Be Excellent To Each Other

Hi guys and girls,

I'm looking for Stuart's account of what happened to him re: the re-use of his work without notification.

Something similar has happened to someone on another forums (not relating to Future publishing, but another publishing company) and I thought it might help him if he were able to read Stuart's account of his experience but I can't find the link, if it still exists.

If someone could point me in the right direction it might help this guy to consider how to precede.

Other people here might be able to find a better piece about it, but a quik google of his sight pulled up this:

http://worldofstuart.excellentcontent.com/opapoc/index.htm

I thought I read something different way back when though....

For those who can't be bothered to read it all:

Got ripped off due to work being republished

Quite rightly fought hard and was made a not unsubstantial offer for settlement.

However as usual couldn't let it go and had his ass whipped and ended up on the losing side.

Ended up worse off than before and it's everyone else's fault apart from his.

Aw, didn't really want to turn this into a whether Stu was right or wrong type thing Chinny, I just thought it might help out some guy who is having a bit of a barny with a magazine publishing his work long after he left and under a different author's name - as it was sort of similar I thought it might be handy for him to read some of the pitfalls that might come about trying to set things right or fight it, so just wanted a link or two, really.

Thanks for the URL Lave, I couldn't work out how to search Stu's site and wasn't having much luck with Google.

I think you knew what can of worms you'd be opening there. We all now know better than to take anything he says for granted. Things tend to be presented as rather black or white and one sided.

If money is involved your friend would do better to contact a real solicitor for advice, preferably one with media experience. If you can be bothered to wade through the pages self pity and righteousness on that blog you'll see the one salient lesson (other than quit while you are ahead) is to get good advice.

I won't go on as the mods are likely to tell me to get to fucking fuck.

I shall enjoy the next ten pages of this thread tomorrow mid-morning over a cup of coffee.

I'M NOT READING TEN PAGES OF etc.

Not until you've paid your two quid, you won't. *rattles tin* Come on! Cough up!

Actually, no.

To be honest I had assumed that everything that could possibly be said already had. You will have said this elsewhere. Everyone will already have commented on this and anyone who is interested will pretty much already know what happened. I didn't/don't really think it needs everyone to say exactly the same things the have already said countless times, but really I just wanted a link or two, not a tonne of duplicate debate.

As far as I know the guy who is having the trouble was paid a wage for his work (not per article) so it isn't about the money received but rather that his work has been published under another's name. I don't thin he's going to pay for a solicitor for that, but I thought the account might at least have given an impression of what he might be up against with the publishing house (albeit from a particular point of view) but he could always try contacting Campbell if he wanted advice. I regret bothering to ask if it's going to cause a load of sniping and bickering, though I deny that I opened any 'can of worms', I just asked for a URL, others seem to have seen that as asking for discourse on what happened, when actually this isn't about Sta, it's just about trying to give someone who's having issues with their ex publisher background on what might have happened in a similar instance. The thread wasn't started to be about Stuart Campbell and I'm surprised that there is anything left to say that hasn't been said a thousand times. Actually, I doubt there is. Maybe it would be quicker if we just link to an old discussion.

I was going to invite the author to the forums as people often have at least some practical reasoning and can at least commiserate when they don't have any advice to share, but I doubt this thread is going to be very helpful

Chinny, you're like a mangy dog with a rancid bone.

My last word on this is that if he can't afford a solicitor then he should go to the CAB. He might get some genuine help. He also needs to consider the small claims court. He'll probably win as people rarely contest (in my experience).

Or perhaps he could just start a blog about how not to go about things and get his arse whupped...........

If by 'how not to go about things' you mean 'sticking to your principles instead of being bought off like a cheap whore', then yes.

Where's than animated gif of you and him having sex when I need it? Those were the days.

