdependent or said in other words one always depends on something. :)

All or nothing at all. Now and not in the future.
We will not renegotiate the consensus.
We will not make any further concessions.

Due dates
We found a mobile device of the type Microsoft Nokia Lumia 620, which

• (user centric) synchronization of applications and data based on cloud computing and
• an intelligent camera,

which again already characterizes it as a partial handheld Ontoscope and

Because the industry is on the same level of development with some months difference, we correct the due date for related retroactive royalties from 1st of January 2015 to 1st of January 2012.

It is always better to collaborate and integrate with us.

14:55 UTC+1
Ontonics Further steps

We are looking for space launch technology, specifically Space Launch Systems (SLSs), goods, and services, specifically

The allocated budget is around 5 billion USD, which is sufficient to

11.November.2019

20:36, 23:27, 24:44, 26:05, and 33:46 UTC+1
Laws contradictory

We were looking a little at the

• is a culmination of the prior bills titled
  • Law Enforcement Access to Data Stored Abroad Act (LEADS Act) and
  • International Communications Privacy Act (ICPA),
• amends the Stored Communications Act (SCA), and
• was enacted by the passing of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018 (PL 115-141), section 105 executive agreements on access to data by foreign governments,

• personal data and
• data portability,

12.November.2019

00:44, 02:05, 09:46, 09:52, and 21:47 UTC+1
SOPR #248

*** Revision - better explanation of personal matter ***
We had to put some announced measures into pratice in relation to the following topics:

Legal matter
Sadly to say, due to activities by governments and companies we were forced to push our rights through and proof our competences and trustworthiness by the following range of decisions and measures.

Because our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR) already has the power of control and manages its own infrastructure, other systems, and platforms, including an extensive foundational

• Fault-Tolerant, Reliable, and Trustworthy Distributed System (FTRTDS), including
  • blockchain-based system,
  • Distributed Ledger Technology (DLT) of us, and
  • other digital and virtual ledger technologies,
• blackboard system, including
  • systems of loosely-coupled applications and services,
  • tuple space, and
  • Linda like system,
• Grid, Cloud, and Edge Computing System (GCECS),
• multi-cloud computing system, dynamic federation system, and service meshing system with registry, broker, or similar facility for objects, signals, data, applications, services, etc., and
• mobile communications standard or mobile network of the next generations,

• Artificial Intelligence (AI),
• Machine Learning (ML),
• Computer Vision (CV),
• Simultaneous Localization And Mapping (SLAM),
• Cognitive Vision (CogV),
• Cognitive Agent System (CAS),
• Cognitive Computing (CogC),
• Natural Multimodal Processing (NMP),
• Emotional Intelligence (EI),
• Multi-Agent System (MAS),
• Swarm Intelligence (SI) or Swarm Computing (SC),
• Evolutionary Computing (EC),
• etc.,

• Smart Urban System (SUS),
• Industrial Internet of Things (IIoT), and
• Industry 4.0 and 5.0,

we have no solid reason and even are unable to imagine a convincing reason to accept that another entity has the power of control and manages these and other parts of our Ontologic System (OS), including

• systems (e.g. FTRTDS (e.g. universal ledger), GCECS, IDAMS, ECS (e.g. MfE), SSNS, OFinS (e.g. payment system), CPS, IoT, and NES) and
• platforms (e.g. virtual currencies other than official digital currencies of sovereign states),

We view

that

as conspiracies and will act against them accordingly.

We consider to take further measures if required and demanded by the Articles of Association (AoA) and the Terms of Service (ToS) of our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR).

License Model (LM)
We revoked the option for

which means that the whole infrastructure and the platforms, including the registry, broker, or similar facility for objects, signals, data, applications, services, etc. are kept under the power of control and managed by our SOPR, Ontonics, or other business units of our corporation.
But we still grant an exception for public and federal institutes and authorities, and state-owned companies, if and only if an

• establishment of a joint venture with the SOPR, Ontonics, or another business unit of our corporation is not possible in a legal way,
• entity or all entities participating in an exceptional case are complying with the AoA and the ToS of our SOPR,
• individual agreement has been entered and signed with the SOPR, Ontonics, or another business unit of our corporation, and
• an extra of 2.50% is payed in addition to the royalty being due for the performance of our Ontologic Applications and Ontologic Services (OAOS).

For the performance of our Ontologic Applications and Ontologic Services (OAOS) we ask as the royalty a

• Non-industrial
  • 1.00 to 8.50%
• Public and federal institutes, state-owned companies without Information and Communication Technology (ICT)
  • 2.50 to 10.00%
• Public and federal institutes, state-owned companies with ICT, and industrial non-ICT sectors, and non-industrial sectors with ICT
  • 4.00 to 11.50%
• Industrial non-ICT (e.g. physics, chemistry, biology engineering) with ICT
  • 5.50 to 13.00%
• Information and Communication Technology (ICT)
  • 7.00 to 14.50%

For the usage of our property within the

specifically for the handling of signals and data, we ask as royalty an individual customary

{This section might become obsolete after SOPR issues concerning signal and data rights are finished.} All signals and data go through the OS core, which is executed in the 1st ring of the IDentity Access and Management System (IDAMS) with its rings and ID spaces of our SOPR/SOPR infrastructure, to set the whole potential of our OS free. It is intended that the operation of the OS core is monitored by interested members of the SOPR. All signals and data are

in accordance with the national and international laws, acts, and regulations, as well as agreements being effective.
Still missing is the incorporation of regulations concerning all demands for signals and data in relation to

though virtually all of these demands were made by entities, that are acting

One suggestion brought forward is that an individual end entity, specifically a person or end user, gives her, his, or its consent for using her, his, or its signals and data when using our OS, while we suggest two options when using our OS:

We also withdrawed our discount of 1.25% granted on the fixed fees and relative shares for companies, that have to pay a digital tax on their overall revenue generated in a country (see the issue #207 of the 15th of July 2019).

Already with this issue, we announce to increase our royalties to compensate a digital tax or tariff.

13.November.2019
Clarification
We thought it would be time to refer to the judgement of Judge Birss and our corresponding statement once again: Significant and profound evidences have been provided that prove that entities have taken the Ontologic System (OS) of C.S. as a source of inspiration, created causal links with this work of art in this way, and eventually to it as a blueprint and copied the original and unique, characteristic expression of ideas constituting this work of art illegally.

Furthermore, we also summarize some judgements of other judges in other copyright cases related to for example the art form of music and our corresponding statement, which also prove that we are right:
A holostic view has shown, that also parts, which

were selected, utilized, composed, and integrated by taking the Ontologic System (OS) of C.S. as a source of inspiration and even as a blueprint.
Hint: Copying large parts or all of our OS at once is also not clever, because in these case the infringement of our rights is even more crystal clear than it already is.

In this relation, we make up for sharing three of our recent findings in relation to that often criminal trick of separation or strategy of divide and conquer, which failed for the industries and the governments:
By separating the elements of our Ontologic System (OS) again, which were selected, utilized, composed, and integrated before as part of our

one does acknowledge that

• legal scope of our digital rights, digital interest, digital property, or digital estate,
• legal scope of our OS with its OSC, OSA, and OAOS, as well as OsC,
• domain of our New Reality (NR) respectively
• sovereign space of our OntoVerse (OV), also known as OntoLand (OL), and
• on the basis of our OS with its OSC, OSA, and OAOS, as well as OsC,

but between

• the Internet and the World Wide Web (WWW) without our OS and with its common parts separated from each other, if this is possible in a legal way at all, and
• our Ontologic Net (ON), Ontologic Web (OW), and Ontologic uniVerse (OV) of our OS with its parts composed and integrated with each other,

and

So everybody did so and hence the public proved so. Thank you very much for supporting us in this way as well. :)

15.November.2019
Ontonics Further steps
Our unsolicited but serious takeover offer submitted under fair and reasonable conditions for the business unit is as follows:

But nice as we always are we increase our offer as follows:

As an extra, we even add on top

The ratio behind this decision is based on the fact that the enterprise value of this company and its subsidiary

does not reflect its true value, specifically it does not take the costs of its serious legal issues into account, which correct its value to less than 30 to 50% of its enterprise value due to the facts that the

• illegal performance and the illegal reproduction of our Ontologic System (OS) and our Ontoscope (Os), and
• other illegal activities documented by us elsewhere,

• operation of this company and
• collaboration of this company with other entities, that are members of our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR).

