Page for Invent-Tech or Invent Tech
Note: Not to be confused with Inventech which was the first to use this name.
We have no concerns about Inventech.
Some time ago Invent-Tech was arrogant and stupid enough to file lawsuits against dissatisfied clients. That act let to InventorEd putting a program in place to channel information to various law enforcement entities. Still that effort was minimal.
Then Invent-Tech tried to take a few domains from us and that in turn led to their getting a bit more quality time, and a number of new domains. Coincidently, we started seeing defamatory remarks posted on internet about InventorEd and it's volunteers which started about the time the Invent-Tech domains were donated, and that caused them to get more attention. We are always ready and willing to give ample attention to any promoter who asks for it.
Our policy regarding these issues is widely published, and to be frank I just do not understand why a company like Invent-Tech would keep jerking our chain when they really should be focusing their attention on delivering the service which they promised to their clients.
We have long observed that invention promoters are not the brightest bulbs in the pack and Invent-Tech is no exception. They make a profound number of mistakes, the latest of which is challenging the ownership of three domains names which Washington, DC intellectual property law firm Greenberg & Lieberman kindly donated to InventorEd so that we can help aspiring inventors avoid wasting money and time on Invent-Tech.
Readers may or may not be aware that it is "fair use" to use a trademark to criticize the holder of the mark. The latest in a string of Invent-Tech attorneys (one of whom was disbarred) apparently has difficulty grasping the concept of "fair use".
I say latest because after we sent a letter to their first attorney who wrote about the domain issue pointing out that we would have to alert the USPTO's Office of Enrolment & Discipline (OED) of his association with a known invention promoter he lost interest in further contact.
Invent-Tech's arguments are to put it mildly flawed. But to be fair they did cite the fact that there is case law which specifically protects domain names which contain the word "SUCKS". Now here is the really funny part, a number of Invent-Tech-SUCKS domain names were available, and Invent-Tech clearly wanted us to pickup those domains because they left them all on the market and then brought them to our attention.
It is a fact that the Invent-Tech trademark is weak for a number of reasons. First is that a derivative of it (Inventech) was in common use for a number years by another company in the intellectual property business. Second is that it is descriptive.
Invent-Tech likes to talk about goodwill associated with their name, but I have yet to see a customer who has dealt with them for more than a year who is satisfied. The reason is simple, in that Invent-Tech is very good at selling themselves -- at least long enough to collect money -- but according to an endless stream of EX-clients not so hot at actually licensing inventions.
From time to time InventorEd is attacked by an invention promoter. Sometimes the attack takes the form of libel defamation claims and treats of litigation, sometimes it is denial of service attacks, and sometimes it is paid stooges who attempt to discredit us.
In all cases we track down the offending promoter and give them quality time. Sometimes their period of quality time is brief, say a few months, and other times it goes on for years. Time will tell rather or not Invent-Tech knows when it is time to fold.
We have posted the domain dispute ruling in part to educate potential clients and in part to take advantage of the rich source of links which the document provides to get the word out about Invent-Tech.
Please Notify Us Of Any Errors Of Fact
Below you will find links to explore
1/. FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION COMPLAINTS UNDER FREEDOM OF INFO ACT: www.ftc.gov/foia/frequentrequest.htm
2/. PATENT OFFICE COMPLAINTS:
3/. COMPLAINTS FILED AGAINST INVENTORS COMPLAINING ABOUT INVENT-TECH, ETC: www.miami-dadeclerk.com/civil
Once at the site, select: (1) Standard Case Search then (2) type Invention Technologies in the "Party Name."
I strongly advise you to become familiar with the American Inventors Protection Act of 1999 as found at: www.wenderoth.com/statute.htm
Run cursor down to: SEC. 4102. INTEGRITY IN INVENTION PROMOTION
SERVICES. If you can get them to give you their stats as mandated by
federal law per the question you should be asking them on the above
link, I believe you may find the answer to your question.
MARKETING IDEAS CAN BE COSTLY:
PAYING FOR A PROMISE
SLAPP LAWSUITS ("Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation"): www.inventored.org/SLAPP
FTC Invention Technologies-Consumer
Invention Technologies Corp. (as of 01/15/02) [PDF 1MB]
Read the Caution Flags List at http://www.InventorEd.org/flaglist/ .
Another information source is: Invention Marketing Companies .
$10,000 to $20,000 Wasted money
Source FTC Jodie Bernstein