—

Here’s a little video on the Alchemy of Ideas.  Hopefully this will shed some light on why Intellectual Property law does not care about your idea – only what you’ve DONE with your idea to bring it into the word and share it with the rest of us.

Granted, I still have a lot of improvement to make on the video technical – lighting, sound, visuals, etc.  Stick with me.  I hope to polish up the technical as quickly as I can.

Comments Welcome.

Nor are we talking about helping a bud roll one.

—

We’re talking about when at least two people work together on a creative project.

—

Unfortunately, “inadvertent” joint authorship happens all the time.

Here’s the analysis:

1.  A work is “jointly authored” automatically upon its creation if:

1) two or more authors contributed material to the work; and

2) each of the authors prepared his or her contribution with the intention that it would be combined with the contributions of the other authors as part of a single unitary work.

2. Intent AT THE TIME THE WORK IS CREATED is the controlling factor.

3. The contributions do NOT have to be equal.

4. IN the ABSENCE of a Collaboration Agreement or agreement otherwise:

• Joint authors have undivided interest in the ENTIRE WORK.  (that means even-Stephen for all the authors, even if they didn’t contribute equally.)
• Each joint author has the right to exploit the copyright, without the other’s consent.
• Each joint author has the right to license the joint work, without the other’s consent.
• Each joint author has the right to transfer their share of the ownership without the other’s consent.
• The ownership interest does NOT revert to the joint author upon one author’s death, it goes with the estate.
• Both authors have a duty to account for profits – each joint author has to pay the other the appropriate share of profits.

So, what this means to you is that before entering into any collaborative creative project, you should create a “Collaboration Agreement” that irons out the details of the project and relationship.

A collaboration agreement should include at least:

1. Description of the project
2. What each person will contribute
3. Ownership %
4. Authorship credit
5. Control of use – decision making

There are a bunch of other things your lawyer will help you with, but the things listed above are the key relationship issues to keep in mind and bring to the meeting with your attorney.

Please understand that I’m not saying “don’t collaborate” because collaborations can be incredibly powerful.  I’m saying get the deal in writing before you begin the work, even if you’re sure everything will be swell.

Things happen.

—

Thursday, March 11th, 12 Noon to 1pm
Art Lab Fort Collins, 239 Linden St. (next to Cozzola’s Pizza)

Grab Your Brown Bag Lunch and join your marketing, design, and web friends for an informative yet entertaining lunch learning session:

Kevin Houchin, Creative Business Lawyer, presents the first in this series:

No Lame Names.

Help yourself and your clients create brands for their companies, products, or services that will be both MARKETABLE and PROTECTABLE.

Before going to law school Kevin was a graphic designer. He wasn’t one of those people who would just buy a Mac and some software from Adobe and then call himself a designer.He spent 4 years at a top university and have a BFA in Graphic Design. He started his career in the design department of a Fortune 500 company and then built an Art Department in a small advertising agency. He built his own design studio, worked as Vice President of Marketing and Internet for a retail software company, and finally provided large-scale branding and communications consulting for colleges and universities all across the United States.

Kevin has designed dozens of logos and branding systems and supervised the design and implementation of dozens more.

The hardest part of those jobs: lame names.

This session walks you through the discussions Kevin has had with his clients. If you attend the session and then follow the steps in his FREE ebook (available free at www.houchinlaw.com – just input your email address) you will understand how to help yourself and your clients create brands for their companies, products, or services that will be both MARKETABLE and PROTECTABLE. It’s not easy. It can be frustrating, but the right name is the hub of your brand and few businesses or products will succeed in today’s market without a great name.

So, what’s the problem?

The problem is that most of us don’t have data to state what the Generally Expected Performanc Results ARE.

We’ve never done the research.

Now we must.

I was approached by Michelle DeKinder-Smith with an opportunity to co-affiliate the Site Compliant program, including the FTC Toolkit with her professional market research services. You wouldn’t guess it from first glance, but Michelle has over 20 years of consumer product market research experience – including projects for some brands that you would easily recognize.

Michelle was the first market research pro to understand the implications of the new FTC rules.  We immediately hit it off and saw a way to help each other out.

The first thing we did was a survey of the people who had purchased or otherwise indicated an interest in the Site Compliant LLC products including the FTC Toolkit. I don’t know how many of you have ever worked on a market research project, but let me tell you that working with Michelle was PAINLESS, EFFICIENT, and effective.

