I trust that you would be Frank… lol. Please don’t compare or associate me with people who insult EN. You know as well as any that I am a HUGE fan of EN’s. They have been nothing short of dignitaries.

I watched them for 6 months before I signed up an account with them and then I submitted a bogus invention to see the process out. All the while I was meeting. With Beryl Solo to launch my other products. I dealt with Beryl for 3 years. He trained Kevin Harrington you know, he is another “Shark” So he says. I must have had “Sucker” written all over my forehead because he saw me coming from a mile away.

As Beryl Tells it, Kevin worked for him and he started Kevin in infomercials. Then Kevin Split off and started doing his own thing. Supposedly, Kevin still calls Beryl for advice.

Well this Beryl Wolk begged me to get him in with EN and that he would sponsor any product that got to stage 7 and R8… Matt will vouch for all of this… I made the virtual intro and although Beryl has a ton of clout and is a billionaire made by his own muscle, EN turned him down because of his reputation. That spoke volumes to me LOUD AND CLEAR! I immediately disassociated from Beryl and signed up with EN. Beryl still has me on some e-blast system and would take my call in a second.

I told Beryl what his reputation is and that I could never consider doing business with him. I showed him that his own people that left his office consider him a senial old man… I told him in his office to his face. He nearly broke down to tears, this 82 yr old man. He ran me around for three years though with promises of his cash that was tied up over seas. Then he started to hook me up with these lenders and marketing specialists that would travel the world on your dime presenting my ideas to sheiks and kings in Africa as well as Iranian oil tycoons. He spoke 12 languages and has a charming British accent, very believable, but all part of the same lie beyond the door to nowhere. His name is “Zee”.

In the midst of all that, I introduced Beryl to an EN member because she had a patented product and needed help getting it to market. I thought I was helping her, she knows who she is, bur I was only drawing her into the same lies that I was being fed. Regrettably, I introduced her to Beryl as I promised her that I would present her product along with 3 of my own. Well, Beryl insisted I call her and I did right there in her office and got her audience with this billionaire.

After that meeting and they spoke I made Beryl’s intro to EN. EN denied Beryl and I did more research. I begged her to pull back and fforget I ever introduced them but he had her hooked with the same lies he had me intoxicated on for 3 YEARS prior she knows who she is and will atest to all of this if she wants. I wont call her out unless she volunteers.

Bottom line, I do my due diligence now and I believe what I find… I got caught up in the fantasy land of the “Dream” with Beryl. Also, I don’t trust billionaires… I have a couple stories about them too. Being a Billionaire to me means nothing but you did it for yourself and now your looking for more money; not necessarily to help anyone else. I am cautious, thats all.

I really don’t like when people come in here to the forums spouting off. I will stand up for EN because I believe they would do the same for me. It is called LOYALTY which is rare to come by these days.

Thanks for not picking a fight Frank!

La Vida EN!

Chappy wrote:
“It has been a while and I thought we some sort of truece since you friended me Frank.”

What I posted wasn’t a stab at you Chappy; as I said, “doesn’t prove anything, but it is interesting and entertaining!”
You know me…LOL… if I thought you were involved I’d be all over it! <;-)
--

Personally, I don’t have any problem with the system/procedure as it currently stands… all of us should be so lucky to have
EN and an independent contact interested at the same time! If it came down to negotiating the terms of licensing with
a nice company, let’s be realistic; if one is not well versed in the intricacies, they’d be MUCH better off letting EN do the deal
in their stead! I mean, if I go into a negotiation unprepared, chances are very good I will either screw the deal or sign
away my rights for a bowl of beans…. EN’s staff are veterans of the negotiation and know how to broker a deal that has
everyone’s best interest in mind. To me, having a 50/50 secure deal would be better any day than sitting at home kicking
yourself for letting such a grand opportunity slip through your fingers!

