Ronald J. Riley - blog postings and opinions

Ronald J. Riley does not want you to read the information posted on this website. Here is a small sampling of blog postings that explain the mindset of this individual.

Monday, May 23, 2011

Ronald J. Riley & Bob Lougher - what they don't want you to know.

Ronald J. Riley is threatening to close down this blogspot:

"I could bring a lawsuit and force each of the service providers to give up their server logs. Or I can pass your communications to law enforcement at no personal cost :-)"

Disclaimer: The following information has simply been collected from other blogs and websites. If you have been threatened by Ronald J. Riley or his alias "Inventor Ed", please send all information to:

9/6/10: "Dozier Sues College Dropout for Trademark Infringement"

"The lawsuit alleges that Ronald J. Riley has "perpetrated one of the most successful business credential frauds

ever committed upon the inventor and entrepreneur community." "Around 1990, Riley was an unemployed

community college dropout living in a mobile home. Using the Internet, he developed an elaborate scheme that

grew in sophistication over the years to portray himself as a renowned and successful inventor. He made money

as a consultant, offering his “feigned expertise” to help inventors and entrepreneurs commercialize their ideas and


Blog Postings & Opinions:

From UT Blog:

Capitalist said... Ronald J Riley is a nutcase. He posted literally thousands of hate-filled accusations against American

Express,including these comments:

"I was implying that the Amex family was in-breeding."

“If I am in the mood for a bit of fun I stick the phone between my legs and pass gas.”

“I have the ear of tens of thousands of people in the inventor community.”

"I have been kicking the tar out of NWA for about eight years and they have been totally powerless to stop me. I estimate that the negative PR has cost NWA millions of dollars.""Is it true that American Express has a breeding program where they are crossbreeding their most obnoxious and ignorant staff to produce a superior race of Amex shills?"

"I am willing to bet that all three of them can't figure out when theyneed to wipe unless head stooge tells them." "I believe that this is their form of foreplay, and that they are getting ready to mate. I surmise that they are planning to produce genetically tailored offspring for American Express."

“The top dogs are most full of dodo and as the dodo spreads out each successively lower tier gets covered.” “To be blunt, I make my living by eating CEO's lunches. I am very good at it.”

“The way you conduct yourself comes across as a young male with raging hormones. Either that or you have one of the worse cases of thingy envy I have ever seen in a women."

"I am a credentialed investigative journalist." This is a SMALL sample of what this idiot posted. To see it all first-hand, just look on amexsux dot com.

There is a search function available. Here's the kicker....someone found out that his claim against American Express was completely bogus!

Riley's response: Capitalist is one of American Expresses' infamous financial advisors. Apparently Amex pays people to try to obscure the issue that their advice leads to high commissions, great Amex profits, and very low returns for the poor slobs who bought them. One of the worst mistakes any new business can make is to get credit from Amex. Stories abound about how Amex suddenly pulls credit lines even when all bills have been paid on time. This often drives the young company into a crisis. And that is then a good excuse for Amex to balloon the interest. Companies go broke as a result of dealing with American Express. Amex commercials about being the choice for small business is all hype and no performance. Ronald J Riley, President

About Riley and his telepathic associate:

From PC ADVISOR: http = 394&blodid=4

Ronald J. Riley Unmasked: "Ronald J. Riley has fleeced inventors for thousands of dollars by using Internet sites and free time to prey

upon the unsuspecting. Claiming to rub elbows with politicians, no politician claims knowledge of Riley.

He co-owns InventorEd & Professional Inventors Alliance (PIA) with the infamous Penny Ballou. A self-

proclaimed scientologist with the ability to communicate telepathically over 1000’s of miles.

Together they generate insufficient income to file taxes and have been unwilling to disclose the use of

donated funds. We have never found Riley claims to be true and no source political or otherwise claim to

have received funds from Riley for the purpose of furthering any inventor cause. Based upon their income

levels it is now suspected that both Riley and Bellou use funds for personal bills in hopes of perpetuating

the scam and finding a wealthy unsuspecting inventor who will donate large sums."

From: UT Blog

Walter said:

I know Riley. All day long he sits at his computer spewing nonsense on on every blog that will allow him to

participate. Even a former Director of his "Board" thinks he's a fool (and has posted his comments about how

'pig-headed' Riley is). His good friend Penny Ballou, is a 'telepathic Scientologist' who has been involved with

Riley's schemes for years. Riley is a genius at exaggerating and convincing others that he has accomplished great

things. This is how he rakes in donations and fees. In reality, he hasn't sold one invention that anyone can verify.

All he talks about is his great success with Grandma Tibbetts and how much he hates Skippy Peanut Butter

(among a hundred other companies). He has no verifiable success as an inventor. He doesn't seem to know

anymore about the patent system than anyone who has read the Patent Office's free booklets. There is no one

better at faking the part of a patent expert than Riley. But, the people who know him, understand

what an awful human being he truly is.

Ronald J. Riley & Bob Lougher by Alice B.

