front sight, plagiarizing.

Thanks to Dedicated Dad, I’ve learned that Front Sight Firearms Training Institute is sending out advertising newsletters for their training courses that include the full text of my “Why The Gun is Civilization” essay.

Here’s the full text of their newsletter:

March 31, 2008
Dr. Ignatius Piazza
Founder and Director

<<LINK removed>>
Get Civilized! Get a Gun and Training…

Dear dedicated,

As the Supreme Court hears arguments for and against the
Washington DC Gun Ban, I offer you another stellar example
of a letter (written by a Marine) that places the proper
perspective on what a gun means to a civilized society.

Read this eloquent and profound letter and pay close
attention to the last paragraph of the letter…

If you want be a true, civilized individual, then get your
gun and training at:<<LINK removed>>

The Gun is Civilization by Maj. L. Caudill USMC (Ret)

Human beings only have two ways to deal with one another:
reason and force. If you want me to do something for you,
you have a choice of either convincing me via argument, or
force me to do your bidding under threat of force. Every
human interaction falls into one of those two categories,
without exception. Reason or force, that’s it.

In a truly moral and civilized society, people exclusively
interact through persuasion. Force has no place as a valid
method of social interaction, and the only thing that
removes force from the menu is the personal firearm, as
paradoxical as it may sound to some.

When I carry a gun, you cannot deal with me by force. You
have to use reason and try to persuade me, because I have
a way to negate your threat or employment of force.

The gun is the only personal weapon that puts a 100-pound
woman on equal footing with a 220-pound mugger, a 75-year
old retiree on equal footing with a 19-year old gang
banger, and a single guy on equal footing with a
carload of drunk guys with baseball bats. The gun removes
the disparity in physical strength, size, or numbers
between a potential attacker and a defender.

There are plenty of people who consider the gun as the
source of bad force equations. These are the people who
think that we’d be more civilized if all guns were removed
from society, because a firearm makes it easier for a
[armed] mugger to do his job. That, of course, is only
true if the mugger’s potential victims are mostly disarmed
either by choice or by legislative fiat–it has no
validity when most of a mugger’s potential marks are
armed.

People who argue for the banning of arms ask for automatic
rule by the young, the strong, and the many, and that’s
the exact opposite of a civilized society. A mugger, even
an armed one, can only make a successful living in a
society where the state has granted him a force monopoly.

Then there’s the argument that the gun makes
confrontations lethal that otherwise would only result in
injury. This argument is fallacious in several ways.
Without guns involved, confrontations are won by the
physically superior party inflicting overwhelming injury
on the loser.

People who think that fists, bats, sticks, or stones don’t
constitute lethal force watch too much TV, where people
take beatings and come out of it with a bloody lip at
worst. The fact that the gun makes lethal force easier
works solely in favor of the weaker defender, not the
stronger attacker. If both are armed, the field is level.

The gun is the only weapon that’s as lethal in the hands
of an octogenarian as it is in the hands of a weight
lifter. It simply wouldn’t work as well as a force
equalizer if it wasn’t both lethal and easily employable.

When I carry a gun, I don’t do so because I am looking for
a fight, but because I’m looking to be left alone. The gun
at my side means that I cannot be forced, only persuaded.
I don’t carry it because I’m afraid, but because it
enables me to be unafraid. It doesn’t limit the actions of
those who would interact with me through reason, only the
actions of those who would do so by force. It removes
force from the equation…and that’s why carrying a gun is
a civilized act.

By Maj. L. Caudill USMC (Ret)

So the greatest civilization is one where all citizens are
equally armed and can only be persuaded, never forced.

Get civilized… go to this link and take advantage of my
greatest course offer ever. Get your gun and training from
Front Sight:

<<LINK removed>>

I look forward to seeing you at Front Sight.

Sincerely,

Dr. Ignatius Piazza
Founder and Director
Front Sight Firearms Training Institute

While I’m flattered that Front Sight deems my material good enough to use for commercial purposes, it does not please me at all that Front Sight a.) misattributes the essay, and b.) uses it to make money without asking the copyright owner for permission to do so.

Their web page doesn’t include an individual contact email for this Dr. Piazza. I’d type up an indignant email, but I’d rather send it to the right person than just shoot it into their general direction.

(UPDATE: I fired off an email to the originating address anyway.  I titled it “Copyright Infringement and You.”)

Needless to say, I’m not wildly enthusiastic about giving Front Sight any business. If their ethics are so lax that they swipe third-party material for their own purposes without even the hint of an effort to gain permission, it doesn’t reflect well on their operation in its entirety.

But that’s just my opinion…you know those narcissistic writer types. Always wanting credit for their work, and stuff. What’s next, asking for payment?