Since the extensive research is done in stage 6, I feel EN could legitimately say that they have rights at G6. The fact is that this is still EN’s system. We are lucky that they have let this system be as democratic as it is.,

I think everyone is giving Mr.T way too much thought. Negative, destructive people thrive on getting a rise or reaction. I find his posts ridiculous and boring. Personally, I’d rather watch paint dry than read them. I’m outta here, but not without saying EN ROCKS!

Margaret – thanks for bringing some clarity to this thread.

Collectively, we need to get out of the weeds, and look at what is being proposed from the 30,000 ft perspective.

By building in a submitter actioned GO/NO GO step (at stage 7); we are essentially asking EN to do all the leg work for our idea; including an extensive patent search, for the tidy sum of $20/$25 dollors. This is indeed the situation now; however without this GO/NO GO step, I believe the risk to EN is reduced that the submitter will pull their idea out at G6.

My point is this, I can see EN complying to this GO/NO GO step; however if the submitter decides to pull out, then they will have to pay for all costs incurred by EN to arrive at stage 7.

Nice Margaret…
Tony, And so YES, EN is that compassionate!

Maybe at stage 7 before a presentation (time/resources allowing?!)… EN can ask if we would like to:

Y-Yes, I accept my idea/product/innovation going forward to presentation with said Search Sponsor! Thank you so much for this wonderful opportunity, EN!!!

N-No, I decline and would like to try and seek licensing on my own with said Search Sponsor so I don’t have to split 50/50 with you. Thanks for the review and professional patent search, though. Goodbye until next time! Wish me luck!!
:-(

Tony,

I get your point. You are concerned that EN may go through each step, but at times will jump people up a couple of levels at once on their dashboard, thereby creating a potential problem for someone who is seeking to pursue licensing on their own. It is EN’s business model to pursue licensing for those who enter the searches. So if your intention is to pursue your invention on your own while it is in a search, you take the risk that they will get there before you. In my opinion, if you enter the search, it is implied that you may tie up your invention, and it’s a bonus that we may have a period of time in which to decide to pursue it on our own.

When I first joined over 4 years ago, once an invention was submitted it was locked in…period. I did have a conflict. I had a possible opportunity present itself, so I asked if I could withdraw. They kindly obliged. Unfortunately, that opportunity didn’t pan out. The member feedback to EN back then was that our ideas were unnecessarily tied up for too many months while they went through the process. The current way of doing things evolved from EN responding to members’ requests to work with us on that situation. They decided after that to only lock us in at stage 7. If you are entering the searches and pursuing your idea on your own, then it’s whoever gets to the finish line first. If EN does, great. If we do, great. I think most of us have an understanding about that and therefore are not as troubled about the error that occurred.

Wait a second Frank… I use that phrase “Low hanging fruit”… I am not Tony. Like you Frank, lord knows if I have something to say, I say it. No masking my identity. I won’t cower in the shadows like some others. It has been a while and I thought we some sort of truece since you friended me Frank.

“Or is the fear of retribution too great?”

Why don’t you use your own identity, or is the fear of retribution too great?

Look Jack,

Papajim asked you a simple doggone question. What is your point? WHAT IS YOUR INTENT? Maybe some of the other naive people you came to save can help YOU understand a simple question…

And if this, I’ll cut and paste the closest thing you came up with in your babble…
“I have no ulterior motives other than to make at least some of you question what really transpired here.”

Let’s have some fun with this crap…

I have no ulterior motives….“other than” …sooooooo wait , you DO have one.

Who said ulterior? To me that’s a word that snakey, suspicious, underhanded, cowards use.
And you want to MAKE at least some of us question what (you perceive) happened here.

hahahahahahahahahahahah

ew. MAKE ME.

So, out of nowhere the crusader comes (with only ONE admitted ulterior motive), to save all of us. And you believe that us poorthangs are going to endear you for bailing us out of a bad situation? OUT OF NOWHERE YOU COME WITH THIS?

