If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Some Cook)   Magazine steals author's Web article from 2005, says "You can't sue us. The Internet is public domain"   (illadore.livejournal.com) divider line 209
    More: Dumbass, public domain, valid arguments, rewrite, First man or woman, copyright infringement, magazines, Digital Millennium Copyright Act  
•       •       •

9070 clicks; posted to Geek » on 04 Nov 2010 at 2:10 PM (3 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



209 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2010-11-04 01:44:46 PM
internet tough guy monthly has been stealing my articles for years. whatever, they are a bunch of pussies anyway.
 
2010-11-04 02:10:41 PM
Uuuuuuuhhhhh...... no
 
2010-11-04 02:10:44 PM
I sent them a nice e-mail thanking them for giving me permission to steal all their stuff.
 
2010-11-04 02:14:29 PM
I dunno - that editor had a good point. She better pay up and stop complaining.
 
2010-11-04 02:19:03 PM
Well maybe I should just lift some articles from their site and re-publish them as they will all be public domain as well then.

I think if enough people did it they might just change their tune.
 
2010-11-04 02:20:54 PM
eBaum's World has magazine?
 
2010-11-04 02:20:58 PM
teardrop: Well maybe I should just lift some articles from their site and re-publish them as they will all be public domain as well then.

I think if enough people did it they might just change their tune.


Yeah, I'd like to see this end well for the cook, but I'll be honest I don't care enough to do anything about it except writing this post of apathetic support.
 
2010-11-04 02:23:06 PM
Ok, that response is just jaw-dropping. Wt flippin fark?
 
2010-11-04 02:23:46 PM
Either she's trolling us or she's about to get a few grand in the settlement.
 
2010-11-04 02:24:17 PM
Marcus Aurelius: I sent them a nice e-mail thanking them for giving me permission to steal all their stuff.

I think that would be a fun thing to do. Everyone that has a blog should copy an article from them and post it verbatim. Hey, if it's posted on the web, we can steal it...amirite?
 
2010-11-04 02:24:42 PM
He should just go down there and rape the shiat out of anyone he can find. It is all public domain coont anyway.
 
2010-11-04 02:30:55 PM
I'll be damned.

LiveJournal still exists.
 
2010-11-04 02:32:14 PM
MrEricSir: eBaum's World has magazine?

Came to say something else, lol'd instead.

Well played.
 
2010-11-04 02:36:23 PM
Whiny food tard is whiny

Your publicly posted live journal is in fact public domain.
 
2010-11-04 02:37:10 PM
For some reason, the editor's tone and ridiculousness leads me to believe it may be David Thorne.

www.geekologie.com
www.geekologie.com

Better size (new window)
 
2010-11-04 02:37:48 PM
fluffy2097: Whiny food tard is whiny

Your publicly posted live journal is in fact public domain.


DNRTFA, I take it.
 
2010-11-04 02:38:43 PM
I hope the author hires a pitbull lawyer on contingency. She offered up a minimal settlement that was more than fair. The editor responded like a douche, so she should unleash hell on him. They had the opportunity to do the right thing and they didn't (which, by the way, is the way the McDonald's coffee settlement started out).
 
2010-11-04 02:40:58 PM
fluffy2097: Whiny food tard is whiny

Your publicly posted live journal is in fact public domain.


It wasn't originally posted to LJ. And I don't believe LJ is in the public domain. Their TOS clearly states the users retain all rights to their journal entries.
 
2010-11-04 02:48:59 PM
The author should get Drew to write a strongly worded blog post demanding Jon Stewart apologize for stealing the article.
 
2010-11-04 02:50:23 PM
Mike Chewbacca: fluffy2097: Whiny food tard is whiny

Your publicly posted live journal is in fact public domain.

It wasn't originally posted to LJ. And I don't believe LJ is in the public domain. Their TOS clearly states the users retain all rights to their journal entries.


Well. looking at her website, the last time she touched it was in 2006.

There's a note about a re-design in 2009, but it still looks like a 06 webpage.

Webpages like this go 404 all the time and their data is lost forever.

Without an actual copyright, (no, sticking the © symbol on your page doesn't make it copyrighted) Her information is public domain.

It's not like she was making a profit from it to begin with, she was giving it away for free. She can hardly claim damages from more people seeing her free writing.

What this woman has done is shot herself in the foot. She could have leveraged this to get herself a job in a real magazine, instead she will spend her time kavetching on livejournal and working on revamping her obsolete webpage with MS word.
 
