"The Sword in Two Hands by Brian Price" review wan

[Aaron]

I'm learning a lot on this thread:

1. Don't annoy research librarians.

2. Keep track of your legal obligations.

3. Everything is not what is seems.

Thank you everyone for the lessons,

-Aaron

[Greg Mele]

The week has now passed, with only one form of communication.

Mrs. Price contacted Christian Tobler last night to ask him if he would like his royalties paid in check or books? She then later wrote all authors, besides myself, "offering" them:

1. stock at 50% off of cover price, charged against back royalties

2. the return of rights, although somewhat disingenuously, stating that they had already said that they would return rights when they paid royalties. That is patently NOT true. What Brian stated was:

If authors want the rights to their books, as we have already returned to David Lindholm, then they should contact me directly for a negotiation. Our phone numbers have not changed in 10 years. Email is *not* a reliable channel for critical messaging, and the brian@chivalrybookshelf.com email has not worked since 2008.

Emphasis added.

Further, she asserted that they have always supplied books, even when royalties were not available. As Brian acknowledges in his post - he was not in contact with his authors since the end of 2006 and start of 2007 and as Christian has asserted, he has not been able to get copies of his books at all during that time.

Finally, I would like to make clear that what Mrs. Price actually offered is to pay royalties - based on no verifiable accounting - 4+ years late and then to *deduct* product from them, as if it were business as usual. This completely ignores the breach of contract and writes this off as "poor communication".

We have told the Prices that they have 24 hours to comply with the actual demands, or we will begin taking the next legal steps.

So for all of you who have defended our rights here, my thanks. For those of you who have wondered why we weren't doing anything - we are and have been, but we agreed to give the Prices time to resolve this privately. They opted against that, so I am now answering the questions of Morgan and others as to "what are the authors doing"?

Answer: asserting our rights.

[Talbot]

Greg, Christian, et. al,
I hope I did not mess you guys up in offering to accept copies of books written by you in lieu of payment for debts he owed me. My hope was to give them to the authors so you could sell them yourself.

However, based on the timing of your demand letter the books may not have been his to send. If if they are Brian's to send then they are books upon which royalties are owed as stated (by someone) in an earlier thread.

As it happens, Brian notified me today of shipment of 13 packages which he informed me contained books authored Greg Mele and Christian Tobler stating, "I do not feel comfortable giving copies of books that Greg or Christian do not have direct involvement with, so we have provided a mix based on the two authors you mentioned."

Again, since I did not know of the details of your court case I hope I did not muddy the waters too much. When the books arrive I will notify the board here and make arrangements to have them transferred to the rightful authors.

If I messed things up for you guys you have my apologies, it was done with the best of intentions.

[Christian H. Tobler]

Dear Doug/Sir Talbot,

You have done all that honor has demanded of you, in accordance with your knightly obligations, and have treated with fairness and square dealing.

With that, no man's condemnation may be laid upon you in this matter. Whether that has been 'convenient' for us or not, well, that's irrelevant.

In chivalric fellowship,

Christian

[Lady Charlotte]

Hello, Louis,

Just FYI, the Girl Scouts totally kick our ass.

In spades: pathetic, isn't it?

Lady Charlotte, former 1st Class Girl Scout and Daisy Scout/Brownie Scout/Junior Scout/Senior Girl Scout leader for over a decade...

[DukeAvery]

[Christian H. Tobler]

Some of you might want to think about a screen capture of that post, if you have not already though to do so.

Hi Stump - this was done a number of days ago, but thanks for looking out for us!

Yours,

Christian

[Galleron]

I'm learning a lot on this thread:

1. Don't annoy research librarians.

2. Keep track of your legal obligations.

3. Everything is not what is seems.

Thank you everyone for the lessons,

-Aaron

4. If you must buy expensive tropical fish while simultaneously stiffing authors, use an alias that isn't perfectly obvious.

5. See 1. above. Do you have any concept of the forces you're dealing with? Good God, man, any concept at all?

6. If you have violated 1. and 4., may God have me mercy on your soul, if it is right that He should do so.

[Baron Alcyoneus]

In this case, it may be necessary for the SCA to take action before the civil matter is resolved to prevent further injury.

