Who Was Jack The Ripper ? (H Division, 2019)

[Steve Stanley]

I could be wrong......But I thought extracts for review purposes aren't liable to copyright?..Now I can accept one man's review is another's unfair criticism, but are we being told 'You can't reproduce any of the book here...But you can talk nicely about all the chapters but two' ?

[Gary Barnett]

Might be an idea if Howard closed this thread down since no one wants to discuss the book. And to be honest 90% of the people posting here are only posting because if there dislike for Ricky and has nothing to do with plagiarism.

90%? Really?

[Rob Clack]

Might be an idea if Howard closed this thread down since no one wants to discuss the book. And to be honest 90% of the people posting here are only posting because if there dislike for Ricky and has nothing to do with plagiarism.

As John and myself have rightly advised everyone here , no more will be said on this matter and the adults involved will discuss this behind the scenes like real professionals. Have a good day.

I know who the adults are...and I know who the professionals are. While they discuss this matter, have they dropped you off at a pub?

JM

[Rick Cobb]

As John and myself have rightly advised everyone here , no more will be said on this matter and the adults involved will discuss this behind the scenes like real professionals. Have a good day.

[Paul]

How interesting. Someone uses material from other people's work without acknowledgement and when the evidence of that use is displayed as proof, the person who used the material threatens legal action because the pages have been displayed without permission. And at the same time urges people to discuss other parts of the book, which would divert attention away from the matter of concern.

Since Rick Cobb has decided to step up his game, so to speak, and suggest legal action due to the display of pages from this book without his permission, I've removed ( hopefully) all screen shots of the book.

How,

Really? On what grounds? Surely he's not objecting on the grounds of copyright?

If so, then I'm sure the irony won't be lost on the readers of this thread.

Andrew

[Howard Brown]

Since Rick Cobb has decided to step up his game, so to speak, and suggest legal action due to the display of pages from this book without his permission, I've removed ( hopefully) all screen shots of the book.

If I missed one, let me know.

I've soft deleted all the screen shots. This means I have them for anyone's perusal.

Carry on...but without screen shots of the book.

Thank you.

[Rick Cobb]

I’m only replying to say , while the adults involved discuss this behind the scenes away from forum playgrounds. We would welcome any constructive talk and opinions on the other chapters by the authors.

We can all agree that they deserve more than what has currently been discussed.

Thanks

[Suzie Huntington]

It would seem unfortunate that Mr Cobb has inadvertently missed my suggestion on my previous comment. That being said, I fully understand that these things happen and Mr Cobb must, increasingly, have more pressing things on his mind.



A firm clarification from him and his publishers would of course have been a simple solution to this matter and removed all aspects of doubt in peoples minds. As it stands, his silence could be interpreted by the more cynical viewers as an admission that he is unable to provide such clarification and regrettably these observations on the content and authorship of the book only continue to fester out into the wider ether, tainting Mr Cobb's felicitous position within the Ripperology community.


Indeed, I was musing last night whilst viewing this thread on the increasing numbers of 'watchers' (both members and guests) whom, we can only imagine, are eagerly awaiting further developments on this saga; an ever expanding audience of awareness and judgement, who will no doubt decide for themselves what they believe has happened in the absence of any explication on the part of Pen and Sword or the recognised legal author of the book.



I myself am shocked by the inference, now prevalent and seemingly irretrievably embedded within the internet that Mr Cobb is Keith Stride and has plagiarised both that chapter and his own. Surely not? Someone with Mr Cobb's standing within the Ripperology community would, I am sure, never stoop to bringing a collection of authors together for his own financial gain, only to realise that there are an insufficient number of them from which to appease his publishers and resort to plagiarism and pseudonyms to complete his book, believing no one would notice. I can only say I am truly aghast at that suggestion and am equally surprised that anyone could possibly think that Mr Cobb would have not taken into consideration the impact to their reputation being associated with this book would have had on these well respected authors. I simply cannot believe he has only chosen now, when the situation has got out of hand and in the hands of the lawyers to respond, albeit briefly, because he had hoped the whole sorry mess would go away. No, I shake my head.



Of course, this is only my account and observations of the mutterings of the community at large and are not my opinions, however this whole saga does very much remind me of a saying my late father, who as many of you know died last year, used to like to say; "if you are going to stir the shitpot then at some point you are going to have to lick the spoon".

[Paul]

It may be convenient to have “Keith Stride” identified but maybe not necessary. As Ricky Cobb has assumed full ownership of the book’s content, it might be his full responsibility. That’s an issue the professionals will decide, I imagine.



JM

Indeed they will, I suppose. It would be nice if the professionals didn't get involved though; maybe unpleasantness could be avoided if "Keith Stride" came forward and explained himself (or herself).

It may be convenient to have “Keith Stride” identified but maybe not necessary. As Ricky Cobb has assumed full ownership of the book’s content, it might be his full responsibility. That’s an issue the professionals will decide, I imagine.



JM

[Paul]

I have sought professional advice regarding this and a decision will be made how to proceed in the near future. Until then, I shan't be commenting on the matter publicly or privately for the foreseeable.


What I will be willing to hear (privately by anyone who knows) is the identity of Keith Stride. It is important that his matter is cleared up if this situation is to be resolved properly. I wait with interest.


Regards all
JB

I'm afraid it is necessary for 'Keith Stride' to be identified and to step forward, preferably publicly. Speculation does nobody any good in cases like this.

[Rick Cobb]

Well said John

I’ve messaged you privately and will no longer be commenting here. As far as I’m concerned the matter here in forums is closed.

[John Bennett]

I have sought professional advice regarding this and a decision will be made how to proceed in the near future. Until then, I shan't be commenting on the matter publicly or privately for the foreseeable.


What I will be willing to hear (privately by anyone who knows) is the identity of Keith Stride. It is important that his matter is cleared up if this situation is to be resolved properly. I wait with interest.


Regards all
JB