Originally Posted by
Old Noob
No doubt he's a liar. That wasn't my point. I was refuting the claim that the "system" had been found to be a "fraud" in a court of law. That's false and doesn't even logically stem from the lies nothwithstanding your correct assertion that deposition testimony can be used later for some purposes at trial. So, to more directly answer your question, both Sin The and Jake likely gave in (though we won't know for sure because there's likely a confidentiality agreement that was part of the settlement) but the reason for the settlement had to have been because Sin The's lawyer rightly recognized that his copyright is not defensable given his contradictory stories about the origins of the material that he holds the copyright for. None of that says anything about the legitimacy or the system. Rather it speaks to the legitimacy of the systems origins as told by Sin The.
To me, this isn't just a semantic point either. I and some others in SD, JP for instance, have said for some time that, if Sin The did make it all up, then he's a genious at curriculum development and progressive skill integration. Consequently, the system, insofar as it is a solid MA system that produces usable skills and provides a breadth of forms practice, is a good system. It's origin is highly suspect. I view those as different and not bound up part and parcel. I'm 100% willing to say that the system's origin, as put forth by Sin The, is completely unbelievable. But that's because he has himself cited two mutually exclusive origin stories. The system itself, though, is a useful legitimate martial art.
My most recent thinking on the origin is that Sin is lying about having made it up in order to try to protect his copyright. I think that he and his brother learned almost all of it from Ie. They may have tweaked the short katas and sparring techniques to make them easier for the KY fellas but I don't think he created anything from whole cloth. Please don't think that means that I believe any of this came "straight from the temple."
I'm rambling so I'll stop now but that's why I made the legal distinction.