Roger Brown wrote:I know an Inventor that got a deal with a toy company. he was excited that his action figures were going to be on the market and he was going to get a royalty on the sales. What he failed to read was that it stated he would get royalties on the sales of every action figure made in the USA. Well I can guess you have already figured where 99.9% of the action figures are made. He has yet to receive any rolyalty beyound the small advance they paid him. He went to court but as the Judge pointed out he had time to read it and get legal advice prior to signing the document.
I would agree that in this case the lingo was designed to be shady and dubious in the hopes the inventor would not read between the lines as it were. But this is fine print about the deal he signed, the macro print being that the overall document was about producing his idea as toy action figures.
In the Ruckus Nation case the fine print of the document an eligible winner must sign to be paid is of course important, but the macro print is 'to get your money you must sign this document which relinquishes the i.p. to HopeLab'. Even if you didn't read the fine print the macro print is fairly straight up and easy to understand. I suppose one might wonder if the inventor would be created in any production model and would have to read the fine print etc., but in terms of "you win and get x dollars by signing this document and we get the i.p.' the competition appears to my eyes to be very plain; no fine print reading required.
It was stated that the person smart enough to win would also know better to read any document before signing it. I have to disagree. There are a lot of book smart people who can't find their way out oa room with one door. There are also a large number of people with great inventions that will never make it to market because they don't have a decent business sense.
I bow to your experience in the field since I'm only an inventor in my mind lol. But again, at least the 'winner' document's main intent is very up front regardless of any legalese it may contain.
Consider all the people that are still getting ripped off by unscrupulous invention submission companies that are only after the Inventors money. This is after all the publicy and constant ranting by people like us trying to warn them and they still fall prey to them.
Totally hear you guys on this front, I guess I just question whether historical precident and a desire to watch-dog inventors is, in the ruckus case, causing a bit of a mis-perception and attribution of shadiness which isn't really there. Meh, just my $.02
I actually have a couple (3 maybe) ideas for great commercials, and I wish to hell there was a forum for marketing a marketing idea and how to go about that

They've been rattling around my head for years now and I have zero idea how to put them into motion.