GM Davies threatens S&BCC blog with legal actio...

Originally posted by adam warlock
Are you really Nigel Davies?

Yes, but there are times I wish I wasn't. Nigel 😳

Originally posted by NigelDavies
Yes, but there are times I wish I wasn't. Nigel 😳

In that case congrats for The Chess Player's Battle Manual

And why does a thing written on an internet chess blog bother you so much? I think that if I were in your shoes I'd just keep on eating my cereals at breakfast after reading some bad reviews on one of my books.

Originally posted by adam warlock
In that case congrats for The Chess Player's Battle Manual

And why does a thing written on an internet chess blog bother you so much? I think that if I were in your shoes I'd just keep on eating my cereals at breakfast after reading some bad reviews on one of my books.

The accusation of 'plaigarism' isn't a bad review, it's a libelous indictment of both my work and my character. Nigel

Originally posted by NigelDavies
The accusation of 'plaigarism' isn't a bad review, it's a libelous indictment of both my work and my character. Nigel

If it was on a magazine or on a site of coleague of yours I'd fully understand but written as a comment on a chess blog... I don't think I'd be bothered by it. But since I've never experienced nothing similar I don't know excatly how I'd react.

Originally posted by NigelDavies
Here we go again, I've already had to answer this stuff in several other forums.

Just to set the record straight, the S&BCC blog published several comments that said I'd 'ripped off' and 'plaigarised' Ray Keene's Flank Openings. All that’s left is the negative, anonymous review that rather deliberately sparked them. I was well within my rights to get . Libel and other damaging actions are a more serious matter entirely.

Nigel

it's an internet BLOG for heaven's sake.

and for what it's worth, you got a mostly positive review. the writer mentioned MANY times how much he loves your books and has good use for them. the ONLY 'negative' thing was that he compared the strikingly similar analysis from you and keene. now I do understand that assuming both you and keene knew what you were doing (which I'm sure you did), the analysis is bound to contain pretty much exactly the same observations. anything else would mean that one of you were either mistaken or ignoring relevant aspects of the position. still, the fact remains that the analysis quoted was very similar.

and it wasn't like the review made wild claims without backing them up. instead, they provided specific quotes from both books, which made it absolutely obvious there were far more similarities than differences. anyone would have to be blind to not see them.

so you threatened legal action. because a review on an internet blog gave only 80% thumbs up on your book. which us, the readers, are putting our hard earned money in. should the reviewer ignore such striking similarities between your book and keene's? would you have held back that information? doesn't the customer have a right to get an uncensored review? should we only have infomercials praising unconditionally the excellence of all and any products?


I used to think you were one of the few reasonable persons in the less than stable pool of high level chess heros. but now I'm just very disappointed.

Originally posted by wormwood
it's an internet BLOG for heaven's sake.

I used to think you were one of the few reasonable persons in the less than stable pool of high level chess heros. but now I'm just very disappointed.

All I can say is that the remarks (which have now been removed) were libelous and it was the 'ECF web site of the year, 2007'. So my federation evidently takes them seriously.

Anyways, I'm off now.

Originally posted by NigelDavies
All I can say is that the remarks (which have now been removed) were libelous and it was the 'ECF web site of the year, 2007'. So my federation evidently takes them seriously.

Anyways, I'm off now.

I'm sure they would've removed the comments, made by a completely unrelated third party, had you simply asked. I mean, I would have, no questions asked. don't know how much you're familiar with the site, but they're really very nice guys. instead of all this, you could've just commented then and there WHY the quotes are so similar, and it would've been the end of it. it would've even scored you a bunch of new readers I'm sure.

but trying to silence them with a legal threat, well, not very cool. people tend to respond very badly to threats.

Originally posted by NigelDavies
The accusation of 'plaigarism' isn't a bad review, it's a libelous indictment of both my work and my character. Nigel

At least you can't be accused of excessive use of a dictionary! (lol)

Originally posted by adam warlock
If it was on a magazine or on a site of coleague of yours I'd fully understand but written as a comment on a chess blog... I don't think I'd be bothered by it. But since I've never experienced nothing similar I don't know excatly how I'd react.

There are probably worse accusations in the world of chess publishing than plagiarising one of Raymondo's oeuvres, though nothing immediately comes to mind...

Originally posted by Northern Lad
There are probably worse accusations in the world of chess publishing than plagiarising one of Raymondo's oeuvres, though nothing immediately comes to mind...

lol!

I'm going to try taking some deep breaths if this ever happens again...

Originally posted by NigelDavies
Here we go again, I've already had to answer this stuff in several other forums.

Just to set the record straight, the S&BCC blog published several comments that said I'd 'ripped off' and 'plaigarised' Ray Keene's Flank Openings. All that’s left is the negative, anonymous review that rather deliberately sparked them. I was well within my rights to get ...[text shortened]... . Libel and other damaging actions are a more serious matter entirely.

Nigel

It is against the TOS to give persons real names on this site.

Originally posted by wormwood
I'm sure they would've removed the comments, made by a completely unrelated third party, had you simply asked. ...
but trying to silence them with a legal threat, well, not very cool. people tend to respond very badly to threats.

I didn't feel like going cap in hand to them to ask them if they'd kindly remove it. Seems rather like pleading with a mugger.

I won't say anything more about the Réti book (Northern Lad makes a good point á la what comes around goes around with regards to Mr Keene) but I'd like to ask Mr Davies how long the Schliemann section of your Gambiteer II book took to put together?
It is worth the admission fee alone.
🙂

Originally posted by Squelchbelch
I won't say anything more about the Réti book (Northern Lad makes a good point á la what comes around goes around with regards to Mr Keene) but I'd like to ask Mr Davies how long the Schliemann section of your Gambiteer II book took to put together?
It is worth the admission fee alone.
🙂

Are compliments allowed in the forums? I had no idea. 😲

Originally posted by Squelchbelch
I'd like to ask Mr Davies how long the Schliemann section of your Gambiteer II book took to put together?
It is worth the admission fee alone.
🙂

Difficult to put a time on it as I was mulling the thing over for quite a while, on and off. I bought just about every available book on it in the end.

The main issue was selecting a main line vs 4.Nc3 as there seem to be quite a few things that are playable besides what I give. It's a great defence imho, and evidently Radjabov agrees.