We found out great information about the products and services we’re offering through Site Compliant – including ways to improve the offer.  We also found out that 8-10 customers though the FTC Toolkit was a great value for their money!

Now we’re ready to take it (and you) to the next level.  Michelle has created a couple solutions to help people gather and analyze customer data so that YOU CAN use your wonderful testimonials again.

REMEMBER, the NEW FTC GUIDES require the disclosure of Generally Expected Performance Data when using testimonials – especially testimonials of the “aspirational” nature.  IF YOU USE atypical/aspirational testimonials without this GEP data disclosure, your aspirational (and completely truthful) testimonial will be interpreted as a statement of generally expected performance results, likely subjecting you to accusations of “deceptive advertising” from the FTC.

Michelle and I will be doing a FREE WEBINAR on the topic of Generally Expected Performance Results and the Market Research you need to back up your claims TOMORROW at 2pm EASTERN.

Register here: https://www2.gotomeeting.com/register/667018355

Again, the webinar is free, will only take an hour, and will be hugely informational and helpful if you want to use those great aspirational testimonials again.

OK, it’s time to register now.  Register here: https://www2.gotomeeting.com/register/667018355

Share the word.

Again, that’s Wednesday, December 16th at 2pm Eastern. (TOMORROW!)

I’ll be leading a Webinar with my friend, marketing partner on this project, client, and internet marketing Guru, Joel Comm next Monday, November 9^th at 6:00pm MOUNTAIN time. The Webinar is free, but space is limited. You can sign up HERE.

Again: sign up for the free Webniar Here.  Do it now.  Space will fill up quickly.

The new rules go into effect December 1, 2009.  Yes, in only a few weeks.  So are you ready?

Do you even know where to begin?

No?

I didn’t think so.

Well, don’t feel like the Lone Ranger. Most people don’t – and it’s not your fault because the new guidelines were just released a few weeks ago and they are subject to some different interpretations.

Joel and I will be discussing many of the implications of the new rules and introducing the project, product, and system that I’ve been working on almost non-stop ever since the new rules came out. Really, I’ve been dreaming about this stuff. Just ask my wife and friends – they’re sick of listening to me talk about this. Of course as a co-author of this product I’m hugely invested and probably a bit biased, but I’m convinced this is really going to help a lot of people quickly figure out what they need to do.

The product is a guide to the new rules we’re calling the FTC Toolkit. It is a thorough guide to the new rules including analysis, self-assessment checklists, sample disclosures, sample agreements, and sample policies. Incredible stuff here because I’ve not been working on this alone. I’ve assembled a team of lawyers, marketers, and communications professionals with over 75 years of combined experience in the relative material to develop the Toolkit.

We haven’t stopped there, because the FTC isn’t stopping there. These rules are going to evolve as the FTC starts enforcing the rules against people who don’t comply. So, people who purchase the FTC Toolkit will be able to join the Site Compliant(tm) program and receive ongoing updates to the Toolkit content and other timely information as the FTC begins enforcement.

And, we didn’t stop there. Members of the Site Compliant(tm) program will also be able to apply for and be able to use what we believe is the Internet’s first compliance “Trust Seal” that they will be able to proudly display on their site as a signal to consumers and to the FTC that they, as a member of the program, are taking a proactive and affirmative approach to being and remaining compliant.

This has taken a lot of work by a bunch of people over the last few weeks. If you were going to invest in this content from a lawyer on your own you would be need to budget at least $50,000 in legal fees, because my team has at least that much otherwise-billable time invested in this product.

Join us on the free Webinar to learn more. Again, that’s THIS MONDAY, November 9th at 6:00pm Mountain. Sign up HERE.

Remember to sign up NOW because space on the Webinar is limited.

… Then Vladeck (speaking of David Vladeck, Director of the Federal Trade Commission Bureau of Consumer Protection) turned to the new FTC Endorsement Guides.  Everyone held their breath.

Before I go further it is important to remember that Vladeck comes from a consumer protection background.   He led the Public Citizen Litigation Group for 20+ years.

On the endorsement guides Vladeck’s message was clear:

1. Disclaimers like “results not typical” are useless and will be attacked by FTC.

2. Advertisers who make claims “will be held responsible for their claims.”

3. If your promotion relies only on testimonials “you will have a problem with us.”

Vladeck described this area for the FTC as a “target rich enviornment” in which they intend to pursue violators using all the resources at their disposal.  And when the 1000+ enforcement personnel at the FTC run out, FTC plans to call on the state attorneys’ general.  When the AG’s are too busy, Vladeck says that they will do as the FDA does and publish warning letters on the internet in order to “bully companies into compliance.”

