Richard Dawkins brings court case

cj.23 · 23rd October 2010, 12:33 PM

I found this interesting.

http://www.courthousenews.com/2010/10/22/31283.htm

Bloody shame all round, hope resolves well

cj x

ddt · 23rd October 2010, 01:05 PM

That name, Josh Timonen, rings familiar. He's the same guy who was behind the clamping down of the Richard Dawkins forum. I wonder if Dawkins now looks in a different light to that episode...

Floyt · 23rd October 2010, 01:17 PM

So he is. Well, that'll resonate with all the forum refugees.

AdMan · 23rd October 2010, 01:35 PM

It is sad, even more so because Timonen and Dawkins had been close friends (see the dedication page for The Greatest Show on Earth).

Here's a blog post with some behind-the-scenes perspective on the closing of the forum.

Cain · 23rd October 2010, 01:36 PM

That's what you get for trusting an atheist (nobody ever embezzles money from churches).

Virus · 23rd October 2010, 02:13 PM

Wow. He didn't just skim off the top, he took everything and left the skim. From a charity. And he was on $100,000 a year too. Greedy little bugger.

geni · 23rd October 2010, 02:23 PM

Originally Posted by Virus

Wow. He didn't just skim off the top, he took everything and left the skim. From a charity. And he was on $100,000 a year too. Greedy little bugger.

Eh anecdotaly it been something I've seen a fair bit with small charities of late. Perhaps I just know about the wrong charities.

KateHL · 23rd October 2010, 05:07 PM

Tinomen is certainly in the wrong, but I found this a bit nauseating (from the article):

Quote:

In his 18-page complaint, Dawkins describes himself as "the world's best known and most respected atheist."

Seriously? He has the nerve to call himself the 'most respected atheist'? Best known I understand, but it takes cajones to call oneself the 'most respected' anything. My Dawkins love is falling a few major pegs.

AdMan · 23rd October 2010, 05:12 PM

Originally Posted by KateHL

Tinomen is certainly in the wrong, but I found this a bit nauseating (from the article):

Seriously? He has the nerve to call himself the 'most respected atheist'? Best known I understand, but it takes cajones to call oneself the 'most respected' anything. My Dawkins love is falling a few major pegs.

Well, I am sure he didn't write that document himself, but I see where you're coming from.

Mr. Scott · 23rd October 2010, 05:17 PM

Originally Posted by AdMan

Well, I am sure he didn't write that document himself, but I see where you're coming from.

Yes, it doesn't sound like something Dawkins would say about himself.

I hope that SOB Timonen gets his luxury homes, allegedly improved by the foundations money, seized by the courts.

geni · 23rd October 2010, 06:17 PM

Originally Posted by KateHL

Tinomen is certainly in the wrong, but I found this a bit nauseating (from the article):

Seriously? He has the nerve to call himself the 'most respected atheist'? Best known I understand, but it takes cajones to call oneself the 'most respected' anything. My Dawkins love is falling a few major pegs.

In any case the likes of stalin and the chinese leadership are probably the best known athiests.

cj.23 · 23rd October 2010, 06:24 PM

Hey, crap happens, humans being human, ragrdless of religious belief or lack thereof. I critisiced Timonen on my blog over the forum closure fiasco - yes the ex-members in exile are celebrating (how I heard - http://www.rationalskepticism.org/ne...en-t14455.html ) but it's just one of those things. Felt sorry for Dawkins though - but I will wait for the court judgment before I take it all too seriously. There might still be some misunderstanding or something

cj x

angrysoba · 23rd October 2010, 06:49 PM

Originally Posted by geni

In any case the likes of stalin and the chinese leadership are probably the best known athiests.

They were also shown quite a bit of respect in their lifetimes as well:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fik2-...ext=1&index=74

eeyore1954 · 23rd October 2010, 07:25 PM

Originally Posted by Virus

Wow. He didn't just skim off the top, he took everything and left the skim. From a charity. And he was on $100,000 a year too. Greedy little bugger.

Quote:

KateHL says Tinomen is certainly in the wrong, but I found this a bit nauseating (from the article):

I guess guilty until proven innocent is the theory here.
I wonder if he also looking for criminal charges or just money.

arthwollipot · 23rd October 2010, 07:32 PM

Yes, let's please remember the adverb "allegedly" here, okay?

Delvo · 23rd October 2010, 07:32 PM

Originally Posted by AdMan

Timonen and Dawkins had been close friends (see the dedication page for The Greatest Show on Earth).

When some people at the forum were pissed off about things being changed or the forum closing, Dawkins apparently always defended Timonen and all that he did, essentially saying if you have a problem with JT, you have a problem with RD.