Ronald J. Riley's ineffective (bogus) companies had close ties with Bob Lougher and Lougher is a

former employee of an invention marketing scam (the type of company Riley claims to despise). Yet, there

appears to be a close relationship between Riley and Lougher. Riley describes his relationship with Lougher on

his website "InventorEd". So, the question must be asked, does take money from inventor's in the

same way that Riley's organizations appear to? The Attorney General of Michigan (Riley's State) and Attorney

General of New York (UIAUSA's Domicile) should launch an inquiry into the questionable activities of

PIAUSA. org (Riley's group) and and their very clever practice of accepting huge "donations"

from inventors and others. What the heck are all these donations being used for? Is the money being reported to

the IRS as income or chartible donations? I would guess that Bob Lougher did what Riley has done: taking the

name of a formerly reputable organization, and using its prior reputation to front as a new legitimate entity (but,

with very different intentions). By hiding behind the name of a defunct - once reputable organization - the new

administrators (usually high-pressure salesman) can prey on the innocent inventor and extract thousands of

dollars from him. How is this possible? Let's look at the type of "donations" UIAUSA wants you to donate to

their organization:

Corporate Sponsor Gold:

More than $10,000.00

Silver: $10,000.00

Bronze: $ 5,000.00 - $9,000.00

Sponsorship: $5,000.00

Patron: $2,000.00 per YEAR

Banner ads: $500.00 every (3) months or $1500.00 per year.

And this is just the beginning. UIAUSA offers patent searches, marketing evaluations, and all kinds of invention

marketing services - just like the invention-scam artists they are denouncing! So much for taking the moral high-

ground, and warning inventors about all the scams out there!They are also trying to circumvent the invention

development laws by claiming to be a non-profit organization. Meanwhile, PIAUSA and UIAUSA should

not be exempt from State & Federal regulations, and should be pursued by the FTC.

UIAUSA claims to have (5) success stories about successful inventions that no one has heard of. The FTC

should investigate whether any of these people ever made a dime as a result of buying UIAUSA's services.

UIAUSA is selling patent searches for $550 with the disclaimer that they can renegotiate this price if they want

to. Usually non-profit organizations do not sell patent searches to the public - and if they do, they are not allowed

to split fees with patent attornys performing the patent search. If UIAUSA is "fee-splitting" with patent lawyers;

The US Patent and Trademark office (Dept. OED) should be notified immediately.

For $312 they will sell you a marketing evaluation which tells you about your possible chances of

commercializing your invention. However, instead of calling your payment - 'a fee'; they call it "an investment".

This investment buys you worthless written material and some guesswork about your possibility of success(in

percentages!). Considering the fact that 98% of all patents fail (that's 2% out of approx. 6M) - your chances of

success are not very good. In fact, your chances of success are much better if you try to market your invention

yourself. Just hire a legitimate patent lawyer and a find company to build a prototype. Next, identify companies

that could manufacture your product, and contact them to see if they'll set-up a meeting with you (most large

companies have strict policies about NOT accepting outside inventions). If you're fortunate enough to find a

company who will meet with you, ask them to sign a confidentiality (non-disclosure) agreement (which your

patent attorney will provide for you). After the company signs this non-disclosure form - you can meet with the

company (along with your attorney) and disclose the details of your invention (bring your working prototype with

you). If the company is interested, let your patent attorney negotiate with the company (you always have the right

to accept or reject any deal). But, don't be greedy, and listen to your attorney's advice.

Now - THAT's HOW YOU DO IT. Anyone - who tells you otherwise, is either a fool, or is trying to rip you

off!!!! So, you certainly don't need UIAUSA to take your hard-earned money. All you'll be buying is the old

invention-development model that is preying on your hopes and dreams. It's the oldest trick in the 'invention-

marketing scam' book!

Now - what the heck is UIAUSA doing with all these donations of $10,000, 5,000, 2,000 per annum? and what

about all these other "investments" that they are lining their pockets with? Does it cost 'hundreds of thousands' of

dollars to run a non-profit website? No, it costs about $20 a month for web-hosting these days. WHERE IS

THE REST OF THE MONEY GOING? "The simplest answer is usually the correct one" (Occam's Razor).

And finally, the public needs to understand that this age-old invention marketing scam has taken a new form.

Now, the game (for former invention-marketing salesmen) is to form a non-profit organization, work with a

retired oddball patent lawyer, and offer the same old one-two punch: $300 for a boilerplate invention evaluation,

and then $3,000 - $30,000 for a marketing program (leading to a guaranteed failure).

Now listen: these invention marketing programs do not work -they have never worked - and they will never

work. And now - unfortuantely - a new, sad day has dawned in the invention-development world. These

huxsters have figured-out a way to gain the inventor's trust and collect huge donations from the unsuspecting

inventor. And, so here are the state-of-the-art deceptions: and

This is only my opinion - you decide for yourself.

Charlie Henderson said... "After reading this blog I wanted to do my own research into Ronald J. Riley and/or InventorED. I found something interesting information at: where he is asking for contributions to InventorED.

