Dawkins sues Josh Timonen

[Coito ergo sum]

I think Timonen was probably to some extent honestly believing that he was to run the store and that since he owned it, he could set it up the way he wanted, and that because of the large amount of work involved he could legitimately pay himself a salary out of it.

well if you look at the shitload of money he was aparently receiving per year for the work he did (not counting The Shop)
if the running of The Shop doubled his workload, it's quite natural to double your salary from the proceeds of The Shop (or proportional to the %%% of the workload increase)

I think it's up for debate whether the legitimate salary he was paid was a shitload as far as what's standard/what the cost of living is for where he was (LA) - notwithstanding the fact that combined with his other paid endeavors it probably did total up to a more than adequate income. The sum for RDF, in itself, probably wouldn't be enough to scrape by on in LA, though. Nonetheless - not really up to him to determine what his employer would pay him - especially seemingly without that employer's knowledge!

That's the point. The law doesn't allow you to set your own remuneration, not unless you're self-employed. Whether you might "deserve" it or "need" it are also completely besides the point.

True, except here Timonen was self employed. He was the 100% owner of UBP which is the entity that ran and ostensibly owned the store. So, that would under normal circumstances leave it to Timonen to decide what to pull out of the company and what to put back in to develop the business.

[Coito ergo sum]

I think Timonen was probably to some extent honestly believing that he was to run the store and that since he owned it, he could set it up the way he wanted, and that because of the large amount of work involved he could legitimately pay himself a salary out of it.

well if you look at the shitload of money he was aparently receiving per year for the work he did (not counting The Shop)
if the running of The Shop doubled his workload, it's quite natural to double your salary from the proceeds of The Shop (or proportional to the %%% of the workload increase)

Natural ... maybe. But without permission?

The thing is. Timonen owned 100% of UBP, which is the entity that owned and operated the Store - that is what RDF alleges in its complaint against Timonen.

So, the only person who needs to give permission in that case is Timonen. Like anyone who owns 100% of a business, they pay themselves what they pay themselves. What RDF is alleging here is that Timonen made a verbal contract to only operate the Store through UBP for the benefit of RDF, but we don't know exactly what RDF thinks that means, except that RDF has taken the position that whatever Timonen was required to do to operate the Store was to be at no additional compensation. There is nothing in writing to that effect.

I don't know about the US, but in the UK verbal contracts aren't worth the paper they aren't written on.

Very true, that is a common saying. And, it is the first legal basis asserted by Dawkins against Timonen. He is alleging that he and Timonen made an "oral contract" whereby Timonen, at no compensation above what he was already being paid by RDF/Dawkins for other things, would run the Store "for the benefit of" RDF. That's a paraphrase of what Dawkins/RDF is alleging in the complaint. They haven't alleged anything more than that in terms of what the "terms" of the oral contract are.

The "embezzlement" we are hearing about is really Timonen and Norton taking salaries from UBP, and charging certain expenses to the company (dinners and such).

I tell ya, after reading the summary of the lawsuit, I expected to see something really juicy in the complaint.

[devogue]

Very true, that is a common saying. And, it is the first legal basis asserted by Dawkins against Timonen. He is alleging that he and Timonen made an "oral contract" whereby Timonen, at no compensation above what he was already being paid by RDF/Dawkins for other things, would run the Store "for the benefit of" RDF. That's a paraphrase of what Dawkins/RDF is alleging in the complaint. They haven't alleged anything more than that in terms of what the "terms" of the oral contract are.

The "embezzlement" we are hearing about is really Timonen and Norton taking salaries from UBP, and charging certain expenses to the company (dinners and such).

I tell ya, after reading the summary of the lawsuit, I expected to see something really juicy in the complaint.

Ha ha - "terms of the oral contract".

I would be very confident if I was Josh.

After all the shit spouted about Dawkins' big scary lawyers, charitable status etc., they really fucked up on that one. You lost Richard. As I said right at the start - they deserve each other.

[maiforpeace]

I do not share the Dawkins hate that some here seem to have, although it's nothing compared to Ratz... Jesus, I was just there and I'm remembering where all the "OMG they killed 'Off Topic' " people went. Now that was a hysterical overreaction if ever I saw one. Some of those people need to chill the fuck out and get a sense of proportion.