I do greatly admire Stuart for sticking to his principles generally but then he will stick to them in the face of irrefutable logic and common sense at times. It's part of what makes him ace but also why this forum sprung up and he ends up getting banned off 90% of the forums he visits. He reminds me of Dave Mustaine (who I just found out now has an entire Wikipedia page dedicated to just his fallings out) - a hell of a lot of talent but an inability to let it lie.

On the Future thing I read it all with interest a while back and even accounting for author's bias I felt that he did catch some bad breaks with it all. I wouldn't follow his course of action because I would have folded around the second offer of cash but that's why he's a famous* writer and I'm not I suppose.

*citation needed.

Yeah, well thanks, guys. Chinny, to be honest everything else you said got covered up by the other nonsense, and because you said this:



YOU are the one 'opening a can of worms', I just asked for a URL. You are using me as a scapegoat for the fact that you just can't help yourself and what's worse you are saying that I have started a thread for the sole purpose of causing you and anyone else to go over the same old tired nonsense when I actually couldn't give a damn. You are trying to go over the same old drama and shifting the blame onto me by saying 'well, I think you knew that this was going to cause a drama' and use that invented excuse to do exactly that. Not cool.

I wanted a few links to just put someone else's way. You want to rake over those coals again, go ahead, but do not insinuate that it is me that wishes to have another identikit discussion just because you want to start the same old nonsense.

If anyone else knows any relevant links or any information not related to Stu but rights in the publishing world in general please PM them to me so that whoever wants to derail this thread into their own little mission can do so without me wanting uselessly to find out anything helpful.

Mimi, I'll get MrsA to drop you a line this afternoon or sometime, as she's got experience of things that you are asking for, and there's a big book of publishing law on the bookcase upstairs.

Principles are fine, providing you quit when you are ahead.

What was it again, 10 grand for what was essentially reprints of work already paid for? I'm sure the actual amount claimed was far far more but it boils down to being realistic. That's still a tidy amount probably a fraction of the total but were the publishers ever liable to hand over a larger amount? Of course not, they would have fought tooth and nail.

Principles don't pay the bills and life is about compromise.

And for anyone late to the party, the thread title has been changed to something less inflammatory..

Inflammatory? Don't be an idiot, Chinny.

It said 'Stuart Campbell vs Future publishing account' which as I was asking for the account of the court case of Stuart Campbell vs Future publishing isn't exactly inflammatory but rather the exact thing that I was asking for. I changed it to another 'my xbox is working fine' thread but thought that would make people angry, but I thought maybe the name 'Stuart Campbell' being in the title was excuse enough for some people to go over their same tired old gripes, so I changed it t hopefully bring it back to what I was asking. I see you will not let that happen.

Chinny, you are trying to make out that I have started some debate over whether what Stu did in his battle with Future publishing was right or wrong. I did not, YOU have - if you want that debate be a man and stand up and say you want it. If at all possible do it elsewhere, but stop telling me and everyone else that it is me that has 'opened up a can of worms' and that it is me that is being inflammatory, because it is YOU that are doing both of those things, and I will not be the excuse for your nonsense.

Let's nip this in the bud, eh? Stop it!

Um, guys?



Hug?

chinny v mimi? Unlikely.

How does the song go?

If you're gonna be dumb you gotta be tough

Edit. Just to point out incase it's taken the wrong way my comment above was not aimed at Mimi or anyone else here.

I've had a Mimi for 2 years now and this is the first I've known it overheat. My Chinny however has been going since 1987 and shows little signs of breaking down.

Both are excellent.

Um, why didn't you ask Stu on his forum? By PM or in the 'non subscribers post here' topic?

Impossible to upgrade though.

God this is awful. I'm bored of the debate already and I don't even know what the fuck it is about (and no, that is not an invitation to tell me)... just help Mimi/her friend if you can or gtfo.

And vote Albin0 for mod if there's still time.

That's a outright lie!

The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.

Good old Bernard Shaw, eh?

Chinny has given out, by far, the most important bit of information in this thread. Tell your friend to get professional advice.