Also, when he is asking for money for his other group, PIAUSA, he says his direct telephone number is in Washington, DC, but here he says his direct phone number is in Grand Blanc, Micigan. So, where is this guy?

Notice that Ronald J. Riley does not disclose how much money he collects from people each year. In fact, he doesn't want to disclose any finanicial information about his organization to anybody. What is he trying to hide? " From: justgive dot org Fiscal Year: Information not available

Assets: Information not available (from IRS BMF)

Income: $0 (from the IRS BMF) No. of Board Members: 3 No. of Full-Time Employees: 0

No. of Part-Time Employees: 0 'This organization is seeking funds from contributions and grants. These funds will be used for unrestricted operating expenses, special projects and endowments.' "The whole thing sounds fishy to me."

From various blogs where Riley posts his opinions:

Don't Join PIAUSA

Reader post by: williamscottesq

Watch your wallet. Hold onto your credit card. Ronald J. Riley's organization wants your money. That's why he wants the unsuspecting public to "donate" to "PIAUSA".

After reading his posts over the last several years, the reader will be able to judge the motives and intentions of this individual. Mr. Ronald Riley has a very creative imagination. He's copied information from the public domain onto his websites and makes unsubstantiated claims about how he fights for individual inventor. The only problem is, there's no verifiable proof that any of his claims are true!

It seems that the only area in which he excels is posting his verbiage on all the patent blogs trying to solicit "donations" from the naive inventor. He does this by constantly promoting his organization PIAUSA.

Mr. Riley has a long history of constantly trying to collect money for his websites and organizations. Please ask Mr Riley how your money will be spent, and have him send you an email stating that none of your funds will be spent on his personal expenses.

Also, ask how he has spent past "donations". Please do not give any money to Riley until you check him out thoroughly. Mr. Riley should disclose exactly how much money he's collected from the public, and how the money is spent.

Any legitamate non-profit group will give you this information. Riley is a very clever fellow and he's very good at playing the part of "patent advocate", but don't be fooled - there's no track record here of licensing patents, backing individual inventors or earning royalties.

From blog:

Ronald J. Riley is your A-Typical Inventor who is a complete moron and has no idea how to deal with the real world. He claims to have helped people secure license agreements, because they have the best idea. BULL. Ron Riley and "InventorEd" is a joke to all but 1% of inventors and patent holders. Do yourself a favor and hire someone to help you get your product or patent to market, not Ronald J. Riley.

From Techdirt by Mike:

If you read the comments on this site regularly -- especially concerning posts having to do with patents or the patent system -- you're probably quite familiar with a guy named Ronald J. Riley. He's quite the character. He's also quite the fan of the existing patent system. He's started a bunch of different "organizations" supposedly to protect the patent system, though there are plenty of accusations that Riley's main focus in life is getting unsuspecting inventors to give him money. Someone has even created a site cataloguing Riley's ridiculous statements. It's not clear what Riley has actually done in his life, but he has been effective over the years in using his made up organizations to give himself an air of legitimacy, which often gets him quoted in the press on patent issues, despite showing a consistently poor understanding of the process of innovation, technology and the patent system itself.

Techdirt: Arnold Kempler:

Riley is a Cyber-Bully if ever there was one. He could be the poster child. IMO here are the issues that Riley must overcome:

1) commercial disparagement;

2) slander & libel;

3) copyright & trademark infringement;

4) misrepresentation of invention services;

5) offering patent advice without a law license;

6) offering to help inventors market their inventions without complying with State & Federal law.

7) not disclosing all income received;

8) misrepresentation as a non-profit organization;

9) Cyber-Bullying and;

10) misrepresentation of his credentials to Federal & State authorities.In my opinion, Dozier is not suing Riley because he is a pest. There's so much more information you need to be aware of.

Riley has been accepting 'donations' of sizeable amounts (some believe in the range of hundreds of thousands of dollars) for the last 15 years. These 'contributions' come from unsuspecting inventors and others, who truly believe in his expertise as a successful inventor. Riley has no financial success as an inventor, and no true expertise in the field. He's not a lobbyist and not a graduate of MIT. In other words, anyone could create a website with publicily available patent information, and pretend to be a patent expert (and rake in 'donations').

Techdirt: Truth-Is-Out:

Mr Riley has 5 patents pertaining to rail transportation (4892980, 4919057, 4924164, 48984521, 553260) four of which were assigned to J. N. Fauver Company in Michigan. This is the only deal Riley ever had and it was scrapped by the company. This is also where his hatred for corporations began. Riley believed that he cornered the market for highspeed rail technology. The truth is that this frist-semister, jr. college drop-out couldn't engineer a highspeed rail improvement if it was a divine gift. Obviously these patents were never produced and they were never brought to market. Riley has no experience, no success and no credentials. He is an incompetent loser that could not live with his failure so he lashes-out at everything. He is an angry little man who finds revenge bullying while he hides behind his keyboard. Legislation needs to be enacted against Nut-cases like Riley. His neurosis has no place in IP, invention or the business environment.

