I'm curious who might sue them for fraud. Who was the injured party?

As for any plagiarism on their behalf, what amused me most about this book was that they did engage the body of literature that was available at the time of publication. Some of it, particularly the attempt to invalidate the wuseng (warrior monks) was clearly reactionary to material I had published. I was really the first to introduce wuseng to English readers, but it's been something that's been bandied about in Chinese for some time. As for 'village boxing', I'm not sure I'd take credit for that. It was a term that I worked out with Sifu Wing Lam, but I'd have to credit him with it more than me, albeit I was the first to publish it in that landmark IKF article on Ha Say Fu Hung Gar. Honestly, I don't know the Cantonese (Lam's native tongue) so I don't really use the term anymore since I seldom work from Cantonese. Now I usually say 'folk master', although it's a bit different to 'village'. Village implied rural martial arts practice, where I feel much of the most authentic kung fu is happening now. Folk master is more to distinguish from monastic practitioners like the wuseng, et.al.