About these ads

66 thoughts on “front sight, plagiarizing.

  1. Feanaro says:

    You could always send a lawyered up letter with proof of delivery. Then at least Front Sight can’t claim they never heard about it.

  2. Jeffro says:

    Be pissed. You certainly have that right.

  3. Paul Simer says:

    The essay from “The good Major” was also featured in a recent newsletter from Rangemaster’s school in Memphis.

  4. Sevesteen says:

    I wrote them last year, and got a letter claiming to be from ignatius@.

  5. mw, when the good dr. ran that “which gun are you” farce i gave them a secondary email to send their newsletter to, and they’re still in the mailbox…never read them, but they have subject lines like “the color code of mental awareness”, “the combat mindset”, and “catchy phrases and sage thoughts”…love that one…it all has a very cheesy flavor, and if i were tha major i wouldn’t want my words used by them even if they were paying me…

    and if those words are yours, they are stealing from you and they owe you money and apologies…the zumbo debacle showed the power of a virtuous online avalanche and i would give them one chance to make restitution and post apologies and attribution before putting out the call…this is a big deal…follow up!

    jtc

  6. Don Gwinn says:

    I’d bet Rich Sicilian friend could probably put you in touch with Doctor Pizza. I don’t think they get along, but I get the impression Rich knows him.

    For my part, I’ll just say “unsurprised.” At least he didn’t sell you a $600,000 half-acre of unimproved desert. This is just more confirmation that I was right not to accept his offer to screw up the search engines with his list of links in exchange for a free class.

  7. Joe Allen says:

    As litigious as Dr. Piazza, Front Sight and the CoS is against anybody who even remotely crosses them, well… I’d certainly contact a lawyer if I were you.

    Joe

  8. Joe says:

    For what it’s worth, I took a two-day handgun course there, and the training is excellent. It’s just that I really don’t want to give my money to Dr. Cheesy Piazza (luckily, I didn’t – the course was paid for with a certificate from my uncle, a member).

  9. Jered says:

    Well, you’re selling your words. If someone steals your words, they are stealing your livelihood.

    Sue.

  10. Jered says:

    And, from what I’ve see of him on TV, Dr. Pizza gives me bad vibes, so be careful.

  11. Will says:

    Marko,
    I recognized your writing as soon as it showed up in the regular FS newsletter. I sent him an email with a link to your original post (I have it saved, plus a link in my bookmarks) I cannot speak for him, or the school. However, a similar mistake was made recently, where incorrect attribution to the “Sheep, Wolves, and Sheepdogs” letter was made. Col. Grossman wrote him to correct the origin. Naish sent out a correction in his newsletter. I would expect him to make this right, just may take some time for him to get up to speed on the particulars.

  12. Tam says:

    I would lawyer up and go after that crooked sonofabitch. You know who I’d call, too.

    Dr. Pizza has know problem playing Scientology-style heavy and siccing lawyers on others, so it’d be nice to see the M-F’er get a taste of his own medicine.

  13. Putting the legal heavies on him is the last thing to do, in my opinion, but I’m fairly certain that you’ve already been backed into that corner, so….

    Good luck, sir.

    And, to steal a line from Seinfeld, “No Front Sight for you!!!”

  14. Sailorcurt says:

    Marko, I sent them an e-mail. If you’d like to see what I sent, shoot me an e-mail and I’ll forward it to you. I’ll let you know if I hear anything.

  15. Sailorcurt says:

    They responded. As a part of my letter, I asked that they contact you within 7 days to reach an equitable agreement with you. Let us know if they do that.

    Again, if you’d like a copy of their response forwarded to you, shoot me an e-mail.

  16. [...] writing from bloggers without permission in a commercial promotion?  Not cool.  I have a training certificate from Front Sight that I have no intention of using.  [...]

  17. dear dr. p:

    having referenced the original of this essay and corrected its attribution in a letter to your media department, i await direct contact from you regarding your plan of correction.

    please note that online search results for the retired officer you credit returns multiple previous mentions of me, my original content, and incorrect attribution to this person, so this is something your research department should not have missed for what you have promoted as a primary motivator and component with implied endorsement of your commercial products.

    as a professional writer, intellectual content is my only product, and while this article has been widely disseminated with proper permission and attribution, its use without such implies personal recommendation of the product which i have not given and financial gain which i have not received, and that is a matter of my own reputation which i take very seriously.

    i will operate on the assumption that this matter has escaped your awareness until now, but at this point i await your further action…please contact me immediately at the direct email address provided to make arrangements to correct this important mistake.

    public perception of a product and the reputation behind it are key to the successful promotion of any product, and the use of a product without permission or attribution must be protected, and that is my primary concern.

    not wishing to see further harm done to your interests or my own by further public discussion of this oversight…i await your timely reply.

    regards,

  18. Desi says:

    Piazza is the leader of the largest firearms training place in the world. Front Sight trains more people in a year than the NRA trains in ten years. Front Sight trains more students each year than the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center.