Just what the heck is in YOUR Kool Aid? And where were you cutting and pasting the word Tony from your first post, incidentally? I didn’t see it anywhere in there. So, yes, THAT theory still holds water lead.

Jack, I know you said goodbye. I’ve seen this one before. Some sick bastard came to these parts before and screamed goodbye and threatened lawsuits and all that on his way out of Dodge. Yea. WE are naive. We thought he was gone. hehehehe…NOT. Yep, these goodbyes as I see ’em usually take many, many posts.

Oh. Did I say I would present the proof of your ID? Hmmmmmm. Nudge me Jack.

Oh, Tony…did you have some more time yet to think of the simple answer to Jim’s simple question?

EDIT…Oops I accidentally WAS cutting and pasting some things from an earlier post and spelled Tony wrong a couple times. Magic. Sorry.

Tony,

When you use words like subserviant, naive, kool-aid. and a couple other of your antagonistic terms you probably won’t have the red carpet rolled out for you. I think we all are well aware of what is at stake when we click “submit”. We also know what benefits there are.

Your presumption of Naivity on our part is plain ignorant and insulting. I mean you are ignoring the fact that we know how to read. You are ignoring the fact that you are speaking to intelligent people. You are ignoring the fact that there are actually patent attorneys (well, at least 1… Hi Kelce) that are involved in this company and in these forums. You are ignoring the fact that we have all seen our share of JUNK in the industry and we probably have done our due diligence.

Because you have blasted EN in their own forum that may be construed as Rude. Because you are prying into business of others that has already been resolved between the parties it could be considered Medalsome. Complaining about something and not offering a solution is just plain whining.

Now, I don’t think you intend to be an insulting, ignorant, Rude, medalsome whiner. I really don’t; I think you are better than that. As it is though, you have not made a case for much more than that…

Perhaps EN would be that compassionate… Have you asked? or are you making another presumption? Do you feel that there should be a timeframe affiliated with each stage? perhaps a day or 8 hours per stage?

Oh yeah, they probably would not answer a hypothetical question like that, because they have enough to deal with in reality. No time for hypotheticals…

Tony, would it be enough for you if EN promises they will implement extra precautions so this never happens again? Or are you just caught up in enjoying being the self-appointed savior of all helpless, unwitting, and naive independent inventors where nothing EN does or says will be good enough for you?

Boy oh boy, shake the nest and out come the subservient drones to protect the queen. Doesn’t anyone have their own opinion around here? Or is the fear of retribution too great? I guess I wouldn’t say how I really felt either given the circumstances which although unfortunate, is understandable.

For the posts that attack me personally without addressing the issues I present, well, THAT’S the type of behavior reserved for children (not mine).

Greg, no retraction whatsoever so I’m sorry my friend. I do applaud your attempt to inject tone and meaning into my posts in order to massage the words towards your favor; unfortunately, it’s just way too obvious and no one is buying it. Further, to attack the low hanging fruit of a post without addressing the real points is a waste of time. As for the proof you’re searching for: if it walks like a duck and talks like a duck…

By the way, how long have you worked for EN?

As for the conspiracy theorists among you:

a) Sorry to disappoint but the reference to myself was a result of typing the reply on my phone in a busy airport. I was copying and pasting different replies to my original post and with a 4" screen and keyboard the size of a matchbox, it is rather difficult to get things proofed in that situation. Not a very juicy excuse I know, so I do apologize for that.

b) I’m not here to bash EN nor was I jilted by them or another site. If it feels better to project your own delusions and bad experiences on to my situation, well, so be it. I have no ulterior motives other than to make at least some of you question what really transpired here. Plenty of you expressed concern originally and were way too quick to reverse course – including the OP – after an answer that in my mind flung a lot of your rights out the window.