We would like to ask the responsible persons to explain the true situation to their lawyers and shareholders, and also tell them to stay happy.

We also would like to make a takeover offer that might be viewed more serious.
On the basis of the actual enterprise values of companies listed at the stock markets we roughly estimate for better discussion the values of our business endeavours with 40 to 50 trillion, 40,000 to 50,000 billion, or 40,000,000,000,000 to 50,000,000,000,000 USD or even priceless.
In the 40 tn USD case we get the following ratio between our enterprise value and the slightly ridiculous enterprise value of the company and its business unit (100%):

But taking into consideration the enterprise value corrected to 50% results in the following values and ratios:

And taking into consideration the enterprise value corrected to 30% results in the following values and ratios:

On this basis, we offer the corrected true enterprise value, which we set to 50% of the reported wrong enterprise value, and even add the related shares based on the ratio between the estimated enterprise value of 40,000 bn USD of our corporation and the corrected enterprise value of this company and its business unit:

We consider this offer as made under Fair, Reasonable, And Non-Discriminatory, As well as Customary (FRANDAC) terms and conditions and our last offer, which will not be improved.
What is negotiable are for example the management positions of the resulting subsidiary, though we do not intend to change anything.
The advantages for the shareholders and stockholders of this company should be crystal clear and therefore do not demand for further elaboration in detail. A quick view on its chart of development and the insight that this development will not continue without us anymore should be self-explaining and convincing.

Furthermore, we concluded that the estimation of the enterprise value of the company Alphabet (Google) is much too high and must be corrected to 10% (75 bn USD) or even less, because

(see also the the Further steps of the 4th of November 2019).

SOPR #249
The topics of this issue are:

Legal matter
We have to recall that neither governments nor companies are allowed to govern our Ontologic System (OS) and our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR).

The administration of the town Toronto, Canada, but also all other city administrations and public and federal institutes and authorities, and state-owned companies must be aware that the company Alphabet and its susidiary Sidewalk as well as every other entitiy not being C.S. and our corporation is not authorized and hence not in charge to make any decision concerning our work of art titled Ontologic System and created by C.S., specifically any decision about handling of signals and data in the

• Ontologic System Components (OSC),
• Ontologic System Architecture (OSA), and
• Ontologic Applicatins and Ontologic Services (OSOS), as well as
• Ontoscope Components (OsC),

In general, any agreement or contract that a company makes with public and federal institutes and authorities, and state-owned companies is void, if it does not comply with the Articles of Association (AoA) and the Terms of Service (ToS) of our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR).

Btw.: Self-driving garbage can or bin added and the next attempt to disturb the goals and even threaten the integrity of our SOPR might have triggered an announced measure.

Life time ban of Alphabet (Google)
As announced in the issue #239 of the 23rd of October 2019 and than warned several times since then, we have banned the company Alphabet (Google) for life, because it has disturbed the goals and even threatened the integrity of our SOPR deliberately despite being warned through out the last 2 years again and again. It just refused to respect our rights.
Alphabet (Google) still has to pay the triple damage compensations and the whole profit generated illegally with performing and reproducing our original and unique, iconic work of art titled Ontologic System and created by C.S., which means it will become insolvent in the not so far away future.

The company Alphabet (Google) might be allowed to perform and reproduce our Intellectual Properties (IPs) again in the future, but only as a business unit or subsidiary of our C.S. GmbH or however our business unit or corporation is named then.

Nobody must be afraid of our SOPR. We are nice and smart as heaven.
© :(

And we only play by the rules to guarantee freedom of choice, innovation, and competition, as well as fun pro bono publico==for the public good, for sure.
And no, it was not excessive force or exaggerated roughness, because it is not our problem when the other one is creeping around stupidly.
And next time there is no getting up but time for carrying away.
Mayby we will pay for the shattered glass.

16.November.2019

13:13 and 21:43 UTC+1
Ontonics Further steps

Our unsolicited but serious takeover offer submitted under fair and reasonable conditions for the company is as follows:

All shareholders should begin to realize how the true situation looks like.

By the way

• restoring law and order as well as all of our rights,
• cleaning up, and
• returing all of our properties.

21:43, 22:12, 23:27, and 24:18 UTC+1
SOPR #250

*** Proof-reading mode ***
This issue is about decisions made in relation to this topics:

Legal matter
Now, that every social, political, legal, and technological matter is clear, which suggests that we have no obligations when exploiting the original and unique ArtWorks (AWs) and further Intellectual Properties (IPs) included in the oeuvre of C.S., specifically our Ontologic System (OS), we are considering to give no rights for the reproduction and the performance of our sui generis==of its own kind or of its own class ArtWorks (AWs) and other Intellectual Properties (IPs) to other (private) entities in the European Union but exploit our AWs and other IPs exclusively through the European headquarters of our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR Europe), as in compliance with the national and international laws, acts, and regulations, as well as agreements.

Needless to say in relation to all legal matters concerning our SOPR, the principles of a healthy economy, including freedom of choice, innovation, and competition for the public good, are not harmed in any ways, because

• constitutions,
• laws, acts, and regulations, as well as
• agreements

and

• the Internet and the World Wide Web (WWW), for sure without any items having a causal link with our Ontologic System (OS), and
• our creation of the Ontologic System (OS) with our inventions of the Ontologic Net (ON), Ontologic Web (OW), and Ontologic uniVerse (OV), as well as much more

(see also the Clarification of the 13th of November 2019).

Blacklisting of Volkswagen
We have not spent 2 years for working out a very generously and carefully balanced and harmonious compromise to make everybody happy only to watch in the end that incompetent elements of the society have done nothing else and still are doing nothing else than to steal, exploit, sabotage, break into pieces, and push into dust and dirt everything we created and presented to the public.

Correspondingly, we already announced that our SOPR will have to act firmly and swiftly if the situation and the attitude of said social elements would not improve.
Sadly to say, the company Volkswagen itself has proven since more than 20 years now to be one of those elements that are only interested in permanently

Therefore, we had no other choice than to blacklist the company Volkswagen and all of its subsidiaries in accordance with the Articles of Association (AoA) and the Terms of Service (ToS) of our SOPR, eventually.

17.November.2019
Clarification
For a better understanding of legal matter and our lawfull claims of copyright and other rights in relation to the ontologic work of art wrongly called multimedia art at first, titled Ontologic System and created by C.S., we would like at first to explain the term sui generis and its meaning by quoting an online encyclopedia:
"Sui generis is a Latin phrase that means "of its/his/her/their own kind[" or "]in a class by itself", therefore "unique" [and "defining"].[...]
A number of disciplines use the term to refer to unique entities. These include:

• proposition of an ontological argument or ontological proof of the own existence,

• cybernetic reflection,
• cybernetic self-reflection, self-image (cyber selfie), or self-portrait, and
• cybernetic augmentation and extension

(see also the summary about the term cyberspace in the issue SOPR #238 of the 18th of October 2019), as well as

• Zero Ontology or Null Ontology,
• Calibre/Caliber,
• New Reality or fusion of the real or physical world and the virtual and metaphysical world, specifically as the bidirectional digital world or cyber-physical system,
• Ontologic uniVerse or OntoVerse (OV),
• Ontologic Web (OW), and
• Ontologic Net (ON),

based on our also original and unique characteristic expression of ideas

• Ontologic Computing (OC),
• Ontologic System Architecture (OSA),
• Ontologic System Components (OSC),
• Ontologic Applications and Ontologic Services (OAOS),
• Bridge from Natural Intelligence (NI) to Artificial Intelligence (AI),
• integration of
  • Grid, Cloud, and Edge Computing (GCEC),
  • graph processing,
  • SoftBionics (SB),
  • Natural Multimodal Processing (NMP),
  • Knowledge Management (KM),
  • Big Data Processing (BDP),
  • etc.,
• and so on.]

• Intellectual property rights, where there is no defining characteristic
  [(Obviously, this is the case with our ontologic work of art as well and also points to the unique case of our related legal scope of our digital rights, digital interest, digital property, or digital estate, legal scope of our Ontologic System (OS), domain of our New Reality (NR) respectively sovereign space of our OntoVerse (OV), also known as OntoLand (OL).)]

