84 Comments

1. Independent Inventors Beware

   The USPTO has urged independent inventors to beware of commercial invention-promotion services. The patent office warns people to examine the disclosures that invention promoters are now required to give to potential clients. They include: How many inv…

   Trackback by Patently Obvious — April 11, 2004 #

2. Dear Sir / Madam

   Could you send me a list of e-mail contact details for reputable invention promotion companies in the USA - I would like to forward me information to them by e-mail.

   Kind Regards

   Max Lourens
   Ad-in-a-bowl
   South Africa

   Comment by Max — September 15, 2004 #

3. I have paid Advet Products Development about $1,500 to have two of my ideas “evaluated”. I signed a contract with a finance co. “Triad” and still have several payments pending. So far I have received a “phase 1″ info package on my first idea. After reading about the complaints agains Advent, I am not going to pay another dime. What obligations do I now have to Triad? Will my credit be attacked? Can I get my money back for false advertising (scam) ? What should I do?

   Comment by jfilep — November 10, 2004 #

4. I AN LOOKING FOR AN ATTORNEY TO FILE A LAW SUIT AGAINST APD I PAID THEM ALMOST 11000.00
   FOR NOTHING
   IF YOU WANT TO JOIN ME LET ME KNOW

   Comment by agustin aguirre — December 21, 2004 #

5. Re Advent Product Development;

   You might check their history via any search engine using the term “NISI”.

   Also, go to http://www.inventored.org/caution/extreme

   Once there review some of the links under their name.

   Unfortunately unless you did not have capacity to contract; were drunk; and/or mentally disabled when you signed their contract or you have substantial evidence of a breach of contract you’ve been unable to correct, your chances of getting any money or satisfaction are slim and none.

   Below are some intermediate solutions for you:

   1. Read this before contemplating visiting an attorney: http://www.inventored.org/SLAPP

   Visit an attorney with contract in hand and relevant documents.

   2. Fill out a complaint online at the FTC’s complaint page: http://www.ftc.gov/index.html

   Some of us are hopeful 2005 will see a new “Project Mousetrap” sting launched by the FTC.

   3. Download, fill out and snail mail to the US Patent and Trademark Office a complaint notice via: http://www.uspto.gov/web/forms/2048.pdf

   4. Read complaints on them at:
   http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/com/iip/data.html#LicensePromotion

   5. Read the following short articles:
   (a) BULLIES,HANDLING OF
   http://www.inventored.org/bully
   (b) SIC CODE SCAMS
   http://www.inventored.org/SIC-code-scam/
   (c)”GOT AN INVENTION, YOU TOO CAN BE SCAMMED”: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4863987

   In the future, carefully make a list of questions one asks invention promoters before signing their contracts per the “American Inventors Protection Act” of 1999 as found at:

   http://www.wenderoth.com/statute.htm (once there, run cursor down to “Section 4102, Integrity of Invention Promotion Services.”)

   If they refuse to reveal answers to those questions, notify both the FTC and Patent Office via their complaint forms.

   Comment by PBallou — December 28, 2004 #

6. I to have been taken advantage of
   just last night so called VP Bob Condin called me 8:22 and advised me to pay up or forget about it.
   He told me that he was sure the invention would be done this year that it was to bad that I would
   lose out. Then hung up on me. I tryed to talk to him two more times and he continued to hang up on me. I now have a call in witing for a reply.

   Comment by Jerome Denk — January 27, 2005 #

7. I want to know if you all know that invent-tech is a scam why aren’t they shut down!!!! they took me for a ride of almost 6.000.00$ i’m mad at myself because my product is a life saving product, but most of all i could of hired an attorney to do it right!!! why does our goverment let this keep happing, maybe its time to call good morning america, or 20/20 or someone big to open up!!!!!!!

   Comment by wondering why? — February 24, 2005 #

8. For a comprehensive list of people and companies who either have been busted for fraud or who have complaints and similar mo to those who are known to be questionable players see http://www.InventorEd.org/caution/

   Comment by Ronald Riley — March 26, 2005 #

9. What is the status on the Davison vs FTC suit ?

   Comment by Tom Bay — April 14, 2005 #

10. InventorEd has now published all the unpublished complaints made to the USPTO. We sought and received this information under Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) statutes. Invention Submission Corporation had the greatest number of unpublished complaints.

    http://www.inventored.org/caution/promoter-complaints

    http://www.inventored.org/caution/isc/

    InventorEd made the FOIA request as a result of one of ISC’s attorneys, Brian M Adrian’s requesting that we give them additional quality time.

    http://www.inventored.org/caution/friedman/.

    Ronald J. Riley http://www.rjriley.com/contact/

    Also President http://www.PIAUSA.org & Executive Director http://www.InventorEd.org

    Former advisory board president of the Alliance for American Innovation 1995-2002.

    Comment by Ronald J Riley — April 14, 2005 #

11. Regarding the question about the FTC action against Davision and Associates, FTC litigator Steve Balster (216) 263-3401 is in charge of this action. He is interested in hearing from new victims, as am I.

    Ronald J. Riley http://www.rjriley.com/contact/

    Also President http://www.PIAUSA.org & Executive Director http://www.InventorEd.org

    Former advisory board president of the Alliance for American Innovation 1995-2002.

    Comment by Ronald J Riley — April 14, 2005 #

12. I beleive Invent-Tech has taken me for a ride also. let me along for about a week telling me what a great idea i have and then the last time i talked to Gene Dumett he tells me my idea is refused and just don’t know why, bye. lol. if i see my idea riding down the road on a vehicle i will not be happy!

    Comment by josh hammond — May 11, 2005 #

13. I’m so thankful I came to this web-site!
    Just now this very second as I type I was considering on paying Daniel Moodie from Invet-Tech for my idea I just spoke to him today at work & yes he was talking me into paying them $ 800.00 to $1000.00 to get me started. I don’t know but something in my gut was telling me everything sound to good to be true, so i did some research and found various sites that tell me about invention scams. I’m thankful but then
    again pist-off! Man I’m going to call Him tomorrow & give him a piece of my mind! I kind of thought it was kind of suspicious, the first day I spoke to Him I asked if He could sign a docoument that I had saying everything was “CLEAN”! I faxed Him my info. But when He did’nt want to fax back what I had asked for, that really raised a red flag. What do you think I should tell him?

    Comment by Rosa Zamarripa — June 20, 2005 #

14. does mico soft help get something patten a computer game

    Comment by diamond — July 6, 2005 #

15. I am working with Invent Tech any news about these people and if they are scammers

    Comment by Janene Davis — August 15, 2005 #

16. See http://www.InventorEd.org/caution/intent-tech/ to learn about this unsavory company and then see http://www.InventorEd.org/scam/ to file complaints with all the appropiate authorities.

    Ronald J Riley, Exec. Dir.
    http://www.InventorEd.org

    Comment by Ronald Riley — August 16, 2005 #

17. Sorry for the typo:

    See http://www.InventorEd.org/caution/invent-tech/ to learn about this unsavory company and then see http://www.InventorEd.org/scam/ to file complaints with all the appropiate authorities.

    Ronald J Riley, Exec. Dir.
    http://www.InventorEd.org

    Comment by Ronald Riley — August 16, 2005 #

18. I contacted Invent-Tech received paperwork from them then tossed it out. About two weeks later I was contacted by a fellow from the company. He was real ecited about me sending them my idea as soon as possible. So I printed out the page from the website filled it out and sent it to them. He called me back telling me I had a unique Idea and asked me more about it. I told him and he asked questions about what I did for a liveing and such. Then I started looking on the Internet finding lots of negative info on them. Sure enough he called me again and this time he mentioned the amount of money they would want from me and that a package was on it’s way with a DVD and further paperwork. I am afraid of them stealing my idea but I see I am lucky compared to folks who sent money into them. I read somewhere that it is not your idea that they want but the money you give them to supposedly promote it for you. Even if they are not a fraud they should say up front about the money I really did think that the money they received came from the outside companies that paid them royalties to harvest idea from people and not from the inventors themselves. Oh well feel bad for those who sent them money, and worry for myself now that my idea is hangin out in the wind now.

    Comment by Danny — August 16, 2005 #

19. CAVEAT EMPTOR - BUYER BEWARE

    Regarding Davison Design and Development

    I wanted to share with all who desire to use this company of their business practices. I sent a certified letter to the President, George M. Davidson, III. in April 2005. The only response I have received after the letter was sent is a compliance letter that was sent to my old address and then forwarded to my current home address because I had moved. The letter was sent after the company refused my requests to contact me in writing and no action has been taken by the company to reimburse me or settle my complaint. My email complaints were met with telephonic, verbal “strong arming” by Tony Larussa (sp?) and Mr. Valkanas (sp?). They made statements to my wife, stating “I did not know what I was talking about and did not know what I was doing.” The initial response by Michael Leonardi, Director of New Products, was a negative “sigh” and he stated he would to talk to his engineers about the poor quality of their design and craftsmanship. Their marketing mock up was probably designed and completed in less than 30 minutes during one of their 8-10 hour day business production runs. I never signed off on their marketing design, therefore their contractal obligation was never fullfilled. I have enclosed a link to my website that shows what you can accomplish for less than $300.00 and a little ingenuity. Be advised once they have your money it is all downhill from there.

    marketlaunchers.com/blackburn.html

    I have enclosed the copy of my letter I sent to Davison that clearly details my complaint it also shows a format as to how to write a letter if you have been scammed by a inventing promotion firm. You can mull thru the technical information as to my invention, but the most disappointing aspect of dealing with Davison is that they promise you the world, they hide behind organizational charts and creative marketing brochures and that they are able to legally prey on the general public. This company is a true charlatan. They are all fluff and no stuff. I hired Davison to meet my marketing goals and do this work for me. I work over 45 hrs per week and have a family to take care of (like most of us do). If you spend this type of money with an organization you would expect them to roll out the red carpet and do a great job. I have been in the insurance industry now for almost 9 years and my customers spend a lot of money on auto insurance and you had better believe I bend over backwards to take care of them-this is a service I am contractually obligated to do and do well in order to retain them as policy holders.’ My invention is even designed to save all of us money on our auto insurance if we have a minor at fault accident. I recommend that before dealing with this company you resort back to your childhood and reread the story, “The Emporer’s New Clothes.” I have spent $13,433.00 with a company that espouses “Integrity” in it’s definition of Inventegration (TM) business model. If there is law firm willing to take this company on and make them truly a legitimate business operation, please contact me. To all pontential inventors… please do not fall into the financial chasm of invention promotion firms. They do not work. I have called and verified with the FTC (Federal Trade Commission) that they are no longer in litigation with the federal government and their case has been settled. At the time of my letter though, with the information I had, I thought they were still in litigation with the federal government which is no longer the case. They have, however, been fined by the FTC and in 1997 they made millions but only 30k for their clients. Please read all reports on this great website and check out the USPTO and FTC about invention promotion firms. Also check out http://www.UIA.com, http://www.InventEd.org and http://www.marketlaunchers.com. These are legitimate companies that are really out to help inventors fulfill their dreams and financial goals.