    In spite of that… Piazza doesn’t hide behind a screen name. He is very accessible. You can e-mail him and he will actually personally respond.

    I’ll bet if you e-mailed him and identified the author of the article, the way Lt. Col David Grossman did, Piazza would do the same thing as he did in Grossman’s case, and send out a correction.

    Plus, it looks to me that Piazza didn’t plagiarize anything. He was sent a letter that has circulated the Internet that was attributed to the wrong person. It is a good letter, so he sent it to his group crediting who he thought was the correct author.

    Send him an e-mail Marko, identify that you are the author and ask him to correct it. No reason to create animosity with Piazza. He is a good guy and a straight shooter — figuratively and literally.

  19. SayUncle says:

    I dunno. Piazza and crew are a bit coo coo banana. but i’ve seen your piece mis-attributed to the good major often enough to think that the Gun Toting Scientologists didn’t mean any harm in it

  20. munchkinwrangler says:

    Desi,

    I did, and he hasn’t replied to me yet, although he apparently responded to other people who pointed out the oversight.

    Look, I don’t know the guy, and I really don’t care to “create animosity”. That essay has made its way around the Internet many times since last year. I don’t really care whether people forward it to each other (hell, I find it flattering), and I’ve never asked for anything but proper attribution.

    That said, when you use third-party content for commercial purposes, you have to follow a higher standard of accountability. He’s using that essay to make money, he didn’t verify the source and ask for permission to do so, and I’m pretty sure he won’t send me a cut of any new signup fees any time soon.

    Asking permission before using others’ material is desirable for non-profit purposes, but it’s essential for commercial purposes. I wouldn’t have cared if that email was a chain forward to his list of friends, but it’s clearly a commercial solicitation, and that goes a bit beyond “oh, I found it on the Internet and thought I’d forward it.”

  21. Tam says:

    Desi,

    This isn’t some harmless chain email glurge forwarded by your mom. This is advertising by a for-profit-corporation that is using without permission (or even correct attribution) the copyrighted work of an author.

    I can assure you that this is not how the piece wound up in, say, Dillon’s Blue Press.

  22. Tam says:

    Wow, you type a lot faster than I do. ;)

  23. Desi says:

    I’ve never had Piazza not respond to a direct communication before – it’s likely it got caught in a SPAM filter or something. Seriously, try one more time to contact the guy – ask for what you want to ask for directly. It’s not like him not to respond. I can always reach him at ignatius@frontsight.com — where did you try to email him at?

  24. Desi says:

    or maybe it’s info@frontsight.com — let me check my “sent” folder…

  25. Desi says:

    It’s info@frontsight.com that’s listed. I think I have the ignatius address from when he responded.

  26. btw, mw, my little proforma business letter above was supposed to have a preface that said i wouldn’t presume to word your missive, (i write a decent letter but you are a f’n writer!), but that a similar letter of notice is the correct step before any legal involvement…nobody really wants that, including frontsight; the last thing they want is for a featured piece that they have focused on and used for promotion to become an albatross and distraction or worse.

    but others can take all the casual “webrules” attitude they want; the fact remains that commercial use without permission and compensation is theft, intentional or not.

    and the issue is about more than getting your bouquets…that essay is the basis for the particular product frontsight is selling and carries the weight of implied endorsement…would you endorse their programs and products? maybe, maybe not, but wouldn’t you like to decide for yourself?

    as i said, notice first to the dr.’s media department, followed by direct contact with him requiring response is enough for now…but waiting too long is a mistake because the justified outrage that is at your disposal now and has formidable commercial clout through the interweb itself…has a short attention span, so time is of the essence.

    jtc

  27. Dillis Freeman says:

    FYI, Rangemaster in Memphis, TN, sent this out with the wrong attribution in their most recent newsletter. I let them know who the true author was, but have never heard anything back.

  28. Dedicated_Dad says:

    As the guy that started this brouha-ha, I have to agree with the “give ‘em a chance to make it right” bit.

    I alerted Marko because I thought it was the right thing to do. I still believe it was, but I didn’t mean to start a shiat-storm that would hurt someone’s business.

    I suspect that once he’s aware, Mr. Piazza will make it right.

    DD

  29. Ahab says:

    Wait a minute, hold on just one dang second here.

