InventorEd, Inc. Presents:

Invention Promoter Caution List
Click here to break out of Frame

PLEASE Support InventorEd

Your Donation Helps

Special Page for Inventors Publishing & Research (IP&R)

IP&R  Barbarich Letter 11-27-2003

Blue bar graphic divides sectins of the page

Nov. 27, 2002 (Note the actual date was 2003)

Re: IP&R 

Dear Ronald Riley,

I am the founder of IP&R. I want to reply to your “special” section on IP&R (Inventors’ Publishing and Research). There were several questions you had for me, and there were some misrepresentations on the web-site that I would like to clear up. It took some time to gather the necessary back-up material to answer your questions. I would like you to evaluate my package and make your own decision on the integrity and success of the IP&R family here in San Francisco.

First of all, I support you for having a web-site to protect inventors. I think it is our great right for freedom of speech, and there is no doubt it is helpful to inventors. I’m in no way against any “people’s rights” web-site, I just want to answer your questions and objectively prove to you that we’re the “good guys”.

There is one important point that I need to make. If I was evaluating and rating somebody’s business and I made my judgment based solely on the bottom 2% of its clientele (as far as satisfaction), the owner of that business would probably call me an “unreasonable person.” In order to examine the quality of that business, you have to evaluate its full clientele’s satisfaction rating, as well as its successes and failures in business.

On another note, it is important that you remove a misrepresentation on the web site. It says “when companies lack a track record, more caution is generally in order wher. they are new and unproven as is the case with IP&R.” This is a gross misrepresentation. First of all, our business license was obtained in 1995 so we are about 9 years running in business. We are not a “new business.” Secondly, upon further research, you would find that our company has the largest and the most successful track record for licensing inventions of any firm that works with inventors.

As far as track record, we post our track record and positive testimonials all over our web site: If you go to
www. inventorspublishing~com/successstories/index. html
You will see over 30 licensing deals that we have made for inventors. Also if you go to: .html, you will see over 10 testimonials from inventors that we successfully licensed and help get their products to market. I’ve also included in Addendum A, copies of these agreements (1st and last page), and in Addendum B a list of the names and contact info of a dozen of these inventors per your request. Please call a couple of times if you can’t get a hold of them because they are working people. In addition to this, I’ve included in Addendum C, over 60 satisfied surveys from current IP&R clients (out of 67 current clients), they attest they would “recommend IP&R’s services to other inventors.” Customer satisfaction is of utmost importance to IP&R, and we do our very best to make sure our that the clients are getting the service and attention they deserve.

You might already know that most invention marketing firms would not only not provide you with references at all, but they most assuredly wouldn’t provide you with the

overwhelming references and evidence as I have in Addendum’s A through C. I hope you respect my offering, and in return re-evaluate your judgment of our company.

Lastly, my only prior correspondence with you was an email in an email in May of 2000. I did not contact you over the phone this year as you mentioned on the web site. I apologize that someone called you and spoke in my behalf, so please remove mention of this. My attorney did contact you once on my behalf in an amicable way to figure out what we could do to correct or remove the web-site section on IP&R. In turn, he mentioned that you wanted me to reply to your questions on your web-site.

I feel confident that I have provided you with substantial proof and weight showing that our company is both successful at licensing inventions and satisfying our clients. After all, if I’ve provided you with over 10 positive testimonials (web-site) and 12 licensing references from my clientele. It reasonable to infer that this heavily outweighs, or at least balances the “displeased” customers that have been mentioned on your web-site, and the 3 complaints that you referenced on the USPTO site.

Another important thing to note is that as our business is becoming more mature, we are getting better at licensing inventions and satisfying our customers. If you notice between the years 2002 and 2003, we have gone from a rate of licensing 1 invention every 2 to 3 months, to licensing 1 per month by January 2003, to licensing 2 per month by September of 2003. Our licensing deals are going up, while the volume of our business is staying the same. Currently we are finalizing two licensing agreements per month and we hope to build our number of successes to 4-5 per month. From my research, no other invention firm licenses at a rate of 2 inventions per month. Clearly, that makes us the most successful invention-launching firm (contestably) in the country.

One other request on your web site was that we give “disclosure” as it applies to the American Invention Protection Act. We abide by this law fully. We give this disclosure when first contacting inventors and it’s in our contract. See Addendum D for a copy of the paragraph of disclosure from our contract. This is updated monthly. Most of the licensed products are new to the market and are in the beginning of their sales cycle because our business was primarily a book publishing and research firm for the first 4 years of business.

Also in regards to refunds. Regardless of whether or not my company feels it is wrong or right, if a client is so unsatisfied that he asks for a refund, I usually give it or am willing to negotiate a partial refund. All the people that have complained on the USPTO web-site, I have offered to pay them back half their money. These are projects where we believe we totally completed our work to the best of our ability, but the client still was very dissatisfied. Admittedly, our company has had a handful of dissatisfied clients, but this is out of a total of hundreds. It is the bottom 2-3 percentile of our clients. As you can see from our surveys (Addendum C), currently over 60 of our clients said they would give an “excellent referral” and gave permission to give out their phone number and email address. This is more than 90% of our clientele (we have not received all the surveys back yet).

You are very correct that most invention-marketing firms that charge fees do not do a good job. But I urge people not to engage in “profiling.” We are one of the few exceptions in marketing firms. In fact, we may be the only invention marketing firm has broken the mold. Our “licensing deals” speak for themselves. The surveys speak for themselves. The positives outweigh the negatives greatly. See addendum E for a section titled “Important Differences Between IP&R Firm and Other Inventions Marketing Firms.” If you hear mention of Absolutelynew in there, this is referring to a totally separate manufacturing corporation that I own. Absolutelynew has several employees in Bentonville, and we sell directly to Wal-mart. This is another HUGE advantage to using

IP&R. All the consumer oriented inventions get presented to Walmart. My companies are vertically integrated (see

Lastly, we are proud of our work, and we invite you to come out and visit us. If you’re 

here in person, you can personally see the quality of the marketing consultants we 
have here, and the thorough effort and integrity that we put into making the inventions successful. We are a customer and results driven organization. We are an open book and invite anyone to our headquarters in San Francisco.

I hope this information reaches you well. And I’m hopeful that I have satisfactorily answered all your questions. It is my hopes that you remove the “special section” cautioning inventors about IP&R, but of course it’s up to you to decide.


Steven Barbarich

P.S. — A little more background on myself. I hold Chairman position at the National Business Advisory Council. I was appointed by the House Majority Leader, Tim Daly. I was also awarded the National Leadership Award 2004 by Congress. As an avid author, like David Pressman, I consult with inventors daily.

Blue bar graphic divides sectins of the page


As long as InventorEd is receiving numerous complaints about IP&R we have no choice except to recommend caution.  The comparison to David Pressman is inappropriate.  He does not have inventors complaining that he has defrauded them of thousands of dollars.  He has stature and has published far longer then Mr. Barbarich.

Blue bar graphic divides sectins of the page

USPTO Published Complaints

Read the Caution Flags List at .

Another information source is: Invention Marketing Companies .

National Congress of Inventor Organizations (NCIO).

Blue bar graphic divides sectins of the page

Have you been Scammed?
Find out what to do here.
Please Notify Us Of Any Errors Of Fact - Click ErrorOfFact

Blue bar graphic divides sectins of the page

Site Index - Contact Us - © InventorEd, Inc., Page last revised 4-3-2004

Smiley face which turns to a frown

Unhappy Customer

Wallet with money flying away

$10,000 to $20,000 Wasted money

Source FTC Jodie Bernstein