Originally Posted by cj.23

I critisiced Timonen on my blog over the forum closure fiasco - yes the ex-members in exile are celebrating (how I heard - http://www.rationalskepticism.org/ne...en-t14455.html

14 pages in 9 hours!

I didn't really follow the details of that mess when it was happening. Did people who didn't like it or some aspect of it tend to blame JT and not RD?

cj.23 · 23rd October 2010, 07:47 PM

Yeah, he was responsible for the decision to close the forum -- from my blog

http://jerome23.wordpress.com/2010/0...orum-to-close/
http://jerome23.wordpress.com/2010/0...ns-of-history/
http://jerome23.wordpress.com/2010/0...-at-the-forum/
http://jerome23.wordpress.com/2010/0...-josh-timonen/
http://jerome23.wordpress.com/2010/0...kepticism-org/

but rather shorter and better (as they were all written as events transpired), and from a former mod (Peter Harrison) http://realityismyreligion.wordpress...ill-open-soon/

Even shorter, JT closed the forum, the mods and admin staff were sidelined, RD came to JT's defence when he was criticised, and now many of the ex-forumites are rather amused at the turn of events.

cj x

not daSkeptic · 23rd October 2010, 07:47 PM

Unless there was a written work-for-hire contract, it's going to come down to the exact nature of the relationship between Dawkin's foundation and Timonen. There is some mention of Timonen working through his own company, in which case he was not legally an employee of the foundation. If the works in question were produced under that arrangement, then without a written work-for-hire agreement the works belong to Timonen.

I myself have run into work-for-hire disputes before. Unless you're an employee or you otherwise agree in writing to relinquish ownership of works you produce, they're yours.

http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ09.pdf

pipelineaudio · 23rd October 2010, 07:48 PM

While I still absolutely love Richard Dawkins, perhaps he has learned a lesson from this about being too proud to admit he hired the wrong guy

Life is a learning experience

cj.23 · 23rd October 2010, 07:52 PM

Originally Posted by daSkeptic

Unless there was a written work-for-hire contract, it's going to come down to the exact nature of the relationship between Dawkin's foundation and Timonen. There is some mention of Timonen working through his own company, in which case he was not legally an employee of the foundation. If the works in question were produced under that arrangement, then without a written work-for-hire agreement the works belong to Timonen.

I myself have run into work-for-hire disputes before. Unless you're an employee or you otherwise agree in writing to relinquish ownership of works you produce, they're yours.

http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ09.pdf

Excellent point daSkeptic!

That was my undertanding as to how the law applies here in the UK as well. As the company was independent fo the charity, the creator of the goods well may be legally the owner. Best wait and see. I still think this may resolve amicably, but I have no vested interest either way.

Uncayimmy · 23rd October 2010, 09:41 PM

Originally Posted by daSkeptic

Unless there was a written work-for-hire contract, it's going to come down to the exact nature of the relationship between Dawkin's foundation and Timonen. There is some mention of Timonen working through his own company, in which case he was not legally an employee of the foundation. If the works in question were produced under that arrangement, then without a written work-for-hire agreement the works belong to Timonen.

I myself have run into work-for-hire disputes before. Unless you're an employee or you otherwise agree in writing to relinquish ownership of works you produce, they're yours.

http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ09.pdf

According their 2008 and 2009 Form 990 filings, Timonen was not an employee at all. He was a contractor. He claimed rights to the DVDs, but contributions to audio-visual productions are specifically exempted as being considered work-for-hire, so his claim there is wrong. As for the website and the logo, if there's no work-for-hire contract, there can still be the issue of joint copyright if they worked cooperatively. If the foundation wrote the blurbs for the DVDs (like if they were taken directly from the DVD cover or included quotes from the DVD itself), the copyright will most likely belong to them, and that will be resolved with the effort put into making it into a web page.

roger · 23rd October 2010, 11:19 PM

Timonen's response.

SezMe · 23rd October 2010, 11:28 PM

Originally Posted by cj.23

... but I will wait for the court judgment before I take it all too seriously. There might still be some misunderstanding or something ...

My crystal ball says this never sees the inside of a courtroom. There will be a negotiated settlement which will include the proviso that the parties button their lips. In this case, you'll never get the full story.

Stylesjl · 23rd October 2010, 11:29 PM

Its all falling apart

Xplodyncow · 23rd October 2010, 11:43 PM

Originally Posted by roger

Timonen's response.

After composing an eloquent, thoughtful, nuanced, and reasoned post on his blog, Timonen worked out the remainder of his teen angst by slamming his bedroom door shut, heaving himself onto his bed, and screaming along with the All-American Rejects.