Might as well have a little dig while we're talking about the same thing...[/spoiler]

Ha ha!

487 posts about Josh drama on Ratz.

1720 posts about Josh drama on Ratskep.

Of which you should be proud, Dev. You started that thread.

Those 1720 posts do not include the 11 or so pages of posts that RS moderation removed from that thread yesterday. I'm not sure where they were moved, but if they had been left intact and compared to our response here in the same topic thread, I would say the hysterical overreaction is at RS.

All of it still anger over closure of the forum that happened almost a year ago. Sheesh, talk about overreaction...

[Svartalf]

mmmh... overreaction? when you poured thousands of pages worth of text into the thing, not to mention all the modwork for some, you're going to develop an attachment to the thing that 10 months are not going to make disappear, especially when the disappearance of the forum, and associated community, happened in the rather dramatic and traumatic manner that was the case with RDF... good thing for me I was a relative newcomer and not yet too attached to it.

[Feck]

I do not share the Dawkins hate that some here seem to have, although it's nothing compared to Ratz... Jesus, I was just there and I'm remembering where all the "OMG they killed 'Off Topic' " people went. Now that was a hysterical overreaction if ever I saw one. Some of those people need to chill the fuck out and get a sense of proportion.

Might as well have a little dig while we're talking about the same thing...[/spoiler]

Ha ha!

487 posts about Josh drama on Ratz.

1720 posts about Josh drama on Ratskep.

Of which you should be proud, Dev. You started that thread.

Those 1720 posts do not include the 11 or so pages of posts that RS moderation removed from that thread yesterday. I'm not sure where they were moved, but if they had been left intact and compared to our response here in the same topic thread, I would say the hysterical overreaction is at RS.

All of it still anger over closure of the forum that happened almost a year ago. Sheesh, talk about overreaction...

Are you saying that Ratskep is putting us to shame ??? We can't have that quick everybody post your worst !

[Coito ergo sum]

mmmh... overreaction? when you poured thousands of pages worth of text into the thing, not to mention all the modwork for some, you're going to develop an attachment to the thing that 10 months are not going to make disappear, especially when the disappearance of the forum, and associated community, happened in the rather dramatic and traumatic manner that was the case with RDF... good thing for me I was a relative newcomer and not yet too attached to it.

You may develop an attachment, but there is never an assurance that someone else is going to maintain a forum or message board for longer than they see fit. The moral of the story is, you don't gain a property right in something because you like it a lot.

[J.A.Poisson]

Are you saying that Ratskep is putting us to shame ??? We can't have that quick everybody post your worst !

you're worst

[maiforpeace]

mmmh... overreaction? when you poured thousands of pages worth of text into the thing, not to mention all the modwork for some, you're going to develop an attachment to the thing that 10 months are not going to make disappear, especially when the disappearance of the forum, and associated community, happened in the rather dramatic and traumatic manner that was the case with RDF... good thing for me I was a relative newcomer and not yet too attached to it.

I'm well aware of how it feels to have your community blow up. I was a moderator and long time participant of the RD chatroom (yes, they had one) and it went down in a similarly dramatic fashion as the RD forum did.

And, it's not like the forum and associated community disappeared, did it? Isn't RS most of that community now? Nobody is homeless.

Are you saying that Ratskep is putting us to shame ??? We can't have that quick everybody post your worst !

We are slacking aren't we!

[Feck]

Are you saying that Ratskep is putting us to shame ??? We can't have that quick everybody post your worst !

you're worst

Thank you

[Gawdzilla Sama]

We are slacking aren't we!

Should I go into overdrive? (Only 1300 posts, I can do that will I'm doing the dishes.)

[Coito ergo sum]

Updates on the Dawkins/Timonen Lawsuit
Posted by Hemant Mehta in General, Lawsuits on October 26th, 2010 | 13 Comments

There’s been a statement released by Blaine Greenberg, the counsel for the Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science, regarding the lawsuit against former employee Josh Timonen, his girlfriend, and his production company:

Despite the public interest in this case, I have asked Professor Dawkins and the staff and Trustees of RDFRS not to comment on this litigation while it is still pending.