Despite the backpeddling FTC has done in the media recently, Vladeck made it clear that he will enforce Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act and the endorsement guides.  It was as if Vladeck was drawing imaginary targets on foreheads around the room…

I spoke to several attorneys and CEOs at the reception that evening about the regulatory problem the enforcement guides present and everyone agreed that the problem is very serious.  One observed, candidly, that the problem was that “you never know what marketing is doing until it is too late.”

After all, lawyers and regulatory execs are considered “sales killers.”  We are never consulted by marketing in advance of a promotion for fear we will put the kibosh on the latest profitable social media marketing strategy.

So what’s next from the FTC?  Who knows.  After all, it’s a “target rich environment.”

For the full article. Visit Joel’s blog HERE.

Joel and I are working together on a new product and program to help companies of all sizes and in all niches become and remain compliant with the new rules. I should have more news about that to share with you on Thursday or Friday of this week.  If you are interested in helping promote this product, email me.

Northern Colorado Business Report

October 9, 2009 –
Let’s sue those jerks!

How many times have you thought that? How many times have you actually followed though on your plan? Probably never. Litigation just costs too much.

According to a recent study by Prof. Marc Galanter of the University of Wisonsin-Madison, fewer than 2 percent of civil (non-criminal) lawsuits actually make it all the way through trial. That means the litigation process is ultimately not about suing people – it’s really an extremely expensive negotiation strategy.

If more than 98 percent of cases filed are settled before the end of a trial, then shouldn’t we be focusing more on negotiation than litigation? I think so, and most attorneys, even litigators, concur. But there are some times when the only thing you can do is file a suit. Sometimes litigation is the only way to make the other side understand you’re serious.

I don’t make a living suing people. In fact, I try very hard to never end up in court. But earlier this year a client was backed into a corner and the only thing we could do was come out swinging. My client had been hugely and publicly successful with the launch of a product. Another company in the market niche felt they had been treated unfairly and hoped to make a grab at my client’s success.

…more…

Read the Whole Article – Click Here

This is a fairly long post, and it doesn’t hit on all the issues, but it should give you  an overview of what you need to think about.

If you want a printer-friendly version (PDF) – CLICK HERE.

Feel free to share this with attribution.

—

New Rules: Endorsements & Testimonials in Marketing

© 2009 Kevin E. Houchin, Esq.

“I made $250,000 in the first month using this product! You can too!”*

*Results not typical.

Those were the days–the days when a marketer could use an actual quote from a real person that has used your product as a marketing endorsement or testimonial to capture the aspirations of your potential customers. As of December 1, 2009, those days are gone.

Maybe that’s a good thing for many consumers, because some marketers have been slimy with their marketing efforts. However, it’s safe to say that most marketers are honest and sincerely offer products and services designed to help their clients feel better or make money. Both will definitely be affected by the new Guidelines released by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) which take effect December 1^st.

Before going into details, it’s important to understand that the mission of the FTC is to protect consumers from fraudulent business practices. In the marketing context, you get in trouble if the FTC decides your advertisement is “deceptive.” That’s a noble goal, and a task that is becoming increasingly complex as marketing techniques evolve–especially on the internet. Realize too, that the processes required to change administrative and other governmental rules take so much time that it will be impossible for rules to keep up and address every specific scenario that creative marketers can implement. Accordingly, the FTC’s approach must be relatively vague in some situations – providing guidance, but not “how-to” instruction. Considering that the Guidelines Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising had not been updated since 1980, it’s about time there was a review.

The review process began back in January 2007 when the FTC published a notice seeking input on the Guides. Many national marketing and advertising associations responded with formal comments, which were reviewed by the commission. In November 2008, the FTC published proposed revisions for the Guides and requested comments on the proposal, again receiving formal feedback from major Advertising and Marketing associations. On October 5, 2009, the FTC has published the final Guideline revisions that become effective in December.

There are 16 new rule sections and 36 hypothetical examples illustrating the application of the rules.  I’m not going to discuss everything, but I’ll hit some of the new rules that I think will affect the most people–the rules dealing with “Generally Expected Performance” and disclosure of connection between advertisers and sponsored testimonials and endorsements.