I'm still confused after a whole day to mull that over as to what you mean?

If it was a battle of right and wrong then surely they basically said "look, you're right, here's ten or so grand, you are right"

At which point if it was all about sticking it to the big man then surely there was your chance? Your chance to be proven right and take ten grand for the taking.

I mean, all along Stu basically made it very clear (well, maybe he was fibbing) that it wasn't about the money. So if it wasn't about the money why not just take the money when offered at the admission that they had done wrong?

Why push on for more? Greed?

That's where it all got very muddy for me. Over and over the old "It's not about the money it's the point" was stated. Thing is, even a blind man could see it was most definitely about the money and greed. All you needed to do was read one of his latest little outbursts on a forum about neo geo games to realise that Stu is a self confessed lazy cunt who doesn't like to work and would rather go to the park and feed the squirrels.

Mimi: if the work being reproduced was written during his time on staff, then in effect he has no claim on it whatsoever.

It wasn't about the money but he should have taken the money?

The offer of £10K came with a big fat 'shut the fuck up forever' caveat, i.e. It was a straight bribe and/or pay-off. The one thing they explicitly didn't do is in any way admit their guilt and/or suggest Stu was correct, indeed, they also specifically demanded that he never mention it ever again to anyone as part of taking the cash. (It's all there on the blog site.)

That was his bail-out point for sure, take the money and run, that he pressed on, not knowing what the result would be, tells me it was about principles and not money.

Which is pretty standard in most settlements. You get paid off but you promise to not talk about it. Newspapers do it every day of the week. Even Apple have been doing it with exploding Ipods.

Common sense dictates that's when you take the money and run unless you have bloody good legal backing, have the money and are up for the fight. That kind of case often gets messy and judges don't really have an understanding of the issues involved. And that as it turns out is pretty much what happened.

You're descending deeper and deeper into nonsense, chinster.

Deeper? I've hit the fucking depths year ago and am still digging.

What I was saying was if it was not about the money (and apparently it was more about him being right and them being wrong) then he had his chance to be right.

When someone says to you "here, take this money to shut up" then it says everything. So, that left two reasons why he did not take the money.

1. He was after public bragging rights.

2. He wanted more money. I have read it, and am fully aware of his thoughts of the £10k being woefully short of his estimate of a couple of hundred thou.

Personally I don't see it as a bail out I saw it as a chance for victory. Sure, you don't get to go running around telling everyone how brilliant you were but it would have been a personal victory.

Hence my If you're gonna be dumb you gotta be tough.

TBH? either way I find it incredibly unprofessional to be spouting it all off to the world. Maybe being some kind of matyr made him feel good, maybe you have some respect for him for doing so? I don't know. Personally I think it was incredibly stupid. If I was in that situation that kind of thing would be my business. I certainly wouldn't want to tell the world what was going on. Maybe if he learned to do that instead of always being so (publically) vocal he would go through life a lot better off?

Sometimes you need to learn to bite your tongue. Going on a forum load of users of the Neo Geo (for example) and making a pratt out of yourself (see*) isn't such a great idea when you work in the media?

* His whole argument on the NG forum was of course correct, as pathetic and hair splitting as the whole thing was. However, any argument he had collapsed when he basically started calling people foul names and bragging about how he doesn't work just sits around on his ass all day. Hardly professional. I mean, I can almost see the publications falling over one another wanting to hire such an upstanding hard working professional eh?

I know the publication he wrote for came along and basically said "nothing to do with us, but we think he's great" must have been a great confidence boost. However, the couple of hundred people who piped up and said "we don't buy your publication specifically because you let him write for you" isn't something you should just brush aside and ignore. Well, unless you are as stupid as he can behave.

Seriously, take our old FME battles of words for example. Right or wrong, don't you think a professional (as he loves to repeatedly fucking call himself) should behave as such?