Puppycow · 24th October 2010, 12:02 AM

Why did Dawkins put so much faith in this man?

zooterkin · 24th October 2010, 01:05 AM

Originally Posted by arthwollipot

Yes, let's please remember the adverb "allegedly" here, okay?

Also, that JT is apparently a member here, too.

TubbaBlubba · 24th October 2010, 01:17 AM

Originally Posted by KateHL

Tinomen is certainly in the wrong, but I found this a bit nauseating (from the article):

Seriously? He has the nerve to call himself the 'most respected atheist'? Best known I understand, but it takes cajones to call oneself the 'most respected' anything. My Dawkins love is falling a few major pegs.

I seriously doubt he wrote that himself. He's always rather humble in his books, at least. Maybe he's getting senile.

Soapy Sam · 24th October 2010, 03:11 AM

Complicated. Doing business with a friend is ever fraught with danger, even if both parties see themselves as honest. One man's idea of reasonable reward can be another's idea of embezzlement.

I can't, personally, see what the age of Timonen's girlfriend has to do with anything.

I also have problems understanding what the RDF auditors were doing throughout all this.
Are such trusts subject to audit , as a PLC would be? I have no idea. I do know JREF, as a 401 charity, IS required to produce annual financial statements.

As for JT's response, his memory of his own conduct during the RDF forum shutdown seems to have been airbrushed a tad.

Dawkins is old school. If he thinks he / RDF has been the victim of a crime, I suspect he will pursue it to a possibly excessive extent. Whether that would be in the interest of RDF is open to doubt. The legal niceties of intellectual property ownership must be sorted first though. Maybe JT had a legal right to what he took. If the numbers are remotely correct , I cannot see how he could claim a moral right.

My psychic powers predict some lawyers are about to get richer.

arthwollipot · 24th October 2010, 03:24 AM

Originally Posted by zooterkin

Also, that JT is apparently a member here, too.

A member search for "joshtimonen" returns no results at this time.

Professor Yaffle · 24th October 2010, 03:31 AM

Originally Posted by arthwollipot

A member search for "joshtimonen" returns no results at this time.

Probably hasn't been approved yet.

Uncayimmy · 24th October 2010, 03:36 AM

Originally Posted by Soapy Sam

Complicated. Doing business with a friend is ever fraught with danger, even if both parties see themselves as honest. One man's idea of reasonable reward can be another's idea of embezzlement.

Just as an aside, I do business with friends/family one of two ways. Either I charge my "best customer" rate and treat them like a customer or I substantially discount it (or do it for free) with the understanding that regular customers come first. I give them the choice up front, and it really does help reduce bad feelings.

Quote:

I can't, personally, see what the age of Timonen's girlfriend has to do with anything.

You're not using your imagination.

Quote:

I also have problems understanding what the RDF auditors were doing throughout all this.
Are such trusts subject to audit , as a PLC would be? I have no idea. I do know JREF, as a 401 charity, IS required to produce annual financial statements.

I'm not an expert on the law, but I don't think audits would have been required for RDFRS. Their yearly revenue was under $400K, and I don't think audits became required until you're in the $2M range (not 100% sure).

Quote:

Dawkins is old school. If he thinks he / RDF has been the victim of a crime, I suspect he will pursue it to a possibly excessive extent. Whether that would be in the interest of RDF is open to doubt. The legal niceties of intellectual property ownership must be sorted first though. Maybe JT had a legal right to what he took. If the numbers are remotely correct , I cannot see how he could claim a moral right.

I'd say that's a fair assessment. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

Quote:

My psychic powers predict some lawyers are about to get richer.

I wrote a quatrain when I was 17 that predicted this lawsuit.

stijndeloose · 24th October 2010, 04:26 AM

Originally Posted by cj.23

Hey, crap happens, humans being human, ragrdless of religious belief or lack thereof. I critisiced Timonen on my blog over the forum closure fiasco - yes the ex-members in exile are celebrating (how I heard - http://www.rationalskepticism.org/ne...en-t14455.html ) but it's just one of those things. Felt sorry for Dawkins though - but I will wait for the court judgment before I take it all too seriously. There might still be some misunderstanding or something

cj x

Well, I'm not celebrating. But I don't feel particularly sorry for either Josh or Richard either.

cj.23 · 24th October 2010, 04:28 AM

Originally Posted by stijndeloose

Well, I'm not celebrating. But I don't feel particularly sorry for either Josh or Richard either.

