Trouble at t' US invention millInventors and bar-room brawl aficionados could do worse than look in on this discussion forum – at the time of writing, 258 comments and rising fast – where several members of the United States inventor community are busy smashing furniture and filling the air with oaths, accusations, passion, libel, illiteracy and incoherence. The title of the discussion – reproduced here exactly as written – is:
Would You Call DAVIDSON INVENTION SUBMISSION COMPANY..” One Of Your OWN “. And Praise Them For Biulding A Cool Place With Inventor RIP OFF MONEY.Explanation follows, but the capitals alone give some sense of the pressure about to blow.
The focus of it all is Mark Reyland, CEO of the United Inventors Association of America. He wrote a blog piece praising well-known US inventor services outfit Davison (not Davidson). They, it appears, are not held in high esteem by inventor John Young, who then kicked off the discussion. Hence the title.
But forget Davison. John Young’s main target is Mark Reyland. Why? The precise reason is unclear to say the least, but the direction of travel of John’s loathing is beyond doubt. And it’s evidently shared by other US inventors.
Inventors united against United InventorsWhat seems to be happening now is that several US inventors who also have a bone to pick with Reyland are jointly challenging him to justify his claim to be a big wheel in the US inventor services world, and to respond to a number of allegations of sharp practice.
To give Reyland his due, he’s willing to answer back: but in more than one name, never to the point, and in an irrational and provocatively ad hominem manner that merely adds fuel to the fire.
Unfortunately – or fortunately, if it’s entertainment you’re after – several of his adversaries can easily match his inflammatory ramblings and taunts with their own, which makes the ‘discussion’ somewhat difficult to follow. (An honourable exception is inventor and entrepreneur Nancy Tedeschi, who is doing her patient best to get answers from Mark Reyland by asking nicely. With no success whatsoever.)
Inventor services company in name only?Throwing all legal caution to the winds (when in Rome…), our own take on the shenanigans is this:
First, the United Inventors Association of America may be more smoke and mirrors than reality. Despite its ‘board of directors’ we’d bet that for all practical purposes UIA is Mark Reyland and no one else.
Second, Mark Reyland is a paranoid fantasist who mistakenly thinks he’s very clever in his use of multiple personalities and other forms of fakery to keep his plates spinning.
Yes, it’s that bad.
One can speculate on how many screws might be loose, but our guess is that for Mr Reyland the priority is seeking attention, not making money. And boy, is he getting a lot of attention right now. That probably makes him a happy, if disturbed, bunny while leaving his more mercurial adversaries raging and frothing impotently. Thus, stalemate rather than checkmate.
Our own ten pennorth of advice was to have UIA tax returns checked for any irregularities. That’s how they got Al Capone, after all. But Capone had assets. We suspect that any serious investigation of UIA will discover that it has no real substance, which might account for the inability so far for critics to deliver a knockout blow.
Other than that, starving the man of attention will probably have more effect than feeding him yet more of the oxygen of publicity that he craves. But as other posters seem unable to get that message, fat chance of a speedy end to all the increasingly futile exchanges. This show will run and run!
Do we have an equivalent situation in the UK? Not that we know of. But when it comes to unanswered questions there is always Nesta, which will be the subject of our next post…
UPDATE: As of 26 January the LinkedIn discussion thread seems to have vanished, after more than 500 posts. Probably for the best as it was all getting absolutely nowhere, but it still leaves a very large question mark hanging over the integrity of UIA and the people who run it.