Blog postings about Ronald J. Riley (with replies):

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 Re: Ronald J. Riley

Guest Marcus Anderson: The comment above by Ronald Riley explains why he, and most small inventors, never get anywhere with their inventions. "Inventors have big egos, and I'm no exception" says Riley. "I know inventors who are flat out incapable of working with other people." At least Mr. Riley is being honest when he says he's an egotist. My question is, how does Mr. Riley expect to work with patent lawyers, marketing specialists and possible licensees if he and other small inventors can't get along with anyone? Another question I have is, "why would anyone get a patent in the first palce if they can't work with other people who could help them market it?""After reading Ronald Riley's comments, I agree with him that he has a tremendous ego problem. But with this kind of self grandizement, along comes paranoia, fear and greed. Maybe that's why most small inventors fail. Maybe that's why Mr. Riley will always fail too.

Guest (Arnold Van Kemp):

I agree with your comments about Ronald Riley. He has a very high opinion of himself, but he seems to have nothing to show for it. I have not seen any proof of his expertise in licensing patents or earning royalties for inventors. He certainly believes that he is an expert on patent matters, but where's the proof? After reading his articles, I'm not convinced that he's had any success in this field, even though he wants others to believe otherwise. The most disturbing part of his "work" comes in the form of many "" websites that would cause any rational person to question Ronald J. Riley's credibility. No one has to be an egotist to be successful. Being proud to be an egotist is Mr. Ronald Riley's downfall and one day he will receive back what is coming to him.

Riley's reply:

1) There is a delicate balance between exercising an appropriate degree of caution and taking steps to protect one’s interests and being too paranoid. Most certainly I have known inventors who were unable to succeed do to paranoia. Conversely, those who did not recognize that producing an invention of value will draw the attention of patent pirates generally get blind sided and fail. There is a balance which leads to success while being too trusting or being excessively distrustful clearly leads to failure. 2) Ego is not unique to inventors. All one has to do is spend some time lobbying government or working with entrepreneurs to recognize that ego abounds. The lesson is that it takes incredible determination to succeed in any high stakes venture and ego plays a big role in such success. Ego can also be the cause of failure. Once again it is balance which determines if ego helps or hinders.

Ronald J. Riley

From U. T. Blog:

Ronald J. Riley is one of the meanest, irrational and intensely bitter human beings that you'll ever encounter. He has nothing better to do than to harass people and companies on the internet. He's never made a single penny from his "inventions". He lies, twists, manipulates, needles, harrasses, and purposely attacks people for the just for the thrill of it. He recently posted malicious comments all over the internet about a well-respected school teacher that he didn't like. He maintains many websites that attack amex, skippy, northwest air, ameriprise and countless numbers of people who don't agree with him. Mr. Riley seriously needs medication for his delirium. Just look at any of his websites and you'll be able to tell right away, that this is one angry, insecure, petty, insignificant, whimpy, little man who's trying to make himself feel important.

Franklin Willimas said...

You probably won't be hearing from Ronald J. Riley anymore because you called his bluff. He's moved on to other blogs where people don't question his "authority". You've raised some excellent points and he doesn't want to admit that he's altered the language of the law on his website. But, I've read his other posts, and this is his typical modus operendi. I don't think you're dealing with a stable individual here. Have you seen his amexsux, inventored, northworstair and skippy-scam websites? He's a real piece of work.

Riley admits taking $ from Inventors:

" does take donations from individual inventors but such donations only supply about 10% of our operating budget. No I am not a patent practioner. But I am a commercially successful independent inventor. I do depend on a multitude of patent practioners for expert advice. And when it comes to public policy issues I have depended on recently deceased former patent commissioner Don Banner and top IP law experts Irving Kayton and James Chandler. In addition Pat Choate is deeply involved in the public policy aspects of both and bio is available at I am listed in a multitude of Marquis Who's Who publications. I do highly value First Amendment rights."

Ronald J. Riley

William Scott Esq. said...

Here is reply to Mr. Ronald J. Riley's post on CircleID's blog after he read my post about criticizing his lack of qualifications for offering patent advice:"

In response to Ronald J. Riley, I'm sorry to say that the real "stooge" here is you. But, I'm not surprised by your response. Once again, your natural tendency is to attack and belittle those who try to tell the truth about you. 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." From: Business2.0

The above referenced Blog does not belong to me. It was created William Scott Esq. William Scott Esq. is not a registered patent attorney and the only information I could find on him is that he is a disbarred attorney and was also a lobbyist. Perhaps he could be a bit more forth right and tell us who is employing him. This person is also posting under several other aliases. In spite of numerous requests on a number of forums William Scott Esq. has failed to provide any facts to support his claim to have expertise about inventors, patents, or the realities of the trials and tribulations which inventors face.I am the Executive Director of and the President of the Professional Inventors Alliance. I also own several commercial enterprises. InventorEd is a nonprofit with over 500 web pages which exceed 3000 printed pages. It delivers web content to inventors in nearly 80 countries. InventorEd helps aspiring inventors become entrepreneurs.The Professional Inventors Alliance is a trade organization which represents the interests of those inventors who do achieve economic success. We educate and lobby government and work with media to help keep the patent system and other laws and regulations friendly to startup companies.Also, on the issue of rather or not I have expertise. I do speak a many inventor and business associations, and about the time William Scott Esq.was conducting this defamatory campaign I spoke on a panel at Harvard. It would seem that Harvard law school staff thought I had something to offer. A bio is posted at

Reply by William Scott, Esq.