I do, it must be hard for both, but I am laughing heartily after how they treated us in the past. Still I'm trying to forgive. I was never a very god Christian, but I do try!

cj x

stijndeloose · 24th October 2010, 04:30 AM

Originally Posted by Soapy Sam

I can't, personally, see what the age of Timonen's girlfriend has to do with anything.

Nothing. Actually, as far as I know, his girlfriend doesn't have anything to do with the matter at all. I'm having trouble understanding why she's even being discussed.

Originally Posted by Soapy Sam

As for JT's response, his memory of his own conduct during the RDF forum shutdown seems to have been airbrushed a tad.

Just a wee bit. I wonder if he remembers who deleted a number of members' entire posting history.

Originally Posted by Soapy Sam

My psychic powers predict some lawyers are about to get richer.

Yes.

stijndeloose · 24th October 2010, 04:32 AM

Originally Posted by cj.23

I do, it must be hard for both, but I am laughing heartily after how they treated us in the past. Still I'm trying to forgive. I was never a very god Christian, but I do try!

cj x

Ha! Well, I don't believe he's really sorry anyway.

So Josh isn't here yet? I, for one, hope he doesn't join up.

Delvo · 24th October 2010, 04:34 AM

Originally Posted by roger

Timonen's response.

Interesting... it seems to be mostly about the forum closing, instead of being about the lawsuit.

Originally Posted by Puppycow

Why did Dawkins put so much faith in this man?

When it seems to be earned by experience, reputation, or evidence, it's not faith. The word then is "trust".

Originally Posted by UncaYimmy

I'm not an expert on the law, but I don't think audits would have been required for RDFRS. Their yearly revenue was under $400K, and I don't think audits became required until you're in the $2M range (not 100% sure).

Remember to do the conversions; they use metric money over there.

Originally Posted by UncaYimmy

I wrote a quatrain when I was 17 that predicted this lawsuit.

I'll admit that the bit about the two owls seems to fit, but which one is the one that ate the snake, and who's the snake? And seriously, that part about the river of orchids was just weird.

zooterkin · 24th October 2010, 04:47 AM

Originally Posted by stijndeloose

Nothing. Actually, as far as I know, his girlfriend doesn't have anything to do with the matter at all. I'm having trouble understanding why she's even being discussed.

Well, allegedly she received some of the money under discussion, but her age seems to be irrelevant to that.

Uncayimmy · 24th October 2010, 04:49 AM

Originally Posted by Delvo

Remember to do the conversions; they use metric money over there.

I was referring specifically to the RDFRS in the USA. I don't know where to find the numbers for the UK entity or their laws.

stijndeloose · 24th October 2010, 04:50 AM

Originally Posted by zooterkin

Well, allegedly she received some of the money under discussion, but her age seems to be irrelevant to that.

Ah, I must've missed that. But yes, her age is irrelevant. As are her looks.

23rd October 2010, 12:33 PM	#1
cj.23 Master Poster Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 2,827	Richard Dawkins brings court case I found this interesting. http://www.courthousenews.com/2010/10/22/31283.htm Bloody shame all round, hope resolves well cj x
cj.23 Master Poster Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 2,827	__________________ I'm an Anglican Christian, so I declare my prejudice here. Please take it in to account when reading my posts. "Most people would rather die than think: many do." - Betrand Russell My dull life blogged http://jerome23.wordpress.com

23rd October 2010, 01:05 PM	#2
ddt Mafia Penguin Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Netherlands Posts: 19,579	That name, Josh Timonen, rings familiar. He's the same guy who was behind the clamping down of the Richard Dawkins forum. I wonder if Dawkins now looks in a different light to that episode...
	__________________ "I think it is very beautiful for the poor to accept their lot, to share it with the passion of Christ. I think the world is being much helped by the suffering of the poor people." - "Saint" Teresa, the lying thieving Albanian dwarf "I think accuracy is important" - Vixen

23rd October 2010, 01:17 PM	#3
Floyt Chordate Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Cape Town. Still not mugged. Plenty of chameleons though, and stepped on a cobra. Posts: 1,684	So he is. Well, that'll resonate with all the forum refugees.
	__________________ They had no god; they had no gods; they had no faith. What they appear to have had is a working metaphor. - Ursula K. Le Guin, "Always Coming Home"

23rd October 2010, 01:36 PM	#5
Cain Straussian Join Date: May 2002 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 15,256	That's what you get for trusting an atheist (nobody ever embezzles money from churches).
	__________________ Cain: Don't be a homo. Diablo: What's that supposed to mean? Cain: It's a heteronormative remark meant to be taken at face-value. Last edited by Cain; 23rd October 2010 at 01:37 PM. Reason: Question pre-emptively answered

23rd October 2010, 02:13 PM	#6
Virus Philosopher Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 6,875	Wow. He didn't just skim off the top, he took everything and left the skim. From a charity. And he was on $100,000 a year too. Greedy little bugger.
Virus Philosopher Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 6,875	Last edited by Virus; 23rd October 2010 at 02:15 PM.