2010-11-04 02:51:34 PM
Astronomically high levels of douche in the response from the editor.
 
2010-11-04 02:51:53 PM
Slaves2Darkness: He should just go down there and rape the shiat out of anyone he can find. It is all public domain coont anyway.

FTFY.
 
2010-11-04 02:52:41 PM
If the work wasn't registered with the copyright office the author is limited to actual damages/profits and an injunction. I can't see many attorneys jumping at the chance to go after a cut of minimal damages.
 
2010-11-04 02:54:08 PM
fluffy2097: Mike Chewbacca: fluffy2097: Whiny food tard is whiny

Your publicly posted live journal is in fact public domain.

It wasn't originally posted to LJ. And I don't believe LJ is in the public domain. Their TOS clearly states the users retain all rights to their journal entries.

Well. looking at her website, the last time she touched it was in 2006.

There's a note about a re-design in 2009, but it still looks like a 06 webpage.

Webpages like this go 404 all the time and their data is lost forever.

Without an actual copyright, (no, sticking the © symbol on your page doesn't make it copyrighted) Her information is public domain.

It's not like she was making a profit from it to begin with, she was giving it away for free. She can hardly claim damages from more people seeing her free writing.

What this woman has done is shot herself in the foot. She could have leveraged this to get herself a job in a real magazine, instead she will spend her time kavetching on livejournal and working on revamping her obsolete webpage with MS word.


Wow, just....wow. Copyright is automatic. There is no requirement to file for copyright or even put the little (c) symbol on something to make it copyrighted (it does, however, make enforcing the copyright easier). Up until 1989, a copyright notice was required in the US to be protected by copyright, but this is no longer the case.
 
2010-11-04 02:54:49 PM
Wellon Dowd: The author should get Drew to write a strongly worded blog post demanding Jon Stewart apologize for stealing the article.

Speaking of which, weren't we supposed to get a follow up on that today? I made popcorn and everything.
 
2010-11-04 02:57:26 PM
Everywhere the Berne convention is recognized (almost every damn country in the world), copyright is automatic.

Registering your copyright is not a bad idea, but all that does is make it easier to prove the work is yours.

There is no dispute about who wrote the article that was copied into the magazine.
 
2010-11-04 02:58:34 PM
fluffy2097: It's not like she was making a profit from it to begin with, she was giving it away for free. She can hardly claim damages from more people seeing her free writing.

I tried to use that excuse with the MPAA. They didn't seem to agree.

/sharing is caring
 
2010-11-04 02:58:44 PM
Rawry: teardrop: Well maybe I should just lift some articles from their site and re-publish them as they will all be public domain as well then.

I think if enough people did it they might just change their tune.

Yeah, I'd like to see this end well for the cook, but I'll be honest I don't care enough to do anything about it except writing this post of apathetic support.


www.splitreason.com
 
2010-11-04 03:01:20 PM
The Machine That Goes Ping: fluffy2097: Mike Chewbacca: fluffy2097: Whiny food tard is whiny

Your publicly posted live journal is in fact public domain.

It wasn't originally posted to LJ. And I don't believe LJ is in the public domain. Their TOS clearly states the users retain all rights to their journal entries.

Well. looking at her website, the last time she touched it was in 2006.

There's a note about a re-design in 2009, but it still looks like a 06 webpage.

Webpages like this go 404 all the time and their data is lost forever.

Without an actual copyright, (no, sticking the © symbol on your page doesn't make it copyrighted) Her information is public domain.

It's not like she was making a profit from it to begin with, she was giving it away for free. She can hardly claim damages from more people seeing her free writing.

What this woman has done is shot herself in the foot. She could have leveraged this to get herself a job in a real magazine, instead she will spend her time kavetching on livejournal and working on revamping her obsolete webpage with MS word.

Wow, just....wow. Copyright is automatic. There is no requirement to file for copyright or even put the little (c) symbol on something to make it copyrighted (it does, however, make enforcing the copyright easier). Up until 1989, a copyright notice was required in the US to be protected by copyright, but this is no longer the case.


I tell you what. You want to get involved with the drama from a person whos life consists of going to renfares and runs a webpage on 'ye olde gode cooking'. You go right ahead and dig your own grave. Their drama is more epic then Excalibur.

The author should be happy they got published at all.
 
