UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
                         Washington, D.C.


Litigation Release No. 15074/September 26, 1996


SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION v. INTERNET BROADCAST GROUP,
ET AL., (D.D.C., Civil Action No. 96 CV 02226 (SSH))

     The Securities and Exchange Commission ("Commission") today
announced the filing of a Complaint in the United States District
Court for the District of Columbia against Internet Broadcast
Group ("IBG") and other defendants and relief defendants.  The
Complaint alleges that the defendants violated the federal
securities laws in connection with the offer and sale to the
public of securities designated as "partnership units" in IBG, a
purported general partnership formed to develop a wireless cable
system in Muskegon, Michigan and acquire a hardwired private
cable system in Mesa, Arizona.  The other defendants named in the
Complaint are Internet Wireless Communications, Inc. ("IWC"),
California Financial Services, Inc.("CFS"), One Touch Marketing,
Inc. ("OTM"), Commonwealth Communications Group ("CCG"), Capital
Resources Group Inc. ("CRG"), John C. Trimpin, Richard B.
Parnell, John Larson and Michael Green.  According to the
Complaint, at all relevant times, defendant Trimpin controlled
defendants IBG, IWC and CFS.  

     Additionally, the Complaint names as relief defendants
Interactive Communications Network, Ltd., Able Private Cable and
Satellite Corporation, Greg E. Parker, Michael Kittay, James
Osborn and William Trower.  The Complaint alleges that the relief
defendants received funds unlawfully raised from investors, and
hold these funds in a constructive trust for the benefit of
investors.  

     More specifically, the Complaint alleges that from April
through September 1994, defendants engaged in the offer and sale
of $2.1 million of IBG securities to approximately 186 investors
nationwide, many of whom invested funds from their Individual
Retirement Accounts.  The sales techniques used included high
pressure "boiler room" telephone sales tactics and mailings of
promotional and other documents that contained false and
misleading statements and omitted to state material facts.  When
sales ceased, and to date, the IBG investors obtained no rights
in either the Muskegon, Michigan or the Mesa, Arizona cable
systems.  Despite that, according to the Complaint, the
defendants received approximately  66%, and the relief defendants
received approximately 27%, of the investors' funds.  

     The Complaint alleges that all the defendants except IBG
violated Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section
10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5
thereunder.  The Complaint further alleges that since the IBG
==========================================START OF PAGE 2======

securities were never registered with the Commission, and were
not exempt from registration, the defendants violated Sections
5(a) and (c) of the Securities Act.  Additionally, the Complaint
alleges that defendants OTM, CCG, CRG, Parnell, Larson and Green
also violated Section 15(a) of the Exchange Act by engaging in
broker-dealer activities without being registered with the
Commission.  The Complaint seeks permanent injunctions and
disgorgement, together with prejudgment interest, from all the
defendants and civil money penalties from all the defendants
except IBG.  The Complaint also seeks an order and judgment
directing the relief defendants to disgorge the funds they hold
in trust for investors.

     Simultaneously with the filing of the action, Trimpin, IWC
and IBG consented, without admitting or denying the allegations
of the Complaint, to the entry of a final judgment of permanent
injunction, enjoining each of them from further violations of the
charged provisions of the federal securites laws.  The final
judgment also requires IBG to disgorge $175,688, which is the
amount of IBG investor funds on deposit, and frozen by court
order, in a bank account in IBG's name, and requires Trimpin and
IWC to disgorge, jointly and severally, the sum of $125,000.  The
$125,000 disgorgement to be paid by Trimpin and IWC in this
matter is part of an aggregate disgorgement of $500,000 to be
made by Trimpin and companies he controls to settle this case and
two previously-filed Commission actions alleging violations of
the federal securities laws in connection with the offer and sale
of securities purportedly to raise money for the development of
wireless cable systems.  SEC v. Parkersburg Wireless LLC, et al.
(Civ. Act. No. 94-1079, DDC) (LR-14085) and SEC v. United
Communications, Ltd., et al. (Civ. Act. No. 95-0400, DDC) (LR-
14424) (LR-15018).  Based on Trimpin's and IWC's demonstrated
inability to pay, the final judgment does not impose civil
penalties on them.  The funds disgorged by Trimpin, IBG and IWC
in this case shall be paid into a disgorgement fund to be
administered by a Trustee, and upon the submission of a plan,
distributed to IBG investors.