23rd October 2010, 01:35 PM	#4
AdMan Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2010 Posts: 10,293	It is sad, even more so because Timonen and Dawkins had been close friends (see the dedication page for The Greatest Show on Earth). Here's a blog post with some behind-the-scenes perspective on the closing of the forum.

23rd October 2010, 02:23 PM	#7
geni Anti-homeopathy illuminati member Join Date: Oct 2003 Posts: 28,209	Originally Posted by Virus Wow. He didn't just skim off the top, he took everything and left the skim. From a charity. And he was on $100,000 a year too. Greedy little bugger. Eh anecdotaly it been something I've seen a fair bit with small charities of late. Perhaps I just know about the wrong charities.

23rd October 2010, 05:07 PM	#8
KateHL Graduate Poster Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 1,822	Tinomen is certainly in the wrong, but I found this a bit nauseating (from the article): Quote: In his 18-page complaint, Dawkins describes himself as "the world's best known and most respected atheist." Seriously? He has the nerve to call himself the 'most respected atheist'? Best known I understand, but it takes cajones to call oneself the 'most respected' anything. My Dawkins love is falling a few major pegs.
KateHL Graduate Poster Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 1,822

23rd October 2010, 05:12 PM	#9
AdMan Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2010 Posts: 10,293	Originally Posted by KateHL Tinomen is certainly in the wrong, but I found this a bit nauseating (from the article): Seriously? He has the nerve to call himself the 'most respected atheist'? Best known I understand, but it takes cajones to call oneself the 'most respected' anything. My Dawkins love is falling a few major pegs. Well, I am sure he didn't write that document himself, but I see where you're coming from.

23rd October 2010, 05:17 PM	#10
Mr. Scott Under the Amazing One's Wing Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 2,546	Originally Posted by AdMan Well, I am sure he didn't write that document himself, but I see where you're coming from. Yes, it doesn't sound like something Dawkins would say about himself. I hope that SOB Timonen gets his luxury homes, allegedly improved by the foundations money, seized by the courts.

23rd October 2010, 06:17 PM	#11
geni Anti-homeopathy illuminati member Join Date: Oct 2003 Posts: 28,209	Originally Posted by KateHL Tinomen is certainly in the wrong, but I found this a bit nauseating (from the article): Seriously? He has the nerve to call himself the 'most respected atheist'? Best known I understand, but it takes cajones to call oneself the 'most respected' anything. My Dawkins love is falling a few major pegs. In any case the likes of stalin and the chinese leadership are probably the best known athiests.

23rd October 2010, 06:24 PM	#12
cj.23 Master Poster Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 2,827	Hey, crap happens, humans being human, ragrdless of religious belief or lack thereof. I critisiced Timonen on my blog over the forum closure fiasco - yes the ex-members in exile are celebrating (how I heard - http://www.rationalskepticism.org/ne...en-t14455.html ) but it's just one of those things. Felt sorry for Dawkins though - but I will wait for the court judgment before I take it all too seriously. There might still be some misunderstanding or something cj x
cj.23 Master Poster Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 2,827	__________________ I'm an Anglican Christian, so I declare my prejudice here. Please take it in to account when reading my posts. "Most people would rather die than think: many do." - Betrand Russell My dull life blogged http://jerome23.wordpress.com Last edited by cj.23; 23rd October 2010 at 07:26 PM. Reason: typo

23rd October 2010, 06:49 PM	#13
angrysoba Philosophile Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Osaka, Japan Posts: 34,344	Originally Posted by geni In any case the likes of stalin and the chinese leadership are probably the best known athiests. They were also shown quite a bit of respect in their lifetimes as well: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fik2-...ext=1&index=74
	__________________ Слава Україні! **** Putin!