I hasten to emphasize, however, that the scope of this suit is narrow. Richard Dawkins’ only role is as plaintiff in a single cause of action seeking the return of unearned money he personally paid Mr. Timonen. The Foundation’s claims seek the return of profits from the sale of merchandise from the Store on the RDF website that defendants failed to remit to RDFRS. NO DIRECT DONATIONS TO THE FOUNDATION OR NON-BELIEVERS GIVING AID HAVE BEEN MISAPPROPRIATED.

The Store has been under the Foundation’s direct control since May 2010 and stringent financial safeguards have been established to insure its profits will be used to further RDFRS’s charitable mission. Richard Dawkins regrets that his trust in a colleague has proved to be misplaced. The Trustees of RDFRS authorized the filing of the pending suit to recover all the profits generated by the Store and reassure all Store customers that the proceeds from their purchases will benefit the causes of reason and science.

The full complaint can be read here (PDF).

I’m still hoping RDFRS gets this resolved quickly, the money goes to wherever it was intended to go in the first place, better safeguards are put in place to ensure this doesn’t happen again, and we can all move on from this.

http://friendlyatheist.com/2010/10/26/u ... n-lawsuit/

[Coito ergo sum]

A Statement From RDFRS Counsel, Blaine Greenberg, Esq.:
By CALIFORNIALITIGATION
Updated: Monday, 25 October 2010 at 2:15 PM

As the media have reported, RDFRS and Professor Richard Dawkins filed a lawsuit in Los Angeles Superior Court on October 4, 2010 against Josh Timonen, Maureen Norton and Upper Branch Productions, Inc. A copy of the Complaint is available at this link: COMPLAINT.

I am plaintiffs' litigation counsel. I drafted all the material contained in its 18 pages. The Complaint's language and allegations are written and made by me on behalf of my clients. The Complaint does not contain any quotes from Professor Dawkins or anyone at RDFRS and should not be attributed to anyone else but me. (At least one online news source has already mistakenly suggested the language of the Complaint is Richard Dawkins' language. It is not.)

Despite the public interest in this case, I have asked Professor Dawkins and the staff and Trustees of RDFRS not to comment on this litigation while it is still pending.

I hasten to emphasize, however, that the scope of this suit is narrow. Richard Dawkins' only role is as plaintiff in a single cause of action seeking the return of unearned money he personally paid Mr. Timonen. The Foundation's claims seek the return of profits from the sale of merchandise from the Store on the RDF website that defendants failed to remit to RDFRS. NO DIRECT DONATIONS TO THE FOUNDATION OR NON-BELIEVERS GIVING AID HAVE BEEN MISAPPROPRIATED.

The Store has been under the Foundation's direct control since May 2010 and stringent financial safeguards have been established to insure its profits will be used to further RDFRS's charitable mission. Richard Dawkins regrets that his trust in a colleague has proved to be misplaced. The Trustees of RDFRS authorized the filing of the pending suit to recover all the profits generated by the Store and reassure all Store customers that the proceeds from their purchases will benefit the causes of reason and science.

Questions (from media only) about the legal process or status of the California litigation may be directed to me at this email address: CaliforniaLitigation@RichardDawkins.net

Blaine

Blaine Greenberg, Esq.

http://richarddawkins.net/discussions/5 ... enberg-esq

[Blondie]

I do not share the Dawkins hate that some here seem to have, although it's nothing compared to Ratz... Jesus, I was just there and I'm remembering where all the "OMG they killed 'Off Topic' " people went. Now that was a hysterical overreaction if ever I saw one. Some of those people need to chill the fuck out and get a sense of proportion.

Might as well have a little dig while we're talking about the same thing...[/spoiler]

Ha ha!

487 posts about Josh drama on Ratz.

1720 posts about Josh drama on Ratskep.

Pots and kettles, eh?

3.531827515400411/1, not a bad ratio.

That would be after they deleted almost half the posts in the thread. LOL Retcon!

[Dries van Tonder]

The RDF/Josh tread on Ratskep have been closed temporarily; cooling down period applies