Look, I know a lot of you submit an idea and consider it property of EN at stage one. But there is also a great number of you, again including the OP, that are pursuing multiple sales/licensing paths in parallel. If EN shows you a dashboard with 8 stages, explains what each one means, makes you agree to them under signature, then ignores them – that to all of you is fine if it works in you favor. So what happens if it doesn’t work in your favor? What if the tables were turned? Say Darwin went to staoge 7 as EN intended but in the interim received a better offer from his licensing partner by his own efforts. Do you think EN would be just as compassionate and let him out of his contract to pursue those other venues? Would they buy the excuse, “Well I made a mistake and was going to opt out at stage 6, can we just forget this whole thing happened?” Of course not. So yes, those that think so are naive.

I’ve said my piece. This thread has garnered a lot of views and the fact that more regulars didn’t post than did tells me it has had an effect. The silence, as they say, is deafening…

VERY well spoken, Margaret!!

Mike Demers reveals why he stopped participating here…
http://www.edisonnation.com/forums/just-for-fun...

A discruntled red header shows up, SLAMS “Insiders”, down on EN’s policies, slams Mike Demers, KJ, me (basically anyone who tried to talk reason to them)… then proclaims “EN isn’t the only option” available…
http://www.edisonnation.com/forums/live-product...
then
the ultimate Outsider appears; down on Insiders, down on EN’s policies, desperate for 1 on 1 email contacts, & starts a thread questioning EN’s success rate…
http://www.edisonnation.com/forums/other/topics...
…then in the following month passes on several “links” to other submission companies, (each being questionable at best)

Then after Darwin’s revelation and Matt’s explaination, the “Tony” username shows up blasting EN and it’s members
in a blatent attempt at making a shamble of the “divine providence” that took place between Darwin and EN… but as it
turned out, it’s one of EN’s finest hours as it demonstrates the character of Darwin and EN!!

Their purpose is to publically tarnish EN’s reputation, pit members against each other, and breed disruption in this
“family” forum… and it may appear to be succeeding, initially, but I’m here to tell you my not-so-anonymous friend, your
cover is blown! You carry on because you have beleived the ones who preach the gospel that inventors are mindless idiots
and they certainly aren’t smart enough to see through your “mastery” of dissimulation! LOL

When I submit an idea to EN, it is with 100 % intention of having them try to secure a deal for me. I don’t care if they do it at stage 1 or stage 7. As a matter of fact, I would prefer they’d do it at stage 1. Then I wouldn’t have to wait so long to find out if someone was interested or not. Yes, we all have the option of pursuing these deals on our own, but that is likely the reason most of us are here – we want or need someone else to do it. I really don’t understand what the problem is. It’s not as if EN tried to pass the idea off on their own; they kept their promise to try to get him a deal. In joining EN you have choices… you can participate in the forums and perhaps learn to take your product to market on your own, or you can submit to the live product searches, or both. If you submit to an LPS, the expectation should be that EN is trying their best to get you a deal. I think this situation with D RRoth proves that is just what they are doing. And for the record, we don’t turn over our right to EN at stage 7, we agree to give them 6 months to let the sponsor do their due diligence. It is only when the sponsor signs the deal that we assign our rights. But isn’t that is what we are all hoping for when we submit to EN??

I think it was divine providence for D RRoth that he sought out the sponsor on his own, and that it happened to be the same sponsor, and that EN made the mistake, and that he now has the opportunity to get a larger percentage in his licensing deal. Good for him and bummer for EN. But as always EN has handled this with integrity.

While I definitely understand the original questioning of the situation, IMO, all concern should end when the original inventor (D RROTH) 100% agreed with ALL of Matt’s explanation. I will always take a man (or woman) for his word until proven otherwise. Everything else is just speculation.

Tony,
Nervy dude… You came into this guns-A-blastin. I don’t think you know what you or the rest of us know what you’re aiming for. How did they screw up? It seems that they did not Lock in the invention and Darwin is taking it to the next level on his own. It also seems that there is still an open door with EN. I don’t get who you are calling naive or even why you have involved yourself in grown folks business. It seems to me that the only reason you would do what you’re doing is out of malicious intent.