23rd October 2010, 07:25 PM	#14
eeyore1954 Philosopher Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 6,811	Originally Posted by Virus Wow. He didn't just skim off the top, he took everything and left the skim. From a charity. And he was on $100,000 a year too. Greedy little bugger. Quote: KateHL says Tinomen is certainly in the wrong, but I found this a bit nauseating (from the article): I guess guilty until proven innocent is the theory here. I wonder if he also looking for criminal charges or just money.
eeyore1954 Philosopher Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 6,811

23rd October 2010, 07:32 PM	#15
arthwollipot Observer of Phenomena Pronouns: he/him Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Ngunnawal Country Posts: 81,922	Yes, let's please remember the adverb "allegedly" here, okay?
	__________________ Слава Україні! Героям Слава! 20220224 - 20230224

23rd October 2010, 07:32 PM	#16
Delvo Дэлво Δελϝο דֶלְבֹֿ देल्वो Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: North Tonawanda, NY Posts: 11,083	Originally Posted by AdMan Timonen and Dawkins had been close friends (see the dedication page for The Greatest Show on Earth). When some people at the forum were pissed off about things being changed or the forum closing, Dawkins apparently always defended Timonen and all that he did, essentially saying if you have a problem with JT, you have a problem with RD. Originally Posted by cj.23 I critisiced Timonen on my blog over the forum closure fiasco - yes the ex-members in exile are celebrating (how I heard - http://www.rationalskepticism.org/ne...en-t14455.html 14 pages in 9 hours! I didn't really follow the details of that mess when it was happening. Did people who didn't like it or some aspect of it tend to blame JT and not RD?
	Last edited by Delvo; 23rd October 2010 at 07:34 PM.

23rd October 2010, 07:47 PM	#17
cj.23 Master Poster Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 2,827	Yeah, he was responsible for the decision to close the forum -- from my blog http://jerome23.wordpress.com/2010/0...orum-to-close/ http://jerome23.wordpress.com/2010/0...ns-of-history/ http://jerome23.wordpress.com/2010/0...-at-the-forum/ http://jerome23.wordpress.com/2010/0...-josh-timonen/ http://jerome23.wordpress.com/2010/0...kepticism-org/ but rather shorter and better (as they were all written as events transpired), and from a former mod (Peter Harrison) http://realityismyreligion.wordpress...ill-open-soon/ Even shorter, JT closed the forum, the mods and admin staff were sidelined, RD came to JT's defence when he was criticised, and now many of the ex-forumites are rather amused at the turn of events. cj x
cj.23 Master Poster Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 2,827	__________________ I'm an Anglican Christian, so I declare my prejudice here. Please take it in to account when reading my posts. "Most people would rather die than think: many do." - Betrand Russell My dull life blogged http://jerome23.wordpress.com

23rd October 2010, 07:47 PM	#18
not daSkeptic Graduate Poster Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 1,913	Unless there was a written work-for-hire contract, it's going to come down to the exact nature of the relationship between Dawkin's foundation and Timonen. There is some mention of Timonen working through his own company, in which case he was not legally an employee of the foundation. If the works in question were produced under that arrangement, then without a written work-for-hire agreement the works belong to Timonen. I myself have run into work-for-hire disputes before. Unless you're an employee or you otherwise agree in writing to relinquish ownership of works you produce, they're yours. http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ09.pdf

23rd October 2010, 07:48 PM	#19
pipelineaudio Illuminator Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 4,911	While I still absolutely love Richard Dawkins, perhaps he has learned a lesson from this about being too proud to admit he hired the wrong guy Life is a learning experience
	__________________ Don't fear the REAPER, embrace it

23rd October 2010, 07:52 PM	#20
cj.23 Master Poster Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 2,827	Originally Posted by daSkeptic Unless there was a written work-for-hire contract, it's going to come down to the exact nature of the relationship between Dawkin's foundation and Timonen. There is some mention of Timonen working through his own company, in which case he was not legally an employee of the foundation. If the works in question were produced under that arrangement, then without a written work-for-hire agreement the works belong to Timonen. I myself have run into work-for-hire disputes before. Unless you're an employee or you otherwise agree in writing to relinquish ownership of works you produce, they're yours. http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ09.pdf Excellent point daSkeptic! That was my undertanding as to how the law applies here in the UK as well. As the company was independent fo the charity, the creator of the goods well may be legally the owner. Best wait and see. I still think this may resolve amicably, but I have no vested interest either way.
cj.23 Master Poster Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 2,827	__________________ I'm an Anglican Christian, so I declare my prejudice here. Please take it in to account when reading my posts. "Most people would rather die than think: many do." - Betrand Russell My dull life blogged http://jerome23.wordpress.com Last edited by cj.23; 23rd October 2010 at 07:57 PM.

