Elan Enterprises

Back to INDEX

Company operated by David A. Clayton. There are a number of allegations concerning Mr. Clayton, which can be summed up as follows:

  • "Bootlegging" is the illegal copying of another manufacturer's miniatures. It is alleged that Mr. Clayton has engaged in the sale of bootlegged miniatures. The Editor has been in contact with an eyewitness who confirms that Mr. Clayton has bootlegged figures in the past.
  • Mr. Clayton is alleged to have gained possession of another manufacturer's masters through fraud and theft. The Editor has spoken to a source who confirms this story and has police records confirming this incident. According to this source, criminal charges were dropped when the police recovered the stolen property.
  • Mr. Clayton represented to the Editor that he was the agent for an overseas game company. However, when contacted by the Editor, that company denied that Mr. Clayton was its agent, and affirmed that they had asked Mr. Clayton to stop representing himself as such.

The Editor has asked Mr. Clayton many times for his side of the story, but he instead responded with threats. On November 28, 2000, however, Mr. Clayton requested the following statement be published:

Mr. Armintrout, I have just come across your website again, and see that you are still engaged in supporting libel against me. I do not understand why you are doing this unless you have some kind of relationship, business or otherwise with the person(s) who continue to successfully manipulate you and who are probably laughing at you behind your back. In self-defense and pending a lawsuit whereby I will actively seek to have your self-righteous, judgemental website shut down, I will endeavor to reason with you once again, in hope that somewhere deep inside, you are a man of reason, and will excuse yourself from participation in this false accusation.

Regarding your comments about bootlegging, only your definition, and not your application of it as an attack against me, is correct. The party that is feeding you this false info on me, certainly understands that figure piracy and bootlegging is something I loathe, hence their use of this allegation in their attack. Your "eyewitness" is more than likely one of the slanderers cronies or employees, who themselves have participated in the bootlegging of miniature figures from various companies (and I could name names). I'm sure that you've heard of the concept that "the best defense is a good offense", and this is their tactic.

Regarding the gaining possession of another manufacturer's figures by fraud & theft, this is not even close to the truth. While an associate of the accuser's company, I was instrumental in arranging for them to co-produce a line of miniatures, with my firm which at that time was known as elan enterprises. Since the accuser's company was in financial difficulties at that time and could find no one to produce the molds for the aforementioned line of figures, I was asked by them to make the molds. After we drew up a contract for co-production of the miniatures, the master figures were given to me so that I could produce the aforementioned molds. We had agreed upon a price for the molds. I began this rather involved project, assuming that my accuser would honor our agreement, and also pay me for my services, but since his business was falling upon hard times, he obviously decided on another course of action. I began producing molds for him and turning them over to him, but payment for my services was at first slow, and then not forthcoming. All I heard from him when I would confront him regarding payment for my services was that he didn't have the money to pay me yet. I got promises but little else! In order to protect myseslf against the eventuality that I was going to be stiffed, I simply made myself a duplicate set of master molds, and contacted the then-owner of the miniatures in the U.K. and advised him of my actions. Still hoping that I would finally get paid what I was owed and that my accuser would still honor our joint-production agreement (I have a copy), I turned over the last of the molds, while my accuser hid from me, instead employing his aged father (to whom he had distorted the truth of the matter) to hurl diatribes against me. (This hurt me badly as I had always respected my accuser's father, despite his being used and manipulated by his son). Thinking that I still had the master figures in my possession (I had mailed them back to the then-owner of the miniatures, in the U.K.) my accuser contacted his local county sheriffs department who phoned to enquire about my accusers complaint. When I explained that it was a business dispute or quarrel, and that I did not have the figure masters that my accuser was seeking to gain possession of, that was the end of it. Any police records will confirm that the whole incident was a moot point and no criminal charges were filed or could have been filed. Police never recovered any stolen property because there was none to recover!

Regarding being the agent for an overseas company, here is the real story: Angry at being back-stabbed by my accuser, I contacted an associate in Canada and also the miniatures then-owner in the U.K. and put them in touch with each other. My Canadian associate obtained the rights to sell the miniatures outside the U.S. and entered into a verbal contract with me to produce them at my facility in Florida. The former owner of the miniatures line being discussed, informed me that he simply sold the original master figures to my accuser, without any sole manufacturing agreement or anything, but cash. The former owner also has told me that he has not even received all of his money from my accuser. Thus years ago, I produced some "sample" figures for my Canadian associate and also some personal figures for him, but basically his attempt to sell these figures to the Canadian market failed, and that was the end of it. I have never represented myself as an "agent" for any Canadian company, not have I ever been asked to "stop representing myself as such".

And finally, regarding the periodic contact that the editor says he has had with me, it is true. True that I have contacted him and asked that he remove libelous allegations from his website, on several occasions. I have refrained from telling my side of this silly story publicly, since it is really no one's business but simply an old dispute between two parties, and as such, should not be worthy of my time. And yes, Mr. Armintrout, I continue to maintain that perhaps you are being manipulated by someone who certainly has a less than sterling reputation himself, and who is guilty of many offenses against both those involved in our hobby industry and others. If you do some real investigating you will find that the so-called "multiple sources" all revert back to those individuals who have ties with my accuser. Of course I could "name names" and make related accusations myself, but I try to refrain from this sort of thing as I do not find it either dignified or chivalrous behaviour, except as a last resort of defense.

I had recently contacted my accuser to try to amicably settle this old dispute. I offered to either turn over to him whatever related items I had, or purchase outright, the disputed line of miniatures. I did not receive any response from him, one way or another.

Mr. Armintrout, since you appear to have so vigorously participated in this business in such a one-sided manner, I challenge you to do the right thing and at least print this rebuttel, if not simply removing the erroneous information from your website.

Once again, I urge you to "do the right thing" and show some fairness and impartiality regarding this prejudgement.

Thank you,

David A. Clayton

PS I might add that many of my peers in our industry and hobby know quite well of my accuser and his shennanigans, and I could tell you stories...

This entry last updated on 29 November 2000

Read the FAQ
14,791 hits since 6 Feb 2000
©1994-2024 Bill Armintrout