OVERVIEW

The Guides represent administrative interpretations concerning the application of Section 5 of the FTC Act (15 U.S.C. 45) to the use of endorsements and testimonials in advertising. The goal is to keep marketers honest, which might seem like an easy task – how about “tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth” – but it’s not that easy because we all have different ideas of what constitutes the whole truth in various situations, and in some marketing situations, it’s literally impossible to know the whole truth or which truth to communicate when more than one truth is possible.

What? More than one “truth”? Impossible!

NEW ISSUE #1: “Generally Expected Performance”

Let me tell you a story. Say you offer a product that helps people develop a marketing strategy for the internet. One person vigorously applies the system to a great product, makes $250,000 in the first month, and sends you a testimonial praising your genius. That’s the truth – for that person. Another person buys your product, and does a half-hearted implementation on a lame product idea and makes $250. That’s the truth too, but this person doesn’t bother to tell you the results or share their implementation strategy. As a marketer, what do you communicate to potential customers?

Under the old rules, you could happily post the wonderful testimonial from the wildly successful (but true) customer and capture the aspirations of your potential customers. All you had to do was post a clear and conspicuous disclaimer saying that the successful customer’s results were not typical. This “results not typical” “safe harbor” is being removed.

New Rule: the Guides require clear and conspicuous disclosure of the generally expected performance whenever the testimonial is not generally representative of what consumers can expect. Here’s the text of one of the revised Guidelines that will present some new challenges to marketers.

255.2 Consumer endorsements.

(b) An advertisement containing an endorsement relating the experience of one or more consumers on a central or key attribute of the product or service will likely be interpreted as representing the endorser’s experience is representative of what consumers will generally achieve with the advertised product or service in actual, albeit variable, conditions of use. Therefore, an advertiser should possess and rely upon adequate substantiation for this representation. If the advertiser does not have substantiation that the endorser’s experience is representative of what consumers will generally achieve, the advertisement should clearly and conspicuously disclose the generally expected performance in the depicted circumstances, and the advertiser must possess and rely on adequate substantiation for that representation.

(emphasis added)

Uh-oh.

In the example above, you know that your best TRUE, HONEST, and documented testimonial from the guy who made $250K in the first month is not anywhere near typical. That’s what makes it so great. Typical results don’t SELL.

Additionally, you have no idea what really IS typical. Your product may have just been released and not many people even HAVE results yet, much less results they’ve shared with you.  And, you know that some people are better at implementing your product than others. Now what are you going to do?

You can’t just use the “results not typical” disclaimer. That’s been expressly ruled out. And, the FTC says that if you use the quote without anything else, it will be interpreted as a statement of what’s typical. You can’t go there. Finally, it says that if you use one of these atypical (aspirational) testimonials you have to “clearly and conspicuously disclose the generally expected performance in the depicted circumstances” and that you “MUST (emphasis added) possess and rely on adequate substantiation” for whatever you disclose as “generally expected.” This goes beyond just telling the truth to being transparent in your advertising.

Trouble. (Unless you sell market research services. These rules just might buy a few boats for the owners of market research companies.)

Now you have only a few options.

1. Don’t use the great testimonial.
2. Figure out what the “Generally Expected Performance” actually is through investing in market research after the sale.
3. Risk it.

Very few marketers worth their salt are going to let such a great testimonial go unused without a fight – it’s just too good.  So, let’s face the fact that there are really only two realistic options – market research, and risking it.

Market research costs money. Sometimes a lot of money, and I’ll bet prices for this kind of work are going to increase greatly in the near term as everyone rushes out to get the data to back up the claims of “Generally Expected Performance.” Market research can also take a lot of time initially, slowing your product development cycles. Finally, if you’re going to do this, it’ll need to be an on-going system so you can keep your performance data up-to-date. Pricey, but if you want to stay clear of the guidelines you’re going to have to make the investment.

Many people simply won’t be able to afford the cost of the research to back up the claims of generally expected performance, which will have a major chilling effect on new product and service offerings – or at least a major shift toward fewer aspirational testimonials in advertising. Personally, I think this is a bad thing for everyone because we all want to be the HONEST aspirational example and most people understand that there are a lot of variables that go into success. Setting the goal at a dumbed-down level of expected performance is not good for anyone because people need high aspirational goals to achieve high successes.