Dear Mr. Riley,

You constantly amuse me. I had an especially good hardy chuckle when you spoke of your website InventorED. You are quite skillful at stealing information from other websites and compiling thousands of pages of general information which are readily available in the public domain.

Your conceit is also quite comical as you fake the part of playing the successful inventor who has earned royalties from his patents. To date, you have NOT named one of your products that pay you a royalty. I must therefore assume that you are NOT a successful inventor.

If this is the case, then all your self-promotion as a patent expert and all your self-appointed titles such as President, Executive Director, etc. are but a sham to cover up your lack of legal credentials and lack of true financial success. You may be able to convince "Mom & Pop inventors" that you are their savior and a super-hero advocate for change, but you are just fooling these novices as well as yourself.

The fact is, you're doing more harm than good by offering quasi-legal advice when you're not licensed to practice patent law. If one of these novice inventors is foolish enough to follow your layman's advice about patent matters, you shouldn't be surprised if one day they hold you personally responsible for having lost their life savings.

Mr. Riley, you are treading into treacherous waters when you hold yourself out to be an authentic patent expert. One day this approach will backfire and you will surely suffer the consequences.Aside from all your blabber about how everyone's out to get you, I'd like to know what function you think you're providing with all your internet rhetoric?

But - I have to give you credit for being one of the greatest exaggerators I've ever encountered. I'm sure you've convinced reporters, small inventors and inventor clubs that you really know what you're talking about. And, I can see how you're able to fool many people - but, you don't fool me.

Mr. Riley, you should be ashamed of yourself and your useless chatter. You're nothing but a slick spin-doctor as evidenced by your other websites (your Skippy-scam website is a masterpiece of sheer, egotistical propaganda). And now, you say you were busy speaking at Harvard. Ok, that's impressive.

What was the name of the seminar at which you were speaking? What was the exact date? Was it the real Harvard University that sponsored your presentation? What did you speak about? How many people were in attendance? What was the specific topic on which you were speaking? What kind of "panel" did you participate in? Who, on the Harvard law school staff, can attest to actually requesting your presence at this event?

I know you're a very, very busy advocate whose always defending truth, justice and the American inventor, but maybe you could find the time in your busy schedule to answer the questions above. Posted by: William Scott Esq.

From Zdnet blog:

Name: Ronald J Riley

Occupation: Inventor-Entrepreneur

Comment: Patent quality is in the eye of the beholder. Those who prey on inventors portray all patents which they have infringed upon as being poor quality while the patent holders view those patents as being valid. What grinds Intellectual Property Owners ( IPO ) members is that they are predators who get caught filching others property. It is a fact that they settle most of those cases even as they whine that the patents are not valid. And when they do take such cases to trial IPO members often find that they must pay out tens or in some cases hundreds of millions of dollars. There is a reason that they lose these cases, and the reason is that many if not most of Intellectual Property Owners members are thieves who have been caught red handed taking others property. There is another side to the so called "patent reform" story. The real story is that what IPO and their predatory corporate members are doing is nothing less than a bald faced attempt to mitigate the consequences of their unethical conduct. I suggest that reading our web site may open everyone's eyes as to what the truth is about the patent deform battle. We are the same group of innovation based small business persons who successfully battled the last attempt to warp our patent system during the 1990's. We expect to hand IPO and their unsavory members another defeat. Also, IPO was founded by former Patent Commissioner Don Banner of Washington, DC based Banner and Witcoff. Don Banner has a long history of defending individual inventors rights. He founded IPO to represent ALL inventors rights and after IPO was taken over by big business Mr. Banner quit the organization in disgust. Today it is important to note that IPO only represents the biggest OWNERS of intellectual property and has a long history of doing it's best to undermine the interests of the creators. Ronald J Riley


Mr. Ronlad J. Riley,

There you go again. In your make-believe world of patent reform you love to blame the big bad "patent pirates", and refuse to understand the real issues at hand.

You continue to parade yourself as a patent expert with no apparent financial success in this field. You are not, therefore, a successful inventor, but rather an unsuccessful inventor who is angry at the system instead of looking in the mirrorJust because your patents are failures, it doesn't mean that corporations are to blame for rejecting you.

In fact, the blame doesn't fall on most corporartions, but rather on The USPTO itself with its infamous track record of issuing almost identical patents. You are so busy belly-aching about the big bad corporations, that you fail to see the root of the problem. The root of the problem is the archaic method in which patent examiners grant patents.

Welcome to the real world Mr. Ronald J. Riley. When the small inventor hires a patent attorney to assist them through the process, they have a much better chance of receiving a patent of value. But, when there are patent impersonaters like yourself misguiding them at every turn, they'll end up broke and miserably disappointed.