    All the best in your dreams and endeavors… invention helps helps make us a great country.

    Norman G.

    *here is a copy of the certified letter*

    April 20, 2005

    Davison Design and Development
    RIDC Park
    595 Alpha Drive
    Pittsburgh, PA 15238-2911

    Re: Termination of Representation & Demand for Refund

    Dear G. M. Davison, III, CEO of Davison Design and Development:

    This letter is to inform you that I want all services by your company to terminate immediately. I no longer desire to work with your company for the following reasons:

    1. IT CAN BE SHOWN VERY LITTLE TIME AND CONCERTED EFFORT WENT INTO THE DESIGN OF “THE PLATE BUMPER.” YOUR DESIGN TEAM SIMPLY TOOK TWO ONE- INCH DOME BUMPERS AND MATED THEM WITH WOOD SCREWS. NEOPRENE RUBBER SAMPLES SUCH AS THE DOME BUMPERS CAN EASILY BE ASCERTAINED AT NO COST AND THE WOOD SCREWS CAN BE PURCHASED AT AN ESTIMATED COST OF $1.50 AT ANY LOCAL HARDWARE STORE. I HAVE BEEN WRITING ESTIMATES ON DAMAGED VEHICLES FOR THE LAST EIGHT YEARS AND I HAVE YET TO SEE WOOD SCREWS IMPLEMENTED AS FASTENERS ON ANY AUTOMOBILE. IT CAN BE PROVED THAT VERY LITTLE CAPITAL WENT INTO THE DESIGN PROTOTYPE YOU WANTED ME TO APPROVE.

    IT CAN BE SHOWN THE VIRTUAL PROTOTYPE YOU WANTED TO SEND TO EUROSPORT DAYTONA LOOKS LIKE AN “ELECTRICAL APPLIANCE LEVELING MOUNT OR BASE.” THE DEPICTION YOU HAVE “DESIGNED” HAS NUMEROUS PATENTS ON IT. PLEASE, ALSO REMEMBER, PATENTS 5,904,386 (MAY 18, 1997-BUCHMAN) AND D422,542 (APRIL 11, 2000 -RICHTER). THE AFOREMENTIONED PATENTS ARE VERY SIMILAR IN DESIGN AND SCOPE TO THE PROTOTYPE YOU SENT ME TO APPROVE. DID I NOT SEND YOUR COMPANY NUMEROUS CONCEPT DRAWINGS AND IDEAS? DID I NOT SEND YOUR COMPANY THE APPLICABLE PATENT NUMBERS THAT MAY CONFLICT WITH MY CURRENT DESIGN 0N 2/18/04?

    I PAID YOUR COMPANY TO DESIGN A PROTOTYPE THAT WILL NOT CONFLICT WITH OTHER PATENTED PRIOR WORKS OF ART. DOESN’T YOUR ORGANIZATION HAVE ENGINEERS AND PATENT AGENTS ON STAFF? IT IS OBVIOUS YOUR ORGANIZATION DOES NOT HAVE QUALITY CONTROL MANAGEMENT INCORPORATED INTO THE INVENTEGRATION BUSINESS MODEL.

    IT CAN BE SHOWN THAT I SENT YOUR COMPANY A CRUDE DIGITAL PROTOYPE OF MY IDEA CONCEPT THAT YOU NOT ONLY RECYCLED WITHOUT CREATIVITY BUT THEN COPIED IT POORLY IN YOUR DESIGN ATTEMPT. FOR EXAMPLE, THE USE OF WOOD SCREWS INSTEAD OF EITHER TRUSS OR FLAT HEX HEAD AUTO FASTENERS. THE USE OF SHARP- ENDED WOOD SCREWS WOULD DEFEAT THE PURPOSE OF THE DESIGN OF MY INVENTION. DID I NOT SEND YOU INFORMATION REGARDING THE BENEFITS OF THIS INVENTION? THE PURPOSE OF THE INVENTION IS TO PREVENT DAMAGE TO BUMPER COVERS DURING LOW IMPACT COLLISIONS. YOUR DESIGN, AS SHOWN, WOULD HELP MINIMIZE AND POSSIBLY PREVENT DAMAGE TO THE BUMPER OF THE OPPOSING VEHICLE BUT THE SHARP- ENDED, WOOD SCREWS WOULD THEN CAUSE PUNCTURE DAMAGE TO THE BUMPER OF THE VEHICLE IT WAS FASTENED TO ON IMPACT.

    2. IT CAN BE SHOWN THAT YOUR COMPANY IS ATTEMPTING TO DESIGN AND MARKET A CONCEPT TOO CLOSE IN SCOPE WITH OTHER PRIOR ART AND PATENTS. WHY WOULD YOU PLACE A CLIENT AND A SUCCESSFUL THIRD PARTY COMPANY LIKE EUROSPORT DAYTONA IN A POSITION WHERE WE CAN BE SUED FOR BREACHES OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY. DON’T YOU HAVE A VESTED, FUTURE FINANCIAL INTEREST IN THE INVENTIONS OF YOUR CLIENTS? OUR CONTRACT STATES YOU RECEIVE 10% OF ANY LICENSING AGREEMENT. DON’T YOU HAVE PATENT SUPPORT CONSULTANTS AND A PATENT ATTORNEY ON STAFF TO REVIEW YOUR PROTOTYPES BEFORE THEY ARE PRESENTED TO MAJOR ORGANIZATIONS?

    3. PLEASE ASK YOURSELF THESE QUESTIONS:

    A. DID MY CLIENT, NORMAN G., FULFILL HIS OBLIGATION UNDER THE TERMS OF THE CONTRACT? HE PAID $685.00 FOR THE INITIAL PRODUCT SEARCH AND PAID $12,748.00 FOR PRODUCT DESIGN AND MARKETING.

    B. DID DAVISON DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT FULLFILL THEIR OBLIGATION UNDER THE CONTRACT?

    C. CAN MR. MICHAEL LEONARDI, VP OF NEW PRODUCTS, BE DEPOSED UNDER OATH FOR STATING THAT BOTH THE PADDED LICENSE FRAME SCREW AND THE PADDED LICENSE PLATE FRAME WOULD BE INCLUDED IN THE AMOUNT OF $12,748.00 THAT WAS PAID YOUR COMPANY. MR. LEONARDI STATED THAT IT WAS APPROVED AND WOULD BE ADDED TO THE CONTRACT THAT I SIGNED ON 03/04/2004, ONLY TO SAY A YEAR LATER THAT IT WAS NOT INCLUDED NOW BECAUSE HIS SUPERVISOR SAID SO. MR. LEONARDI AND I AGREED THAT BOTH PROJECTS WOULD BE VERY SIMPLE TO DESIGN AND MARKET AND THAT BOTH WOULD BE INCLUDED IN THE ABOVE AMOUNT. MR. LEONARDI AGREED TO THIS IN ORDER TO PROCEED WITH THE CONTRACT. THIS CAN BE PROVED AS A DECEPTIVE PRACTICE, ACCORDING TO THE 1999 INVENTOR’S PROTECTION ACT.

    D. CAN YOU SWEAR, UNDER OATH, THAT YOUR COMPANY WAS TO FILE A PROVISIONAL PATENT APPLICATION WITH THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE FOR THE PADDED LICENSE PLATE FRAME ? THIS WAS ALSO SUPPOSED TO BE INCLUDED IN THE AMOUNT I PAID YOUR COMPANY.
    WHERE DID THIS MONEY GO?

    E. CAN YOU SWEAR, UNDER OATH, THAT MR. TONY VALKANAS, DIRECTOR OF NEW PRODUCTS, ANSWERED ALL OF MY QUESTIONS REGARDING THE SUCCESS RATE OF YOUR ORGANIZATION IN WRITING AS I REQUESTED ON 7/14/2004 . BOTH MR. VALKANAS AND MR. LEONARDI STATED IN A CONFERENCE CALL THAT YOU ARE NO LONGER IN LITIGATION WITH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WHEN IN FACT YOU ARE.

    4. IT CAN BE SHOWN THAT I FILED AND PRESENTED EITHER VIA FAX, EMAIL AND/OR AIRBORNE EXPRESS NUMEROUS DOCUMENTS THAT INCLUDED THE PADDED LICENSE PLATE FRAME. THE INITIAL PATENT RESEARCH THAT I PAID $685.00 FOR EVEN INCLUDES THE PADDED LICENSE PLATE FRAME IN THE REPORT.