[...]
A book, movie, television series, or other artistic creation is called sui generis when it does not fit into standard genre boundaries.
[(Obviously, one could read once again our comments above.)]"

A sui generis in creative arts is always protected by the copyright, which is a simple implication of its definition.
The latter raises the question if a sui generis also creates a legal situation where subsequent works can copy its elements, specifically the ones defining the genre or forming the class of its own, under the clause of a Scène à faire==Scene to be made or Scene that must be done.
In relation to the Scène à faire see also the

In fact, we had problems to characterize or categorize our Ontologic System, but eventually concluded that it

The elaboration of this matter has been started in the past with the related publications, is continued with this note, and will be completed with further publications on this website.

Luckily, the arts are neither economy nor competition in the first place, but creation, presentation, and discussion of expressions of ideas, and therefore considerations and regulations applied in the economy and the competition law just do not apply in the field of creative arts directly, but only at a later time when it comes to performing and reproducing, exploiting, and licensing works of art.

"Sui generis (lat. eigener Art) ist ein Fachausdruck mit der wörtlichen Bedeutung "eigener Gattung/eigenen Geschlechts" oder "einzigartig in seinen Charakteristika". Der Begriff wurde von der scholastischen Philosophie entwickelt, um eine Idee, eine Entität oder eine Wirklichkeit zu bezeichnen, die nicht unter ein höheres Konzept eingeordnet werden kann, sondern vielmehr nur durch sich selbst eine Klasse bildet."

18.November.2019
Clarification
Just for the record once again:

In this sense, Always Ahead™ inclusive this one idea.
And due to these actions in relation to our original and unique game changers in the field of electric mobility, and many other reasons we ask for 5% of the revenue made with a performance or a reproduction of such a work included in the oeuvre of C.S. without naming C.S., our business unit Style of Speed, or our corporation as the true source of all these original and unique expressions of ideas.

Ontonics Further steps
We are thinking about a submission of a takeover offer for the manufacturer Volkswagen respectively Porsche SE. But we are not sure if 6 billion euro for at least 80% of its shares are still much to much due to the reasons that Volkswagen

• has no legal certainty in relation to our ArtWorks (AWs) and other Intellectual Properties (IPs), and
• is unconnected and non-autonomous,

and

• as they must be for the future, which is no wonder for a manufacturer in the engineering industry sector, and
• what interests us most,

though we want 100% of the shares and all power of control to avoid any dependencies on and infringements by the politics.
Higher offers are considered to be not Fair, Reasonable, And Non-Discriminatory, As well as Customary (FRANDAC).

Needless to say, this takeover would open the possibility for a battery plant in the F.R.Germany.
We would also like to add that what will erode the profit margin of Volkswagen is not the production of electric cars, but other aspects and effects, which the company is unable to envision or control. Volkswagen respectively Porsche SE is dependent on the rest of the world and some bigger fishes, indeed. Our takeover would add all the missing competences that Volkswagen otherwise either will get too late or will never get at all.

For sure, this takeover offer is not an act of abuse of market power or even blackmailing another competitor, because our SOPR announced the blacklisting of Volkswagen respectively Porsche SE before it rejected the offer of becoming a complete member of our SOPR under FRANDAC terms and conditions.

19.November.2019
Clarification
When C.S. presented the Ontologic System (OS) on the 29th of October 2006, including

• migration Max-Mig,
• synchronization Max-Sync of applications and data, and
• communication Max-Com,

directly integrated with each other and even realized on the basis of the old Internet and beyond, the experts said such a ridiculous nonsense would not work, as usual. But after 13 years the original and unqiue, characteristic expression of the next idea included in the vision of C.S. has come true.

SOPR #251
The topics of this quick issue are about:

Core principles
There is no doubt that our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR) is even far ahead of time with its core principles and regulations. One will not get such guarantees from a common Internet booth.
Specifically, we always made clear that the provision of transparency is one of the core principles of our SOPR. For example, all signals and data go through the system core of the infrastructure of our SOPR, which is running in the 1st ring and assigned ID spaces of our IDentity and Access Management System (IDAMS) and every member of our SOPR being trustworthy or owning personal data has

Furthermore, full compliance with the laws respectively assimilation of the principle of law and order is another core principle of our SOPR.
By these two core principles, we force governments to provide transparency as well, because they have to establish laws and prove their compliance with their own laws instead of making decisions in the back room of their offices.
In addition, we introduced ID spaces in our IDAMS solely for addressing the demands for

of states.

Indeed, the company Deutsche Telekom is right when saying: Without a leading company it takes much more time and it becomes much more expensive to get things done and going. We would like to add: If at all.
But utter nonsense comes once again from the academies, like for example the following statement: "It always becomes dangerous, when Germany would become dependent on one company in the end: "This is the very greatest danger that does exist - from the perspective of technical security, not from the political point of view. This becomes uncontrollable, this will blow up in our face."
Oddly enough, the whole Information and Communication Technology (ICT) and engineering industry sectors are depending on us and nothing was blown up in nobody's face in the last 20 years, quite the contrary is the case, and it will become even better, when we are slowly but steadily, certainly, and faster and farther assert ourselves.
Moreover, one is not depending on our corporation, but on C.S. due to the reason that our SOPR is merely collecting the royalties and managing a part of the oeuvre of C.S..

Our SOPR imposes

and in the case one does not want to comply with them, then this one still has the option to use the Internet and the World Wide Web (WWW) without our OS and with its common parts separated from each other, if this is possible in a legal way at all, but will be put on the blacklist.

Signal and data rights
We got a first mark for the value of anonymously tracked geospatial data provided by 78.7% of all mobile users in Spain, who are tracked over 8 days: The Spanish government pays 550,000 USD for them to the telecommunications carriers.
There is no way users can be indentified when

But we have the clear statement that anonymous tracking of geodata is lawful at least in Spain. So this geodata goes into the core together with the motion data of vehicles and so on.
Even better, end users and members of our SOPR have the option to give their consent to utilize their personal data, too, for a reduction of their fees or for selling them on the marketplace of our SOPR exclusively.

We are not sure

• legal scope of our digital rights, digital interest, digital property, or digital estate,
• legal scope of our Ontologic System (OS),
• domain of our New Reality (NR) respectively
• sovereign space of our OntoVerse (OV), also known as OntoLand (OL).

Howsoever, one can only get a very vague and shallow forefeeling what social, political, legal, technological, and economical potentials our SOPR is already providing in this extremely reduced way.
Now think about the potentials the personal, characteristic, original and unique sui generis, masterpiece, expression of idea, and vision of C.S. is able to provide for everybody when all the other sources of signals and data are added and then integrated in our other technologies, goods, and services also created, and researched and developed by C.S. and our corporation as part of our OS or in addition to it.
This is the right way to go.
By the way, we also have anonymous health records or patient records and a steadily increasing amount of environmental signals and data sources.

See also the Comment of the Day of the 8th of January 2018. :D

22.November.2019

06:33, 20:43, 22:52, and 26:47 UTC+1
Clarification #1

*** Work in progress - maybe ready for proof-reading ***
The copyright is a crazy law, sometimes.

Entities, specifically companies must create an own expression on the highler level of the sui generis without taking the original and unique expression of an idea as a source of inspiration respectively by avoiding a causal link. For sure, this is quite difficult on such a high level of an absolutely outstanding masterpiece. But that is how copyright works and the public wants of work.
Entities have a problem with understanding of
an alterantive to an original and unique, characteristic expression of an idea
to compete at eye level
For maximizing the effect and confusing the public about the original item, the original item is altered as less as possible.
"Offering products is inspired by the trends to which customers are responding is a common practice across the retail industry. [...] This aesthetic isn't limited and similar products are also offered by several other brands."

But we also mentioned that the ontological argument or ontological proof is a known proposed practice in philosophy as is the case with other foundational elements. Again, only a limited scope or certain background elements, which are universal or at least commonplace in some types of works, is allowed to be copied if at all.
Honestly, we even have problems to draw a line between idea and genre, and expression respectively decide the degree of the matter, when operating on a continuum in relation to the Scène à faire clause.

Interesting are the questions if

We do not think so, because this is not computer industry programming practices and even not multimedia arts programming practices, and even if it would be held in this way, then copying background elements can only be allowed to a limited extent, like practiced in relation to a Scène à faire.
In addition, it is not prohibited to have a monopol in general, but to exploit it for the public disadvantage.