You are a hard one to figure out… I am just going to forgive you and hope that this conversation was one big silly mistake. Now, are you submitting anything or are you just here to complain? Your answer to that question will identify you as an inventor or complainer. The oonly thing worse than being an insulting child, as you have been to this point, is to be a noncontributing insulting complaining child. Who is naive and how?

Always on the mark….buddy!

Crack(ed)er jack …it’s magically schizophrenic.

Greg…..that would be cool to have a like button……..an iggy button would be cool as well..LOL

Hey Biskit………got a toob jack?

Kevin, we need a like button on here!…..good one :)

Tony,

I have no problem whatsoever with the fact that you chose to highlight the error….the issue has been noted and recorded eternally in the forums where we may all allow this information to weigh in on our decisions and how we choose to utilize the EN process now and in the future…..However, when you state:

“It’s a sad state of affairs that the management at EN would actually think for one second that a community of intelligent inventors would buy this excuse.”

….this implies deceit..and in the absence of hard evidence, this is where I take issue with your post. It is one thing to urge caution, to suggest, but when I say the above statement is “bold” can you defend how, with zero proof backing you, that my summary is “laughable at best”? Perhaps you could elaborate upon the laugh factor when indeed your statement is 100% pure speculation…and in my book, that would absolutely qualify your accusation as “bold” and “aggressive”…. —my adjectives are a far far cry from “laughable”…..

I think deep down you do agree with me as your next post seems to reflect a sort of reverse course, a vaguely conciliatory tone:

“The resulting excuse is not really the meat of my post…………”

Well, thank you for that retraction….sort of…..But it sure sounded like the meat of your post originally……..I am all about the conversation. the red flag alert, the policy questions……but to directly state, even to the point of using quotation marks around a fictional EN meeting launch that EN intentionally fabricated the explanation…..I just thought that crossed the line a bit my friend….either bring the proof or tone down the rhetoric………

EN reviews thousands (if my math is correct) of submissions annually……and makes tens if not hundreds of thousands of dashboard stage advances (clicks) each year…..in my book, to believe that ONE was made in err, is NOT out of the question……no conspiracy…..no behind the scenes scam….one instance…..if you can find where this has happened to others….please let me know…until then I am taking EN at their word….perhaps EN may need to go to a two man system where two approvals are needed before a submission moves…I can see the need for some QC discussions coming from this situation…..point taken…..I only take issue with the lopsided nature of your original post…..proof/evidence should be proportional to the degree of accusation and you threw out a bomb…..and zero proof to back it up…

I am all done here….may each take from this discussion what they may….

Tony, if you have an interest in inventing, I wish you the best and hope you will join in here. Good group of people – varied, opinionated, but good!

“…incidentally “Tony” in your “who am I today” world, you said Jim and “Tony” are drinking the Kool-Aid. Now theeeeere’s a big oops…”

LOL.. that’s a classic catch, Kevin, and proves our point! Thanks!

Edit… Looks like my post was removed, Kevin.

PapaJim I’m still waiting for this anonymous schizophrenic to answer a few things…incidentally “Tony” in your “who am I today” world, you said Jim and “Tony” are drinking the Kool-Aid. Now theeeeere’s a big oops for the masked, cowardly crusader who has nothing better to do than sling mud and…um….save us naive losers. So….

What IS your schedule Superdude? You are an outsider alright. In a whoooole different way than you are even close to understanding. How about ponying up some info about your real identity so all here can see why you are such a jilted sore loser. Where is your portfolio of successes that the not-so-naive people like you carry around. Maybe if you weren’t such a jilted sore loser you would go invent something. Now, if you’d like (and I knowwww many here would too) I can prove your identity. Keep poking your distasteful mugS in here and I’ll lay it out for the world to see…

Btw did you EVER sell any of that garbage you are peddling…I mean more than 200 bux worth in your “big” month"?

Now find something worthy to do on those other sites. I think we’ll be alright here. But thanks.