    5. IT CAN BE SHOWN THAT DAVISON DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT SHOWS LITTLE REGARD AND RESPECT TO IT’S CLIENTS’ FINANCIAL FUTURE. IT CAN BE SHOWN THAT YOUR COMPANY HAS AN APPARENT HISTORY OF QUESTIONABLE BUSINESS PRACTICES. YOUR ORGANIZATION HAS BEEN AND IS CURRENTLY IN TROUBLE WITH BOTH FEDERAL AND STATE REGULATORS. “OPERATION MOUSETRAP” SHOWS: Davison & Associates: File No. 962 3310 / U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania, in Pittsburgh, Civil Action No. 97-1278 / Steven Balster, FTC Cleveland Regional Office, 216-263-3455 YOUR COMPANY ALSO HAS HAD IT’S FINANCIAL ASSESTS FROZEN ACCORDING TO THE FOLLOWING LEGAL DOCKET TITLE:

    UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
    WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
    FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION,
    CIVIL ACTION NO.
    Plaintiff,
    v.
    BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF EX PARTE
    MOTION FOR TEMPORARY
    RESTRAINING ORDER FREEZING
    DAVISON & ASSOCIATES, INC.,
    a corporation,
    ASSETS, APPOINTING RECEIVER,
    GEORGE M. DAVISON III, individually,
    EXPEDITING DISCOVERY, AND
    THOMAS DOWLER

    I DEMAND THAT ALL INFORMATION I PROVIDED TO YOU, INCLUDING WRITTEN DOCUMENTS, SKETCHES AND PROTOTYPE PICTURES BE IMMEDIATELY RETURNED TO ME IN 14 BUSINESS DAYS. I ALSO DEMAND TO BE REIMBURSED IN THE AMOUNT OF $12,748.00 THAT I HAVE ALREADY PAID YOUR ORGANIZATION BE RETURNED WITHIN 14 BUSINESS DAYS FROM THE DATE OF THIS LETTER. THIS IS MY THIRD WRITTEN ATTEMPT TO BE REIMBURSED.

    I AM PREPARED TO FILE A WRITTEN COMPLAINT WITH THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF BOTH THE STATES OF PENNSYLVANNIA AND VIRGINIA, THE FEDEREAL TRADE COMMISSION ,THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE AND TO WTAE. PLEASE DIRECT ALL WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE TO THE ABOVE ADDRESS.

    SINCERELY,

    NORMAN GLENN

    Comment by Glenn Blackburn — September 25, 2005 #

20. Has anyone ever dealt with “Patent $ Trademark Institute of America”? I don’t want to be ripped off. Let me know, are they good or bad?
    Thanks to all who respond.

    Comment by Karl Mitchell — October 20, 2005 #

21. Are there any reputable prototype firms out there?

    I recently approached Davison about my idea but I found their sales tactics to be very pushy and their “Director’s of New Products” to be idiots and really know nothing anything about what they selling. It does seem to all be scripted.

    I want to find a company that will take on my idea and help me develop it into something that can sell. Since Davison cannot do this who can.?

    Comment by Jim — October 23, 2005 #

22. I almost used Davison Design to create a project for me.. This site saved me a lot of grief. My mom subsequently got scammed by an invention company. They kept wanting more money. She refused to pay more than the original 500 bucks to create the drawings. This company sounded like it was legitament. I will refuse to share any ideas withthem. I will handle things some other way better informed now. I went on line to make sure they didn’t have complaints before sending any money. I wish I did this before sending my idea. UGH!!!

    Comment by Laurie — October 24, 2005 #

23. Has anyone been succesful at getting a refund from Davison. I paid for my original research and now I am just figuring out that I have been ripped off.

    The research they sent was uttlery disgusting. I can’t believe I paid for this garbage. I did a google search on some the things listed in the report and discovered that they are just print outs of companies website. And the patents they printed out are worthless to me.

    Just taking print outs, a templated letter, and putting a fancy cover on them is not worth the amount I spent with them.

    This whole company is nothing but a con. Buyer beware. Don’t make the same mistake I did.

    Comment by Jason — October 25, 2005 #

24. Hey, here’s a tip for Glen, from back in September….stay away from PTI….of all the sites listed here, PTI has the most complaints and I now have personal experience with them…here’s how it goes….
    submit…they say “wow” great idea!!
    give them $795, they say thanks, things are good, you’ll be rich soon!….give them another $5000, and then they call once more (emphasis on once) and say thanks, you’re going to trade shows, and then you wont here from them again until you start badgering them about legal pursuit…regardless how good your idea is….they will try to wait until any patent or patent pending idea has expired and then steal your idea and all your royalties. my advice….get your patent pending and start from scratch yourself, you wouldnt believe the power of writing letters to the indutry leaders that you are trying to pursuade.

    Comment by Craig Kallenbach — October 27, 2005 #

25. In response to glens comment about Davison Design and Development:

    Did davison ever reply to you? I also found another site that shows what kind of work they do.

    http://www.yourimagematters.co.uk/davisons/davison-inventegration.htm

    Comment by Drew — October 27, 2005 #

26. Hello all,

    I stumbled upon this site while researching compalints against Davison. I am so surprised by the number of unsattisfied customers this company has. How do they stay in business?

    If anyone has’nt already check out what others are trying to do to get back at Davison. I found one guy saying that instead of reporting them the FTC to report them to the FBI.

    http://inved.org/pipermail/inventors-l_inved.org/2005-October/008274.html

    Good Luck All….

    Comment by Bob Stevens — October 28, 2005 #

27. I would be interested in joining a class action lawsuit against Davison. My husband and I paid Davison 11,500 dollars over the past few years to develop our ideas and have really seen nothing in the way progress.

    I really should have done my research about this company before doing business with them.

    Comment by Kristy — October 30, 2005 #

28. The FBAA seems to allow you to put up whatever you want about your company just as long as you pay for it.

    They offer a dispute form on their site. Let’s let them know how feel about Davison.

    http://fbaa.us/filedispute.htm

    Comment by Kristy — October 30, 2005 #

29. I am waiting for the verdict by a Federal judge in December or January 06. Mr. Tom Bay has found a company who will take Davison on in a class action lawsuit if the decision is not in the favor all the inventors’ that have been taken by them. Myerson and O’neil in Philadelphia, PA. Jack Meyerson #: 215-972-1376
    They will work for 40% of the total return.

    Thanks

    Glenn

    Comment by Glenn Blackburn — November 10, 2005 #

30. I’ve just submitted my idea to Davidson. After reading these reviews, I seriously considering breaking all ties with them. Is their any other company out there whose trustworthy of such inventions? I would appreciate the info a great deal. thanks too the reviews, I saved some money!

    Comment by Natasha — January 9, 2006 #

31. For those that submitted an alleged complaint on this blog, please email your reasons for such to Compliance@davison54.com. Davison has and will continue to maintain the highest customer care program possible. We have just discovered this blog and are concerned. We attempt to understand and deal with each individual personality that contacts us. We are contacted by tens of thousands of inventors per year. Therefore, dealing with each individual personality is difficult. We also understand that competitors of ours post false and misleading information on blogs in hopes of diverting business.

    Comment by Compliance Department — January 16, 2006 #

32. I submitted an idea to Patent & Trademark Institute, and they have responded by telling me a had a good idea and asking if I was interested in a contract with them for $850.00 (this would get me a scaled down analyzes package) or 1295.00 (for an 72 point analyzes, very indebt package). I am leery about sending money to anyone; I don’t want to get ripped of. So I am in search of any feedback regarding this company. I have read the one complaint about the company from Jason on October 25th. Is there anyone else with information about this company? Is there any company out there that is trust worthy? Any information would be great.

    Comment by Dorothy — January 18, 2006 #

33. I have done some research on companies that say they will research and patent your idea. I have found that the best web site to go on is the Better Business Bureau (www.bbb.org)and you can search the company before you think about dealing with them. For example The Patent & Trademark Institute has an unsatisfactory report with the BBB and there for I would not deal with them. I have found a number of companies that are members of the BBB and have excellent feed back by the BBB. For example it would be worth while to check ou…Patents & More, Inc.
    3356 Station Court Lawrenceville, GA
    or
    AMERICAN PATENT and TRADEMARK LAW CENTER
    12702 Via Cortina Del Mar, CA

    If you are considering a company to deal with secure a written estimate of all potential fees.
    * Carefully read and understand the terms of the contract and make sure all verbal agreements and guarantees are put in writing.
    * Have your own attorney or agent review any agreement before signing it.
    * Check with the Better Business Bureau for a report on the company.

    As of January 2000, The American Inventor’s Protection Act of 1999 provided new protection for inventors: the invention promoter must disclose in writing the number of positive and negative evaluations of inventions they have given over a five-year period, and disclose their customer’s success in receiving net financial profit and license agreements as a direct result of the invention promotion services. Customers harmed by failure to make required disclosures or by any false or fraudulent representation by the invention promoter can sue to recover statutory damages of up to $5,000, or actual damages.

    Just some suggestions, watch out for those SCAMS!

    Comment by Ben — January 19, 2006 #

34. The following information was found on the BBB regarding DAVISON……..

    Customer Experience

    When evaluating complaint information, please consider the company’s size and volume of business. The number of complaints filed against the company may not be as important as the type of complaints and how the company handled them. The Bureau processed a total of 125 complaints about this company in the last 36 months, our standard reporting period. Of the total 125 complaints in the last 36 months, 41 of those were closed in the last 12 months.

    Complaints Concerned
    Advertising Issues: 7
    Outcome of all complaints -
    Resolved: 7

    Sales Practice Issues: 33
    Outcome of all complaints -
    Resolved: 30; Administratively Closed: 2; No Response:
    1

    Delivery Issues: 2
    Outcome of all complaints -
    Resolved: 2

    Service Issues: 43
    Outcome of all complaints -
    Resolved: 41; Administratively Closed: 2

    Product Issues: 7
    Outcome of all complaints -
    Resolved: 7

    Refund or Exchange Issues: 14
    Outcome of all complaints -
    Resolved: 14

    Contract Issues: 19
    Outcome of all complaints -
    Resolved: 19

    LEGAL ACTION: In July 1997, The Federal Trade Commission filed a civil action against Davison & Associates alleging violations of the FTC Act seeking a permanent injunction and other equitable relief including restitution for consumers.

    The Complaint alleges, in part, that Davison & Associates represented that it has successfully marketed many inventions ideas, that those purchasing its services have a good chance of realizing financial gain, that the company prepares objective and expert analysis of marketability and that it has a network of companies with whom it regularly negotiates successful licensing agreements.