How can you claim to be a patent expert without having successfully licensed your patents? And, I'm speaking of authentic royalty agreements, not the kind that someone might forge in their basement.

Why don't you and all your unknown patent organizations concentrate on the real issues. If you were so passionate about your cause, you would start a Foundation that would finance the small inventor and hire true professionals to help them through this complex and perilous process.

My guess is, that you wouldn't want to participate in a such a legitimate venture, because that wouldn't leave you enough time to post ridiculous propaganda on the internet.

William Scott ESQ.

Riley wants to sue the US Patent and Trademark Office original post; Ronald J. Riley wrote:

It is ironic that the memo below had been sent out to our members and media this has received credible intelligence that the USPTO has issued internal memos to implement restrictions they proposed limiting claims and continuations in spite of the fact that these rules are overwhelmingly opposed by a broad spectrum of small and large entities. In addition the USPTO has implemented similar restrictions for applications to make special. We are seeking collaborators, both those willing to play a public roll and those who will remain anonymous to bring a lawsuit against the USPTO for failure to comply with the regulatory flexibility act. The implications of a successful lawsuit could be to strike down all rulemaking which has been made one calendar year back from the date of filing and to effectively cast a cloud over all rule making made after the date of filing the lawsuit. The agency has failed to comply with the act in a meaningful way since its inception. The agency's conduct regarding rule making, reexaminations, and an increasing tendency to be inappropriately politically influenced has become unbearable and they must be taken to task or they will destroy the essence of what has made both our patent system and America.We are seeking volunteers and contributions to cover legal fees. We are happy to either bring the lawsuit or to be part of a coalition bringing the lawsuit. We do have lawyer volunteers with regulatory flexibility act expertise. Recipients of this memo are free to circulate it.Ronald J Riley #2 At 11:38 AM on July 29, 2006,

William Scott replied:

Once again, Ronald J. Riley is threatening a lawsuit. This time it's against The United States Patent Office. Ronald Riley says he has "credible intelligence", and has gained access to internal memos issued from The Patent Office.

What exactly do these memos say? How did he gain access to them? Is it legal to obtain classified documents from a government agency? Under what circumstances were these documents obtained? Shouldn't "leaks" at The Patent Office be reported to The Department of Commerce? Secondly, Ronald J. Riley says that his organization has "lawyer volunteers" to bring a lawsuit against The Patent Office. In the next sentence, he asks for monetary contributions to cover legal fees. So, which is it? Are the lawyers really volunteers or are they charging legal fees?Another question - and I would truly appreciate an answer - what in heaven's name is your legal basis for such a lawsuit against The USPTO?

Do you and your "volunteer lawyers" think you have even a 1% chance of winning such a case?Why do you send out pleas to collect money from gullible individuals who are being led to believe that such a case can actually be won?

Mr. Ronald J. Riley, or InventorEd, or who ever you are, I know that your first inclination is to sue, threaten, harass and attempt to torture your perceived opponent, but you know that this type of lawsuit is a waste of everyone's time and money.

You should be ashamed of yourself as you constantly solicit donations for your own misguided attempts to find "Ronald Riley styled justice." (ie. let's smoke 'em out of their caves).You continually brag about your organization's lobbying power in Congress and your close relationship with Senators and those in power. If this were truly the case, then your organization's "powerful" lobbying influence would have had some positive effect on the writing of these new Patent regulations. Most people know that this is a political issue that involves influence at the legislative level. Mr. Ronald Riley and his organization have obviously failed at this level, and so he's ready to fight through the judiciary (using other people's money, of course).

Maybe one day, you'll focus in on the root of your problem and sincerely attempt to fix it. And - you won't find it in a court room.

Riley says he has secret sources giving him information:

Response To Ronald J. Riley about Dell Computers:

Well, there you go again. This time it’s Dell who’s the "patent pirate" according Ronald Riley who supplies no evidence or proof of this allegation.

His only "proofs" are his unidentified secret sources who give him unsubstantiated and unverifiable "tips". On one hand, Mr. Ronald J. Riley says that Dell is "pirating" the patent rights of the individual patent holder, and yet on the other hand, he says that the patents that Dell is pirating have resulted in the making of, "shoddy products and that it is a miracle that people have not been maimed or killed by these notebooks."

So, in other words, Dell has pirated patents that cause the making of shoddy and dangerous products? Mr. Riley, I’d like to know something: who are these individual patent holders that have been infringed upon by Dell? What are their patent numbers? What cases has Dell lost in patent infringement lawsuits as a result of "pirating"? I know that you’ll never answer these questions, because verifiable specifics are not part of the admitted "guerilla tactics" used by Ronald J. Riley.

So, let me see if I understand your complaint. You’re saying that Dell "pirates" patents that could cause injury; resulting in lawsuits, stock price decline and a plunge in overall market share. Now, that’s a logical theory, Mr. Riley - do you also believe that the Sun revolves around the Earth?