    Piazza is the leader of the largest firearms training place in the world. Front Sight trains more people in a year than the NRA trains in ten years. Front Sight trains more students each year than the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center.

    I am going to heave up on the bullshit halyard on that one. I am not trying to start shit here, but I find it hard to believe that in 1 year Iggy P’s joint trains more people than every NRA Certified Firearms instructor in the country COMBINED trains in 10 years. I have a hard time believing that Front Sight trains more people in a year than FLETC does, since FLETC trains people from 80 different alphabet soup agencies, plus state and local LE as well.

    Without a source that quote smells of fish to me.

  30. Will says:

    Ahab,
    The big question is how many students go through the feds school? Any way to find out? I suppose the numbers for how many the NRA trains is available from them. I don’t recall the exact number quoted for FrontSight offhand, but it is into 6 figures. I’ll look in my papers, might have it somewhere.

  31. Ahab says:

    Saying “NRA trained” allows a lot of wiggle room in your statistics, because it limits your numbers to people trained directly by NRA employees, which I’m sure is a small number. The thing is that the bulk of training done by NRA is done by NRA certified firearms instructors, people who aren’t paid by NRA but nonetheless are doing “NRA Training”. I doubt that it’s even possible to get an idea of how many those are, since there are thousands upon thousands of NRA Certified Trainers all over the nation.

  32. D.W. Drang says:

    Plagiarism.
    The point is plagiarism, not how many people FS trains in a year.
    Theft of intellectual property.
    While it is possible, even likely, that the Elronners thought they were quoting a letter or email that was in the public domain, how many people they “train”–and whether a freebie SMG course counts as training ;-) –is irrelevant.
    Given the litigious propensities of the Church of Scientology, collectively and severally, you may be OK not retaining a lawyer at this time, but you might want to at least have one on speed-dial.
    Winning a lawsuit against Elronners would do any legal eagle’s ego, and credibility, good…

  33. Will says:

    Good point. I was thinking that the NRA might have been collecting that data in some fashion for leverage when they go smack some idiot legislator upside the head. I’m in the middle of moving my office stuff around, and haven’t yet stumbled on the stack of paperwork I brought back from FS last month.

  34. Ahab says:

    I agree that they likely ripped of Marko, but that horse had been ridden into the ground, I was only picking squares with that individual comment.

  35. raincoaster says:

    Oh hellz yeah, get a lawyer. If it goes nowhere you’ve spent nothing. If they don’t contact you within six weeks, get the lawyer to send a letter. It’s not as if they got drunk and thought THEY’D written it. Whoever they thought the source was, they made no attempt to offer the source a deal. They simply stole it and used it to pimp out their business.

    Seriously, a lawyer’s letter won’t cost you much and you know these fellows have money. They’d rather give it to you to go away than be hauled through the courts for something like this.

  36. [...] Marko wrote the excellent Why The Gun Is Civilization. It shot up all over the internet and was mis-attributed to a marine major. Heck, even Neal Boortz read it on the air and attributed it incorrectly. But now, the gun-toting scientologists are using it in their advertisements. [...]

  37. Bitter says:

    I’m with Ahab on calling crap on that NRA stat. NRA currently has more than 50,000 Certified Instructors. While not all were training people all the time, I knew more than a handful who were training 400+ a year. They would regularly host events at clubs that would draw 75+ people. While that’s not the norm, you add that to those like me who get 1-10 people through the basics a year, and I find it hard that he has 50,000 instructors beat.

  38. jimbob86 says:

    “subject lines like “the color code of mental awareness”, “the combat mindset”, and “catchy phrases and sage thoughts”…love that one…it all has a very cheesy flavor,”

    -the pawnbroker

    So he rips off Cooper, too………. does he attribute that? Seems he’s making money off others’ ideas.

  39. ParatrooperJJ says:

    Be careful or else Xenu will get you!!! lol

  40. just found out says:

    I ended up here because another blogger had posted your quote just to complain that FS had used it. So it linked here. Having read the follow ups there sure are a lot of people that are unusually opposed to FS. Not just “don’t think it is good, wouldn’t waste my time on it” but “It must be the devils spawn, and the center of all evil in society” kind of hate. You gotta wonder what make FS so special that people that have never even been there or had any first hand knowledge will spend so much time, effort and even money opposing it. While others that have actually been there, will normally make reasonable (not always positive) statements.

    I almost want to see what all the fuss is about.

  41. just found out says:

    I almost want to see what all the fuss is about.