So, back to what to do if you really can’t even measure a generally expected performance metric. In our example, the product is a system for helping customers implement an online strategy. It’s going to be tough to figure out the metric to share as generally expected. Is it $/month, % increase in business, or something completely different? The Guidelines do not specify, but they do give several examples, but most rely on quantitative data, not qualitative. If you can’t afford to get the data, then you only have the options of not using the testimonial, or risking it.

So, what’s at risk?

I’m a lawyer, so I’ll never tell anyone to do anything other than do everything they can to be in full compliance with applicable law. With that said, if the FTC decides to prosecute you for deceptive advertising, you could be fined, and those fines could be hefty, but they’re not going to come without warning. First, according to Richard Cleland, assistant director, division of advertising practices at the FTC, the FTC will generally contact you and give you a chance to stop using the ad in question or bring the ad into compliance before initiating stronger actions. (See: http://tinyurl.com/ydjfabb) Consider that a warning track. Then if you continue use, you could find yourself on the receiving end of FTC litigation and possible fines for thousands of dollars.

What should you do?

First, if you CAN get the research done – do so. That research should only make your product claims more credible, and having the research will allow you to use truthful, although not generally expected, testimonials for your product safely.

Second, if you CAN’T get the research done or the variables are just too diverse to get credible numbers (talk to your market research guru about that), then you might still want to use that ad, but do a very comprehensive explanation to potential clients that the testimonial you used is only one example of someone who implemented the program in a specific way. You can’t stop there though, because that’s just the same as “results not typical” – it seems like you would have to go a lot further and give some discussion about those variables and really let people know that their results are going to be dependent on how THEY use the product.

If done correctly, I think the explanation of generally expected performance, or why there really isn’t a generally expected performance could be an incredible sales tool, and it could give you a chance to share your product guarantee and refund policy information. After all, if your goal is to help people through your products, you want to help them succeed.

In the example of the online-business advice product, the maker of the product could use the testimonial of the guy who made $250K in the first month as a spring-board to the discussion of what really made this work for him, then give an example of someone else where the product didn’t work as well (with the less-successful person’s permission of course) and detail what the unsuccessful person might have done to see better results, turning the table on the buyer and saying none of these results are typical, there are no generally expected performance metrics because every user of this product is in a completely different environment, and that the sky is the limit on the success any particular buyer of the product might see. Then go on to solicit case studies so that the advertiser can build an understanding of the results people are seeing in order to give people an even better idea of how the product is implemented successfully.

The FTC has made it very clear that each situation is evaluated on a case-by-case situation in the context of deceptive advertising. While it’s understandable that people do not trust a governmental agency to be reasonable in their interpretations, having a logically defensible position of disclosure and transparency in an attempt to follow the guidelines as closely as possible in a given situation makes sense.

That’s not all folks.  The revised Guidelines don’t stop there.

In addition to the issues around generally expected performance disclosure requirements, the new Guidelines also require people who are “sponsored” by the marketer and are endorsing the marketer’s products (consumers, experts, bloggers, celebrities) to disclose the nature of the relationship. Again, transparency becomes the key.

New Rule: You have to be transparent about your relationship with people providing endorsements or testimonials.

255.1 Consumer endorsements.

(d) Advertisers are subject to liability for false or unsubstantiated statements made through endorsements, or for failing to disclose material connections between themselves and their endorsers. Endorsers also may be liable for statements made in the course of their endorsements.

(emphasis added)

Uh-oh, again.

This rule is going to have a major impact on the affiliate marketing industry, because now, if you have affiliates, they could subject you to liability if THEY don’t follow the rules.  And if you ARE an affiliate, expert, or other person defined as being a “sponsored” endorsement or testimonial, you could face liability if you do not disclose the nature of your sponsored relationship, or if you say something deceptive in your endorsement, review, or testimonial.

Again, transparency is the key, and many people in the affiliate marketing industry are going to find transparency uncomfortable, because coming clean to the fact that you’ve been getting paid to say all those good things for the past few years on your blog might hurt the credibility you’ve been trying to build along the way. So, what do you do?

Marketers

As a marketer working with affiliates you need to take some steps. First, you need to communicate with all your existing affiliates that you expect them to be in full compliance with the new FTC Rules. They should also be informed that you reserve the right to drop them as an affiliate and/or withhold payment if you feel, at your complete discretion, that they are NOT in compliance with the new rules. These requirements should be spelled out in a new affiliate marketing agreement which includes having the affiliate indemnify you as the marketer if something they do or say results in any FTC or other legal action.