    The complaint alleges that in fact, virtually all of Davison & Associates’ customers have lost their entire investment, that the company has not successfully marketed the invention ideas of many customers, does not prepare objective and expert marketability analysis and does not have a vast network of companies with whom it works.

    In response, the company stated, in part, that Davison & Associates does not inform their clients that they offer an investment service, does not state that there is a good chance of realizing financial gain, does not offer any analysis of marketability and does not inform their customers that is regularly negotiates successful licensing agreements. Davison & Associates states that its literature and agreements clearly Inform customers of its services and that they make every
    effort to inform their customers of the services properly.

    The FTC civil action remains pending.

    Comment by Dorothy — January 19, 2006 #

35. IAM HAPPY AND SAD AT THE SAME TIME . IAM IN THE SECOND STAGE WITH DAVISON. THEY INFORMED ME THEY FOUND A COMPANY FOR MY INVENTION.IAM WAITING FOR LETTER FROM THEM AS TO THE NEXT PHASE.IAM GLAD I FOUND THIS SITE .I WISH I WOULD HAVE FOUND THIS SITE BEFORE I SPENT $700.00. I WILL USE ALL SITES LISTED HERE. MAYBE I WILL HAVE TO PART WAY’S AFTER DOING MORE RESEARCH. THANK YOU!

    Comment by MIKE — January 19, 2006 #

36. I have made the initial payment to Davison for my idea but decided to do more research before committing to any more payments. I have read a lot of complaints and have seen so much poor grammar, spelling, typos, etc. it is dismaying. Also, all the complaints seem to be centered on the fact that Davison asks for money. Well, they can’t run their business without money coming in and their business is to be the middle man between the inventor and the manufacturer. You could do everything on your own and it could cost you more money than it would with Davison and you might still not find a company who wants to buy your product. Another thing that’s troubling about so many of these complaints is that people will say they stopped going through the process with Davison because they figured Davison were scam artists but that later Davison ripped off their ideas. Well, if Davison was able to rip off your idea and market it then maybe they really would have been able to market your product and get you paid if you hadn’t backed out. Also, apparently they have licensed a number of actual products so they can’t be intentionally robbing everybody blind. If, however, they are lying about any success in their history then that is certainly grounds for a lawsuit. Maybe they really are intentionally scamming people but the majority of the complaints seem to come from those who backed out before they could’ve found out whether their idea would’ve been profiyable or not. I will still do some more research before committing to any more financial outlay.

    Comment by Christian — January 20, 2006 #

37. Well that person Name Christian sounds like a complainer to me. People are having legitimate complaints and he is trying to complaint about their spelling. My story is similar. One day while I was watching Television I saw a commercial about Davison Invention Corporation and how much they could do for you, so to make a long story short I started to inquire. I wrote the company and they wrote me back. At first, everything was so great. They wrote me back and said my idea was great and the next step is to do a patent search. The patent search would cost $785. They sent me brochure with products that looks like a bunch of junk. No light bulb yet. The patent search turned out OK. The next step would be the design and marketing stage, then the proposal to various companies. This would cost me around $2000 - $10,000 depending on how complicated the item was. They wrote and stated my price would be 10,000. I could not believe this. I told the man that this was not a complicated item and that I had already design and made the item. I wanted them to make it look a little more professional for me because I did not have the fancy computer programs and equipment. They offer to reduce the price.
    Time went on and they wrote back with the first company proposal. The first company they would make a proposal to a company called P A. Tried to look them up on the Internet and could not find them. I thought that was odd. I tried to look again no success. I began to get suspicious because I thought what if this company turns me down. Consequently I would probably have to dish out some more money. So I Internet search the company called Davison Invention Corporation and found law suits against them. I read about the lawsuits and the stories where almost similar to mine. So I call the whole thing off because they since more interested in trying to get by money instead of developing my idea.

    Comment by J.A. — January 26, 2006 #

38. I am in the proccess right now with Patent & Trademark Institute Of America. I already sent them $850.00 for the analysis and it past everything. Now they’re asking for $9,750.00 to get the patent and take care of the rest. I haven’t seen my idea out yet at stores so I have to protect it. Sooner or later it’s going to come out,it’s one of those ideas. But the problem is that they already saw it. Should I continue? Will they steal my idea if I don’t? Or what should I do?

    Comment by Alex — February 4, 2006 #

39. Does anyone know if InventHelp is a reputable company? My father was originally going to do business with Davison, but after I researched them on the internet and found all this negative information about them, I told my father to hold off. Any suggestions?

    Comment by Vicki — February 9, 2006 #

40. I, recently proposed an invention idea to Davison. I am waiting to recieve my second phone meeting, meanwile I recieved a letter saying I had to pay $685. After the Pro-Bowl game I was curious to see if anyone had heard of this company. I was happy and sad to see what I had seen about them. My heart goes out to you who have spent any amount of money on these A-Holes,especially you who have family and could of spent your money else where. Now I don’t know where to go or what to do to go about getting my idea heard or started. Any help would be useful.

    Comment by Raul — February 12, 2006 #

41. Dear Sir,

    Could you send me a list of reputable/reliable invention promotion companies in USA. I can find lots of firms that are not reliable but where can I find those that are reputable?

    Regards and God bless

    Comment by Anna — February 13, 2006 #

42. I am one of many that has been taken by Davison Design, I have gotten over the shock of being taken for $12,000.00 and would like to know if anyone has gotten a class action suite against them and any information how to get my money back. I am like everyone else who had a dream/idea and trusted Davison Design. I paid the $685.00 waited and got some pictures, a “proto type”, a letter stating how financially my idea would be and that they were locating a company. Then of course they needed more money just under $10,000.00 to continue working on my idea. They company they found was a awening company that had nothing to do with my idea. They didn’t take my idea. Next Andrew Cable of licensing sent another letter requesting another $360.00 to contact another company that had nothing to do with my idea. I refused and requested they try a company that made things to childproof your house, as this is the line my idea is in. Andrew Cable said he understood and that it could take awhile. I requested my money back and was told it was too late and that if I wanted I could take my idea and try finding a company on my own but it would be best to let Davison Design continue to look for me. That was almost a year ago and many unreturned phone calls. I would really appreciate any information any one could give me to get my money back and stop these people from taking advantage of people like us. email info to littleorton5@hotmail.com

    Comment by Angelique — March 14, 2006 #

43. Good news….as of 3/17/2006 Federal Judge Gary Lancaster has made a ruling on the FTC vs. Davison Design and Development that has been in litigation since 1997. He has ordered this company to pay the FTC 26 million dollars. If you have filed a complaint with the FTC you should be contacted via mail and provided a reparations claim form. I will update this site on how to file a claim in order to get to your money back.

    All the best in your invention dreams and endeavors.

    Glenn Blackburn

    Comment by Glenn Blackburn — March 24, 2006 #

44. To whom it may concern

    I am just a regular guy with great ideas. The problem I have is one company that use to be ISC (invention submission corporation) which is now called Invent Help. People stay away from this company as they are a bunch of CON ARTIST!!!. There good at taking your money but bad very bad at giving you results. I spent over 13,000.00 dollars on a great idea and they told me they did nothing with it but when they presented this info to companies one of those companies took my idea and the only reason I know this is because one of my friends saw my product I created in a magazine. This is one of the companies that saw my info sent to them by Invent Help Corporation. When my uncle emailed the company advertising the product on the net they automatically took it off the net. So my thought is that they sold the info to the company that is making them. PEOPLE IF YOU HAVE A GOOD IDEA FOR MARKET I WILL TELL YOU STAY AWAY FROM THE (INVENT-HELP CORPORATION. THERE HEAD OFFICE IS LOCATED IN PENNSALVANIA U.S.A THERE ARE SO MANY MORE RESPECTFUL COMPANIES OUT THERE. DO YOUR SELF A FAVOUR UNLESS YOU WANT TO LOSE $13000.00 LIKW I DID.

    Comment by Robert — March 28, 2006 #

45. On Ronald J. Riley:

    It’s one thing to be an advocate for a cause, and another thing to use deceptive tactics. He makes false accusations to make himself appear as a hero. Ronald J. Riley has posted his web addresses here for his own self promotion, and even though he says he’s a succesful inventor, he offers no proof that he’s ever made a penny in royalties. Basically, this man is deceptive and can’t blog here truthfully. Ronald J. Riley asks for donations on his websites and encourages people to send him money. It is obvious that Ronald J. Riley is always trying to get attention and he’ll say and do anything to get it. Someone should audit the amount money he’s received in donations over the last few years to see what he’s done with this money.

    Comment by Penny Rogers — March 29, 2006 #

46. This blog is quite useful. Last month Invention City entered into an advertising agreement with Davison. A good friend of mine visited Davison a few years ago and gave me a positive report on what he saw: engineers and protoypers working hard. I believe a protoype is what seperates a serious inventor from a wannabe. I did a cursory search on the web and found nothing. With that in mind I took on Davison as a sponsor. Now there is some seriously bad news about Davison. My questions are these:

    1. Does anyone have recent(last 6 months) experience with Davison? Was it positive or negative?

    2. And a broader question - what responsibilty does an invention service provider have to save an inventor from him or herself? If your idea is lame, should an ethical prototyping company (or patent agent) discourage you from spending money on it? If they did would you go to another company and spend your money anyway?

    I see approx 1000 invention submissions a year, maybe work on three, maybe commercialize one (not counting my own). There are a lot of bad ideas out there and a lot of people so in love with their bad idea that they won’t let it die.

    Aren’t some of the complaints against Davison and others a result of inventors mourning with the death of an idea that had little real merit?

    Comment by Mike Marks, President, Invention City — March 30, 2006 #

47. I read Ronald Riley’s post and I’m slightly confused. He’s pretending to be a naive inventor when he has a file cabinet full of information about Davidson & Assoc.. He says, “Then I started looking on the Internet finding lots of negative info on them. Sure enough he called me again (their salesman) and this time he mentioned the amount of money they would want from me.”