    So any of you that have those free certificates that vow never to them, send one my way. This is a Triple WIN, first you can still say you have never been there, Second, you make sure that Mr. Pizza/Scientologist/warmonger/Spammaster/SecondAmendment-exploiter/egotist/and-now-plagarist will have to spend a bunch of money and man hours treating me well, and I promise not to buy anything while there, so he gets nothing in return, and the third win, I’ll be better prepared to use the gun I carry to pretect myself and my loved ones.

  42. voice of reason says:

    I just received from Naish a new email where he explains the issue and does give credit to Marko (text below). So he does respond when he finds out. does that make everyone happy?

    April 15, 2008
    Dr. Ignatius Piazza
    Founder and Director

    http://www.frontsight.com/free-gun.asp

    Get Civilized! Get a Gun and Training… (correction)

    Dear ,

    I sent the e-mail below to you back on March 31, 2008 after one of my lifetime members sent me an article entitled, The Gun is Civilization by Maj. L. Caudill (Ret)

    Well, evidently this article was not written by Maj. L. Caudill, (Ret.) I received an e-mail yesterday from a friend of the real author of the article informing me the author’s name is “Marko.”

    It seems this article has circulated the Internet prior to it being sent to me with the same misattribution.

    I do not know if “Marko” is his first name or last name, or a pen name, but I do know he wrote one great article.

    Here is my e-mail to you again with the proper attribution
    of the article to Marko.

    As the Supreme Court hears arguments for and against the Washington DC Gun Ban, I offer you another stellar example of an article (written by Marko) that places the proper perspective on what a gun means to a civilized society.

    Read this eloquent and profound piece and pay close attention to the last paragraph of the article…

    The Gun is Civilization by Marko

    Human beings only have two ways to deal with one another:
    reason and force. If you want me to do something for you,
    you have a choice of either convincing me via argument, or
    force me to do your bidding under threat of force. Every
    human interaction falls into one of those two categories,
    without exception. Reason or force, that’s it.

    In a truly moral and civilized society, people exclusively
    interact through persuasion. Force has no place as a valid
    method of social interaction, and the only thing that
    removes force from the menu is the personal firearm, as
    paradoxical as it may sound to some.

    When I carry a gun, you cannot deal with me by force. You
    have to use reason and try to persuade me, because I have
    a way to negate your threat or employment of force.

    The gun is the only personal weapon that puts a 100-pound
    woman on equal footing with a 220-pound mugger, a 75-year
    old retiree on equal footing with a 19-year old gang
    banger, and a single guy on equal footing with a
    carload of drunk guys with baseball bats. The gun removes
    the disparity in physical strength, size, or numbers
    between a potential attacker and a defender.

    There are plenty of people who consider the gun as the
    source of bad force equations. These are the people who
    think that we’d be more civilized if all guns were removed
    from society, because a firearm makes it easier for a
    [armed] mugger to do his job. That, of course, is only
    true if the mugger’s potential victims are mostly disarmed
    either by choice or by legislative fiat–it has no
    validity when most of a mugger’s potential marks are
    armed.

    People who argue for the banning of arms ask for automatic
    rule by the young, the strong, and the many, and that’s
    the exact opposite of a civilized society. A mugger, even
    an armed one, can only make a successful living in a
    society where the state has granted him a force monopoly.

    Then there’s the argument that the gun makes
    confrontations lethal that otherwise would only result in
    injury. This argument is fallacious in several ways.
    Without guns involved, confrontations are won by the
    physically superior party inflicting overwhelming injury
    on the loser.

    People who think that fists, bats, sticks, or stones don’t
    constitute lethal force watch too much TV, where people
    take beatings and come out of it with a bloody lip at
    worst. The fact that the gun makes lethal force easier
    works solely in favor of the weaker defender, not the
    stronger attacker. If both are armed, the field is level.

    The gun is the only weapon that’s as lethal in the hands
    of an octogenarian as it is in the hands of a weight
    lifter. It simply wouldn’t work as well as a force
    equalizer if it wasn’t both lethal and easily employable.

    When I carry a gun, I don’t do so because I am looking for
    a fight, but because I’m looking to be left alone. The gun
    at my side means that I cannot be forced, only persuaded.
    I don’t carry it because I’m afraid, but because it
    enables me to be unafraid. It doesn’t limit the actions of
    those who would interact with me through reason, only the
    actions of those who would do so by force. It removes
    force from the equation…and that’s why carrying a gun is
    a civilized act.

    By Marko

    So the greatest civilization is one where all citizens are equally armed and can only be persuaded, never forced.

    Great job Marko!

    I look forward to seeing you at Front Sight.