Consider this analogy. Merchant B sells the goods of several craftsmen on consignment. Seven of them come to you and tell you that they no longer have an agreement with B because he's been selling their goods but not paying them anything from the sale. They want you stop him from selling the goods.

B admits that what they say is true, but says that he wants to sell the goods anyway.

The craftsmen say that if you let B sell, their goods will be gone, and B will blow their money on his tropical fish habit and they'll never get it back.

In this case, the least bad choice is to prevent him from selling.

The Seneschallate (the only office having any sort of jurisdiction here) really isn't the appropriate way to deal with this. It is the office that acts as an intermediary between the SCA and the real world. And the officer isn't going to put his neck on the chopping block over allegations between different people when he has no investigatory or punitive powers.

Now, the moment someone shows up with a legal paper (such as a cease&desist) that is signed by a COURT, not just a lawyer, they can take action to enforce mundane law in an SCA setting.

IE if the verified court papers say "Mr Price may not sell theses books: A/B/C/D, or these items of jewelry E/F/G", then they can say "If we see these on display in your booth, you will be asked to leave site. If you do not leave on your own, you will be considered a trespasser and the sheriff will remove you."

And NOT until then. (it is a little more complicated than that, of course)

Very good I just wanted to ensure it was preserved in it's unedited and original form.

Some of you might want to think about a screen capture of that post, if you have not already though to do so.

That isn't necessary. BP could edit it to say only that "Stump Shags Sheep by the Sea Shore", and your quote of the original would remain.

[Gerhard von Liebau]

You know, this all still sucks, of course... I hope it is resolved speedily... But I have to say (now, just because Greg's last post made me extremely satisfied) that I'm actually very proud of the community here and its support of these authors and affected customers. Many remarks were made that are not worthy of merit, including many of my own - I have not "contributed" to this thread, so to speak, but I wish I had. This thread may change the lives of several individuals who are deeply involved in our world, whether they be friends, fellow SCAdians or enlightened enthusiasts who have illuminated us with their work.

F*cking awesome. Good luck on your pursuit of justice, Christian, Greg, et al! Cheers.

-Gerhard

[JT]

Very good I just wanted to ensure it was preserved in it's unedited and original form.

Some of you might want to think about a screen capture of that post, if you have not already though to do so.

That isn't necessary. BP could edit it to say only that "Stump Shags Sheep by the Sea Shore", and your quote of the original would remain.

However, there is nothing preventing a person from editing the quote he's making.

While I hope -- and would rather -- that it doesn't come to this, there is a reason I do daily backups (besides the obvious one, for those of you who have been around since before the great DROP TABLE of whenever it was.)

[Thorsteinn Raudskeggr]

OK. I've watched this tragic thread unfold that I started, and I know that I was more the straw not the load that broke the camel, but I must confess:

I do not feel bad about starting this. Perhaps I should but, if I were the one stiffed, it would have been a very bad day indeed for the one on the end of my wrath.

Go get him guys. May the Judge look kindly upon your case. I hope that, once rights are returned to their rightful holders, Mr Tobler will re-issue those nifty books through his website.


-Ivan
(yes, my dad is a Jewish Lawyer. I grew up with a different viewpoint.)

[Louis de Leon]

Lady Charlotte, former 1st Class Girl Scout and Daisy Scout/Brownie Scout/Junior Scout/Senior Girl Scout leader for over a decade...

Another piece to the puzzle is found, and the picture becomes a little clearer....

Yeah, I was poking around other organizations similar to the SCA for reference to see how they deal with these kinds of problems. And as it turns out you can get booted for ethical violations pretty easily it seems. Other groups take their problem children and toss 'em. Other groups don't wait for an actual legal trial. Other groups will boot you essentially for "conduct unbecoming" - not necessarily even illegal activity, just stuff against their charter and the theme of the group. And that's it - there's the door.

[Stump]

However, there is nothing preventing a person from editing the quote he's making.

...or from editing the text in a daily back up for that matter provided they had access, but still it does add another layer of complexity in any attempt at duplicity don't you think.