2010-11-04 03:02:03 PM
fluffy2097: Mike Chewbacca: fluffy2097: Whiny food tard is whiny

Your publicly posted live journal is in fact public domain.

It wasn't originally posted to LJ. And I don't believe LJ is in the public domain. Their TOS clearly states the users retain all rights to their journal entries.

Well. looking at her website, the last time she touched it was in 2006.

There's a note about a re-design in 2009, but it still looks like a 06 webpage.

Webpages like this go 404 all the time and their data is lost forever.

Without an actual copyright, (no, sticking the © symbol on your page doesn't make it copyrighted) Her information is public domain.

It's not like she was making a profit from it to begin with, she was giving it away for free. She can hardly claim damages from more people seeing her free writing.

What this woman has done is shot herself in the foot. She could have leveraged this to get herself a job in a real magazine, instead she will spend her time kavetching on livejournal and working on revamping her obsolete webpage with MS word.


you're right sticking a copyright sign on a article doesn't copyright it; THE MERE FACT OF WRITING IT DOES.

ALL written works are presumed copyrighted with rights vesting in their author unless specifically waived.
 
2010-11-04 03:02:48 PM
Not to mention that the Internet Research Machine is starting to turn up uncredited stock photography and stuff pulled from NPR, Food Network, and a Time-Warner magazine.

Someone's about to get farked.
 
2010-11-04 03:03:09 PM
Magorn: you're right sticking a copyright sign on a article doesn't copyright it; THE MERE FACT OF WRITING IT DOES.

It wasn't written. it was typed you idiot.
 
2010-11-04 03:04:10 PM
fluffy2097: Without an actual copyright, (no, sticking the © symbol on your page doesn't make it copyrighted) Her information is public domain.

You quite obviously have no clue how copyright works... Everything you create is automatically copyrighted, with no effort required on your part to register it or even identify it as such... Public domain is not the default; you have to explicitly mark it PD for it to be so...
 
2010-11-04 03:04:11 PM
My photo was used in a 4chan meme.

Where is my money?
 
2010-11-04 03:04:15 PM
There are way too many people out there who think the Internet was a copyright-free zone until the DMCA came along. Or worse, people like this who still think the Internet is entirely public domain. I don't understand their thought process at all.
 
2010-11-04 03:04:34 PM
fluffy2097: Mike Chewbacca: fluffy2097: Whiny food tard is whiny

Your publicly posted live journal is in fact public domain.

It wasn't originally posted to LJ. And I don't believe LJ is in the public domain. Their TOS clearly states the users retain all rights to their journal entries.

Well. looking at her website, the last time she touched it was in 2006.

There's a note about a re-design in 2009, but it still looks like a 06 webpage.

Webpages like this go 404 all the time and their data is lost forever.

Without an actual copyright, (no, sticking the © symbol on your page doesn't make it copyrighted) Her information is public domain.

It's not like she was making a profit from it to begin with, she was giving it away for free. She can hardly claim damages from more people seeing her free writing.

What this woman has done is shot herself in the foot. She could have leveraged this to get herself a job in a real magazine, instead she will spend her time kavetching on livejournal and working on revamping her obsolete webpage with MS word.


Uh, that is not at all how copyright on the internet works.

Also, Cooks Source stole articles from NPR, Martha Stewart, Paula Deen, Sunset Magazine, and Food Network (at least). A rep for Paula Deen stated the information has been forwarded on to their legal department. This wasn't a one-time mix up involving some poor schmuck on the internet.
 
2010-11-04 03:05:51 PM
fluffy2097: It wasn't written. it was typed you idiot.

Heh. Ok, never mind... I didn't realize you were just trolling/joking... But, this remark clearly gives you away...
 
2010-11-04 03:06:38 PM
fluffy2097: Magorn: you're right sticking a copyright sign on a article doesn't copyright it; THE MERE FACT OF WRITING IT DOES.

It wasn't written. it was typed you idiot.


1/10
 
2010-11-04 03:07:59 PM
fluffy2097: The Machine That Goes Ping: fluffy2097: Mike Chewbacca: fluffy2097: Whiny food tard is whiny

Your publicly posted live journal is in fact public domain.

It wasn't originally posted to LJ. And I don't believe LJ is in the public domain. Their TOS clearly states the users retain all rights to their journal entries.

Well. looking at her website, the last time she touched it was in 2006.

There's a note about a re-design in 2009, but it still looks like a 06 webpage.

Webpages like this go 404 all the time and their data is lost forever.