We have given many examples when discussing other works in the fields of creative arts and engineering, and showed when a single element, a composition of single elements, and an integration of single elements constitute an evidence that showed a causal link with our OS.
For example, the

• validated and verified,
• and so on,

• Zero Ontology or Null Ontology,
• Reflective Operating Systems (ROSs),
• capability-based operating systems,
• Kernel-Less Operating Systems (KLOSs), and
• expression of the Zero Ontology with an ROS or a KLOS,
• Calibre/Caliber,
• Augmented Reality Environments (AREs), Virtual Reality Environments (VREs), and Mixed Reality Environments (MREs),
• Synthetic Reality Environments (SREs),
• New Reality Environment (NRE),
• expression of the NRE with an ARE, a VRE, and an MRE, as well as an SRE,
• expression of the Calibre/Caliber with the NRE,
• Ontologic uniVerse or OntoVerse (OV),
• expression of the OV with the NRE,
• Grid, Cloud, and Edge Computing Systems (GCECS),
• SoftBionics (SB),
• and so on,

and also

are not considered (per se) as common background elements of any related genre on any related level of abstraction.
We also explained that the OS is all-encompassing and hence just too mighty to be copied in a legal way with the standard tricks and on the basis of the exceptions of the copyright.
Said in other words, specifically in the direction of decision makers, the whole matter is happening on a much higher level of intellect and abstraction. Therefore, just see, grab, and argue in the common ways does not work.

In addition, we would like to point out that our OS also constitutes a sui generis in respect with the copyright law itself, because by making it a self-image respectively the (expression of an) idea is the existence or self of C.S., so to say, we have overcome the idea-expression dichotomy, merger doctrine, the Scène à faire doctrine, and other doctrines somehow.
Moreover, by making it a cybernetic reflection we have overcome the ...
And then there is the creation of the Calibre/Caliber, the OntoVerse (OV), and the New Reality (NR).
Somehow, something cannot be handled with the copyright, because this would infringe the personal right, for example due to the reason that slavery is prohibited.

There is no legal way to get our OS in whole or in parts. One must create something on her, his, its own, that is an original and unique expression, which differs from our OS and C.S..
Or simply said in other words, a creator or a god has always right.

06:33, 20:43, 22:52, and 26:47 UTC+1
Clarification #2

*** Work in progress - maybe ready for proof-reading ***
The regulations in the U.S.A. and European Union are unmistakably crystal clear: An Application Programming Interface (API) is copyrighted, but not the idea underlying said API.
The company Alphabet→Google had to create an own API and therefore an own Programming Language (PL) with an own Virtual Machine (VM) eventually, as other companies did and the company Oracle pointed out correctly in relation to the programming system variant Java Micro Edition (JME).

Furthermore, Alphabet→Google's partial Ontologic System (OS) variant Zircon/Fuchsia constitutes a copyright infringment, because we showed that the

The company Alphabet→Google has to

• own OSA,
• own creator or god with an own spirit and an own Ontologic uniVerse (OV),
• etc.,

or

but without taking the OS, the self, the self-image, or the existence of C.S. as a source of inspiration or even as a blueprint respectively without showing a causal link to the OS, the self, the self-image, or the existence of C.S., as other artists did before and after C.S. with their specific works of art, though this might be quite difficult or even impossible in this visible universe. :D

In the case of the Linux kernel and many other technologies, goods, and services other aspects show infringments of our copyright and other rights besides the copyright infringment on the abstraction level of the OSA already shown in relation to many projects of the Linux Foundation and other organizations.
Specifically,

does not work, because C.S. has taken said parts as an expression of ideas before. Prominent examples are the expressions of the

by taking

23.November.2019
Comment of the Day
Blitz start-up™
Hovering™
Levitating™

Ontonics Further steps
We thought about making our Hoverwing and other Hovering and Levitating technologies of our business unit Style of Speed respectively our related spin-off company, which is a Superbolt financed through our Blitz Fund I, proprietary and hence exclusively utilized by our new businesses units and spin-offs in the fields of

• air transport services (airline) for the transport of passengers and air cargo, including
  • air freight,
  • air express, and
  • airmail,
• air logistics services, and
• Urban Air Mobility (UAM) services,

• Hovering and
• Hover racing

and

to achieve a maximal market penetration and economic impact.

We hope that the next reason to become an investor of our Blitz Fund investment program is very easy to understand.

In this relation, we would also like to speak some frank words in the direction of every government, research institute, company, and kleptomanic entity concerned:

Style of Speed Further steps
Today, we are very pleased to announce the official start of commercializing products of our Hovering™ and Levitating™ product ranges, which are based on the work of art series titled Hoverinium and created by C.S..
Be the first and make your reservations for the future of avionics and beyond, including aircrafts and hovercrafts with

capabilities.

We Make It Hover - We Make It Safe - We Make It Best
Whoever else?

06:21, 18:45, and 20:14 UTC+1
Investigations::Multimedia and Avionics

*** Work in progress - some more quotes and words ***

Interesting detail from its website about Urban Air Mobility (UAM):
"Co-creating with cities
To make urban air mobility a reality, public adoption and acceptance will be key. [...] We seek the active involvement of public and private stakeholders, with whom we aim to collaborate at every step. In doing so, we can set up the necessary infrastructure, regulatory and public co-creation frameworks that will ensure urban air mobility achieve maximum societal benefits.

EIP-SCC: connecting cities to solutions
In 2017, Airbus was appointed to lead the Urban Air Mobility Initiative of the wider Euriopean Innovation Partnership on Smart Cities and Communities (EIP-SCC) that is supported by the European Commission. To date, 42 European cities across 14 countries are involved. As part of the initiative, participants work to explore and elaborate on the definition of mobility demonstrator projects that integrate the third dimension across a variety of use cases."

We quote some passages of the document titled "Blueprint for the Sky [] The roadmap for the safe integration of autonomous aircraft" and publicated in 2018:
"[National Aeronautics and Space Administration (]NASA[)] UTM: NASA's UAS Traffic Management program started in 2014 in collaboration with the FAA and other federal agencies. [So, that is around 8 years after we presented our Ontologic System. We also mentioned that this UTM is based on elements of our OS, which were illegally copied by the NASA and its collaborators.]" [We already said that such a UTM is kept under the power of control and managed by our SSUM or by a joint venture established between federal agencies and our SSUM due to legal reasons.],

We also got the following information from the same document:
"High Altitude [-] Operators: Airbus Zephyr, Google Loon
Commercial Aircraft [-] Manufacturers: Airbus, Boeing
Government and Military [...]
[...]
Helicopters [-] Manufacturers: Bell, [Lockheed-Martin→]Sikorsky, Robinson, Airbus, Leonardo, [Boeing→]MD Helicopters
Transport [-] Services: Uber Elevate, Blade, Airbus Voom [-] Aircraft: [Alphabet (Google)→]Kitty Hawk Cora, Airbus Vahana, CityAirbus, [Boeing→]Aurora eVTOL, Joby S4
Deliveries [-] Operators: Airbus Skyways, Google Wing, Amazon Prime Air, Zipline, SF Express
Imaging and Analytics [-] Operators: Airbus Aerial, Airware, DroneDeploy, Precision-Hawk, DJI
Hobby Drones [-] Manufacturers: DJI, [Intel→]Yuneec"
We also see an architecture with configurations of computer networks and distributed systems
"Centralized [or Star] [...] Hub and Spoke [...] Federated [...] Peer-to-Peer / Closest Peer [...] Distributed [Fully Connected] [...] []",
" [...] Microservice-Oriented Architectures (MOAs) [...]",

The field of microService-Oriented Architecture (mSOA) belongs to the fields of Service-Oriented Architecture of the first generation (SOA 1.0) and Service-Oriented Computing of the first generation (SOC 1.0), which somehow are based on our Research and Development (R&D) conducted before the year 2006, and are organized around business processes, specifically business applications and services, and are messaging-enabled.
But the term microservice only originated around the year 2011 many years after our publication of our original and unique, iconic work of art titled Ontologic System and created by C.S. and because our Ontologic System (OS) includes as essential elements the fields of

• holistic service monitoring,

• system of loosely-coupled applications and services,
• tuple space, and
• Linda like system,