My post quoting Mr Price was made in order to devalue any potential editing of said post he might consider. My suggestion of a screen grab was to allow documentation for any injured party considering legal action. It is nice to know the Archive has these capabilities for just this sort of happenstance.

Redundancy is in general a strength rather than a weakness.

[Roland Ansbacher]

I see a couple of ways to let Mr. Price know the displeasure that exisits in the community over these matters.

There is always the easy method, for the end user anyway, of not shopping at Revival.us, and not patronizing Brian Price. Let the money do the talking. I am pretty sure that most people who have read this lengthy post have already decided to do so.

Obviously, encouraging others to do so is the next step. I believe with 47,000 plus viewings, quite a few people are doing this.

Another possible step is a rather more direct. In line with the founding tradition of the SCA, it might be time to stage a bit of a protest at Gulf Wars, encouraging a boycott of CB products until such time as their obligations are fulfilled to the satisfaction of the wounded parties.

Let me phrase it a bit more un-delicately. By Mr. Price's own admissions, he has cheated people out of what is rightfully due to them. It seems to me he is rushing to make some attempt to recompense them so as to avoid any possible trouble with his merchanting at Gulf Wars. It strikes me he is making a token effort to try to weasel out of obligations, hoping that the powers that be will drag their feet or waiting for the slow wheel of justice to begin to turn.

I would heartily recommend that attendees of Gulf Wars make their displeasure known, in a clear and gentlemanly manner as possible. No vitriol, no hate, no hurtful or angry words. Just send a simple message, give the authors their due. Make good to those you have wronged.

I would hope that there is also room for mercy. I do believe we owe a great debt to Mr. Price and the Chivalry Bookshelf for making a great contribution, not only to the SCA and WMA, but to general medieval scholarship as well. It is a terrible shame that it was built on the exploitation of those who wrote the books, and the betrayal of so many friendships.

Sir Roland Ansbacher, OL
Atenveldt

[Greg Mele]

Sir Roland,

Excellent counsel and spoken well. This was what I meant by peers may not have power, per se, but wield influence.

Gerhardt, Ivan and Roland,

Thank you for the well-wishes. I hope it is clear why we waited to post this letter. My fervent hope was that it need never have been posted. I am deeply hoping that tomorrow I will be able to post a resolution to the immediate issue of our intellectual property, rather than having to ask people at Gulf Wars to use their phones to snap pictures of Brian selling books in his tent for evidence. But, if it comes to that, it does.

Again, my thanks for the many well-wishes and the support that we have been shown. It *does* mean a lot.

Greg

[Lady Charlotte]

Hello, Vitus,

Brian has refunded the money for the defective gauntlets. I hope he can somehow make amends to everyone he has pissed off.

This has all been sad and depressing in the extreme.

"A coat is given to a Knight in order to symbolize the great ordeals that he must suffer in order to honor chivalry. For just as the coat is worn above the other garments of iron, and faces the rain, and receives blows before they reach the hauberk or other armor, so a Knight is chosen to sustain larger burdens than another man. And all the men who serve under him and are in his care ought, whenever necessary, to seek him out for help; and the Knight should defend them to the extent of his power. Knights ought to be captured themselves, or wounded or killed, rather than allow the men who are in their care to suffer these fates. Similarly, princes and barons ought to exert themselves, at the highest levels of chivalry, in order to protect their lands and their people."

--Adams, Robert, translator. William Caxton's 'The Book of the Order of Chivalry' (in late Middle English) as translated from a French version of Ramon Lull's 'Le Libre del Orde de Cauayleria'. Huntsville, TX: Sam Houston University Press, 1991. 74-75. Print.

Lady Charlotte

[Lady Charlotte]

Hello, Aerimus13,

That really does not matter. If you are stand around and profess that you uphold chivalric ideals then it is your duty to out a wrong when you see it not wait until you hear stories from other people who got screwed like you. it is said he is a "peer" in the SCA then why didn't the peers take him aside and discuss it with him long before now? If they were seeing this happen time and time again it was their duty to have a polite discussion with him. His actiosn not only reflected on the SCA but it also reflected on how the non-peer view the peers.