When you, Mr. Riley have accomplished 1% of what Michael Dell has accomplished over the past ten years, maybe you’ll have a tiny bit of credibility. But, when you and your little known organization, (who’ve had no effect on the re-writing of the new patent rules), stop acting like cry babies and offer some constructive and credible leadership that leads to positive change, maybe you’ll actually do some good. But, as long as you continue to accuse practically every technology company of being, "a patent pirate", it makes one wonder what your true agenda really is.

And then there’s another classic Ronald J. Riley statement in your post, "In fact Dell is a member of the Coalition for Patent Fairness :), a misnomer if I ever saw one. (Riley’s group) refers to the group as the Coalition for Patent Piracy. We received a tip some time ago that members of the Coalition for Patent Piracy each kicked in $250,000, creating a public relations war chest of two to three million dollars...." Well, there’s another one of your infamous "tips" again from somewhere, nowhere or in-between. So, now you’re accusing Dell of giving $250K to an organization that purposely sabatoges the rights of the individual patent holder. Once again, where’s the proof? Ah, yes, tips, tips and more tips.

Mr. Ronald, if you don’t want to be taken as a joke, stop acting like a jokester - say something intelligent for a change. William Scott Director Alumni Association

Riley's original post about Dell:

Dells pyrotechnic notebook. I am not at all surprised to see the scandal unfolding over Dells pyrotechnic notebook computers. And I doubt that Dell is only aware of three incidences and think it far more likely that they failed to report the hazardous computers to the CPSC. I very much believe that CPSC should initiate an investigation into Dell’s conduct. Personally I have always thought that it is a very poor business practice to foist products on consumers which can maim or kill. Yet over the years there has been an endless stream of such cases.One of the reason that I am skeptical of Dell’s only reporting three notebooks to the CPSC is that the company has acquired a reputation in the inventor community for pirating inventor’s work and then brutalizing the inventors with abusive litigation. We have found that companies who have ethical problems in their dealings with our community generally have many other issues in the way they do business.In fact Dell is a member of the Coalition for Patent Fairness :), a misnomer if I ever saw one. refers to the group as the Coalition for Patent Piracy. We received a tip some time ago that members of the Coalition for Patent Piracy each kicked in $250,000, creating a public relations war chest of two to three million dollars whose sole purpose is to paint the inventors whom coalition members have victimized as bad players, and in large part media swallowed this propaganda without question. Isn’t it time that the public learns the truth about Dell? I think they are a parasite who produces shoddy products and that it is a miracle that people have not been maimed or killed by these notebooks. But then again maybe there have been fires and injuries where no one recognized that incendiary computers were the cause? Ronald J Riley

Riley creates a website about his daughter's teacher: The headline, "Angry parent puts his opinions about school district on the Web", page A10 is perhaps too strong, for as the author of QualitySchoolsNow dot org, I have to say that disgust is better term, disgust coupled with a determination to see some accountability returned to public schools.

John Sharpe made the following comments in the Flint Journal:

"I'm a little disappointed (about the Web site)," said John Sharpe, Lake Fenton Board of Education president. "(Riley) appears to be witch-hunting more than anything else." "If I were him, I'd be careful about slandering somebody."

"Sharpe said he is worried the site will become a vehicle for spreading misinformation." "I'm concerned things will be written that are untrue," he said. "People will only hear one side of the story - (teachers and administrators) won't be there to defend themselves."

Like John Sharpe, I am also disappointed that it takes something like this web site to get a dialog going. If Mr. Sharpe and the rest of the board had been doing their jobs this would never have happened. I am disappointed but not surprised that John Sharpe did not have the sense to at least act like he was concerned about the issues I am raising, for public relations reasons if nothing else.

In fact, I sent two letters to the Lake Fenton school board. The board members failed to respond to either. So three weeks after writing the second letter, I called John Sharpe and asked him if he had seen my letter. His answer was telling, in that he replied "was it that really long letter". We then discussed the issues at length, and it was obvious that John Sharpe had not read the letter. Apparently some school board members eyes glaze over when confronted with more than a page at a time.

And then John Sharpe rattles his saber about slander. Perhaps John Sharpe should review what slander and libel are, so that he can at least chose the proper term. It sure sounds like John Sharpe is threatening me. Is he trying to chill my First Amendment right to speak about the important public policy issues? If that is the case, I suggest that he look at one of my web sites, Look at what happened to CPC-Bestfoods when they bullied grandma Tibbetts, whom I barely knew at the time. Another example is . A well healed bully was picking on Hank Mishkoff, and kicking the tar out of him. I referred him to Paul Levy at the Public Citizen Litigation Group. Paul Levy gave the Taubman's a rather serious attitude adjustment. Then carefully consider how I might react to any attempt to abridge my own First Amendment rights.

I am sure that John Sharpe is worried that parents and concerned citizens will have another source of information which he has little control over. He and the rest of Lake Fenton staff are welcome to defend themselves. I will post their responses to complaints, allowing the public to judge the merits of their position. That is the whole point of the web site, to force them to PUBLICLY address a host of issues that they have swept under the rug for many years. I suggest that he address the issue of why the whole board has failed to respond to my letters first. I will post his response to the site just as soon as he writes one.

