InventorEd's Invention Promoter Caution List
Special Page for Invention Submission Corporation (ISC)
Every Questionable Company
Per Mr. Friedman's demand letter I hereby retract the "nastiest pit bull types I have seen" and "legal thugs" remarks. I hold the practice of law in the highest regard. Any inventor values litigators, for they are generally the only way we get paid. I associate with many litigators, generally those who practice in intellectual property. I often characterize them as "legal thugs" or "pit bulls" and also a number of other similar descriptions and I have never had one react to such in a negative way before. In fact, all of the litigators I know see themselves as hired mercenaries and they have viewed such remarks as a tribute to their skills, their ability to bring an opponent to their knees, and such comments have always brought a smile to their faces. To give Mr. Friedman's views full and equal exposure I have posted his demand letter at: www.InventorEd.org/caution/isc/friedmandemand.html
I constantly hear about threats from invention promoters which are little more than attempts to stop the public from discussing these companies rather questionable business practices and their dismal success rates which hovers from less than 0.2% for ISC to ZERO for many others. In any event, ISC has a long history of threatening those who would dare try to educate inventors about their rather poor success rate or otherwise spread the word about the multitude of reasons that inventors should avoid these companies.
Several years ago I started creating web based educational resources for inventors which included the "Caution" pages. The caution pages list a bunch of companies who try to sell services to inventors and their known associates with links to FTC actions which have been taken against those companies or individuals. These are all companies which it would behoove inventors to take extra special steps to avoid doing business with. www.InventorEd.org/caution/
Some time ago Advent sent me a threatening letter. To facilitate giving their position on these issues the widest possible audience I gave them their own section on the caution pages at www.InventorEd.org/caution/advent/ and published their letter and my response. I also sent the same information to other inventor advocates and the FTC.
I never really understood why, but when I told their attorney what I had done for him and his client he did not react very well.
Later I received a call from Advent's patent attorney objecting to his listing. I offered to post any comments he would care to make on the web site but he declined to take advantage of the opportunity. I reported the offer and his unwillingness to take advantage of it on the web site.
I received yet another call from him early this summer about a client of his who decided to withdraw after discussing patent quality issues associated with invention promoters as a group with me. This invention promoter became quite agitated when he heard periodic beeps on the line. It seems he was not as comfortable talking under these circumstances. I made the same offer I had previously, that he state his position in writing and I would publish same but he declined once again.
I have heard that ISC threatens many people, including actually posting a public threat on InventNet some time ago. But so far they have not sent any threats to InventorEd. They have logged hundreds of hits on the InventorEd web site over the last two months. Such an interest in the web site is of coarse an implied threat and I have reported their interest in the special ISC section of the caution pages at www.InventorEd.org/caution/isc/ .
ISC's legal (I retract "thugs" and appoligize, now using:) eagles, Friedman Law, have been visiting the caution pages a great deal. 110 hits in August and 130 (as of 9-15) (now in excess of 300 as of 9-22-2000) so far for September. I have brought this to the attention of Nader's people, the Reporters Committee for Free Press, the ACLU, and other organizations who have an interest in the First Amendment. Since I have presented the information in a somewhat different way than Mike Neustel did, and the site has been evaluated by a number of people for libel and passed with flying colors, I think it will be a real stretch for ISC to find a suitable cause for action.
In addition, I have been writing professionally for more than twenty years and I am a member of a number of journalism organizations. The bottom line is that since I have no business relationship with ISC either present or past (as did Mike Neustel), and that I am a practicing journalist, any suit by ISC is going to draw a great deal of media attention and is also well positioned to draw serious fire from organizations which defend the First Amendment.
In any event I would like to give ISC the benefit of the same public exposure which I gave Advent. It is foolish for ISC to waste time and money sending out an endless number of threatening letters when a few representative examples posted on the web would do an equally good job of making their feelings about public discussion of their business well known in the inventor community.
So I am offering to publish any of ISC's letters to inventors in the ISC section of the caution pages which seek to chill the letter recipient's first amendment rights. I urge anyone who has received such letters to send a copy to either caution@InventorEd.org or fax the letter to (810) 655-8832. I am also interested in your response if you sent one.