The INSTANT our TMTA IP fell into the hands of IV it became untouchable. IV could sue you, Intel, AMD, and Micro$oft right off the map. IV has a special-ops legal team on the payroll - waiting to defend their 2,000 trolled patents and their multi-billion revenue. Here's how the the dialogue went:

MYHRVOLD (aka: Myhrvole, Myhole) - Les, once the IP paperwork is in our office you will be untouchable. We can protect you. No one can touch us.

CRUDELE (the less) - I'm not so sure about this, Nate. Transmeta has been sued before - and lost. We dodged the first suit - but there's sure to be more. We've robbed hundreds of people - perhaps thousands. People never take these things lying down! How will we get through the endless litigation? And how will we even get the paperwork to your desk before we are behind bars?

MYHRVOLD - Les. We really want this tech. And you KNOW that you want us to have it. We have made it worth your while. But we will get it - with you or without you. Do you understand me? Am I making myself clear? And I assure you, Les, we OWN firms. We OWN judges, we own seats on the SEC. Do you think I have spent hundreds of millions in all the right places only to let history-making IP slip away? Don't worry Les. THE VERY MOMENT we get the IP from Nova, you'll be immune to prosecution. Besides - If anything DOES go wrong, we always have Sujan. The plan is moving forward perfectly. Are you in? or out?

CRUDELE - I'm IN. I'm IN. But what if they come after Nova? How am I protected from Nova?

MYHRVOLD - God Les. Have you not been paying attention? Nova is disposable. We only use it as a buffer. We can make Nova disappear in a heartbeat. With Transmeta gone who can sue Transmeta? With Nova gone - who can sue Nova? The tracks are gone. If they come to us - I mean ME, IV, we are an impenetrable fortress. They won't make it through the gate. Those who persist will lose things that are very important to them. I assure you that they will lose interest in what we have. So where you do stand Les?

CRUDELE - You're right, you're right. Nate - this is the biggest heist I've ever been involved in. I think it's just nerves. Let's just get on with it. They'll have no time to contest the vote before you own the tech. And the legal tracks to follow will roll up faster than they can turn a Suburban around. By the time they catch up - it will be too late. You're right. See you in the morning.

MYHRVOLD - Good choice Lester. Good choice. You're a smart man. Tomorrow's your big day. And by the way, did you get that cute little island in the Carribean that you were looking at?

______

And so it goes. If some starts the suit I'll be right behind. I'll be the one wearing Kevlar.

What a crock. Investors were hoodwinked and fleeced by vaporware. Close to a billion dollars in "research" sold off for $10M. Kudos to the management team for pulling this one off. It certainly took a brass pair- nobody can argue with that.

Although we all would like to believe otherwise, the U.S.of A has become a morally bankrupt nation. The theft of Transmeta was just a small reflection of the shredded moral fabric of what passes for business ethics in our society. I'm not bitter, in fact I do feel sorry for the people who did this, because I do believe that there will be a FINAL JUDGMENT, that is not presided over by a crooked SEC, or DOJ, and true justice will finally be served. The wicked will not go unpunished.

Bit confuse here - would shareholders have to vote/approve a merger. While IP sales can probably be done at an an operating level, I was under the impression something like a merger would require formal stockholder approval. Was this not done in this case?

Transmeta's success was in engineering. The EARLY BoD was niave and idealistic. They failed in marketing.

That the technology was the greatest of achievements is proven by it's worthiness of theft.

That the LAST BoD was savvy and excepional at marketing is shown by the fact that they sold a theft to shareholders, regulators, and judges in broad daylight. It would make my very happy if they were nuable to sell their lie to the public - and that starts here.

I bought shares since the IPO; and I continued to average down while only management reaped in the rewards. Over the course of many years it was painfully obvious that this stock was manipulated. I can't remember how many times we were on the Naked Short list. I have now lost complete faith in the markets; and will pull out my money as soon as possible. It's one thing to have the sharks in New York mess with my investment; but it's quite a different thing to have your own BOD's screw you. Why they would hire PJ to advise on a sale in beyond me, when over the years they only bad mouthed the company. Please explain how you could pay an outfit 2 million to have them tell you the company is worth peanuts above the cash you're sitting on, I could have done that for $2.00. I will not try to convince anyone as to how good the tech is, just read IV's reason for the purchase (theft) of the Transmeta IP. Again, I've lost faith in the system, and I don't think the SEC gives a damn about your average investor.

Thank you Paul Taylor for having the eyes to see what the lawyers, the judges, the SEC, etc... can not see! As a longtime shareholder of TMTA, I have learned a severe lesson here. These things should not be allowed to happen!

"Transmeta's successes were in marketing, not engineering."

Hey Jim B., if its marketing, they pulled a big shade over the following companies. Nice effort! Oh, why did Nathan use a front company (Novafora)? Trying to maintain his image of forthright corporate citizen or is it a form of marketing.

Transmeta had licensed it products to the following:

NEC
FUJITSU
SONY
TOSHIBA
INTEL
NVIDIA
AMD (another strange transaction)

Transmeta peddles its wares on the TAIWAN SEMICONDUCTOR website.

I'm sure there is more undisclosed (non-transparent) activities that were hidden from shareholders.

Transmeta had a very moxy CEO who was great at spinning the yarn. Transmeta didn't set out to be a low power computing company. When they launched, after a couple years of hype, performance was poor, but power was low, so they switched into "we meant to do that" mode. Even though power was lower, perf/watt wasn't anything special either.

Transmeta's successes were in marketing, not engineering.

Given the obvious malfeasance, and sharpened regulatory oversight catalyzed by subprimes/Madhoff etc....where in heaven were the SEC in this matter? Even the Santa Clara AG could have stepped in but didn't.
Seems like a slam dunk to put BOD in the slammer, but what do i know?

I bought and kept stocks of transmeta when I read at the inquirer that the company was on his recovering stage two years ago...

Even you are wrong sometimes...

Crappiest piece of news I've read all week and this time it's not even INQ's fault