    Why is Ronald Riley pretending to be a first time inventor? Just go to his inventor ed website and you’ll see that he’s aware of every invention scam that ever existed. He know exactly what they do and who they are. So, why pretend to be an innocent victim? You just lost all your credibility Mr. Riley as well as any respect I had for you. The real victims of Davidson don’t need your fake stories.

    I just read what a patent attorney said about Ronald Riley: http://urbanterrorist.blogspot.com/2006/03/ronald-riley.html

    Comment by stacey johnson — April 3, 2006 #

48. In response to Mr Ronald J. Riley: you may be able to fool the naive inventor as well as the novice reporter, but you can’t fool patent attorneys or anyone else who has a true understanding of the patent system.

    On invention-related blogs your tactics are several. Sometimes, you pose as an innocent inventor who has been taken advantage of. Sometimes, you play the part of the successful inventor who never states the amount of royalties he’s received. Other times, you offer baseless predictions about the outcome of selected patent infringement lawsuits. Other times, you’re the vigilant patent reformer who is going to “kill” legislation single handedly. And then, there’s the egotistical Ronald J. Riley who knows everything about every patent related issue, and who ceaselessly touts his great accomplishments of which I’ve seen no proof of whatsoever. I’ve also seen your contradictory posts on different blogs, your constant pleas for donations, and your tireless attempts at self-promotion.

    I’ve seen your amateurish websites, and have read your inflammatory language and personal biases. I’ve seen your “amexsux, northworstair, taubman sucks comments, skippy-scam” and other “sux” websites that make you feel important. I can’t imagine that anyone takes you seriously. In fact, Mr. Riley, you are your own worst enemy by participating in such pursuits.

    When you offer information about invention scams under your fake name “inventor ed”, that is actually somewhat of a noble endeavor, but when Ronald J. Riley offers his opinions on patent law, patent infringement, confident predictions on who will prevail in patent infringement cases and advice on licensing matters, you are so far out of your league that sometimes I laugh out loud when I read your posts. I will say this much, you are very entertaining.

    You should be careful about offering any patent related advice to anyone. Only registered patent attorneys and patent agents can offer legal advice to individuals on many of the matters that you prattle on about.

    If you want to protect small inventors so badly against all the big, bad corporations, why don’t you go to law school and become a patent lawyer? Instead of preaching, editorializing and spreading propaganda, you could ACTUALLY DO SOMETHING instead of just writing about what you “know” is going to happen in the future. Judging from the amount of time you spend promoting yourself and your websites, it appears that you certainly have the time to go to law school. On the other hand, if your blogs are any indication of your reasoning ability, then I seriously doubt you’d make it past the first year.

    I truly feel sorry for you Mr. Ronald Riley. If your legacy turns out to be the person whose patent rhetoric never accomplished anything, then you’ve wasted your life by trying to sound like a patent attorney, but not having the credentials or the knowledge to offer any credible patent advice.”

    Comment by William Scott Esq. — April 3, 2006 #

49. Hello, I work for a prototype design and fabrication company. If there is anyone out there looking for some help with their invention design or getting a real working prototype made to help show your invention off please contact me.
    We as a company do not keep any ideas or concepts that we may create or help you create. Any ideas are kept completly confidential. If you would like more information please contact me at peter_amy14@yahoo.com and i will send you info on our company.

    Thanks

    Comment by Peter — April 12, 2006 #

50. Please help me. I have an idea which Davison is very “interested” in. I was ready to sign with them and decided to do my homework on them first–finding this site, I’ve decided not to pursue anything with them. What are some reputable firms that can help me get my idea “to market”.

    Comment by Nancie — May 7, 2006 #

51. $26M judgment against Davison will stand

    Tools
    Print this article
    E-mail this article
    Subscribe to this paper
    Larger / Smaller Text

    By Kim Leonard
    TRIBUNE-REVIEW
    Saturday, May 13, 2006

    A U.S. District Court judge has rejected invention promoter Davison Associates Inc.’s request to slash a $26 million judgment against the company.
    Based on the O’Hara firm’s history with its customers, Judge Gary L. Lancaster said Friday: “I could have ordered total disgorgement of every dime (Davison and other defendants) ever received as a result of their deceptive practices, which is in excess of $89 million.”

    Lancaster, however, decided against enforcing the monetary part of his March 17 order, pending appeal to the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

    As a result, the Davison company and other defendants — associated firm Manufacturer’s Support Services Inc., brothers George and Gordon Davison and Barbara Miele Davison — must post a $12 million bond within 30 days.

    Under the order, they would have to pay the Federal Trade Commission the entire $26 million by next week to set up a compensation fund for customers in order to avoid interest payments.

    Attorneys Michael Milgrom and Steve Balster with the FTC, which sued Davison nine years ago, said yesterday they are pleased with Lancaster’s decision.

    Davison attorneys Cynthia Reed Eddy, who had proposed a $4.8 million cash bond, and George Crompton declined to comment.

    Amateur inventors contract with Davison Associates to research their ideas, prepare prototypes and present the products to companies that might license and market them. The FTC sued the company as part of its “Project Mousetrap” series of cases against invention promoters. Lancaster found that Davison misrepresented its services and track record for getting inventors’ products marketed.

    Davison attorneys sought to cut the judgment to $6.87 million, based on current liquid assets and sale proceeds from two homes owned by family members.

    Lancaster, though, pointed out that courts base redress awards on amounts that consumers lost.

    “We will not reduce the award because defendants contend that they no longer have the ability to pay back their defrauded customers,” he said.

    The judge based the $26 million figure on the $8 million that Davison Associates took in before the FTC filed its lawsuit, as well as $18 million that was earned in 2004, according to testimony during a trial last summer.

    Those were the figures he had at the time, Lancaster said, although a certified public accountant testified Thursday that Davison revenues totaled $89.3 million from 1994 to 2005. Net profit during that period was reported at more than $17 million, the judge noted.

    In approving the stay, or hold, on the $26 million payment, Lancaster said he took into account that the company continues to operate. Forcing the Davison defendants to pay the total amount could bankrupt them, and it would be difficult for them to obtain a $26 million bond, he said.

    Lancaster denied the FTC’s request that he appoint an auditor to oversee the business pending appeal or prepare it for liquidation.

    He also specified some language for Davison’s court-ordered disclosure statement, which tells potential clients about the company’s track record, including: “The total number of consumers in the last five years who made more money on royalties than they paid Davison … is five.”

    Court records show that 22,981 customers bought prototyping services from Davison in the past five years.

    Comment by Glenn Blackburn — May 13, 2006 #

52. Hello Inventors, I too have been taken advantage of in the past before I went to school to be an Industrial Designer. I’ve since turned my situation around and have been designing products for about 8 years now for everyone from independent inventors to fortune 500 companies. It seems like nobody in this forum has a place to turn to for great industrial design. If anyone needs help or would just like some questions answered, please feel free to send me an email. I am very knowledgable in the practice and have an impressive portfolio to back it up. My email is jarridhenderson@hotmail.com

    Comment by Jarrid Henderson — May 24, 2006 #

53. Hi, I just read most of this that was posted. I received in the mail from G.M. Davison Inventegration, about inventing any ideas i have. I did fill out the confindential form about my invention and it does say that they can not use my idea or tell anyone about my idea i gave them. After of about 4 days of sending the form in to the company, i did get a call from a gentelman, but at that time i could not talk to him. I did call him back today, May 30th to call me back. As he wanted more information from me on my invention. I am glad i was thinking about looking this guy up before i went any further. Thank you very much of letting me know about this fraud. I am disabled and don’t have any money to give out anyway. Please fill free to contact me on this anytime. Also can you tell me how you go about of filling your inventions without alot of money. Who to contact, address and phone numbers. I have two great ideas and don’t want anyone to take it away from me. Thank you again…I go by the name Cindy P.S. I am not sure of what you meant by URL, so i put the website down to G.M. Davison….Sorry i not very good on computer

    Comment by Cynthia Chouinard — May 30, 2006 #

54. I posted this on another Blog, but I feel it is appropriate here as well.

    I have recently requested information from Davison Design and Development through Invention City, and I have sent them my idea. What I received back from them was a court ordered Affirmative Disclosure telling me their numbers. As a educated inventor, I have done my research. To be honest with you Davison is one of the few companies that do inform Inventors of the risk, they are clearly laid out on their brochure, affirmative disclosure, and website. Davison is the only company that I know of that builds a physical prototype or as they call it “a product sample”. Invention City has been around for many years and the owner Mike is a respected individual. Mike has spent hundred of thousands of dollars on his inventions and has several companies to show for his investment. We should thank him for providing us his wisdom. Below is what he had to say about Davison on his website. I believe his story because he has been there and has seen the service Davison provides. We can all assume that there are people who believe they are experts in inventing, but seeing is believing in my book.

    As an inventor, I feel that I have done my research. Besides Davison there is only one company that provides inventors with risks and disclosure statements. Inventors must understand that there are two sides to every story.

    Smarty, obviously you are not a serious inventor who has done their homework, nothing in the invention business is free, inventors need to be aware that.

    I hope that I shed some light on the subject.

    Davison Design & Development
    Perspective on the FTC judgment and more.
    by Mike Marks

    If you’ve been researching invention service companies, you’ve likely come across Davison Design & Development. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) contends that Davison mislead inventors in the past and recently won a judgment against them. Davison has appealed this judgment and seeks to have it overturned.

    Davison is a sponsor of Invention City. After learning about the FTC judgment, I decided to personally investigate how Davison operates today. On May 5th 2006, I flew to Pittsburgh and visited Davison’s facility. I expected to see a low-end design company that was reeling from the FTC judgment. What I found instead was a truly remarkable company brimming with optimism for the future.

    Company founder George Davison is channeling the manufacturing and creative processes of his heroes, Thomas Edison, Henry Ford and Walt Disney, to deliver amazingly inexpensive, high quality, custom invention development services. The services and prices are good enough that my company WorkTools, Inc. (http://www.worktools.com) will be using Davison soon, and I’ve also recommended Davison to two other companies I’m involved with.

    I don’t state this lightly. I believe George Davison is fundamentally changing the way inventions are developed and will someday be recognized as a visionary. Simply put, Davison uses mass production techniques to provide inexpensive, customized, invention development services.