"A heraldic emblem is given to the Knight on his shield and on his coat so that he may be known in battle and so that, if he is brave and does fair deeds of arms, he may be praised by name. If he is a faulty and recreant coward, the same token allows him to be properly blamed and reproved. The heraldic emblem is also given to the Knight so that he may be identified as a friend or enemy of chivalry. Hence every Knight ought to honor his token and see to it that it is never associated with blame."

--Adams, Robert, translator. William Caxton's 'The Book of the Order of Chivalry' (in late Middle English) as translated from a French version of Ramon Lull's 'Le Libre del Orde de Cauayleria'. Huntsville, TX: Sam Houston University Press, 1991. 75. Print.


Lady Charlotte

[Petter Brodin]

The week has now passed, with only one form of communication.

[...]Email is *not* a reliable channel for critical messaging, and the brian@chivalrybookshelf.com email has not worked since 2008.

I just want to point out that revival.us still lists brian@chivalrybookshelf.com as the way to get a hold of Headquarters & Editorials on their contact page, so it's not weird if someone still tries to use that.

[Aaron]

Lady Charlotte, former 1st Class Girl Scout and Daisy Scout/Brownie Scout/Junior Scout/Senior Girl Scout leader for over a decade...

In good humor (please don't look me up, please...please...)

[Talbot]

I would heartily recommend that attendees of Gulf Wars make their displeasure known, in a clear and gentlemanly manner as possible. No vitriol, no hate, no hurtful or angry words. Just send a simple message, give the authors their due. Make good to those you have wronged.

Should people do this, I urge you to pay heed to Sir Roland's words. In all likelihood Brian himself will not go to Gulf Wars to face this level of public displeasure. It is far more likely that he will send his wife Ann and it will be her rather than him who will be there running the booth. As far as I know there is no reason to be discourteous to Ann no matter how strong your feelings about Brian may be.

[Aerimus13]

I would heartily recommend that attendees of Gulf Wars make their displeasure known, in a clear and gentlemanly manner as possible. No vitriol, no hate, no hurtful or angry words. Just send a simple message, give the authors their due. Make good to those you have wronged.

Should people do this, I urge you to pay heed to Sir Roland's words. In all likelihood Brian himself will not go to Gulf Wars to face this level of public displeasure. It is far more likely that he will send his wife Ann and it will be her rather than him who will be there running the booth. As far as I know there is no reason to be discourteous to Ann no matter how strong your feelings about Brian may be.

Well if he sends his wife to the wolves then he is a coward and a cad and not worthy of the white belt.

[Angusm0628]

Well if he sends his wife to the wolves then he is a coward and a cad and not worthy of the white belt.

Removed due to 17 pages of mind numbing reading and not reading all the posts.

[Christian H. Tobler]

Folks,

While no one should be discourteous or belligerent to anyone at any event, Mrs. Price is an involved party here, not an innocent bystander.

This not Brian's business alone; it belongs to both of them. And in attempting to arrange either books or money to placate me she is acting for the business. And as Greg has pointed out CB/Revival.us are a d/b/a's for both of them.

It's also irrelevant which of them is at Gulf Wars. Given our demands, published here, we regard the presence of our intellectual property on-site and for sale unlawful and unacceptable.

Again, courtesy and controlled tempers are, and must be, the rule here, no matter what, but it would be inaccurate to paint Brian as the sole actor here, with a hapless wife along for the ride.

Yours,

Christian

[Christian H. Tobler]

OK. I've watched this tragic thread unfold that I started, and I know that I was more the straw not the load that broke the camel, but I must confess:

I do not feel bad about starting this. Perhaps I should but, if I were the one stiffed, it would have been a very bad day indeed for the one on the end of my wrath.

Go get him guys. May the Judge look kindly upon your case. I hope that, once rights are returned to their rightful holders, Mr Tobler will re-issue those nifty books through his website.


-Ivan
(yes, my dad is a Jewish Lawyer. I grew up with a different viewpoint.)

We're at over 50,000 views now Ivan. If I ever do get copies of Fighting back, and you don't already have one by then, I'll personally send you a signed one for free.

