Innovations have the potential to generate substantial wealth, yet many creators have not reaped the financial rewards of their groundbreaking ideas. A recent exploration into the history of popular inventions highlights how some inventors made millions while others were left with mere fractions of their potential earnings.
Anthony Pratt, the creator of the immensely popular board game Cluedo, is a prime example. Conceived during World War II blackouts in his Birmingham home, Pratt initially called his game “Murder”. He was inspired by his experiences as a musician performing in grand accommodations and his love for detective fiction, particularly the works of Arthur Conan Doyle and Agatha Christie. Although Cluedo has sold millions since its launch in 1949, Pratt sold the UK rights for just £5,000 in 1965, long before it became a commercial success.
Despite this financial oversight, Pratt’s daughter, Marcia Lewis, recounts that her father was content with his creation, which brought joy to countless individuals. She recently donated one of the game’s earliest versions to the Birmingham Museum and Art Gallery, illustrating the lasting impact of his invention.
In the automotive industry, James Moylan made a significant contribution with a simple yet effective idea: a dashboard indicator arrow to show drivers which side their fuel tank was located on. Moylan proposed the idea in an internal memo at Ford Motor Company in 1986. By 1989, the feature was implemented in new models. Despite his role in enhancing convenience for countless drivers, Moylan, who passed away at age 80, valued the friendships cultivated during his career over financial gain.
The history of invention is rife with examples of innovators who missed out on vast fortunes. Research conducted by the legal patent-tech company Lightbringer estimates that British creators have lost out on potential earnings amounting to as much as £100 million each in today’s currency due to various circumstances, such as failing to patent their ideas or being unable to negotiate fair compensation.
One such inventor was John Kay, who patented the flying shuttle in 1733, significantly increasing weaving speeds and contributing to the Industrial Revolution. Unfortunately, manufacturers were hesitant to pay his licensing fees, resulting in his financial demise.
Another example is Sir James Dewar, who invented the double-walled vacuum flask in 1892 but never patented it. His invention was later commercialized by others, leading to a loss of approximately £60 million in today’s money. Similarly, Alexander Bain, who created the first electric clock in the 1840s, faced lengthy legal battles over his patents, leaving him financially strained despite his contributions.
The story of the tin can offers another illustration of missed opportunities. Peter Durand, who secured a British patent in 1810 for preserving food in tin-plated iron cans, sold his patents for a mere £1,000, a fraction of what he could have earned as his invention transformed the food industry.
While some inventors faced setbacks, others have managed to profit significantly from their creations. The board game Monopoly has become one of the world’s best-selling games, yet its origins reveal a tale of underappreciated talent. Elizabeth Magie developed “The Landlord’s Game” in 1902 to critique the inequities of capitalism, yet her idea was overshadowed by Charles Darrow, who sold Monopoly to Parker Brothers in the 1930s for substantial profit.
In the realm of technology, Alexey Pajitnov developed the iconic game Tetris in 1984 while working for the Soviet Union’s Academy of Science. Although the game gained immense popularity, Pajitnov did not profit from its success until he established The Tetris Company in 1996, having previously missed out on significant royalties.
The story of the computer mouse is another cautionary tale. Douglas Engelbart, who patented the device in 1970, saw little financial gain as his employer, Stanford Research Institute, licensed it to Apple for around $40,000.
In the world of consumer products, Bette Nesmith Graham, mother of musician Michael Nesmith, invented correction fluid known as Mistake Out in 1951 to solve her frustrations with typewriters. She ultimately sold her company for $47.5 million in 1979, demonstrating that some inventors do achieve substantial success.
Similarly, Richard James, a naval engineer, created the Slinky toy in 1943, which has since sold millions, making him an estimated $250 million. The Slinky has become a staple toy, recognized worldwide and even featured in popular culture.
The enduring appeal of inventions like the yellow smiley face, created by graphic designer Harvey Ball in 1963, also highlights the disparity between creators and those who capitalize on their ideas. Ball was compensated $45 for his design, which later became a multi-million-dollar brand.
These narratives emphasize the complexities of innovation and the importance of intellectual property rights. As Dominic Davies, co-founder and CEO of Lightbringer, stated, “Innovation has always driven progress, yet history shows that even the brightest ideas can be lost without protection.” This serves as a reminder for current and future innovators to safeguard their creations to avoid repeating the misfortunes of their predecessors.