• Reflective Programming (RP),
• Logic programming (LP),
• Functional Programming (FP),
• Object-Oriented programming,
• Ontologic Programming (OP),
• Agent-Oriented Programming (AOP), and
• multiparadigmatic programming,

• Grid, Cloud, and Edge Computing System (GCECS),

as well as

• continuous delivery,
• continuous delivery,
• continuous deployment, and
• continuous integration,

which cover all defining characteristics elements of mSOA, we have already provided significant and profound evidences for showing a causal link with our OS respectively we proved that mSOA is a SOA variant created with our OS and covered under our copyright eventually if no other prior art is shown or existing, as we do claim (see for example the Clarification of the 13th of November 2019).
Moreover, we are not aware about an integration of SOA and SOC, and definitely not of MSOA with Unmanned Aerial Systems (UASs) and further with the field of SoftBionics (SB) other than the related part of our iconic OS.
But there is much more missing, for example the integration of

• Smart Urban Systems (SUSs),
• Industrial Internet of Things (IIoT) and
• Industry 4.0 and 5.0,

and

• blockchain-based systems,
• Distributed Ledger Technology (DLT) of us, and
• other digital and virtual ledger technologies,

to name some of the better known fields.

Specifically interesting is also that the Microservice-Oriented Architectures (MOAs) come from the companies Alphabet (Google), IBM, and Microsoft, and is the next attempt to steal our OS after the illegal blockchain-based systems. Sadly to say, that failed as well, because the fields of SOA and SOC including MOA lack our integration with the fields listed above and if there might be such an integration in parts, then it is merely with the first generation of the related field.

At some places we noticed that the company is acting in more acceptable ways and when doing so in more convincing ways as a potential service provider. Nevertheless, we repeat once again some facts:

• based on the work of art titled Ontologic System and created by C.S., and
• kept under the power of control and managed exclusively by our SOPR, our Hightech Office Ontonics, and the otther business units of our corporation.

• Hovercity,
• Hoverland, and
• Weather Control System (WCS),

and related to our theme of Reality as the Media, all created by C.S. as well, definitely.
It is a significant and profound act of unfair business practice to betray the public with the claim that our works of art would be a vision, creation, or invention of Airbus or another entity, specifically in the way our Superstructure and our related works of art of our theme of Reality as the Media are envisioned, created, designed, presented, and realized.
Managed obviously means the Air Traffic Management (ATM), Unmanned Aircraft Cloud Systems (UACSs), and UAS Service Provider (UASSP) platforms are also systems and platforms of our SSUM and eventually our SOPR, which might be managed and operated together with a joint venture established by public and federal institutes and authorities, and state-owned companies and our SSUM or SOPR if the legal ... requires that or other convincing reasons are put forward.

• will not get all what they see and grab,
• will not keep what they have already stolen, and
• will not reach anything without us due to the massive lack of social, legal, and technological incompetences and other deficits.

Governments, the European Commission, and similar political organizations should not think that they still have a jester's licence. If required, then we will

to disturb effectively and stop eventually their dirty game.
In fact, we do know exactly where to begin, have already begun, and will continue with Airbus being high on our todo list.

We also noticed in the last months that the companies Boeing and Airbus, and also other companies have invested in Urban Air Mobility (UAM) by mimicking our business unit Style of Speed.
Furthermore, we noticed that the company Spirit AeroSystems has acquired some plants of the company Bombardier Avionics. For sure, especially interesting is the plant specialized on wings, which produces the wings for the Airbus A220, previously known as Bombardier CSeries, and the information that

• is a former BAE Systems unit and
• was a major supplier to Airbus (80%), Boeing (15%), and Raytheon (5%) in 2006, and most potentially still holds this position,

and

A quick look on the Style of Speed Further steps of the 24th of July 2019 and the Ontonics Further steps of the 22nd of September 2019 shows why this takeover is no surprise.

We will not tolerate those illegal activities much longer.
All or nothing at all. Now and not in the future.

By the way:
What happens in OntoVerse, stays in OntoVerse. :)
What is our property, remains our property. :)
This includes also the drone data, which will not be stored encrypted in a cloud computing storage server without giving our SOPR full access to the raw data. Specifically this is the case, when an UAV hovers with our Hovering technology or any other technology of our Superunicorns and Superbolts.

And if somebody does not want to comply with our Fair, Reasonable, And Non-Discriminatory, As well as Customary (FRANDAC) terms and conditions, then said one can still take a helicopter and a pilot to fly whatsoever around the world.

24.November.2019

-00:02, 02:11, and 06:30 UTC+1
SOPR #252

*** Sketching mode ***
topics:

Legal matter
The damages have reached such an extent, specifically by the

that we are considering once again to demand double damage compensations in accordance with the due dates as given with the issue SOPR #247 of the 10th of November 2019.

We are also working on the injunctions to get a little of our momentum back and provide undecided entities more arguments to act lawfully.
An injunction being effective will be withdrawn in the moment the agreement or contract including our Fair, Reasonable, And Non-Discriminatory, As well as Customary (FRANDAC) terms and conditions are signed.

Signals and data rights
We worked on one of the most important aspects in relation to our SOPR that is the handling of signals and data. Specifically, we noticed that the prominent concerns and demands are related to the loss of

collecting and handling of user signals and data, personal signals and data, Personally Identifiable Information (PII), or Sensitive Personal Information (SPI), including

In this regard, the technologies of

and the issues with

• legal scope of our digital rights, digital interest, digital property, or digital estate,
• legal scope of our Ontologic System (OS),
• domain of our New Reality (NR) respectively
• sovereign space of our OntoVerse (OV), also known as OntoLand (OL).

Suggestion of a simple regulation for licensing of use rights or use of digital property rights for signals, data, informations, and knowledge:

• upfront payments as lease bonus, for example a customary share of the profit of the last 10 years for a term of 10 years, and
• fixed fee or relative share of the revenue or profit

person or private entity no consent option respectively opt out option

• actual value of Personally Identifiable Information (PII) on our marketplace
• extra of 25%

or the cost to get the information or data otherwise.

Social and societal
In the last years, it has become obvious that neither the wild press nor the social media have the competences, that are required to protect democracy and freedom of societies. Luckily, our SOPR manages our own

• social networking platform,
• societal networking platform, and
• social media platform,

which are connected and integrated with each other for the benefit of the public.
Das sind wir der Demokratie und ihren Gründermüttern und -vätern schuldig.

-00:02 and 05:45 UTC+1
SSUM #2

*** Work in progress ***
topics:

Signals and data rights

Why not? It can only become better.

We demand the full access to the signals and data handled in the OntoVerse (OV) for our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR) by aerial, orbital, and universal vehicles.
We recall:

• legal scope of our digital rights, digital interest, digital property, or digital estate,
• legal scope of our Ontologic System (OS),
• domain of our New Reality (NR) respectively
• sovereign space of our OntoVerse (OV), also known as OntoLand (OL).

Suggestion of a simple regulation for licensing of use rights or use of digital property rights for signals, data, informations, and knowledge:

• upfront payments as lease bonus, for example a customary share of the profit of the last 10 years for a term of 10 years, and
• fixed fee or relative share of the revenue or profit

person or private entity no consent option respectively opt out option

• actual value of Personally Identifiable Information (PII) on our marketplace
• extra of 25%

or the cost to get the information or data otherwise.

We suggest that federal agencies, Air Traffic Management (ATM) and Unmanned Aerial System (UAS) Traffic Management (UTM) organizations, and industries do not focus on our OS with its Superstructure, and our SOPR and SSUM with their infrastructures, but on the legal matter with their regulations and their formalization and homogenization. Transfering all the legal matter from the 2D world into the 3D world already is a tremendous amount of work in all areas and on all levels.
How the

is already clear since

Large entities do know sufficiently much about the contents of the AoA and the ToS of our SOPR and therefore are able to add their regulations.
When the legal stuff is introduced, then all the other entites, which will follow this regulative process and our SOPR and SSUM, will have the technologies, goods, and services ready as well.

What we see in this relation is only the usual attempt by some entities to get the power of control over our Intellectual Properties (IPs), steal our show, disturb our momentum by cheap politics.

