Ronald J.
Riley's Response To Friedman Demand Letter
BEWARE:
InventHELP.com
is ISC's new home and name.
InventHELP.com
offers a free book "How We Work" The REAL story of how they work is
available on the FTC web site at: http://search.ftc.gov/query.html?qt=invention+submission
Ronald J. Riley
1323 West Cook Road
Grand Blanc, MI 48439
(810) 655-8830, Fax (810) 655-8832
Personal Email: rjriley@rjriley.com
Edward B. Friedman
Friedman and Friedman
Attorneys AT Law
900 Fifth Ave. 2nd Floor
Pittsburgh, PA 15219
Telephone 412-261-5834
Fax 412-261-0350
Delivery Via Fax Monday, 9-25-2000
- AM
Mr. Friedman,
I received your letter
objecting to your listing on the web site as a known
associate of record of an invention promoter and I
understand your concern. Please rest assured that I am
taking your complaint very seriously and doing my best to
resolve it as fast as possible. I have worked all weekend
on addressing your concerns.
I most certainly
appreciate your advice to consult with counsel. But since
I received your letter mid morning Friday 9-22-2000 I was
unable to talk with counsel until briefly at the end of
Friday. I did fax your letter to him Friday evening but
will not have an opinion until Monday or Tuesday.
I can understand why you
might interpret what was really a compliment to your
effectiveness as a litigator as an insult. For that
reason, and without the advice of counsel, I have made
changes and offered a public apology to you on each of
those pages and also a link to an apology from the main
page. In addition I have posted your letter to
ensure that all readers have the benefit of your point of
view.
But the rest of your
points, in that you are reading a quote from a clearly
cited public document as being personal remarks by me has
me baffled. I trust that you may have been angry and not
fully considered the scope of your demands. Frankly,
asking me to remove material which is derived from public
documents is stepping way over the line and no journalist
worth their salt would ever agree to such. My
understanding of the law is that I may quote such
documents in whole or in part. If I am wrong, and I am
the first to admit that I am not a lawyer, I will remove
the material and apologize. But since your opinion on
these issues runs contrary to everything I have ever been
taught I will remove the material only after I confirm
that your position on the issue is correct.
Even more egregious is
your demand that I remove all references to you from the
web site. For example, a public letter which Mr.
Berger posted to InventNet mentions you. It has been on
the site for several years. Am I supposed to remove the
letter, or just your name. You are counsel of record, and
the case being dismissed or not, especially when such was
apparently dismissed because the junior party was
virtually broke, does not negate the fact you were named
in a RICO complaint and as such is newsworthy.
Like any good journalist I
do want to present the whole story. So in the interests
of fairness I am willing to post one document from you
that presents your side of the RICO complaint issue. As
always, I am more than willing to correct any errors of
fact, but so far you have not shown me any such errors.
I do thank you for
supplying the letter which Mr.
Neustel signed, for I had not seen it. Mr. Neustel was
adamant that he could no longer discuss the case or even
ISC. I have to say that I am familiar with Mr. Neustel's
writing style and this letter does not appear to have
been drafted by him. Considering what he had told me
about the case before the gag agreement went into effect
I have no choice except to think that he was coerced into
signing this document.
I suggest that you should
release Mr. Neustel from the gag agreement and allow him
to speak freely, without fear of retribution. Whether you
realize it or not your client, and you by association,
have threatened many people in the inventor community.
Threats cause everyone to distrust and resent both your
client and you. Your logging hundreds of hits on the
InventorEd site is an implied threat and that threat
caused me to drop many other tasks to research the
Neustel case - which in turn led to my reporting on the
RICO action.
A better approach would be
to invest more money in marketing ISC client's inventions.
What would it cost to raise the success rate from under 0.2%
to 1-3%? A few million a year, maybe five million?
Considering the total cash flow this would be a good
investment and would completely change public perception
of both the value of the services and the rather negative
image that threats to silence critics have created.
Last, my wife and I are
leaving for combination business - pleasure trip which
will last for three weeks. My phone will be forwarded to
the cell phone at least part of that time but I will not
be able to respond to you in as timely a manner. And web
site updates or posts will take longer but I will give
posting any statement you would care to make on the site
about the RICO issue priority.
Very truly yours,
Signed,
Ronald J. Riley www.InventorEd.org
Have you been Scammed? Find
out what to do here.
Please Notify Us Of Any Errors Of Fact - Click ErrorOfFact
Site Index - Contact
Us -© InventorEd, Inc.,
Page last revised 12-24-2005
|