It would also be a good idea for you to have every affiliate complete an application (which someone on your staff actually reviews) letting you know you’re dealing with the type of people you want to deal with, because having some vetting process in place may give you a better case to avoid FTC liability if one of your affiliates goes rogue and exposes you to liability. You have to account for the fact that if you end up getting fined by the FTC as the Advertiser because of something an affiliate did on their own, it’s probably because the FTC has realized they’ll never be able to collect the fine from the affiliate. And, even with the indemnity clause, if they don’t have the money, you can’t get it. So, do everything you can to show the FTC that you are a conscientious marketer doing everything you can possibly do to stay within the guidelines.

Oh, and don’t worry that you’ll be the Lone Ranger asking your affiliates to sign new affiliate agreements and complete applications. They’ll be getting the request/requirement from everyone. Getting those applications completed and reviewed, then new affiliate agreements signed is going to take some time, but you should be well into this process by December 1^st.

Before moving out of the context of Marketer, it’s also important to know the new rules state that you can only use the endorsement of an expert or celebrity so long as you have good reason to believe the endorser continues to subscribe to the views presented and that you must secure the endorser’s permission to keep using the testimonial at regular intervals – especially if you’ve made a change in your product, or even if your competitor’s products have changed.

Affiliates, Reviewers, Testimonials, and Endorsers

If there is a connection between the endorser and the seller of the advertised product that might materially affect the weight or credibility of the endorsement (i.e., the connection is not reasonably expected by the audience) – even in-kind compensation –then you must “fully” disclose the nature of the connection (§255.5). Again, this goes along with an unwritten theme of transparency in the advertising.

Additionally, what you say must reflect the “honest opinions, findings, beliefs, or experience of the endorser.” And, the endorsement may not “convey any express or implied representation that would be deceptive if made by the advertiser.” (§255.1(a)) This means that you can’t just use some ad layout, brochure, copy, or a script they give you without checking it yourself. If you use their stuff, and it’s found deceptive, then YOU are liable as much as they are.

So, as an affiliate, I would expect any affiliate agreement I sign to include an indemnification clause from the marketer saying they will cover me if any materials they provide are found to violate the FTC Guidelines. I would also require access to, and actually check, the data they are using to back up their statements of generally expected performance.

Action Items

There are a lot of articles like this one hitting the Web in response to these new Guidelines, many of which may not fit your situation, and many of which may simply be wrong. Therefore I strongly suggest that you read the new Guidelines for yourself. The publication found at http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2009/10/endortest.shtm is very simple to read and provides many examples that might answer your specific questions. After reading the Guidelines you’ll want to talk to your legal and marketing teams to complete the following tasks.

1. Audit your testimonial-based advertising for compliance with the rules.
2. Make any adjustments to your existing advertising to bring existing materials into compliance.
3. Take action to define generally expected performance metrics.
4. Require affiliates to complete an application, then review and renew affiliate relationships with updated agreements.
5. Revise affiliate marketing agreements.
6. Disclose any connections you have with the sponsors of products you endorse.
7. Initiate procedures to regularly secure the permission to use testimonials and endorsements.
8. Do a Google search to make sure your name is not being associated with any products or services that might expose you to liability. If you find any sites, take active steps to get your name/testimonial removed if the use does not comply with the new Guidelines.

Kevin E. Houchin is a Creative Business Lawyer™ and author in Fort Collins, Colorado specializing in helping people reach their potential through creative business. He can be contacted through his website at www.HouchinLaw.com or @kevinhouchin on Twitter.

Last night it was featured on The Daily Show.

What does all this prove? It proves that a laugh is worth at least a buck. iFart Mobile sells for $0.99 on the App Store. I don’t know the exact sales numbers, but I’m betting over 500,000 people have purchased the app by now.

A LAUGH IS WORTH A BUCK.

It also shows that when you become wildly successful with a creative endeavor, there is going to be something that comes along to complicate the success. In this case it was a competitor. It seems like there is always some price for success.

Here’s the segment: (evidently I’m not a “Real” lawyer… )  :-)

Here are the links:

Trademark & Branding

Copyright

Feel free to forward these links to any of your friends who might need the information.

If you would like me to do a similar session tailored to your group – give me a call at 970-493-1070 or drop me an email and we’ll work something out.