    Sincerely,

    Dr. Ignatius Piazza
    Founder and Director
    Front Sight Firearms Training Institute

    http://www.frontsight.com/free-gun.asp

    1.800.987.7719

    Front Sight Firearms Training Institute is committed to best email practices and has been accredited by the Institute for Spam and Internet Public Policy as meeting the requirements for listing in their SuretyMail IADB Email Accreditation Program.
    Our IADB registration number is 2007043000543.
    For more information see http://www.SuretyMail.com

  43. Justin Buist says:

    So.. he sent it out AGAIN without contacting the author?

    I’m not quite sure the good Dr. understands the issue.

  44. Desi says:

    I got the same correct email this morning. Notice the lack of any kind of commercialization links in that email, just a correction. Sounds like the right thing to do to me.

    BTW, I asked Piazza at lunch time yesterday if he’d received the above-mentioned email from the correct author. And I heard back by dinner that he hadn’t but would like to. Looks like he still hadn’t gotten any such email about who to attribute it to as of when he wrote this morning’s correction.

    I wonder whether the author actually sent the email as claimed or — alternate theory — whether you are searching for controversy because you’re frustrated over how much hacking up this article is being subjected to as it makes it’s way around the net by email chain letter (without attribution).

  45. Desi says:

    To Ahab – As for the stats I got about student numbers, they were from some newsletter I got. I don’t know where they came from. If you want to question the numbers, I’m not the one to question.

  46. Egregious Charles says:

    This is aimed at the other commenters not Marko, and it’s about FrontSight in general not them reprinting the misattributed email. I took a four-day rifle course at Frontsight this February. I’ve never taken a similar course anywhere else, so have no grounds for comparision of training methods to other schools. But I can say for certain there was no attempt to sell me desert and no hint of Scientology during the training, and I can’t imagine the course instructors who taught me putting up with it. During one lunch break FrontSight played a video in the lunch room that talked about the plots in the desert, but it was less obtrusive than say a preview on a DVD.

    I decided to take the training because when I searched the web, I could find dozens of internet rumormongers with some ninth-hand bad rumor, and dozens of actual attendees with good reports. Having been there myself, I’ve got to tell you that what you are spreading is utter bullshit. Piazza may be a Scientologist or may not, I couldn’t tell, but the firearms training isn’t influenced by it.

  47. Tam says:

    I once met a murderer, but he didn’t kill me, so I don’t see why everyone says he’s such a bad guy.

    Go back and read y’all’s posts. You freakin’ sound like Elronners defending the Commodore.

    Yes, they have good instructors and good training is given there. This is fact. I am not disputing that.

    People have been sold desert. This is also a fact. It is not open for debate.

  48. Egregious Charles says:

    As to the desert, I really don’t know much about that except they didn’t try to sell my class any. My current impression is that it’s a dream Piazza didn’t have the business chops to back up.

    I really care if someone is a murderer even if they don’t murder me. I don’t much care if they’re an Elronner if they don’t tell me about it. (Although as an Christian I’m supposed to be a lot more proactive about that than I am.)

    As to what I sound like, I’m a lot more concerned with what you sound like. I’ve long been ready to be classed with the Elronner-lovers, Jew-lovers, nigger-lovers, homo-lovers, or whatever. I hate to think of any of us gun types being on the other side of the next big scapegoat-bashing. (Though of course it’s inevitable that some will.)

  49. voice of reason says:

    Hey! “Just found out” Did I read that right, another blogger posted this wonderful essay on his website? OH MY GOD. doesn’t anyone care about the rights of the author. And that Blogger has the audacity to claim righteous indignation about somebody else using the essay for his own purposes.

    What a two faced bone head.

    Mount up the attorney lets go after them all. Everyone start looking for anyone that has posted or referred this fine article. and post their name and contact info here so we can file a lawsuit against all of those brainless automatons. If you don’t know there name at least get their website, or phone number or something.

    We can bring them all to their knees.

  50. So I’m taking a poll:

    Is Desi a sockpuppet or minion of Ignatius Piazza?

    Desi Says:

    …Notice the lack of any kind of commercialization links in that email, just a correction. Sounds like the right thing to do to me.

  51. Also, the same poll for “voice of a false flag operative”

  52. munchkinwrangler says:

    v.o.r,

    if you don’t get the point of the matter after reading through all the comments and follow-up posts, I think that the issue may be a little over your head.

  53. voice of reason says:

    Sorry, Munchkin Wrangler,

    Maybe I don’t understand, let me explain what I think I understand from all the hubbub.

    That someone received an email with a quote that was extemely well written. That quote was the quintessential explanation of a point that is integral to his own beliefs and the primary cause for which he has created a business. He included that quote (along with what he thought was appropriate attribution to the author) in a newsletter that he sends to his friends (associates/contacts/future victims/what ever you want to call them).

