Patent, Trademark & Copyright : Law Office of Kloss, Stenger & LoTempio

Tweet of the week

Thanks to @Patent Wire for tweeting about the new pilot program where the first 3,000 applications related to green technologies will be examined by the USPTO on an accelerated basis. Go green!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments

What inventors need to know...

Clients have been asking me to write a blog post about companies providing invention promotion services and whether or not they can help inventors. I saw a law blog post today by IP Watchdog regarding a lawsuit filed by INVENTION SUBMISSION CORPORATION (dba Invent Help) in the United States Federal District Court for the Northern District of New York.

This case was filed against the corporate entity IP WATCHDOG INC and Eugene R. Quinn Jr. and Renee Quinn as individuals. Invent Help claims that their company has been irreparably injured by IP Watchdogs’ past false advertising, deceptive trade practices and defamatory portrayal of Invent Help and its inventor assistance services. One such example of alleged defamatory portrayal is stated in the complaint as:

"[IP Watchdog] state[s] that InventHelp's... invention submission model is to get inventors to spend large amounts of money for services of dubious quality."

Whether this particular invention promotion services company provides services of dubious quality or high quality in which an inventor can take advantage of is a question that may be argued in court. IP Watchdog blog stated, “Rest assured, I will vigorously defend [this case]." Remember the truth is an absolute defense in a defamation case. So are all his allegations true? Will we learn the truth? Will it go to trial? Cases like this are more likely to end in settlement.

I found an article written in 2004 by Bob Sullivan the technology correspondent for MSNBC.com entitled, "Got an invention? You, too, can be scammed" where he explored the vagaries of the invention industry and he told of how, FTC targeted this firm in the past, "

The Federal Trade Commission and various state authorities have taken several sweeping legal actions against invention firms, beginning with a 1994 settlement with Invention Submission Corp., one of the largest firms. In that deal, the firm agreed to pay $1.2 million to redress consumers without admitting to any wrongdoing."

The complaint is interesting because it essentially raises the same issues against IP Watchdog that have been raised against Invent Help in IP Watchdog's blog. Here's an excerpt from the complaint:

"[IP Watchdog] advertise and promote their competing inventor services on their blog in promotional pieces titled "Not All Invention Companies are Created Equal" and in a number of blog postings linked thereto including but not limited to "Beware Invent Help Press Releases","Avoiding Invent Help & Other Invention Scams", "My Position on Invent Help the UIA and Inventors Digest", "Quinn Resigns from UIA Over Invent Help concern", "How Inventors Can Avoid Scams, Traps and Raw Deals", "Falling Prey to Invention Submission Scams", and "No holes Barred: IPWatchdog Addresses Ethical Charges" as well as "Inventing" and a number of blog postings linked thereto. Each of these web pages features IP Watchdog's "Patent Pending Today" promotion of its Invent + Patent System. When the consumer clicks on the Defendants' promotion the consumer is taken to a IP Watchdog webpage explaining IP Watchdog's: a) Watchdog's: a) patentability search and opinion service and b) on-line service for generating a provisional patent application and instructions on "patent pending" submission to industry called the "Invent +Patent System."

Invent Help alleges that IP Watchdog draws people into his website by describing "scams" perpetrated by the invention submission companies. Invent Help further alleges that  "... IP Watchdog's invent + patent system allows [IP Watchdogs'] clients to submit 'inventions' that can be sold or licensed and that [IP Watchdog] can refer inventors to a 'reputable licensing and marketing company' who will do the licensing work that [Invent Help] claims to do rather than 'steal all of your money' like Plaintiff does." (see paragraph 25 of complaint).

If you go to the Invent Help web page entitled The Truth About InventHelp® - Avoid Invention Scams where they list FAQs about Spotting Inventor Fraud you will find they indicate "The law requires an invention company to give you an explanation of its track record in advance," while they say  "we're proud of our record and provide it to you in advance" they fail to list what their track record is on this page. I finally found it on a page entitled InventHelp® Client Invention Stories: Weed Thrasher, That was a curious place to put this nugget of information:

"From 2006-2008, we signed Submission Agreements with 5,692 clients. As a result of our services, 94 clients have received license agreements for their products, and 21 clients have received more money than they paid us for these services."

The law they are referring to is the The American Inventors Protection Act of 1999. This act established certain inventor rights rights when dealing with invention promoters. Before an invention promoter can enter into a contract with an inventor, it must disclose the following information about its business practices during the past five years:

• How many inventions it has evaluated;
• How many of those inventions got positive or negative evaluations;
  
• Its total number of customers;
  
• How many of those customers received a net financial profit from the promoter's services; and
  
• How many of those customers have licensed their inventions due to the promoter's services.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)

Tweet of the week

Thanks to @BarackObama for tweeting this week about a fee that would recover every penny loaned to Wall Street during the financial crisis and stop the reckless abuses that nearly caused the collapse of our financial system.

Do you think the American people will ever see any of that money again? I think the big financial firms are going to push through the massive bonuses. We'll see.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments

In a January 12, 2010 press release IBM reported that it was awarded more U.S. patents than any other company in the world for a 17th straight year,  breaking its own record by receiving 4,914 patents in 2009. The number of patents awarded to IBM was nearly four times that received by Hewlett-Packard and was more than the combined total patent allowances of Microsoft, Hewlett-Packard, Oracle, Apple, Accenture and Google.

Data provided by IFI Patent Intelligence indicated that South Korea’s Samsung Electronics Co came in second with 3,611 and Microsoft Corp., was awarded 2,906 patents to place third in the patent race. The figures clearly show IBM’s commitment to being the world's leader when it comes to filing new patent applications. The reason why is simple, they make a lot of money by protecting their innovation and exploiting their patent portfolio through licensing deals.

Steve Levine of Bloomberg.com reported that Christopher Andrews, a spokesman for the IBM said “We invest $6 billion annually in R&D and we continue to pursue patents for inventions that will advance IBM’s business strategies..."

2009 U.S. Patent Leaders*

1. IBM 4,914
2. Samsung 3,611
3. Microsoft 2,906
4. Canon 2,206
5. Panasonic 1,829
6. Toshiba 1,696
7. Sony 1,680
8. Intel 1,537
9. Seiko Epson 1,330
10. HP 1,273

* Data provided by IFI Patent Intelligence

In addition to filing patents to stop others from using their technology, IBM published almost 4,000 defensive publications so that others are precluded from filing patent applications on certain technology and in turn stopping IBM from using that technology. As a result this technology is open and free for anyone to use because it is in the public domain. Tom Colson the CEO of IP.com  stated in a recent blog post,

"By definition, defensive publishing is the practice of placing innovation into the public domain. Although the tactic is not new, when used hand in hand with patents and trade secrets, it lets companies efficiently build and maintain competitive IP portfolios."

IBM reports, "IBM released these inventions through publication as part of its commitment to improving patent quality. Consequently, the inventions are freely available in a public database of prior art and can be cited by patent offices in limiting the scope of patent applications. The company's publication effort may also spur follow-on innovation, which enables dynamic business growth."  

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)

Take a look at this new invention... will it replace gas powered cars or cure cancer?

• Email This
• Print
• Comments