Sooooooo, Mr. McmAnus, Jim asked you a very pointed question. What is your intent?

EDIT…oops, looks like Frank had a similar thought at the similar time.

Tony, if you think this admitted oversight or honest mistake (or whatever you want to call it!) that’s been committed by Edison Nation is the worst thing that’s ever happened to naive and unsuspecting inventors, then you are indeed not only naive, but you are surely treading outside the realm of invention development reality! Instead of criticizing, you should offer real solutions so we can know what your real intentions are. At this point, I believe you have been hurt some way by another invention development company and you are persistent about placing the blame on EN even after you illogically qualify EN as being ‘good’! So you tell us what’s fair and equitable, or else make some sense in what you’re trying to say so we can give you credit for that.

Greg, you ARE naive. EN, like any other company, could not start deleting threads. Not only would that instantly incriminate them, the backlash would be far worse I assure you. It’s PR 101.  

And I do applaud culpability, as long as it is genuine.  Obviously only Darwin and EN know what really happened. The resulting excuse is not really the meat of my post and that you find it so “aggressive” and containing “intensity” is laughable at best. The facts as to what transpired were clearly laid out by Darwin and the resulting “mistake” by EN. EN screwed up. And this goes far beyond chalking it up to “nobody’s perfect” as everyone seems to be giving me. My real issue is that whatever the reason this happened, any explanation as to WHY it happened goes against the implied policy here (regardless of what you would “argue”).

And yes, a lot of us wouldn’t mind the jump from 1 – x. On the other hand, there are some of us that aren’t that desperate and actually want a choice. As was the case with Darwin. Somehow all of you are missing this point.    

Jim, a few lines with mostly accusations is sort of a cop out. You were an outsider once my friend, we all were. I have no ill intention and no crusade. I’m not trying to speak ill of EN. I just know many are curious as to what really happened but apparently are either too drunk on EN’s Kool-Aid  – such as you and Tony – or are so desperate for a G8. they will gladly eschew any of their rights as long as they win. I would imagine some also fear repercussion from those deciding the fate of their submissions. Whatever the case, it is unfortunate that more people aren’t taking EN to task over this. You know what, maybe I’m the naive one…  

Well said cowbell and papajim…

Tony, may I ask what your intention is then? Has it become your personal crusade to convince EN members how ‘bad’ EN is or how stupid we as members are for trusting EN? I just don’t see why an ‘outsider’ like you would want to jump in the middle of this situation. We all know what you are complaining about and your complaint will likely not change much anyway.

Thanks for the reply Jim. To your points:

I don’t quite get this one. Do you mean you’re happy EN actually does what they say they are going to do? Does that mean your boss is lucky that you do the job you were hired to?

“Second, the inventor in this case benefited greatly from the recognition and recommendation of EN with the prospective licensee and how can you say he was negatively affected?”

He wasn’t negatively affected, but only because EN admitted to making a “mistake.” Darwin pulled his submission at step 6 because he wanted to pursue the opportunity on his own. That way he wouldn’t "have to split the percentage with EN mostly" (his words). If EN did bump him to step 7 automatically, he wouldn’t get that chance and would be stuck to the terms of the EN licensing agreement. Now for most of us, EN’s terms are far better than anything we could possibly get on our own and so agreed not many would complain. But regardless, it should be up to US whether or not we pull a submission. A lot of us have some crazy ideas and we need some validation beyond our girlfriend, wife or mother that our invention is a good idea. So if we reach step 6, it tell us “hey, maybe we actually have something here.” Which leads to, “hey, maybe we can pursue this on our own and get a bigger piece of the pie.”

I mean why have the steps in the first place?

“When you consider the alternative excuses EN could have given, it seems reasonable to say they chose the most noble.”

- The problem is Jim, EN didn’t really have another card to play. They could have admitted to showing a prospective partner an idea at step 3 or 4 (which is likely what REALLY happened), but that would open up a whole ‘nother can of worms for them. I think they tried to cover their tracks but clearly didn’t think through the collateral damage of choosing the excuse they went with.