23rd October 2010, 09:41 PM	#21
Uncayimmy Banned Join Date: Oct 2008 Posts: 7,345	Originally Posted by daSkeptic Unless there was a written work-for-hire contract, it's going to come down to the exact nature of the relationship between Dawkin's foundation and Timonen. There is some mention of Timonen working through his own company, in which case he was not legally an employee of the foundation. If the works in question were produced under that arrangement, then without a written work-for-hire agreement the works belong to Timonen. I myself have run into work-for-hire disputes before. Unless you're an employee or you otherwise agree in writing to relinquish ownership of works you produce, they're yours. http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ09.pdf According their 2008 and 2009 Form 990 filings, Timonen was not an employee at all. He was a contractor. He claimed rights to the DVDs, but contributions to audio-visual productions are specifically exempted as being considered work-for-hire, so his claim there is wrong. As for the website and the logo, if there's no work-for-hire contract, there can still be the issue of joint copyright if they worked cooperatively. If the foundation wrote the blurbs for the DVDs (like if they were taken directly from the DVD cover or included quotes from the DVD itself), the copyright will most likely belong to them, and that will be resolved with the effort put into making it into a web page.
Uncayimmy Banned Join Date: Oct 2008 Posts: 7,345

23rd October 2010, 11:19 PM	#22
roger Penultimate Amazing Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 11,466	Timonen's response.
	__________________ May your trails be crooked, winding, lonesome, dangerous, leading to the most amazing view. May your mountains rise into and above the clouds. - Edward Abbey Climb the mountains and get their good tidings. Nature's peace will flow into you as sunshine flows into trees. The winds will blow their own freshness into you, and the storms their energy, while cares will drop off like autumn leaves. - John Muir

23rd October 2010, 11:28 PM	#23
SezMe post-pre-born Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Santa Barbara, CA Posts: 25,183	Originally Posted by cj.23 ... but I will wait for the court judgment before I take it all too seriously. There might still be some misunderstanding or something ... My crystal ball says this never sees the inside of a courtroom. There will be a negotiated settlement which will include the proviso that the parties button their lips. In this case, you'll never get the full story.

23rd October 2010, 11:29 PM	#24
Stylesjl Thinker Join Date: Jul 2010 Posts: 223	Its all falling apart
Stylesjl Thinker Join Date: Jul 2010 Posts: 223

23rd October 2010, 11:43 PM	#25
Xplodyncow New Blood Join Date: Apr 2010 Posts: 12	Originally Posted by roger Timonen's response. After composing an eloquent, thoughtful, nuanced, and reasoned post on his blog, Timonen worked out the remainder of his teen angst by slamming his bedroom door shut, heaving himself onto his bed, and screaming along with the All-American Rejects.
Xplodyncow New Blood Join Date: Apr 2010 Posts: 12

24th October 2010, 12:02 AM	#26
Puppycow Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Yokohama, Japan Posts: 27,952	Why did Dawkins put so much faith in this man?
	__________________ A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool. William Shakespeare

24th October 2010, 01:05 AM	#27
zooterkin Nitpicking dilettante Administrator Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Berkshire, mostly Posts: 55,771	Originally Posted by arthwollipot Yes, let's please remember the adverb "allegedly" here, okay? Also, that JT is apparently a member here, too.
	__________________ The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts.Bertrand Russell Zooterkin is correct Darat Nerd! Hokulele Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232 Ezekiel 23:20

24th October 2010, 01:17 AM	#28
TubbaBlubba Knave of the Dudes Join Date: Jul 2010 Posts: 12,931	Originally Posted by KateHL Tinomen is certainly in the wrong, but I found this a bit nauseating (from the article): Seriously? He has the nerve to call himself the 'most respected atheist'? Best known I understand, but it takes cajones to call oneself the 'most respected' anything. My Dawkins love is falling a few major pegs. I seriously doubt he wrote that himself. He's always rather humble in his books, at least. Maybe he's getting senile.
	__________________ "The president’s voracious sexual appetite is the elephant that the president rides around on each and every day while pretending that it doesn’t exist." - Bill O'Reilly et al., Killing Kennedy Last edited by TubbaBlubba; 24th October 2010 at 01:20 AM.

24th October 2010, 03:11 AM	#29
Soapy Sam Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 28,765	Complicated. Doing business with a friend is ever fraught with danger, even if both parties see themselves as honest. One man's idea of reasonable reward can be another's idea of embezzlement. I can't, personally, see what the age of Timonen's girlfriend has to do with anything. I also have problems understanding what the RDF auditors were doing throughout all this. Are such trusts subject to audit , as a PLC would be? I have no idea. I do know JREF, as a 401 charity, IS required to produce annual financial statements. As for JT's response, his memory of his own conduct during the RDF forum shutdown seems to have been airbrushed a tad. Dawkins is old school. If he thinks he / RDF has been the victim of a crime, I suspect he will pursue it to a possibly excessive extent. Whether that would be in the interest of RDF is open to doubt. The legal niceties of intellectual property ownership must be sorted first though. Maybe JT had a legal right to what he took. If the numbers are remotely correct , I cannot see how he could claim a moral right. My psychic powers predict some lawyers are about to get richer.