    What happened in the past, I think, is that some of Davison’s salespeople talked to inventors the same way many realtors talk to prospective homebuyers. Some brokers will represent a dilapidated one-bedroom shack in a bad neighborhood as “a cozy, romantic cottage with great investment potential.” We tolerate this kind of behavior in real estate, but not from invention service providers. This doesn’t justify Davison’s alleged actions, but does help put things in perspective.

    A cornerstone of the FTC’s case was that Davison’s success rate in obtaining license deals for inventors was less than 1%. One thing unpublicized is the success rate of patents in general: less than 1% are incorporated into products that earn more money than the cost of the patent. And keep in mind that this only represents issued patents. Even more patents are applied for and abandoned prior to issuance and still more inventions are conceived, developed and abandoned without any patent application being filed at all.

    Another factor to consider is that even great inventions with fantastic commercial potential are more likely to gather dust than generate royalty income. I’ve earned a healthy income commercializing inventions over the last twenty years. I’ve also seen thousands of invention submissions from amateur inventors around the world. Let me be blunt: 95% of the ideas I see from amateur inventors have zero commercial potential. Professionally created inventions have more commercial potential but the vast majority of them fail too. In light of all of this Davison’s success rate isn’t out of line… especially considering their modest fees.

    About those fees - inventors believe that Davison’s rates of about $10,000 are high. WorkTools, Inc. estimates the total costs for developing an idea into a handheld or desktop mechanical product that can be licensed (prototype engineered for production, provisional patent) are somewhere between $50,000 to $150,000. WorkTools’ batting average with inventions is around 40%. That means 60% of the time, WorkTools loses $50,000 to $150,000 pursuing an invention that fails. Imagine the outrage if WorkTools actually charged for its services!

    Any business serving clients who are passionate about their creations, especially in an industry where most products fail, is bound to have some unhappy customers, no matter how good their services are.

    You should carefully and honestly consider the true market potential of your invention before investing serious time, emotion and money into it. Then, if you honestly believe there is indeed great market potential, you should have a prototype built. A prototype will enable you to pursue a licensing deal like a professional. And when it comes time to build that prototype I suggest you consider Davison Design & Development. I am unaware of any company that provides so much value for so little money.

    [comment edited to add the following "Comment from" information]

    Comment from:

    Name: Get the Facts Right
    Email: getthefactsright06@hotmail.com

    Comment by Get the Facts Right — June 1, 2006 #

55. Whois Record
    IP Information
    Record Type: IP Address
    Cached Whois: 2006-06-01
    IP Location: United States - Pennsylvania - Pittsburgh - Davison Design & Development
    Blacklist Status: Clear

    Whois Record

    UUNET Technologies, Inc. UUNET63 (NET-63-64-0-0-1)
    63.64.0.0 - 63.127.255.255
    DAVISON DESIGN & DEVELOPMENT UU-63-118-84-120-D12 (NET-63-118-84-120-1)
    63.118.84.120 - 63.118.84.127

    I have long contended that invention promoters are not the brightest bulbs in the pack. Yes they are glad handers, and yes they are very good at selling themselves to people even while they are not at all effective at selling inventions. But this post by George Davison or one of his stooges takes the cake for stupidly.

    Here is the skinny on how and why the FTC case which Davison thought was finished was resurrected. About 3-4 years ago a Canadian lady named Joyce Oberg paid Davison over $20,000 USD to promote her inventions. Eventually she found her way to InventorEd.org and she was furious that she had been defrauded. She worked tirelessly to raise awareness in both the US and Canada. Almost single-handedly she was responsible for getting the Competition Bureau (like the FBI) interested in the invention promotion problem.

    Joyce Oberg was so effective Davison filed a lawsuit against her claiming she owed him more money. It was a SLAPP lawsuit and in the end all he wanted from Joyce Oberg was for her to quit telling all who would listen that he was a shyster and a fraud. He got what he wanted….well in the short term.

    As a result of the bogus suit I deemed that Mr. Davison needed some of the quality time which InventorEd.org is so well known to give to the most deserving invention promoters. I personally called the attorney responsible for the Davison prosecution and reinvigorated the case. Since the case had been tried but was derailed by the judge who heard the case becoming ill before rendering a judgment the FTC no longer had use of discovery, so InventorEd over a number of years quietly reached out, gathering examples of new victims. We fed a steady stream of victims to the FTC. And it was that evidence of ongoing fraud which led to the staggering 26 million dollar judgment. Davison brought this on himself with his bald faced attempt to silence Joyce Oberg.

    InventorEd has over a dozen investigators, many who are retired professionals. We are always interested in recruiting additional volunteers to do the good work. We have infiltrated five promoters at this point. We are compiling staggering amounts of information and supplying that information on request to law enforcement. There are a number of active cases which will lead to criminal prosecutions.

    Davison’s post on this forum is a perfect example of how dim witted promoters are. Being the most recent poster child of fraud with a 26 million dollar judgment against them one would think they would want to have a low profile. After all, the FTC win amounts to a huge bull’s-eye painted on Georgie Boy Davison’s back. How long will it be before other government agencies smell Georgie Boy’s blood and he his facing state hospitality?

    Yes, Georgie Boy Davison or his staff were dumb enough to to make this post. And it is a fact that this post could be very damaging when he is arguing the case to avoid state hospitality.

    I am looking forward to seeing George Davison pay his debt to society.

    Ronald J Riley, Exec. Dir.
    InventorEd, Inc.
    http://www.InventorEd.org
    RJR”at”InvEd.org
    Change “at” to @

    Ronald J Riley, President
    Professional Inventors Alliance
    http://www.PIAUSA.org
    RJR”at”PIAUSA.org
    Change “at” to @
    RJR Direct # (202) 318-1595

    Comment by Ronald J Riley — June 1, 2006 #

56. Re the email from: getthefactsright06@hotmail.com

    What kinda idiot would not know their IP address could be traced? In this case back to the offices of Davison Design & Development! Likely the above emailer is a senior VP or even George Davison himself hiding behind that address. Twit!

    Even more interesting was the statement they (Davison) are sponsors of Mike & Joel Mark’s at inventioncity.com

    Talk about foul odor! Maybe UIAUSA needs to learn that Davison claims to sponsor Mike Marks. I see a couple of links on Davison’s site to inventioncity.com If my memory serves me correctly Mike is a consultant listed on the UIAUSA site to them.

    I noted inventioncity hosts Google Adwords encouraging inventors to click on (so they can make money) the notorious list of invention promoters some of whom are located on the patent office’s complaint page or the FTC’s page or cited in public documents or practically all are listed at:
    http://www.inventored.org/caution/extreme.

    Maybe no one told Mike he can use Google’s free ad filter to remove those promoter’s names. Wait a minute…I believe I sent him that info a year or two ago.

    Have a Nice Day!

    Comment by PB — June 1, 2006 #

57. Thank you for responding to my blog, I am an inventor and I work for Davison. I wrote this blog on my own time. The reason why I wrote this blog is to express facts not fiction. Apparently you are trying to divert from the facts and that does not help inventors or the industry. Davison offers the most economical program for inventors. I do respect your opinion, and you are right to express yourself. I did not mean for you to strike out on a personal level. The fact is that Davison provides and had provided the most affirmative disclosures and risk statements of any company or organization in the invention development business. It is true that your organization and the UIA-USA do not post AIPA disclosures or other adequate risk statements. I ask you to remove the addresses that you posted, obviously I am just trying to get the facts out personally, and you diverted to striking out at somebody’s mother. I find this to be shameful and hurtful for no other reason than your own selfish motives. Please post your own affirmative disclosures and risk statement so the general public can evaluate your business methodology of new product design and development. I am sure that I could speak with someone to arrange a tour of our facilities. There are inventors and manufacturers touring daily. This is a great opportunity for you to get the facts and to evaluate our company’s development techniques for yourself. Most likely your’re familiar with Toyota’s open door policy for tours and seminars about their business model. We are as well because we are trying to improve the industry, not drag it through the mud. This is an open invitation Ronald. Thank you for your time and consideration.

    Comment by Get the Facts Right — June 2, 2006 #

58. I don’t buy your assertion that you are posting on your own to public forums. It is a fact that all invention promoters keep a very tight reign on their employee stooges in an attempt to avoid being held accountable for their disreputable conduct. I am sure that you do not wipe your backside without getting permission from Georgie Boy.

    As to Georgie Boy’s mother, she would not have been listed if not for the fact that Georgie Boy and his wife are listed on that address. It is called public records. Perhaps it would be in Georgie Boy’s mother’s interests to distance her from from his activities. In light of the fact that he has fleeced perhaps 10,000 inventors I can understand why he is uncomfortable with having his addresses published.

    You talk about getting out the facts and selfish motives. Doublespeak at its worst. Davison has admitted in court to taking nearly a hundred million dollars from inventors. The court handed down the biggest judgment ever assessed an invention promoter.

    As to a tour, I have no need to take one. Charming fraudsters have no effect on me other than to cause the hair on the back of my neck stand up. The smoother the pitch the worse the impression.

    We have gathered all the information we need at this time. I am sure that at some point in the future that there are people from a variety agencies who may chose to take a tour and I am equally sure that they will have no difficulty getting a pass to take the tour at a time of their choosing.

    I have to say that I am surprised that Davison is stupid enough to allow you to continue to lay this kind of paper trail. It will be biting him in the future.

    For your and Georgie Boy’s information, FTC actions are quite useful for creating an authoritative source of information about a promoter which can be cited. But by far the most gratifying result is when a criminal conviction is obtained, the perp is stripped of their ill gotten gains, and they spend years behind bars.

    Ronald J Riley, Exec. Dir.
    InventorEd, Inc.
    http://www.InventorEd.org
    RJR”at”InvEd.org
    Change “at” to @

    Ronald J Riley, President
    Professional Inventors Alliance
    http://www.PIAUSA.org
    RJR”at”PIAUSA.org
    Change “at” to @
    RJR Direct # (202) 318-1595

    Comment by Ronald J Riley — June 2, 2006 #

59. U wrote 1. Thank you for responding to my blog, I am an inventor and I work for Davison. I wrote this blog on my own time.