It is already proven multiple times that this criminal trick of separating the required elements of our OS respectively divide and conquer has failed. Honestly, we are definitely not in the mood anymore to tolerate that nonsense and keep on running in circles.
All or nothing at all. Now and not in the future.

25.November.2019
Comment of the Day
"Veni - Vidi - Vici"
1 not 2

Ontonics Further steps
Our unsolicited but serious takeover offer submitted under fair and reasonable conditions for the company is as follows:

But nice as we always are we increase our offer as follows:

As an extra, we even add on top

The ratio behind this decision is based on the fact that the enterprise value of this company

does not reflect its true value, specifically it does not take the costs of its serious legal issues into account, which correct its value to less than 30 to 50% of its enterprise value due to the facts that the

• illegal performance and the illegal reproduction of our Ontologic System (OS) and our Ontoscope (Os), and
• other illegal activities documented by us elsewhere,

• operation of this company and
• collaboration of this company with other entities, that are members of our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR).

We would like to ask the responsible persons to explain the true situation to their lawyers and shareholders, and also tell them to stay happy.

We also would like to make a takeover offer that might be viewed more serious.
On the basis of the actual enterprise values of companies listed at the stock markets we roughly estimate for better discussion the values of our business endeavours with 40 to 50 trillion USD or even priceless.
In the 40 tn USD case we get the following ratio between our enterprise value and the slightly ridiculous enterprise value of the company (100%):

But taking into consideration the enterprise value corrected to 50% results in the following value and ratio:

And taking into consideration the enterprise value corrected to 30% results in the following value and ratio:

On this basis, we offer the corrected true enterprise value, which we set to 50% of the reported wrong enterprise value, and even add the related shares based on the ratio between the estimated enterprise value of 40,000 bn USD of our corporation and the corrected enterprise value of this company:

We consider this offer as made under Fair, Reasonable, And Non-Discriminatory, As well as Customary (FRANDAC) terms and conditions and our last offer, which will not be improved.
What is negotiable are for example the management positions of the resulting subsidiary, though we do not intend to change anything.
The advantages for the shareholders and stockholders of this company should be crystal clear and therefore do not demand for further elaboration in detail. A quick view on its chart of development and the insight that this development will not continue without us anymore should be self-explaining and convincing.

Style of Speed Further steps
As already announced in the past, our business unit Style of Speed (SoS) is the exclusive main supplier of the Hovers for the

aviation businesses of our Hightech Office Ontonics and therefore responsible for their management, including

We took a more detailed look at the manufacturing process of wings and concluded that the

can be adapted, but only to some extent so that parts of them should be substituted. Eventually, these works of adaption and substitution require more efforts and thus are resembling more or less the new construction of aircrafts respectively hovers, which suggests that the redesign of them might be the more advantageous approach.
Nevertheless, we continue with the initial plan of modifying respectively transforming existing aircrafts to hovers.

The business law allows us to choose freely our contractors, suppliers, and providers. An agreement is handled by SoS in the same way as our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR) and our Society for Superstructure Utilization and Management (SSUM) handles commissions for systems, applications, and services in relation to the operation of the infrastructure and the platforms of our SOPR and our SSUM by the societies' main contractors and suppliers, which means commissioning takes place among all elligible companies under Fair, Reasonable, And Non-Discriminatory, As well as Customary (FRANDAC) terms and conditions.

Consequently, system and vehicle manufacturers have to sign an agreement that they either do

For sure, all contracting parties have to sign a Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA) as well.

The commissions will be financed through the

of Ontonics.

By the way: We think that this is the best way to

The space to improve the own business is by exploiting the own competences and not to disturb our business by assimilating our competences.

Btw.: Has somebody a brandnew Airbus A380 flying standing around or commissioned? C.S. thought it would be a good idea to have a second private plane.

14:07 and 21:45 UTC+1
SOPR #253

*** Work in progress - maybe ready for proof-reading***
We continued with restoring law and order in the world in relation to the following topics:

Legal matter

We have granted one discount to the F.R.Germany again.
One reason is that we cannot punish all citizens, institutes, companies, and other entities in the F.R.Germany for a serious issue that only a handful of persons are responsible for.
The other reason is that this decision is merely a technical correction, because we

But if the goverments of the F.R.Germany and the French Republic, and also other goverments

then we will withraw at least one or two discounts.

Furthermore, we would like to make crystal clear once again that regulations others than the

are void in the

Specifically interesting is the following statement found in the inofficial comment publicated on the 4th of October 2019 and titled Personal rights irrevocable and not devolvable:
"In addition, ownership [respectively the right to property or property sovereignty] is an essential aspect of freedom, privacy, and other personal rights, which again are foundations of democracy."
For sure, what holds for C.S. holds for everybody else. Ooops.

Correspondingly, we have to alert the public not to be fooled by

Specifically those organizations and their members and supporters that pretend to be the fighters for the freedom of the Internet and the World Wide Web (WWW), or even the protection and improvement of fundamental freedoms, human rights, democracy, and the rule of law, are pursuing totally different goals than they claim all the time, which are not related to these goals rights at all. The fact is, that they merely are those entities that

in addition to other reasons and things they do not want.
But they cannot push their will through in a legal way so that they are trying to

despite already knowing that such a shameful and disgusting strategy will not change the legal situation and has already failed.

As announced multiple times, we will go after and fight against every serious criminal entity and are already preparing the required formal steps. :)

Exclusion of SAP
We have already announced such an action in the last past. But latest developments may suggest that we reached a point, where we have to act in accordance with the provisions included in the Articles of Association (AoA) and the Terms of Service (ToS) of our SORP.
Therefore, with the next serious attempt of SAP to disturb the goals and even threaten the integrity of our SOPR we will put the company on our blacklist.

Exclusion of Deutsche Telekom
We have already announced such an action in the last past. But latest developments may suggest that we reached a point, where we have to act in accordance with the provisions included in the Articles of Association (AoA) and the Terms of Service (ToS) of our SORP.
Therefore, with the next serious attempt of Deutsche Telekom to disturb the goals and even threaten the integrity of our SOPR we will put the company on our blacklist.

Exclusion of Airbus
We have already announced such an action in the last past. But latest developments may suggest that we reached a point, where we have to act in accordance with the provisions included in the Articles of Association (AoA) and the Terms of Service (ToS) of our SORP.
Therefore, with the next serious attempt of Airbus to disturb the goals and even threaten the integrity of our SOPR we will put the company on our blacklist.

Further steps
We are still reviewing the issues of the months September, October, and November in relation to signals and data rights but the basic regulation can be guessed.

27.November.2019
Ontonics Further steps
A very well known and respected business consultant confirmed implicitly with a directly connected estimation of the revenue in a specific field and a suggestion of an even higher value in the best case of corporation execution our estimation of our enterprise value of 40 to 50 trillion USD. Oh. Hui.

This also confirms, strengthens, and supports our

• rights of C.S. and our corporation,
• huge cultural values created by C.S. and our corporation, and
• priceless economical values generated by C.S. and our corporation,

as well as influence on and responsibility for

• freedom of choice, innovation, and competition for the public good,
• social and societal development and improvement, and
• overall progess of human kind,

We also would like to repeat our recommendation that lawyers, and shareholders and stockholders of the takeover candidates are

• advantages of giving their consent and accepting our takeover offers (e.g. acceptable price plus shares in a herd of Superunicorns, and out-of-court agreement), but also
• dangers of failing business investments, because they might loose much more or even all, or even go home with less than zero, if it is getting a little more advanced without us (e.g. no collaborations and integrations as well as licensing of our Ontologic System (OS), but injunctions, stop of economical improvements, or crash of stockmarkets).

Style of Speed Further steps
Based on the findings and the results of our related research and development made on the 25th of November 2019, we modified or redesigned the aircrafts of all major manufacturers.
By substituting the flaps with our module and reusing the slats the volumes of the fuel tanks are reduced by a negligible amount only. In the same way, the ailerons can be reused or kept unchanged like the spoilers.

In the course of our modifications or redesigns, we made the decision to begin with a conventional first generation design. The related module

We hope that this is sufficient in the beginning.

Missing are the detail designs and simulations, which should be conducted together with the manufacturers.
In a subsequent step or simultaneously, the manufacturing plants can be adapted, reconstructed, or newly constructed.