Look, I love the potential opportunity that EN provides for its community of inventors and out of the other companies like EN, it has a great track record and seem to be the MOST honest. And yes everyone makes mistakes. But this mistake, as I stated earlier, has some serious ramifications that go completely against the submission process they outline on your dashboard and in the agreement you sign when you submit a product. That excuse tells me one thing: cnce you hit that submit  button, consider the invention theirs.        

Tony,

As a long time EN contibutor, I will be first up to say that in every instance that I am aware of where EN policies and practices may have needed clarifications or explanations, the staff and management at EN have always stepped up to the plate and tackled any criticism or issues head on…..no deflections, no excuses……I much prefer to work with people unafraid to raise their hand in the air and say “Hey, we messed up, we are human – sorry!” as opposed to those who would choose to bury the subject…

With pressure on, EN could easily have opted for the delete thread button and noted it as resolved…..instead, they laid it all out there……maybe I am naive, but EN has also built a couple of years of trust with me and I have seen nothing that indicates to date any reason I should question that trust….call me naive but in the absence of any real evidence, your extremely bold post remains speculation in my book. For someone with a USC law background, I am shocked by the intensity of your accusation….very aggressive statements, especially with no hard facts to substantiate your views. I could more readily relate I guess to a middle of the road post calling for caution and noting the concern, but to state that you know the actions taken by EN were intentionally deceitful and misleading?…And no proof to back up your opinion? ..Wow.

As to the concern of EN taking my idea at Stage 4……Once I click submit, I am all in…….I would argue that people should not submit unless they are prepared for EN to take the idea at any time….I see the dashboards as nothing more than a convenience factor for the inventor…Trying to play roulette with the dashboard is asking for trouble……EN please feel free to take my submissions from 1-4, 1-5, 1-8…I am fine with things as they are.

I commend EN for their transparency. This place is on fire…New searches every week…..New members posting daily…..With growth will come challenges and mistakes..As long as you (EN) continue to operate with integrity (not to be confused with perfection) then I am staying….Thx.

Tony, welcome to posting. I can attest to it happening just like Matt said. I was following very close and it did not happen at 4. Start submitting and posting.

Both the staff and my fellow posters have taught me a lot in the last 2 years. This is one of the, if not the safest ways to learn all the ins and outs of product developement. Many posters and other inventors in my life have shared the horror stories from other inventor sites and the like.

EN got to the bottom of it all in less than 24 hours and that over a weekend. Give them credit in my opinion.

Tony, we’re not all naive members as you claim because some of us did question what had occurred. Other than the fact that I now know I’m more forgiving than you, I got a couple of things out of this problem resolution. First, I’m glad to know EN does pursue licensing opportunities through the Licensing Program and this is now a good example. Second, the inventor in this case benefited greatly from the recognition and recommendation of EN with the prospective licensee and how can you say he was negatively affected? Lastly, I haven’t ever heard a member complain when their submission jumped from any level to G7, no matter how fast or slow it was or how many steps got skipped in-between! When you consider the alternative excuses EN could have given, it seems reasonable to say they chose the most noble. I would ask when you find a totally honest person or company that never makes mistakes to handle one of your inventions to let us know, because we’re here at EN because we found them to be the closest to what you would be seeking.

Been reading this forum for a while and had to finally sign up and post after reading this thread. And so I have to ask, are you really all so naive? NONE of you are concerned with their excuse? I must say I’m very discouraged by this thread. It’s a sad state of affairs that the management at EN would actually think for one second that a community of intelligent inventors would buy this excuse. What’s even sadder is that you guys are. ;(

The topic of you meeting this morning? “Ok team, I want to hear how we’re going to get out of this mess.”