    He is notified that the attribution is incorrect and he (if not immediately) within a reasonable time makes proper attribution to everyone on his list, with a comparably sized email and headline.

    Now if any of the nations newspapers had made such an error on a front page story, the adjustment or retraction would have been place somewhere deep, next to the crease probably below the list of editors; and probably not until long after the entire legal department of the newspaper had a crack at finding a loophole.

    I don’t know what you have asked from him that he has refused to pay, so beyond these points above, I can’t make any claim to knowledge.

    Tell me where I am wrong.

    What I have also noted from this dialog is that some people seem to have an axe to grind, and that this is the freshest whetstone to use. I cetainly do not believe that everyone that has commented is in that position, only those that seem to be so full ofpiss and vinegar that there comments are obviously not addressing the concept of Plagiarism but the entire concept of a Business they have never personally been involve in.

    Start this same story using anyone of the thousands of spam forwarders that previously distributed your work with or without proper attribution, and it would be DOA as a topic for discussion.

    Tell me where I’m drowning in misunderstanding.

  54. munchkinwrangler says:

    I’ll make one more attempt to explain it, then.

    Piazza used someone else’s creative work for COMMERCIAL PURPOSES. He used it to MAKE MONEY. He didn’t just forward it or repost it somewhere because he thought it was well-written (which would have been okay), he used it in an advertising newsletter to solicit business (which is not okay.)

    That newspaper example you mentioned? That’s not entirely accurate. It would be like the NYT copying some small-town newspaper article verbatim without asking permission or paying the author, because they thought it “made a good point”. And trust me when I tell you that no legal department will hold the opinion that it’s okay as long as they run a redaction with a corrected attribution.

  55. voice of reason says:

    I’ll also tell you that I can see where he comes out ahead, He made a mistake, he admits it and he lets everyone know it. That gives him a credibility boost (except with those people that are so tormented by his mere existence even though they have never been damaged by him; and does he really care about them? probably not).

    He is always looking for some content to justify an email campaign, every marketer knows that “often” is better when it comes to interfaces with contacts; as long as that interface is meaningful.

    So he sends a great story, and a few of his mailing list think it’s great. That would be the end of it’s usefulness, if he sent it again, some of his contact list would feel that he is wasting their time; but no, there was an error. He must send another email to his contact list. Oh darn. What percentage of his contact list would opt out because he does the “right thing”, somewhere close to NONE. while others that missed the first email now read it and he gets more play.

    I doubt he is smart enough to actually have this planned at the outset. He probably thought it was just a clean quote to use in his campaign. But when it turned out different he rolled with it and made the most of it.

    Dude have you asked him for reasonable compensation or are you too afraid to negotiate?

  56. munchkinwrangler says:

    I’d love to ask him for reasonable compensation if he ever deigned to respond to my email from four days ago. I know he does answer emails…he’s replied to several people who sent him the correct attribution, with my full name and blog address.

    Besides, it’s out of my hands now, anyway. The Legal Beagle has it covered.

  57. Tam says:

    Hey, Marko, listen to Standard Mischief.

    Is v.o.r. a sock puppet or a minion? He sure is fishing like one.

    Leave it to the Esquires, bro. Nothing you can say now is going to help.

  58. MarkHB says:

    Wingie,

    Sounds like you know what you need to do. I do say “need” – you are, after all, using words as your stock-in-trade. If you don’t lawyer up over this, then it’s a precedent set.

    VOR? You don’t create for a living, I can tell.

  59. voice of reason says:

    Mark HB,
    Actually, i’m at the top tier of supporting myself by what I create. Having supported myself (as well as I choose) for more than 20 years, running my own business as a Business Consultant, I think I understand the finer details here.

    Let me tell you what else I understand:

    that in negotiations, unless or until someone sets a value as a starting point, there can be no meaningful discussion. From the beginning I have recommended that a demand be made. Working with business owners all this time, and with vendors and suppliers, there seems to be direct correlation between those that have the temerity to ask for the money and success. If you can’t actually declare what you want no one, even your mother can make you happy.

    I also understand that whoever does use my knowledge and skill will get far greater value than I will ever receive in compensation. that is the nature of an economy. It makes no sense to buy anything that does not provide more value than it costs. It would appear that Dillon and the Blue Press have received great value for paying you for writing this story, and I assume it was more value than they paid you, Even now, in this little comment tree, every time Dillon and/or the blue Press gets mentioned, they get a little more mileage from their purchase. (Note that I have included 4 specific references)

    I also understand that many people, will gain great benefit from my Intellectual Property who will never compensate me. They will gain directly or indirectly. Indirectly, all of the clients of my clients have the privilege of a more successful partner in their business strategy. Directly, many will gain, because I choose to do business on the “I’ll prove it first”. That means that I’ll invest time effort and energy for a client to determine his best possible solution, I’ll then explain it and make sure that they understand it. Some have never paid me but I imagine have implemented a few or many of the strategies.