28.November.2019
Ontonics Further steps
Our unsolicited but serious takeover offer submitted under fair and reasonable conditions for the company is as follows:

But nice as we always are we increase our offer as follows:

As an extra, we even add on top

The ratio behind this decision is based on the fact that the enterprise value of this company

does not reflect its true value, specifically it does not take the costs of its serious legal issues into account, which correct its value to less than 30 to 50% of its enterprise value due to the facts that the

• illegal performance and the illegal reproduction of our Ontologic System (OS) and our Ontoscope (Os), and
• other illegal activities documented by us elsewhere,

• operation of this company and
• collaboration of this company with other entities, that are members of our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR).

We would like to ask the responsible persons to explain the true situation to their lawyers and shareholders, and also tell them to stay happy.

We also would like to make a takeover offer that might be viewed more serious.
On the basis of the actual enterprise values of companies listed at the stock markets we roughly estimate for better discussion the values of our business endeavours with 40 to 50 trillion USD or even priceless.
In the 40 tn USD case we get the following ratio between our enterprise value and the slightly ridiculous enterprise value of the company (100%):

But taking into consideration the enterprise value corrected to 50% results in the following value and ratio:

And taking into consideration the enterprise value corrected to 30% results in the following value and ratio:

On this basis, we offer the corrected true enterprise value, which we set to 50% of the reported wrong enterprise value, and even add the related shares based on the ratio between the estimated enterprise value of 40,000 bn USD of our corporation and the corrected enterprise value of this company:

We consider this offer as made under Fair, Reasonable, And Non-Discriminatory, As well as Customary (FRANDAC) terms and conditions and our last offer, which will not be improved.
What is negotiable are for example the management positions of the resulting subsidiary, though we do not intend to change anything.
The advantages for the shareholders and stockholders of this company should be crystal clear and therefore do not demand for further elaboration in detail. A quick view on its chart of development and the insight that this development will not continue without us anymore should be self-explaining and convincing.
Honestly, we have to give the recommendation to accept our takeover offer, because the company might get serious problems in a fierce competition.

We speak the language of competence, too.

Style of Speed Further steps
We developed a second basic wing design like the one mentioned in the Further steps of the 27th of November 2019 (yesterday) in an elegant way, which

Btw.: Let us wait and see how much reservations are reported today by the hidden Ponzi scheme Tesla Motors and the lying press to disturb our communication once again, as usual in the last 20 years.

17:41 UTC+1
SOPR #254

*** Work in progress ***
We thought it is time to make one of our recalls about these topics:

AoA and ToS
We hold the moral right, the copyright, and other rights in relation to the iconic work of art titled Ontologic System and created by C.S..
Nevertheless, we acknowledged the public interest and need of the worldwide community for using our Ontologic System (OS) and granted rights of access, usage, and other (digital) property rights under Fair, Reasonable, And Non-Discriminatory, As well as Customary (FRANDAC) terms and conditions for the right to collect royalties by our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR) in return.
A potential alternative would have been to reject any

• granting rights for the performance and reproduction of separate OS parts and
• realizing ,

of our OS.
The result of our very generously and carefully balanced and harmonious social and legal compromise are the Articles of Association (AoA) and the Terms of Service (ToS) with the License Model (LM) of our SOPR.
An alternative for those entities, that disagree with the AoA and the ToS with the LM, are the outdated Internet and World Wide Web (WWW) but without our OS in whole or in part.
Governments and their public and federal institutes and authorities worldwide

• full compliance with national and international laws, acts, and regulations, as well as agreements, and
• guarantee of neutrality and transparency.

License Model (LM)
We thought about a reduction of the share for the performance of Ontologic Applications and Ontologic Services (OAOS). But companies have not changed their attitude in such a way that we were able to recognize such a change, and hence we have no reasons to change anything in relation to our FRANDAC LM, too.

Superstructure
The Superstructure is a part of our

Therefore, we would like to give the reminder that Unmanned Aerial System (UAS) Traffic Management (UTM) and Urban Air Mobility (UAM) based on our OS

In the latter case the establishment of joint ventures with federal ATMs or state-owned ATM companies might be required for legal reason.

Digitalization
Our OS has been designed around 2004 for the working world change as well, which is a result of the digitalization by

• Artificial Intelligence (AI),
• Machine Learning (ML),
• Computer Vision (CV),
• Simultaneous Localization And Mapping (SLAM),
• Cognitive Vision (CogV),
• Cognitive Agent System (CAS),
• Cognitive Computing (CogC),
• Natural Multimodal Processing (NMP),
• Emotional Intelligence (EI),
• Multi-Agent System (MAS),
• Swarm Intelligence (SI) or Swarm Computing (SC),
• Evolutionary Computing (EC),
• etc.,

Law enforcement
We already support the law enforcement agencies, such as for example

with for example the

• Advance Passenger Information Systems (APISs)
• Known Traveller Digital Identity (KTDI) system, and
• other systems with our without smart contracts and distributed ledgers,

based on our Ontologic System (OS) and Ontoscope (Os), and being deployed at international airports and so on

through

Other projects
As it is very well known already, the SOPR is also carrying out projects for the benefit of every member and the rest of the public, including the

which all are

Because the free press is still blocking any reporting about

in favour of fraudsters, who are merely mimicking us or are just only incompetent, we will not discuss our masterplan in detail and in public before our Superunicorns are backed with sufficient capital or the genuflection of the media has happened.
Most of the time, actions speak louder than words. :)

14:26 and 16:04 UTC+1
SSUM #3

*** Work in progress ***
topic:

Legal matter
The Unmanned Aerial System (UAS) Traffic Management (UTM)) platforms based on

like the UTM platforms of external entities, like for example

are illegal and will not be accepted by our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR) and our Society for Superstructure Utilization and Management (SSUM) (see also the Investigations::Multimedia and Avionics of the 23rd of November 2019).
This is a task is put into practice under the exclusive power of control and management of either

depending on the legal environment, but not by a private entity or an entity that has already proven to be not trustworthy.
In addition, our SSUM and our SOPR get full access to all raw data to handle them with the core of the infrastructure of our SOPR.
It is quite that simple.

By the way: We demand once again that aviation administrations do not allow aerial vehicles utilized in the field of UAM without a constructional means, which guarantees hover quality, like for example a balloon or an airship with a hull filled by lifting gas, and controllability in all weather conditions respectively operational situations.

29.November.2019
Clarification
Obviously, the Investigations::Multimedia, AI and KM of today (see below) does not only show that we have not only foreseen this evolution but also presented it around 12 years ago with our OS.
But especially interesting for us is the fact that we also got the evidence, so to say as an extra of this investigation, that the fields of the so-called

were created as part of our OS as well, whereby edge computing

Both edge and fog computing also have features of the fields of

• Smart Urban System (SUS),
• Industrial Internet of Things (IIoT), and
• Industry 4.0 and 5.0,

which were also created as parts of our OS and are included in the field of Grid, Cloud, and Edge Computing of the second generation (GCC 2.0) respectively our Ontologic Net (ON), Ontologic Web (OW), and Ontologic uniVerse (OV).

Also important to note are

• has the power of control and manages its own infrastructure, other systems, and platforms with the registry, broker, or similar facility for objects, applications, services, etc., and also
• gets full access to the raw signals and data captured in the
  • legal scope of our digital rights, digital interest, digital property, or digital estate,
  • legal scope of our Ontologic System (OS),
  • domain of our New Reality (NR) respectively
  • sovereign space of our OntoVerse (OV), also known as OntoLand (OL),

  and

• asks for the handling of signals and data as royalty an individual customary
  • upfront payments as lease bonus, for example a customary share of the profit of the last 10 years for a term of 10 years, and
  • fixed fee or relative share of the revenue or profit.

