A recent post by inventor, Roger Brown, has been setting off a few alarm bells in the inventing community and we really have to question, what the heck is going on?
This was written about a specific inventor, but the inventor he’s commenting on was not stuck nor did they have any hurdle where Mark gave them a needed solution. Of course Roger already knows this because he showed the invention to a company on behalf of the inventor only days after it was presented to Mark Reyland. Is he saying this didn't happen now? (we've seen the emails)
We’re not really sure why Roger is fighting Mark’s fight. Inventors out to expose Reyland try ignoring Roger's interference but he just won't stop going on and on about Mark and throwing himself infront of Mark as his protector. You think this hasn't raised HUGE questions, Roger? You have even emailed an inventor to ask him to stop coming after you while you still spread lies about him and another inventor. This doesn't make any sense.
Quote from Roger in a Linkedin topic
We’re not really sure why Roger is fighting Mark’s fight. Inventors out to expose Reyland try ignoring Roger's interference but he just won't stop going on and on about Mark and throwing himself infront of Mark as his protector. You think this hasn't raised HUGE questions, Roger? You have even emailed an inventor to ask him to stop coming after you while you still spread lies about him and another inventor. This doesn't make any sense.
Quote from Roger in a Linkedin topic
“On the topic of PPAs. If you were working on a product and were stuck for a solution to get your product over a hurdle you needed to make it marketable and I provided you the solution you needed would I now be considered a co-inventor or would you just take my solution and not include me in the PPA?”
In the above statement, is Roger considering the claim that a manufactured sample and some packaging equals co-inventor? If this is true, then wouldn't the factory actually be the co-inventor seeing as THEY determined the material formulas used and the process? (we saw those emails too) So when Sullivan changed the material to silicone and adjusted the width, is he too now a co-inventor? hmmmm...maybe Roger needs to do his homework before making such statements.
Inventors have posted how Roger, in the past, has helped them with problems or hurdles when it comes to their inventions. Given this recent post by inventor, Roger Brown, many inventors are re-thinking if they want to send their invention to him for feedback.
Inventors have posted how Roger, in the past, has helped them with problems or hurdles when it comes to their inventions. Given this recent post by inventor, Roger Brown, many inventors are re-thinking if they want to send their invention to him for feedback.
According to Reyland, Roger is the idea, draw a pretty picture guy. Where as Tania was the inventor who took responsibility for invention function. Below is one of many posts Mark wrote about the inventor Roger insults and Reyland stalks.
Mark Reyland markreyland | "They have also taken the time to learn the process and take responsibility for the function of the invention. We’ll develop it into a full retail ready product, but it would have been much harder if they had not stepped up to the plate and done the initial work" |
Mark Reyland and Kenny Durham are cut from the same cloth, scam artists and thieves. One does have to wonder what Roger Brown brings to the table, who seems to be all over the internet promoting these two.
http://www.ripoffreport.com/patent-trademark-services/innovators-warehouse/innovators-warehouse-kenny-du-3f19b.htmWe wonder too. We STILL believe we’ll be seeing Roger on the board within the UIA soon. Call it a gut feeling or call it, Mark told somebody this over the phone... we were told Mark had conversations stating he is planning “new blood” for the UIA and they will be people of his choosing.
Time will certainly tell, that’s for sure.
Tell you what Roger. We hear you like passing around audio recordings for people to post. This has been passing around for awhile now. You might appreciate it. It's where Reyland's patent attorney explains how Mark was only added on the PPA for the materials (in case the issued patent was attacked) but the materials are not important and would not be part of the claims. Since Reyland didn't contribute to the claims, guess what? He's not a co-inventor. Trouble is Reyland never tells people the truth and won't listen to anyone. Even more troubling is when people like you start repeating the crap Reyland feeds them. We wonder if Mark's ex-partner may have been a victim of Reyland's as well.
Tell you what Roger. We hear you like passing around audio recordings for people to post. This has been passing around for awhile now. You might appreciate it. It's where Reyland's patent attorney explains how Mark was only added on the PPA for the materials (in case the issued patent was attacked) but the materials are not important and would not be part of the claims. Since Reyland didn't contribute to the claims, guess what? He's not a co-inventor. Trouble is Reyland never tells people the truth and won't listen to anyone. Even more troubling is when people like you start repeating the crap Reyland feeds them. We wonder if Mark's ex-partner may have been a victim of Reyland's as well.
Things to listen for.
#1 Maybe Mark Reyland didn't relay the information to you.
( In a post on an inventor forum Reyland claims the patent attorney explained it to the inventor, repeatedly) see inventor VS Reyland on the right
#2 Mark Reyland was not involved with the banoodle, which is 100% TRUE.
(Now if someone can only convince Reyland of this)
#3 I don't know what Mark Reyland has told you
(apparently he told the inventor he knew nothing about being on the PPA) see Inventor VS Reyland link on the right.
No comments:
Post a Comment