Or just throw ridiculous temper tantrums on the internet (I mean the ones where he was a huge advocate for the modding/hijacking (depending if it was your work to begin with and your stance on such things) over people modding his work weren't completely ridiculous and hypocritical?

I've made my opinion clear to you in PM AE. Sometimes life deals you lemons and you need to just suck them and get on with things. Not create a big noise over it and end up looking stupid.

3. He wanted to stand up for his principles and possibly stop Future from dicking over any other freelancers in a similar way.

I suspect he made it worse for freelancers in the long run.

I was dicked around by Future when I was a freelancer.

I wrote about 8 or 9 articles for PC Pro. They liked them. Computer Shopper phoned up and asked me to pitch, based on a recommendation, so I did. They took one of the articles, which I delivered to spec and date. Two weeks later, they abruptly tell me they didn't want it after all, and here's 50% of my fee (a "spike fee"). A month later they run an article on the same topic, with someone else's name under it, clearly based off mine -- entire paragraphs were lifted.

Story went, my subed (fuck you Lynley Oram) took objection to... something. I'm still not sure what. She spiked my story and asked a staff writer to "write something along these lines", giving him my draft. Lazy cunt copied and pasted bits of my copy.

I took it to the editor, and then further up into Future's management layers. In the end I settled for 75% of my full fee, but they kicked and screamed about that much. I should probably have pushed for the full lot but I took a calculated gamble that, by being magnamious, they might give me more work in the future. They didn't

If I'd been in Stu's shoes, I totally would have taken the £10k (well, I'd have countered with £20k and settled at 15). These weren't reprints, as such, reading between the lines; they were some sort of CD-ROM based archive of past articles I think. As such, it wasn't like they were specifically trying to reprint his stuff; they just included it by accident without checking the rights. I think £10k wasn't an unreasonable offer for them to open with.

In before mercy lock.

Would be a very altruistic thing to do. However, after about ten years of watching him 'perform' on the internet (basically the whole "I don't need any friends all I care about is my-fucking-self") I would find that incredibly hard to believe.

So sorry, I'm not buying it Gaz.

You've not been here long, have you?

You don't think that his sense of justice is stronger than his greed?

If it's not, he would never have stopped working for future in the first place, because he would have shut up and sucked it every time they screwed over him and the people around him. Which was many times.

I've been here long enough to be bored of this argument

But yes, I realise mercy locks aren't really done around here if that's what you were getting at. Just another reason why the voting public made a balls-up by not voting me in

You're almost starting to make sense to me. You're nearly there!

Apropos of nothing, and unrelated to this thread, what happened to Comical Gnomes?

Who?


I thought they stopped employing him?
Anyway, "justice" isn't "on" or "off". I shout at people here for making dick management decisions but if they offered me £10k to stop shouting you'd better believe I'd take it. Doesn't mean I think he was wrong to fight on, as it were.

I never ever said that I thought Future were right. Infact, they clearly were not, hence why he had had victory over them before. However, it's hard not to bring greed into it when the guy has basically sat down and worked out pretty much to the penny what they owe him. And, also, why he would not have scoffed at their £10k offer to shut him up. As I said if it was not about money but more about being proven right then he had his chance and decided to blow it. And when you look into the reasons why he decided to push on all you read about is how pathetic and woefully short of his quotes for the work £10k was.

It's not like I am speculating, he made all of these figures perfectly clear. If it was morals over money then he would have kept the figures and ammounts to himself.

Also, note how he did not make the entire debacle public until it was all said and done. So maybe he was biting his tongue and, had their offer been more substantial would have taken a back hander to be quiet?

That I don't know but as I say, the entire thing smacked of greed to me.

And Grim you're right of course. They had long stopped hiring him after he made all of his previous dealings with them public information and spattered it all over the internet. Why would you hire an obvious enemy?

FWIW, I'd accept £10k to stop shouting about how shit the mods are.