    * On your own time while in their offices using their computer? I don’t think so. Come on out of hiding mate. Let’s see who you really are.

    * More likely than not this is GEORGE DAVISON himself, IMO, running damage control after so many years of picking inventors clean now attempting to get free PR. Personally speaking, I wouldn’t believe you or whomever you are if your tongue came notarized!

    2. The reason why I wrote this blog is to express facts not fiction.

    * Facts as you see them not facts as they actually exist. Tens of thousands of inventors who claim no exchange-value for the millions they’ve collectively spent would agree with you. White collar crime to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars a year from what I read in the FTC judgment.

    3. Apparently you are trying to divert from the facts and that does not help inventors or the industry.

    * What helps inventors is their not being stuck like pigs with upfront fees such as Davison and the rest of the ilk charge. If Davison really knew what it was doing it might occur to them they could make more if they did not charge upfront instead took the lion’s share out of backend royalties. That would be the honorable path to take. But the truth is invention promoters have such awful stats they have to clean inventors out early for it’s lean on the backend.

    4. Davison offers the most economical program for inventors.

    * Ha! Then Davison won’t mind paying inventors back $26-mill will they. Economical to me is - NOT CHARGING INVENTORS ANYTHING ON THE FRONTEND! You and I have different definitions, apparently.

    5. I do respect your opinion, and you are right to express yourself. I did not mean for you to strike out on a personal level.

    * On a personal level? Wait a minute, didn’t you say you’re an employee/inventor?
    Ooophs, you “slipped.” Besides which, nothing could be far from the truth when it comes to Mr. Riley. You speak from a tunnel vision viewpoint, IMO. Why? If you had a larger brain you might have noticed his site has no fees, no products, no services it sells!!!! It’s a nonprofit “advice only” site. You twit! How’s about making a donation to help him out? He posts the names of those who donate right on the site so you could have your name in lights! He has personally supported that site and other causes freely for years from out of his licensed patents. That site is manned by volunteers!

    6. The fact is that Davison provides and had provided the most affirmative disclosures and risk statements of any company or organization in the invention development business.

    * Yeah, right! Maybe you need to go look at the list of inventors all over the web including ripoffreport.com and personal webpages set up by at least one inventor about how Davison actually operates. They would not not agree with your obviously biased viewpoint. Apparently neither did the FTC – not once but twice!!!!!

    7. It is true that your organization and the UIA-USA do not post AIPA disclosures or other adequate risk statements.

    * Why would http://www.inventored.org need to post an AIPA disclosure, pray tell? It sells nothing. All advice is free. You are such an “un-informed” lazy cuss or you’d have checked it out before putting foot in mouth. As to UIAUSA, they don’t license or market inventions either! Durhhhh!

    8. I ask you to remove the addresses that you posted, obviously I am just trying to get the facts out personally, and you diverted to striking out at somebody’s mother. I find this to be shameful and hurtful for no other reason than your own selfish motives.

    * Poor baby! Don’t like it when it comes back to bite Davison in the butt, eh? Afraid you or whomever will have to change their phone number/address for fear the plush landscaping and front lawn will be plagued by inventors wanting satisfaction?

    9. Please post your own affirmative disclosures and risk statement so the general public can evaluate your business methodology of new product design and development.

    * Fool. One has to have something to sell or license to start out with.

    10. I am sure that I could speak with someone to arrange a tour of our facilities.

    * Ha! I just bet you could. Why? Y’all owe millions upon millions to inventors how’s about giving them a tour of your U.S. and foreign bank accounts, eh?

    11. There are inventors and manufacturers touring daily. This is a great opportunity for you to get the facts and to evaluate our company’s development techniques for yourself.

    * The actual true facts indicate a different story unless unless you’re implying the federal $26-million judgment doesn’t exist either? Icing is icing; tours are tours. (It’s what’s in the sheds out back I’d be more interested in!!) LOL!!! The true facts have been known for years such as when Davison last got its nuts in a ringer with the FTC in the FTC’s Project Mousetrap sting in the late nineties! Some outfits just don’t learn, do they!

    Y’all just don’t get it, do you. Let me help refresh your memory:

    (a) http://www.ftc.gov/os/1997/07/daviscmp.htm
    (b) http://www.ftc.gov/opa/1997/07/mouse.htm
    (c )www.ftc.gov/os/1997/07/davisb~1.htm
    (d) http://www.ftc.gov/opa/1998/06/petapp38.htm

    * Tell you what, let’s forget the nineteen-nineties and stick with a small sampling of present time “Facts”:

    http://www.ripoffreport.com/reports/ripoff73472.htm

    http://msnbc.msn.com/id/12388995

    http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/business/s_453047.htm

    http://www.thepittsburghchannel.com/News/900840/index.html

    http://pittsburgh.bcentral.com/pittsburgh/stories/1998/08/17/story8.html

    http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/search/s_293702.html

    http://www.thepittsburghchannel.com/pit/news/team4/stories/team4-90084020010801-210838.html
    http://www.thepittsburghchannel.com/video/4642432/detail.html

    12. Most likely your’re familiar with Toyota’s open door policy for tours and seminars about their business model. We are as well because we are trying to improve the industry, not drag it through the mud. This is an open invitation Ronald. Thank you for your time and consideration.

    * Ever heard of “clean rooms”? Now try to figure out what that might have to do with Davison. I’ll tell you how you can improve your image and the industry as a whole:

    (a) CEASE CHARGING UP-FRONT FEES!
    (b) SAVE MONEY: Pick up the phone rather than send out worthless packets of info to contract manufacturers and call
    it “marketing!” Do it the old-fashioned way. Forget all the fancy promo,portfolios of generic market research, press releases, etc…
    (c) PICK UP A PHONE TO THE RIGHT
    PERSON! Oophs, one would have
    know the right person wouldn’t
    one. That might take legwork
    and burning the midnight oil.
    Too much work I expect.

    Comment by PB — June 3, 2006 #

60. I weighed in on another thread about how much fun it was to help put George in the poorhouse by testifying against him in the trial last year.

    I’m not surprised that he or one of his stooges would be dumb enough to come around here and try to BS everyone. Stupid people usually think that other people are as stupid as they are.

    George, you’re a Smurf, and even after stealing millions of dollars, you still wear crappy shoes and cheap suits. You are strictly low-class and will never be anything else. Especially now that you’re going to be poor for the rest of your life, even if you decide to take a stab at making an honest living.

    I have a tape of you, George, admitting that your “design” was something you copied out of the public domain from an old patent that you idiots had sent to me. You’re a punk, but worse, you’re a stupid punk. Bitch-slapping you in court was sweeeeet.

    Comment by Davison's Nemesis — June 8, 2006 #

61. I have some invention but it is not patented.I do not want patent and would like to sell patent and invention to products manufacturing companies.Could it be possible?

    Comment by Md Aslam Durani — July 1, 2006 #

62. Same story here….. Everything sounded great and 12,000 later, we are no further than we were a 1 year and a half ago. My husband’s idea, I had my reservations, but wanted to be supportive. We are not going to waste time sending a letter asking for money back, I am just going to hire an attorney, contact the BBB, the Attorney General’s office, the FTC and the FBI. Is there anything you can do if you were scammed out of 12,000 during the time the FTC lawsuit was? Probably not. I WILL FIND OUT ALL CONSUMERS THAT WERE FRAUDED BY DAVISON AND FILE A CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT, IF I HAVE TO. They will be sorry if they do not give us back our money, because if it is has to come to this, it will be much, much more costly to them than 12,000, I will make sure of it. DO NOT DO ANY INVENTIONS WITH THEM, THEY WILL TAKE YOUR MONEY AND GIVE YOU A PIECE OF %^%$ PROTOTYPE THAT A THREE YEAR OLD COULD MAKE ON THE COMPUTER.

    BUYER BEWARE BUYER BEWARE BUYER BEWARE

    Comment by Hollie — July 3, 2006 #

63. Wonder if there is anything you can do on misrepresentation? Their website says they license a new product every three days. Well, license would mean someone bought the idea. Funny thing is their stastics do not support the website’s claim. Oh and I made a copy of the page in case it mysterously disappears. It is so sad to see them take advantange of less fortunate people.

    Comment by hollie — July 3, 2006 #

64. I submitted a concept called “Ab-Bal” via the Davison website. They phoned me up about 3 days later and asked me for descriptive drawings and such. I complied, by faxing them a 1 page drawing of the concept. I never heard from them for a week or more. I finally got tired of waiting and phoned them up to see if they got the fax. They had a hell of a time trying to figure out who I was at all, never mind that I “apparently” had a “new file” there. I spoke to a man named ERIC KING, who’s title at Davison is “Director of new products”. He gave me the BS about what a great idea Ab-Bal was, and how we should get to work on it right away. He told me about a $685 USD fee to get it rolling. I told him I don’t have the money. He actually offered to let me make some payments, and that “it’s not about the money, it’s about making a agreement between Davison & the inventor that shows a binding commitment for action”. BLA BLA BLA. He told me to think on it for a week, and call him back. So I did. I called Eric King in 6 days, He told me the offer of payment had expired, and it will not be extended again to me, as “it is a one time only offer”. He told me that my “file” was already filed away and closed, and if I want to pursuie anything further with them (Davison) I will have to come up with the full $685 USD in full, up front. I have not contacted Eric King, or Davison since, as I was beginning to smell a turd, so to speak. I have a quesion: Does Davison have alot of complaints regarding concept theft, or fraudulant and unauthorized use of one’s ideas? Do they rip off people’s ideas, to? How do I let them know I’m in no mood to be ripped off regarding a concept that is sitting (I assume) in a file abinet at Davison? I’m a Canadian inventor. What course of action do I take with these weasles if I discover my concept is “out there” as a result of Davison? Thanks for your time in reading this, any help would be appreciated! PS - If Davison or Eric King of Davison is reading this, eat my poop, and I advice you to toss my submission into the shredder, and abandon any idea of ripping me off, I may have been an idiot for submitting it to you, but I am learning quickly not to trust again with the likes of you “fellas”. And if I find out my idea is alreay out there in the market, and on the shelves, as a result of any action you took, I will not let it go, I will not ignore it, I will take whatever action I can to make sure you pay the piper. - Jason Smith, Inventor, Trail, BC, Canada.