Judging from how things work around here, it was obvious that “our mistake, we should have moved you to step 7” was the only card you could play. The problem is, that presents in my mind an equally dangerous issue regarding the entire EN submission process.  With rights being automatically assigned at step 7, are you telling me that this invention went from a “Research & Design” phase to “Finalist” phase in one swoop? That’s pretty ridiculous considering that this inventor would have absolutely no opportunity to pull the submission if he/she wanted during the appropriate stages. It was only a fluke that the inventor did pull it when he did because his tone regarding this thread would be far different I assure you. Going from step 3 to step 6 is a great achievement, but moving right to step 7 is not only a detriment to every inventor here, I would imagine it’s a breach of the EN submission agreement. At any rate, it is a very scary to think that automatic rights assignment could happen as early as step 4 and every member of this community should really reconsider what this means for them and their inventions. And that is, EN can own your invention at Step 4.  

Outstanding Darwin! Good luck!

I just wanted to say thanks to the staff of E.N. for getting to the bottom of this issue, doing it quickly and for keeping it in a public forum.

Good luck D RRoth

If he doesn’t do something I will be right back :)

Thanks for all your help. I am a strong EN supporter.

Hi Guys,
We just finished our Monday morning staff meeting and got our team together to get to the bottom of this.

When we saw Darwin’s submission, we thought of a particular contact at a particular company who we have worked with in the past. We moved Darwin’s idea (or we thought we moved his idea) to G7 so that one of our licensing experts could reach out to this contact. It sounds like we screwed up and moved the idea to G6 rather than G7. This all happened in the matter of a day or two. Scott is correct, we don’t pitch ideas that have not reached G7 status (unless they are specifically in our Insider Licensing Program). This is the first time I know of that we ever moved an idea to the to G6 when intending G7. I imagine it happened because as Darwin noted, we moved it several stages very quickly and we must have lost track of which stage it was on. In our licensing team’s mind, it was G7.

It sounds like when we presented Darwin’s idea to our contact, he correctly asked Darwin who was representing him because Darwin had also been in talks with the same company.

Darwin, I’m sorry for the confusion this has caused you and I’m excited for you and your product. If you decide that you would like to reconsider our representation, just let us know and we’ll get you back into the system (correctly at G7 this time!). If you wish to do it on your own, I hope you knock it out of the park!

Alan you do the same. Always looking to solve issues for our community.

Thanks Scott. I appreciate that it may have been a miscommunication and all I wanted to be sure of was that I understand that the steps and stages are what they are. Have a good Sunday.

Thanks Scott!

Darwin and I have spoken off line about specifics and it is being researched…and it IS Sunday !!

So Alan, I would venture to say that we will understand situation early in the week.

I think in general the forum topic is over and will be resolved by the involved parties.

But as mentioned above the policy is Stage 7 (G7) items are those that get presented and we do not have outside resources that we share an idea with for review purposes.

If anything has happened here there may be a 3rd party that both EN and Darwin know and in conversation both may be aware of the same product.

So , yes in general think the mystery is closer to solved and Darwin and our team will deal with from this point.

So the mystery is solved? Inquiring minds want to know?

You are “on the ball”, Scott! ;)

Great discussion this morning, thanks for all the help.

Becky -

Not a problem. Our goal is to inform and also be available to address a concern or a problem that a community member is facing. I look forward to helping D RRoth and getting to the bottom of his situation.

scott, that must be an old email rothindustry@yahoo.com

Mr. Dromms,

Thank you for responding to this thread. I’m very glad to see the ENTeam checking in on the forums and providing accurate information for all concerned. As a really newbie to the forums as well as submitting my product to a search I find your information very valuable. Thanks again Scott!

D RRoth -

I have sent you an e-mail previously. I suggest that you reply to that e-mail, let’s review the situation and should not be posting in a forum until the facts are in front of both of us.

Thanks and look forward to reviewing your information.

They sent me a copy of the picture with the EN logo on it, I can fwd it to you if you want. Just be careful with accusations of misleading topics and discussions, this is my livelyhood. Thanks

Darwin Roth