Yours,

Christian

[Aerimus13]

Folks,

While no one should be discourteous or belligerent to anyone at any event, Mrs. Price is an involved party here, not an innocent bystander.

This not Brian's business alone; it belongs to both of them. And in attempting to arrange either books or money to placate me she is acting for the business. And as Greg has pointed out CB/Revival.us are a d/b/a's for both of them.

It's also irrelevant which of them is at Gulf Wars. Given our demands, published here, we regard the presence of our intellectual property on-site and for sale unlawful and unacceptable.

Again, courtesy and controlled tempers are, and must be, the rule here, no matter what, but it would be inaccurate to paint Brian as the sole actor here, with a hapless wife along for the ride.

Yours,

Christian

Sir, I do understand that they are both agents in this. I was just pointing out the disconnect of BP’s actions and his words. He professes to be a KSCA with all the chivalric baggage that goes with title but uses his wife as a mouthpiece because he does not have the wherewithal to deal with you (or anybody else it seems) directly.

Once again I find this threat so full of comic irony that Shakespeare would be proud.

I commend all the people (both mundane and SCA ) that have spoken out against this bastard over the years. To those whose voices were drowned out by the BP fan club. I hope you feel some vindication. To the fan club--- Shame on you. Do penance for your failure by apologizing to the people you wronged. I am talking about the nobility that allowed BP to plunder the SCA’s good will and smear egg all over the face of his peers. I am talking about all the knights that saw it and said – “It is not my problem. He did not screw anybody I am associated with.” Live up to your ideals and make your little corner of the world better.

[Jonathan Baird]

I own several of the books in question. I will be contacting the authors and sending them at least a token payment for my enjoyment of their work. I will contact those so I can to get paypal or physical addresses. I feel they deserve to be rewarded for their work even if I am not able to do that through the publisher.

[Galleron]

In this case, it may be necessary for the SCA to take action before the civil matter is resolved to prevent further injury.

Consider this analogy. Merchant B sells the goods of several craftsmen on consignment. Seven of them come to you and tell you that they no longer have an agreement with B because he's been selling their goods but not paying them anything from the sale. They want you stop him from selling the goods.

B admits that what they say is true, but says that he wants to sell the goods anyway.

The craftsmen say that if you let B sell, their goods will be gone, and B will blow their money on his tropical fish habit and they'll never get it back.

In this case, the least bad choice is to prevent him from selling.

The Seneschallate (the only office having any sort of jurisdiction here) really isn't the appropriate way to deal with this. It is the office that acts as an intermediary between the SCA and the real world. And the officer isn't going to put his neck on the chopping block over allegations between different people when he has no investigatory or punitive powers.

I disagree. In my opinion, at this point, Chivalry Bookshelf's continued sale of the authors' books is on ongoing offense, similar to selling stolen property. A reasonable observer has reasonable cause to believe this is true, based on Price's own statements.

The seneschal has a duty to prevent further harm, and has the power to remove Chivalry Bookshelf from an event, or allow it to remain conditional on good behavior.

[Alexander of Lancaster]

In this case, it may be necessary for the SCA to take action before the civil matter is resolved to prevent further injury.

Consider this analogy. Merchant B sells the goods of several craftsmen on consignment. Seven of them come to you and tell you that they no longer have an agreement with B because he's been selling their goods but not paying them anything from the sale. They want you stop him from selling the goods.

B admits that what they say is true, but says that he wants to sell the goods anyway.

The craftsmen say that if you let B sell, their goods will be gone, and B will blow their money on his tropical fish habit and they'll never get it back.

In this case, the least bad choice is to prevent him from selling.

The Seneschallate (the only office having any sort of jurisdiction here) really isn't the appropriate way to deal with this. It is the office that acts as an intermediary between the SCA and the real world. And the officer isn't going to put his neck on the chopping block over allegations between different people when he has no investigatory or punitive powers.

I disagree. In my opinion, at this point, Chivalry Bookshelf's continued sale of the authors' books is on ongoing offense, similar to selling stolen property. A reasonable observer has reasonable cause to believe this is true, based on Price's own statements.

The seneschal has a duty to prevent further harm, and has the power to remove Chivalry Bookshelf from an event, or allow it to remain conditional on good behavior.