    Comment by Jason Smith — July 7, 2006 #

65. I AM A CURRENT VICTAM OF DAVISON & WILLING TO GET INVOLVED IN WHATEVER WILL STOP THIS COMPANY FROM ROBBING PEOPLE!
    Mine is so slight compared to what I have been reading on this blog. I submitted and signed the first stage contract w/DAVISON last March. I was hounded by Tom Gallagher until I sent in the $685. After they got the money, I could not get a call back from them for the life of me. Finally I was so upset I began leaving more & more messages telling him as “Director of New Products” how unprofessional he was. It took a month of leaving messages to finally hear back. During this time I started more research. I read of another lawsuit (other than the incredible $26M posted above). I was NEVER informed of any DBA’s or claims against them - NOTHING! The contract did state “The total number of clients who have contracted w/Davison, except w/in current 30 days is 6,463, and the number of clients that have received by virtue of Davison’s performance in excess of the amount of money paid by these clients to Davison is 10.” That is the only info the disclosed to me. Now they want me to give them $13k + (& the contract says that I can not have anyone else look at any info they send me unless I get permission IN WRITTING FROM DAVISON - later I requested this “permission” & was told I dont need permission & that he (Tom) would go over it w/me during our (15 min.) phone conference - ha!), I was then expected to review the new contract over night & have a 15 minute phone conference w/Tom, enclosed the money in the return envelope they sent me (they didnt even pay for postage to send in the 1st sucker money payment) & be satisfied. Well, Tom left one message a day for 3 days, then told me if I didnt contact him by the end of the day - he’s sending docs to end my contract & how UNPROFESSIONAL I was being. I basically told him I dont respond well to time limits in regards to $13k+ & to send his little documents. This morning I got a message from him saying how disturbing my message was, that I was completely unprofessional, THEY DONT NEED MY MONEY, he just cant work w/a person so unprofessional like myself, and he will be sending the termination docs. I am so upset w/this company it is insane. I only gave the $685. & 5 months out of my life - it just makes me sick to find out how many people gave them so much more. They are a discusting piece of trash company w/no class or morals whatsoever. I WOULD BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO JOIN IN & HELP ON ANY CURRENT ACTION AGAINST DAVISON. Please feel free to contact me at dawna555@hotmail.com
    There are so many contridictions in their sloppy paperwork its just sickening. Never in these past 5+ months did I get an actual person to answer the phone. It always went to a message, but he always mentions his “Assistant”. Again, I know my experience w/them is minor compared to so many - but honestly, how the hell can they get up everyday & even look in mirror. Its just wrong & it needs to stop!

    Comment by Dawna — August 11, 2006 #

66. I was just wondering if anyone has had any success in getting their money back or idea turned into more then that by Davison. I filed a complaint with the FTC and emailed to the attorney that hadled the case against them, I was added to the list and have heard nothing more from Davison or about my complaint.
    By the way to the gentlman that supports Davison and said $10,000 is not much for what Davison does you are nuts. We all paid for something that we did not recieve, was told our dreams, ideas, inventions would be a reality no matter what they were. I know for myself a mother of 3 small children and barely making $25,000 a year the $12,000 was not petty cash, as I am sure is the same for everyone who sent them money, it was suppose to be an investment in a better future financailly. As I am sure with everyone I was misled into believing that Davison has contracts with companies for new ideas to be presented to them for new product lines, that Davison is responsible for more then 1% of ideas being patented and the inventor benefitting in a big way financailly. I was also given some forms for a patent and was told I have a pending pantent, their patent attorning is/was retired and the papers they gave me are not a pending anything. Explain how my idea that had to with child safety has anything to door with Larson Awnings as was the first company Davison said they presented my idea to. The printout flyers they sent showed they worked with Playtex(a child brand of products), why not present my idea to them? The next company I declined to pay another $385 to because I could not see the connection with my idea and when I asked Andrew Cable to explain it to me was told they would keep looking and he would send me a letter, that was a year or more ago. So, I don’t understand how anyone can support a company that is so unprofessional as to not return calls, not be able to explain why they want your money, or even deal with complaints without putting people down. Everything I was given is what everyone was, printouts from the internet, lies, false hope and of course nothing in the end. If anyone has any new information to try and get our money back I am all for it! contact me at email: littleorton5@hotmail.com

    Comment by angelique — August 14, 2006 #

67. If you go to Davison’s Website - you will see this link posted as a disclaimer at the bottom of site. This was apart of the court order back in May of ‘06 … these numbers listed below only reflect the last 5 years… they do not go back to 1989 when the company first started. It appears that Davison’s claims that they acquire licensing deals every 3 days… this may be true but all deals are for their products they make IN HOUSE… certainly not for folks such as myself who paid them over 13k to get the ball rolling. I have had no response from the company since April 05 in obtaining my money back nor have they returned any documents that I provided to them nor have they given me the opportunity to pay for the shipping for the return of said materials. The current legal situation with the FTC vs Davison is that they have appealed the May 17 verdict that ordered them to pay 26M in restitution. They would like the fine to be reduced to 8M or less. An FTC rep stated we may not get the results of the appeal until Spring of 07.

    Affirmative Disclosure Statement

    In 1997, the Federal Trade Commission filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania, captioned F.T.C. v. Davison, 97-1278. As a result of the judge’s decision in the case, the judge has ordered us to make the following disclosures to you regarding our track record over the last five years in successfully marketing our clients’ products. You should read all of this information carefully before proceeding.
    The total number of consumers who submitted new product ideas to Davison during the past five years is two hundred twenty nine thousand seven hundred thirty eight (229,738). Davison does not provide evaluation of commercial potential; thus, it has provided no positive or negative evaluation of this or any other product idea in the last five years. The total number of consumers who were offered a Pre-Inventegration? agreement (or similar contract for research services) is one hundred fifty seven thousand one hundred twenty two (157,122). The total number of consumers who were offered a Contingency Agreement (or other contract for licensing representation) is one hundred fifty seven thousand one hundred twenty two (157,122). The total number of consumers who purchased a Pre-Inventegration? Agreement or similar contract for research services is thirty five thousand one hundred forty three (35,143). The total number of consumers who signed a Contingency Agreement or other licensing representation agreement is thirty five thousand one hundred forty three (35,143). The total number of consumers who were offered a Product Sample Presentation Agreement (or any other contract for design services for a virtual or a product sample) is twenty five thousand one hundred thirty five (25,135). The number of consumers who signed a Product Sample Presentation Agreement or similar agreement is nine thousand eight hundred ninety five (9,895). The number of consumers who obtained a written license with a company that is not affiliated with Davison is one hundred ninety eight (198). The total number of consumers in the last five years who made more money in royalties than they paid, in total, under any and all agreements with Davison, is seven (7). The percentage of Davison’s income that came from royalties paid on licenses of consumers’ products is .001%.

    Numbers current as of July 20, 2006

    Comment by Glenn Blackburn — September 8, 2006 #

68. I hired a firm to market for license agreements. I received two interested responses last week and today have a firm offer. My problem is I filed a provisional patent in May. Do I file for non-provisional utility patent now and risk my license agreement in the event I am denied or do I file for design patent and chase the license agreement. SOLA Co. suggested I file for Utility for various reasons and they have offered to pay for the application. I am a bit confused right now. Has anybody confronted this problem in the past?
    Thank you
    Michael

    Comment by M. Bloomfield — September 26, 2006 #

69. I also was scamd by Davison Design and Associates Director of New Products Ted Leggen (one of 50-100 with this title).Ted contacted me in Fed. 06 ,said how they could proto-type my product(I already had a patent ).Ted also said the co. has access to many large co.’s to present my product in its finished and ready for store shelfs box. Ted said he and the design team were so excited about my product and Mr. Davison would more than likely be calling me. He just needed 685.00 for search to make sure it wasn’t already out there. I told him I had a patent but Ted said it still had to be done. I mailed Ted 685.00. Ted calls back early March 06 to say its a go. Now they just need 1000.00 for proto-type it would be completed in 10-12 weeks .Ted stated things would go fast after this. A few weeks went by ,Ted’s in constant contact with me to say how well its going, they are all so excited. Ted sends a something he calls a virtal-reality picture says not to be upset if there are some changes (and there is) Ted now says he needs 4650.00 to make the real proto-type, the 1000.00 before was just for the picture. I mailed that 4650.00 (and he had to have it in over-nite mail in order to continue) . Ted calls few weeks later to say how great things are going it won’t be long untill its presented to big co. said not to be insulted when co.s offer is not real big , they might offer say 25.000 and percentage of each sale etc.etc. Ted also says after proto-type is ready to be presented to big co.s I would have to send 3700.00 and he would be handing me over to someone else then . It was after this that I found out about the 26 million dollar lawsuit against Davison and all the many, many, many, many complaints filed with ftc etc. that I realized Ted had said almost word for word the same things to me that all the so called Director of New Products said to all the other victims. It sounded like a script. Even the time that elapses between contacts is the same. I knew I had been scamed. Ted calls the end of Sept. 06 to say the proto-type wasn’t done yet but he hoped I had been saving me pennies , he needed the 3700.00 to continue. I reminded him that when I first decided to go with him and Davison he said it would be 10-12 weeks till done and it would go fast .Ted said things were looking very good it would’nt be much longer but it probably would’nt be untill the next xmas season now because the co.s buy x-mas season months before time for them. I then ask Ted to send me my proto-type he had promised , but now he said I would’nt be getting one as they only make one and that one is just to show the buyers in their presentations . I let Ted go on and on and then I said Ted the scams up,I know about you and your co. I want my money back (over 6200.00 dollars) and I don’t want you or Davison to use my idea