In conclusion, John Sharpe and the rest of the school board members need to become part of the solution, or face a solution where they suffer the same fate as the dinosaurs. A recall of the board just might be the best place to start this process. Ronald J. Riley

Parents of children from his daughter's school respond:

Subject: Lake Fenton Hall of (email)

I would personally like to nominate Ronald Riley for the Hall of Shame in the idiot advocate category. Mr. Riley, you are nothing more than a bully who is trying to use the internet as your device of intimidation. If you truly care about making public schools better than why do you seek to go after individuals.

How do you presume to rate teachers? Do you really have all the needed knowledge to do such a chore? You seem to have some serious unresolved issues to deal with. Were you picked on by some jock when you were a student?

Your comments tend to make me laugh more than anything else. Apparently you weren't one of the people in the 60's who decided to go into education to avoid the draft. Were you one of the people who avoided life by going on drugs.

Cause man, you still 'trippin.' I sincerely hope that you lose this case and I pray that your children don't feel the brunt of what you are about to receive in the public back lashing that I guarantee you will receive. They don't deserve this anymore than any teacher or administrator who you happened to disagree with. Sincerely, Tim (Parent, student, educator, and activist)

Riley's reply to above email:

Subject: Lake Fenton Hall of Shame You are welcome to your point of view, just as I am. This is what makes America a great country. I disagree. I spent years working through the Lake Fenton system. First I took the issues to teachers, and then to Principals, and then to the Superintendent, followed by writing and calling the school board members. This is documented on the web site. Only after all else failed did I go public with my concerns. Public schools are accountable to the public, or at least they should be. If they perform well we reward them with ongoing funding, and if they do not the public has the right to punish them by opposing funding. The very character of public schools is determined by the nature of the teachers. Many are dedicated and responsible professionals. I have listed some of the more exceptional Lake Fenton teachers at qualityschoolsnowdotorg/lakefenton/honorable/. In other words those who were the best are being recognized, just as those who are not so good are receiving appropriate criticism. The problem with the public school system is that administrators find it easier to stonewall parents then to address the issues surrounding bad teachers. In the end our children are short changed by leaving poorly motivated teachers in the system. I have extensive experience managing people, both as an employee and as an employer. I come from a family of teachers. But even if I did not, I am a taxpayer and all public employees are answerable to their employers, namely the taxpayer. Actually I saw many people who were picked on by jocks when I was a student. But that is only part of the story, in that if any child finishes school lacking basic skills, and we all know that many are graduating in that condition, then allocating resources to sports is a very poor use of limited funds. Rather those funds should be used to see that those children enter life with basic skills. I have never liked the effects of any mind altering substance, including alcohol. But your acknowledgment that many people used the education profession to avoid the draft is the type of dialog the QSN web site is meant to encourage. Those teachers are some of the worst offenders and many should be removed from the educational system. Actually, the whole point of the QSN web site is to protect children from being further victimized by poor teachers. And yes, both my children were victims of such teachers. Update, case won. Something we both agree on. That the children do not deserve what they are getting. For that matter, those teachers who are well motivated do not deserve to be straddled with those who are duds. Tim, isn't it interesting that many people in the teaching profession are so sensitive about the profession being criticized, even when such criticism is justified? Ronald J. Riley

Who Has Time for this? blog

8:00 AM Lincoln Artes said...

For Ronald J. Riley,

I would never speculate on the number of patent infringement lawsuits that Miicrosoft has pending. Why? Because I don't know. Neither do you. You said that "looking at the current cases", "Microsoft has liabilities in the range of $20B - $200B."

Where are you "looking" to find these cases? Do you have access to international databases that give you the total number of cases pending against Microsoft in Federal and International Patent Courts? Of course you don't. You say that "Microsoft has a reputation for running fast and loose with others intellectual property". Well, Mr. Ronald Riley, I think you have a reputation for running fast and loose with your mouth.

Next time you start throwing around a range of liabilities with a $180 billion dollar differential, have some SPECIFIC facts on your side, so you won't look so foolish. It's one thing, if you want to lambast Microsoft for stealing patent rights, but it's another thing to try to convince folks that you have expert knowledge about this situation when you really don't.

3:18 PM Ronald J Riley said... Actually I do have specific knowledge in that Microsoft publicly acknowledged that they have about forty pending cases in their press release demanding that the patent system be reformed in ways which would mitigate their liabilities. Also, I hear from many of the inventors who have had their patents pirated, including those who are going head to head with Microsoft. Now I would be the first to admit that I do not have as clear a picture of the scope of Microsoft's pirating activities as they do. And that is why there is such a large range. I do believe that I have a better handle on the issue than you do, that is unless you work for Microsoft in a capacity which makes you privy to the scope of their patent pirating liabilities. By the way, did you know that both Microsoft and Research in Motion (RIM-Blackberry) were caught committing fraud on the courts? Ronald J Riley, President