Without an actual copyright, (no, sticking the © symbol on your page doesn't make it copyrighted) Her information is public domain.

It's not like she was making a profit from it to begin with, she was giving it away for free. She can hardly claim damages from more people seeing her free writing.

What this woman has done is shot herself in the foot. She could have leveraged this to get herself a job in a real magazine, instead she will spend her time kavetching on livejournal and working on revamping her obsolete webpage with MS word.

Wow, just....wow. Copyright is automatic. There is no requirement to file for copyright or even put the little (c) symbol on something to make it copyrighted (it does, however, make enforcing the copyright easier). Up until 1989, a copyright notice was required in the US to be protected by copyright, but this is no longer the case.

I tell you what. You want to get involved with the drama from a person whos life consists of going to renfares and runs a webpage on 'ye olde gode cooking'. You go right ahead and dig your own grave. Their drama is more epic then Excalibur.

The author should be happy they got published at all.


Drama or no, any published work is automatically copyrighted until 70 years after the author's death. THEN it becomes public domain. I think you (and the editor of the magazine) are confusing "publicly accessible" with "public domain". Anyone can read stuff posted on LJ (or anywhere else on the Internet) but it cannot be reproduced without permission from the author (with some exceptions for fair use, etc.)

Check out Title 17 of the United States Code, it's pretty interesting: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode17/usc_sup_01_17.html
 
2010-11-04 03:08:51 PM
RobSeace: fluffy2097: It wasn't written. it was typed you idiot.

Heh. Ok, never mind... I didn't realize you were just trolling/joking... But, this remark clearly gives you away...


You quoted my copyrighted statement.

I demand you give me 12 Internets as compensation.
 
2010-11-04 03:09:03 PM
fluffy2097: Magorn: you're right sticking a copyright sign on a article doesn't copyright it; THE MERE FACT OF WRITING IT DOES.

It wasn't written. it was typed you idiot.


0/10. Sad really, you actually had me going until that one.
 
2010-11-04 03:09:46 PM
fluffy2097: RobSeace: fluffy2097: It wasn't written. it was typed you idiot.

Heh. Ok, never mind... I didn't realize you were just trolling/joking... But, this remark clearly gives you away...

You quoted my copyrighted statement.

I demand you give me 12 Internets as compensation.


Damnit, I didn't realize I was feeding a troll, I thought they all lived in the Politics tab.
 
2010-11-04 03:10:49 PM
NuclearWinter:

0/10. Sad really, you actually had me going until that one.


The entire rest of the thread is going to be quoting me anyways. might as let observant people in on the joke.
 
2010-11-04 03:11:17 PM
fluffy2097: You quoted my copyrighted statement.

I demand you give me 12 Internets as compensation.


Fair use... And, the comment probably wasn't long enough to qualify for protection, anyway...

/Plus, my Internet supply only goes to 11!
 
2010-11-04 03:11:59 PM
Visit Cook Source's Facebook wall and watch stuff blow up in real time.

kontraband.se
 
2010-11-04 03:12:03 PM
The Machine That Goes Ping: Drama or no, any published work is automatically copyrighted until 70* years after the author's death.

Until Disney files suit again.

// used to be - what, 17 years?
// isn't it 99 now?
 
2010-11-04 03:12:45 PM
fluffy2097: Mike Chewbacca: fluffy2097:.

Without an actual copyright, (no, sticking the © symbol on your page doesn't make it copyrighted) Her information is public domain.


Carpbull... Copyright is AUTOMATIC upon creation of the work. You do NOT have to register a work.
Registering it makes it easier to prove ownership and date of creation -nothing more.

author for more than 30 years
fought, won and punished more than a dozen copyright infringers without a lawyer
 
2010-11-04 03:12:52 PM
fluffy2097: NuclearWinter:

0/10. Sad really, you actually had me going until that one.

The entire rest of the thread is going to be quoting me anyways. might as let observant people in on the joke.


Seriously though, the editor of the magazine is probably as dumb as you were pretending to be...how sad is that?

"Hurr, the public can read it, so it must be public domain!"
 
2010-11-04 03:13:46 PM
fluffy2097: My photo was used in a 4chan meme.

Where is my money?


To be honest, it wasn't a very good photo

/go away
 
2010-11-04 03:15:38 PM
fluffy2097: My photo was used in a 4chan meme.

Where is my money?


t0.gstatic.com
 
Displayed 50 of 209 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report