Not one shred of evidence has been seen here. A few honorable people have made statements. There have been no bank records, the contract for the books has not been shown. Any Seneschal who would ban someone based on the current statements would be a fool. If Brian were to win his case with these authors he would then get rich emptying the SCA coffers on his counter suit.

I think that Brian is probably very guilty but I still haven't seen evidence or a court decision.

I am not asking to see the above mentioned evidence, simply pointing out that an officer of the SCA has nothing but hearsay to go on at this point.

[Greg Mele]

Gideon,

I own several of the books in question. I will be contacting the authors and sending them at least a token payment for my enjoyment of their work. I will contact those so I can to get paypal or physical addresses. I feel they deserve to be rewarded for their work even if I am not able to do that through the publisher.

You are one of several generous souls who have made such an offer. As Christian and I said, no such compensation is required or sought for.

However, if you or any other CB customers truly feel compelled to do *something* monetarily, could I ask you instead to donate to the Wounded Warriors program:

https://support.woundedwarriorproject.o ... x?tsid=139

I can think of few causes more chivalric than helping seriously wounded soldiers reclaim their lives, and we - the authors -have already agreed that should we reclaim our property a substantial portion of the proceeds will go to the Warriors program.

Thanks!

Greg

[Galleron]

In this case, it may be necessary for the SCA to take action before the civil matter is resolved to prevent further injury.

Consider this analogy. Merchant B sells the goods of several craftsmen on consignment. Seven of them come to you and tell you that they no longer have an agreement with B because he's been selling their goods but not paying them anything from the sale. They want you stop him from selling the goods.

B admits that what they say is true, but says that he wants to sell the goods anyway.

The craftsmen say that if you let B sell, their goods will be gone, and B will blow their money on his tropical fish habit and they'll never get it back.

In this case, the least bad choice is to prevent him from selling.

The Seneschallate (the only office having any sort of jurisdiction here) really isn't the appropriate way to deal with this. It is the office that acts as an intermediary between the SCA and the real world. And the officer isn't going to put his neck on the chopping block over allegations between different people when he has no investigatory or punitive powers.

I disagree. In my opinion, at this point, Chivalry Bookshelf's continued sale of the authors' books is on ongoing offense, similar to selling stolen property. A reasonable observer has reasonable cause to believe this is true, based on Price's own statements.

The seneschal has a duty to prevent further harm, and has the power to remove Chivalry Bookshelf from an event, or allow it to remain conditional on good behavior.

Not one shred of evidence has been seen here.

You have Price's own admission that he has not paid royalties for years. That is both a party admission and a statement against interest.

[Alexander of Lancaster]

Is his admission signed and notorized? If he is willfully doing these things he is accused of he can certainly get around a forum post. Besides, he thinks he is right and if he proves that then that Senschal is next on his list ... Just not a prudent move for an Officer of the SCA.

[Aaron]

If the SCA does nothing and lets this happen (either slandering Brian Price or letting Brian Price getting away with theft) can the SCA Inc be sued successfully? I see the SCA in a non-win situation here.

1. Sanction Mr. Price -- denial of livelyhood, legal issues ensure.

2. Do not saction Mr. Price -- now part of a theft and royalty scheme.

Catch 22 in a way.

I would go with #1 personally, but either method has it's own risk. Which is probably why nothing has been done all these years.

It won't be fun either way we go IMO.

[Galleron]

Is his admission signed and notorized? If he is willfully doing these things he is accused of he can certainly get around a forum post. Besides, he thinks he is right and if he proves that then that Senschal is next on his list ... Just not a prudent move for an Officer of the SCA.

I doubt that the post can be gotten around easily. It seems to me that he would need to prove not only that the post was made by someone else, was untrue, and that the seneschal could reasonably have known both facts

[Baron Alcyoneus]

You have Price's own admission that he has not paid royalties for years. That is both a party admission and a statement against interest.

Presuming, of course, that the 13year old hacker at the other end of the telephone cord is Brian Price.

This is not a legal forum, and no legal evidence has been presented. I can say that I'm President of the Universe, and it has similar legal bearing at the moment.