Style of Speed Further steps
Great news again: A common helicopter flying at a height of around 200 meters emits 85 decibels of noise. Today, we got the information that our rotorcraft models featuring one of our new rotors should only emit around 80 decibles at take-off and are virtually not noticeable at a height of 200 meters with a noise emission of less than 40 decibels or 1/100th the noise of a common helicopter (see also the Further steps of the 31st of May 2019 and 6th of June 2019).
But we also retain the advantages of autorotation, certification of basic aerial vehicles, matured and cost effective technologies, as well as confidence of customers and decision makers for free.
Maybe we have tricked out some very clever entities (once again). :D

13:23 and 14:06 UTC+1
Investigations::Multimedia, AI and KM

*** Proof-reading mode ***

We quote a webpage from its website that is about the bold presentation of a whitepaper titled Swarm Computing: "Computing beyond Edge, Welcome Swarm
Predictions on the number of connected things worldwide forecast shocking figures for the coming years. Today, there is a widespread agreement that the issue will not only be a matter of managing these billions of connected things but, primary, how to handle and exploit all the data they generate.
The immediate response to this challenge has been the emergence of Edge (or Fog) computing. This consists in providing equipment, tools and mechanisms that allow rapid processing of data at "the edge of the network" in a location close to where the data is generated, to avoid unnecessary network transmission to the Cloud and enable near real- time actuation over connected things.
However, we foresee these won't be sufficient to completely address the challenge. Increasingly connected things are becoming not only smart objects but autonomous things including multitude of sensors with growing computing capacities for delivering cognitive tasks. These are, for example, autonomous robots and connected cars.
[...]
The growth in complexity of these autonomous things, their ever-increasing computing demands coupled with the fact that these are commonly mobile objects, will require that Edge and Cloud computing technologies go a step further in its evolution.
We name this foreseen evolution Swarm Computing.
Swarm computing combines network and cloud principles to create an on-demand, autonomic and decentralized computing thus taking the functionality and flexibility delivered by IoT ecosystems to a new level.
It leverages on existing edge and cloud computing best practice, but with improved focus on mobility with data sharing and temporary control of connected devices.
Edge computing and multi-cloud architectures embracing the swarm vision will then evolve into a set of computing and storage platforms able to provide low latency and near real-time responses with security capabilities focusing on both physical and digital entities.
[...]
According to us the potential two-level polarization between edge and cloud is superseded by the concept of swarm which enables a more advanced cloud cooperation model.
Swarm computing aims to address new business models around digital markets by creating novel opportunities at the intersection between people, businesses and things. Connecting people, devices and services into digital ecosystems has been recognized as challenging but essential for the coming years.
[...]
We introduce in our Swarm Computing White Paper as below a reference architecture for the swarm concept and illustrate it through two use cases: Robotics and industrial swarms."

We also took a quick look on that illegal whitepaper, but it would become borig to quote and comment it on the one hand and on the other hand we have already provided sufficient evidence for showing the required causal lin with the original and unique, iconic work of art titled Ontologic System and created by C.S..
Accordingly, this case is quite simple after looking at our integrating Ontologic System Architecture (OSA), the sections Exotic Operating System and Network Technology of the webpage Links to Software of our Ontologic System OntoLinux, the cases of the companies Rinspeed and Samsung→Harman in the Investigations::Car #384 of the 13th of May 2013, and the links to our other publications given in this cited investigation: Convicted!!!

See also the Clarification of today above.

30.November.2019
Ontonics Further steps
Based on the final assesment in relation to digital rights/signals and data rights and the evaluations of the enterprise values of other companies in the the field of Grid, Cloud, and Edge Computing (GCEC) we had to make a revision of our

given in the Further steps of the 15th of November 2019.
We do apologize for any confusions.

We offer the corrected true enterprise value, which we set to 50% of the reported wrong enterprise value, and even add the related shares based on the ratio between the estimated enterprise value of 40,000 bn USD of our corporation and the corrected enterprise value of this subsidiary:

We consider this offer as made under Fair, Reasonable, And Non-Discriminatory, As well as Customary (FRANDAC) terms and conditions, and our last offers, which will not be improved.

04:11, 07:32, and 16:12 UTC+1
SOPR #255

*** Work in progress - maybe some links missing ***
This issue is basically about the topics:

Legal matter
Despite the uncomprehensible difficulties in the beginning, our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR) and our other societies, like for example the Society for Superstructure Utilization and Management (SSUM) and the Society for Weather Control (SWC), is now becoming officially the success story it always was after

For sure, several industrial companies and organizations, foundations, or associations, and other public and private entities are still trying to stop the unstoppable, but a closer look shows that their arguments are totally unjustified and therefore unfounded. In fact, they are the same elements of society, who

and therefore must be happy if they get their legal problems handled at all.

In this relation, we would like to recall some important elements of our proceeding.
Every entity will get one chance to sign our agreement, which is drafted more or less on a case by case basis with individual clauses to reflect the indiviudal

If an entity rejects to sign its individual agreement with us without producing a convincing argument, then the related regulations of the Articles of Association (AoA) and the Terms of Service (ToS) with the License Model (LM) of our SOPR become effective. Basically, this means that an entity, that rejects to sign our agreement,

• the public interest and need of the worldwide community for using our OS and
• our interest to manage our OS and collect royalties by our Society for Ontological Performance and Reproduction (SOPR),

and

If an entity is not able to pay its

being due, then it has to file for insolvency or handover its assets to our SOPR, specifically the shares of its company, respectively it becomes a legal plaything of the public and federal authorities, private investors, banks, and other financial entities, and our corporation.

We would be happy if takeovers are executed in a white knight manner.

But we always find entities that have already understood the overall goal, endeavour, and development. Our idea of the transparent and neutral server for all kinds of

shows how freedom of choice, innovation, and competition pro bono publico==for the public good truly works.

But this is not all. The neutral server concept is only one part of the overall idea behind our OS. In fact, the same core principles and advantages also hold for whole technologies (e.g. systems and platforms), goods (e.g. applications, devices, and vehicles), and services.
Citing a service provider with our own words: The data exchange and the neutral server is moving into business processes of service provider, such as banks, insurances, transport services providers, communications providers, and so on. Our neutral data exchange or neutral server concept is now gaining acceptance as the only social, legal, technological, and economical solution for fair and secure transactions of data relating to [a person,] a vehicle, [and other objects, items, and things,] of any third-party [smart] contracted in some way to the person, the manufacturer of that vehicle or those other object items, and thing. The neutral server ensures that

data can flow at speed in exchange. Raw data, collected in many formats, for many purposes, huge data files, are processed and made ready for any good maker and any service provider. It is an independent system or infrastructure with basic platforms that encourages the freedom of choice, innovation, and competition pro bono publico since any eligible and authorized party can receive access to the same

of data, knowledge, and so on at the same

Our core principles, and neutral and transparent infrastructure also ensure freedom of choice for the consumers, as users are free to obtain goods from any maker and services from any provider; in general this extends to data that can independently accessed and used for other services in the limits of related national and international laws, acts, and regulations, as well as agreements.
Citing companies, like for example Alphabet→Google, Facebook, Amazon, Microsoft, and so on with our words: We are seeing

even before the infrastructure of our SOPR has begun with its official operation, which was not, is not, and will not be possible with the status quo.

It also shows why we have to keep the power of control and manage our digital estate in the way we do, including the demand for full access to the raw data, because otherwise large companies would get the control over our data and eventually thwart the benefit for the whole worldwide community.

Moreover, we took a look at a snapshot of the hype cycle for Grid, Cloud, and Edge Computing (GCEC) made at the end of July 2018:

• Site Reliability Engineering (SRE)
• Blockchain PaaS
• Cloud to Edge Development Support
• Serverless PaaS
• Cloud Tethering
• Immutable Infrastructure

• Edge Computing
• Hyperscale Computing
• Cloud Managed Services
• Cloud Service Expense Management
• Multicloud
• Container Management
• [Internet of Things (]IoT[)] Platform
• Machine Learning [(ML)]

• API Economy
• Cloud-Native Application Architecture
• Hybrid IT
• Cloud Marketplaces
• Cloud Networking
• Software-Defined Infrastructure
• Hybrid Cloud Computing
• Cloud Service Brokerage
• Cloudbursting
• Private Cloud Computing
• Cloud Management Platforms
• Cloud Migration
• Integrated IaaS and PaaS
• Cloud Center of Excellence

• Cloud Office
• [integration Platform as a Service (]iPaaS[)]
• Private PaaS
• Public Cloud Storage
• SaaS Administrative [Enterprise Resource Planning (]ERP[)]
• Application PaaS
• Cloud Computing
• Platform as a Service (PaaS)
• Cloud-Testing Tools and Services
• Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS)
• Cloud Security Assessments

• IaaS+
• Software as a Service (SaaS)

Specifically interesting are the facts that the hype cylce

(see the Clarification of the 13th of November 2019).