    You could look at it two ways, that thy are stealing from me, since they got value and didn’t pay. But I chose this business model. If I wanted to ask for payment before I provided service, I could. I’m satisfied with the results for those clients that have continued a business relationship, All of my business is referral based. So, it must be working.

    As to this little pity party, I imagine that more than one person now knows that Marko exists, than did before, and maybe one of them will decide to make him an offer, with dollar value attached.

    all of you that scream to unleash the dogs and pay lousy attorneys far too much to do simple tasks for you because you are afraid, deserve to live in the attorney infested cesspool you created. “If you keep feeding the pigeons you’ll never get rid of them.”

    I’m just saying. . .

  60. voice of reason says:

    If this story was kyped from Blue Press, aren’t they the ones that should be up in arms about it?

  61. that’s a lot of words, there, vor…and of course you still miss or ignore the two central points, and i doubt that anything that could be explained here (again) would change that.

    i do have a direct question for you; let’s see if you can answer it directly:

    from your vantage point there on the “top tier”, you see things differently than most everyone else in this and related threads…you mentioned or inferred that you had a lunch meeting with piazza…are you employed by or contracted to him? or, if not, what exactly is the nature of your relationship to him and/or his company?

    jtc

  62. sorry, vor, the person who had lunch with the dr. was desi….but my question still stands; what if any is your relationship to piazza and/or frontsight?

    and desi, my original question to vor is redirected to you: are you employed or contracted to piazza or his company? or, if not, what is your relationship to him?

    sorry for the confusion, but for both of you, the nature of any relationships might certainly color your opinions, and in turn others’ opinions of you and your objectivity.

    jtc

  63. voice of reason says:

    I have taken some courses at Front Sight, Living in Las Vegas, it is convenient. I took a Free Sub Machine Gun Course way back when (actually 2, but that was more than he would have wanted) but chose not to buy into anything. I am not nor have ever been in the employ of Mr. Piazza or of Front Sight.

    I have seen many stages of the business of Front Sight. From Bronze Membership being the lowest level of participation, and the offer to buy a piece of Ground, until recently. I took a Rifle Skill Builder Course about 6 months ago. As Far as I know Piazza has not been at front sight during a training session for years. The Sight is managed by a small group of guys that have been there almost since its inception.

    Piazza shook my hand one time at a 4th of July Party, I don’t recall ever having the urge to wash immediately or never wash that hand again.

    I do enjoy Business and his is an interesting model. So in addition to training I get an occasional insight into business that I did not see before.

    Having only taken courses at Front Sight I can’t compare it to many of the other training facilities around the country, But I can compare it to “No Training” and Taking a course at front sight is enormously better than just thinking you know what you’re doing, with no training.

    I have since become a member, and don’t regret it a bit. Before I was a member, he offered a prepaid training program where I could buy as many training days as I wanted at a good deal. I bought that. And have since after taking a few courses determined that I could justify purchasing a membership.

    Front Sight has had to adjust to market demands, I would say the caliber of the trainers has diminished some. As I understand it he treats them fairly but it is a young mans game, standing out in the desert all day every day in black and grey uniforms, drilling each minute detail over and over again to a new group of inexperienced but willing students. And with the number of people that show up to take a course every week, they need a lot of range masters and staff. And those guys have to be dedicated, many of them have been there for years. Some have left, Most I believe have done so on good terms. Being a business owner my self I understand how hard it is to get good employees.

    I have seen him adjust his training plan to fit the realities of the situation. At one time he claimed to have one coach for every 2 people on the line, and in those days, there was a lot of personal attention. He has since scaled it back to a “student coach” where each student acts as coach for another person on the line.

    For anyone that wants to complain that Front Sight isn’t doing the best job; that is an opportunity. Compete, Start your own training facility, do it right, what ever Front Sight is doing wrong, you do it right. What an opportunity! He showed you how to do it, and look at how successful he is; do it better and be even more successful. Compete him out of business.

  64. [...] Marko complaining that Front Sight is ripping him off: front sight, plagiarizing. the munchkin wrangler. __________________ Did you know there was an Indiana State Rifle and Pistol Association? Join [...]

  65. [...] guess I could also add that he’s one of the many people that have stolen Marko’s “Why the Gun is Civilization” essay and incorrectly attributed it to Major…. So you could add “plagiarism” and “intellectual property theft” to the [...]

Comments are closed.