24th October 2010, 03:24 AM	#30
arthwollipot Observer of Phenomena Pronouns: he/him Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Ngunnawal Country Posts: 81,922	Originally Posted by zooterkin Also, that JT is apparently a member here, too. A member search for "joshtimonen" returns no results at this time.
	__________________ Слава Україні! Героям Слава! 20220224 - 20230224

24th October 2010, 03:31 AM	#31
Professor Yaffle Butterbeans and Breadcrumbs Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Emily's shop Posts: 17,694	Originally Posted by arthwollipot A member search for "joshtimonen" returns no results at this time. Probably hasn't been approved yet.
	__________________ Sponsor me please! http://www.justgiving.com/Catherine-Kiernan http://www.justgiving.com/Catherine-Kiernan1 My blog

24th October 2010, 03:36 AM	#32
Uncayimmy Banned Join Date: Oct 2008 Posts: 7,345	Originally Posted by Soapy Sam Complicated. Doing business with a friend is ever fraught with danger, even if both parties see themselves as honest. One man's idea of reasonable reward can be another's idea of embezzlement. Just as an aside, I do business with friends/family one of two ways. Either I charge my "best customer" rate and treat them like a customer or I substantially discount it (or do it for free) with the understanding that regular customers come first. I give them the choice up front, and it really does help reduce bad feelings. Quote: I can't, personally, see what the age of Timonen's girlfriend has to do with anything. You're not using your imagination. Quote: I also have problems understanding what the RDF auditors were doing throughout all this. Are such trusts subject to audit , as a PLC would be? I have no idea. I do know JREF, as a 401 charity, IS required to produce annual financial statements. I'm not an expert on the law, but I don't think audits would have been required for RDFRS. Their yearly revenue was under $400K, and I don't think audits became required until you're in the $2M range (not 100% sure). Quote: Dawkins is old school. If he thinks he / RDF has been the victim of a crime, I suspect he will pursue it to a possibly excessive extent. Whether that would be in the interest of RDF is open to doubt. The legal niceties of intellectual property ownership must be sorted first though. Maybe JT had a legal right to what he took. If the numbers are remotely correct , I cannot see how he could claim a moral right. I'd say that's a fair assessment. It will be interesting to see how this plays out. Quote: My psychic powers predict some lawyers are about to get richer. I wrote a quatrain when I was 17 that predicted this lawsuit.
Uncayimmy Banned Join Date: Oct 2008 Posts: 7,345

24th October 2010, 04:26 AM	#33
stijndeloose Thinker Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 145	Originally Posted by cj.23 Hey, crap happens, humans being human, ragrdless of religious belief or lack thereof. I critisiced Timonen on my blog over the forum closure fiasco - yes the ex-members in exile are celebrating (how I heard - http://www.rationalskepticism.org/ne...en-t14455.html ) but it's just one of those things. Felt sorry for Dawkins though - but I will wait for the court judgment before I take it all too seriously. There might still be some misunderstanding or something cj x Well, I'm not celebrating. But I don't feel particularly sorry for either Josh or Richard either.
stijndeloose Thinker Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 145	__________________ www.rationalskepticism.org

24th October 2010, 04:28 AM	#34
cj.23 Master Poster Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 2,827	Originally Posted by stijndeloose Well, I'm not celebrating. But I don't feel particularly sorry for either Josh or Richard either. I do, it must be hard for both, but I am laughing heartily after how they treated us in the past. Still I'm trying to forgive. I was never a very god Christian, but I do try! cj x
cj.23 Master Poster Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 2,827	__________________ I'm an Anglican Christian, so I declare my prejudice here. Please take it in to account when reading my posts. "Most people would rather die than think: many do." - Betrand Russell My dull life blogged http://jerome23.wordpress.com

24th October 2010, 04:30 AM	#35
stijndeloose Thinker Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 145	Originally Posted by Soapy Sam I can't, personally, see what the age of Timonen's girlfriend has to do with anything. Nothing. Actually, as far as I know, his girlfriend doesn't have anything to do with the matter at all. I'm having trouble understanding why she's even being discussed. Originally Posted by Soapy Sam As for JT's response, his memory of his own conduct during the RDF forum shutdown seems to have been airbrushed a tad. Just a wee bit. I wonder if he remembers who deleted a number of members' entire posting history. Originally Posted by Soapy Sam My psychic powers predict some lawyers are about to get richer. Yes.
stijndeloose Thinker Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 145	__________________ www.rationalskepticism.org