About

In 1980, James designed and prototyped the Supercom, the first high-fidelity hands-free telephone. He developed higher-gain full duplex greater amplification than previously obtained in a two-wire analog system. In 1984, James discovered a loophole in FCC regulations on maximum current to be drawn from a telephone line. This led him to create the first phone-line-powered answering machine that would count rings and answer the line after a number of rings specified by the user. James used this circuit in his next invention, Roxanne (Remotely Operated Xceiver Automatically Networking Nearby Exchanges) in 1985. Roxanne automatically answered and merged two phone lines to facilitate a local telephone call complete what would have otherwise been a toll call. Roxanne was purely analog, full duplex, and energized by the phone line itself without any external power source. James built the world’s longest-range full-duplex speakerphone in 1986. This design outperformed previous performance standards established by the legendary Bell Labs in areas of anti-sidetone performance, range, distortion levels, and echo reduction. His speakerphone utilized the auto-answer feature of his earlier inventions to enable call recipients to begin speaking after a predefined number of rings.

In 1992, James invented The Blue Dragon, a high-fidelity common-source MOSFET audio amplifier that produced less distortion and better manufacturability than earlier than ever before. For this he was awarded his first patent in 1994 and attracted the attention of a top audio company that wished to license his invention in 1995. James met Bill Whitlock in the same year, who is a member of the Audio Engineering Society Standards Committee and the UL Advisory Committee on Pro Audio.

As James continued to tweak The Blue Dragon, he created Premonition, a frequency-compensation network that further reduced the distortion of his amplifier to unmeasurable levels. When writing a patent application in 1997, James solved the phase-optimization equation for Premonition. He asked Bill Whitlock to verify his math using Comtran, a primitive circuit-analysis program sold by Bill’s company, Jensen Transformers. Bill called back, surprised that James had reached a degree of optimization far surpassing what Comtran could accomplish. James didn’t own a computer and used nothing more than a pocket calculator, paper, and pen to devise the equation. James received a patent for Premonition in 1999, which included a reprint of all eighty-three steps of his algebraic derivation.

In 2011, James received a patent for the Panic Button, a bootable restoration system for computers. This revolution ensured that customers’ files would not be erased during a factory reset, providing a useful remedy to an age-old problem. The Panic Button reached over half a billion units by 2016, all due to Microsoft’s willful infringement of James’ patent. He produced a documentary detailing the incident. Here are his views on the current state of intellectual property protection:

As an inventor, I experienced firsthand the deep injustice of a broken patent system. My patented invention, "The Panic Button," was taken by Microsoft, embedded into hundreds of millions of systems under the name "Refresh Your PC." Microsoft not only profited from it but fraudulently claimed ownership by filing their own patents—erasing my name from the creation. The emotional toll of seeing my work celebrated under their name, while I remain anonymous, has been far deeper than any financial loss could ever be. This is not just about money; it’s about recognition, integrity, and the right to have my contribution acknowledged.

This is not an isolated case. Many inventors—especially small entities—face the same systemic injustice. The America Invents Act (AIA) and its Inter Partes Review (IPR) process have created a system where large corporations with vast resources can easily challenge patents and deprive inventors of their rightful ownership. My experience is a clear example of how the current patent system favors the powerful, leaving those who create in the shadows.

I firmly believe that the government’s support for these changes is driven not only by economic interests but by a fundamental conflict of interest. Large corporations, like Microsoft, can afford to file multiple patent applications, knowing that the odds of having at least one survive an IPR challenge are in their favor. Each new patent filing generates thousands of dollars for the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) through application, issuance, and maintenance fees. Meanwhile, the independent inventor—the person who is often the victim of patent infringement—can usually afford only one patent application, making it nearly impossible for them to compete against the resources of these corporate giants.

The real problem lies in the imbalance between small inventors and the corporate interests that dominate the patent system. When I first filed my patent, I did so with the understanding that my work would be protected, that the government would stand by me in exchange for my disclosure. Instead, the patent system has become a tool for larger companies to strip inventors of their rights, making it harder for people like me to defend what we've created. This is why the changes to the patent system, particularly under the AIA, must be addressed immediately.