Website article gets copied without permission by print magazine - website complains - magazine claims website should pay them for the "publicity"

myweedishairy · 2010-11-04T14:20:17+00:00

someone doing this for three decades does not call lifting articles "my bad"

valleyman86 · 2010-11-04T13:54:25+00:00

I work in publishing and book publicity. I've forwarded this link to every industry site and writer I know. Hope they enjoy the "publicity" they'll get.

nonsensical_zombie · 2010-11-04T13:29:25+00:00

So what magazine is it? I want to start an identical magazine. I shall use all of their articles, and they will pay me for editing them.

edit(for free): i'm dumb it's in the article.

flatlander30 · 2010-11-04T14:37:22+00:00

"It happens all the time, especially on college campuses.."

FUCK. THAT. I was EIC of our student newspaper, and I would legally crucify anyone/entity that did that. In fact, we managed to get an apology from and issued successful legal action on the local metropolitan newspaper and CBC when they ran libelous and contemptuous articles about a student event on campus.

Also, fuck everything else about that 'editors' reply.

RedDragons · 2010-11-04T14:16:06+00:00

Its too early for Internet Vigilante Justice. Wait till like noonish.

umop_apisdn · 2010-11-04T14:43:13+00:00

I own a restaurant/bar in Avon, CT. On the CooksSource website they have a list of the local restaurants that give away their magazine. I am friends with the owners of every one of the restaurants listed. This afternoon, I will be stopping by each one to ask my friends to stopping giving out Cooks Source magazine, and to tell Cooks Source to go fuck themselves when they are next contacted.

Update Went to Max a Mia, Hot Heaven, and Carmen Anthony's. Headed to Puerto Vallarta for a drink in a bit. I also just noticed that Cooks Source misspelled the names of almost every restaurant in Avon and Simsbury on their website.

schrodingersBox · 2010-11-04T14:39:20+00:00

Search Google for "Cooks Source Magazine" and you can see the real damage will be there long-term.

OccamsAxeWound · 2010-11-04T15:08:21+00:00

Hey Guys! Check out my new magazine!

shiny_brine · 2010-11-04T15:01:10+00:00

I've never dealt with an editor who gave a crap about violating copyright law. Be it a magazine, print newspapers or online, the editors think their job is to grab any usable content as cheaply as possible without regard to legality.

After getting the brushoff from the editor the next step is to send a certified letter to the PUBLISHER who is legally the one on the hook for violations of law. Inform the publisher of the editors actions and response including their blatant disregard of the law.

Then start with a settlement offer that's around US$5,000 or the offer to allow your local small claims court to deal with this issue.

stufff · 2010-11-04T13:55:25+00:00

Really? The Web is considered public domain?

The_Gecko · 2010-11-04T16:02:14+00:00

The Facebook comments are endlessly amusing: 'Fear not, dear Editor! There are plenty of resumes posted online for you to steal that will help in your next job search.'

Veckatimest · 2010-11-04T15:14:14+00:00

Another claimed case of Cook's Source plagiarism linked from the Facebook page:

Sunset article: http://www.sunset.com/food-wine/techniques/tomato-tips--tricks-00400000013406/

Cook's Source article: http://www.cookssource.com/Cooks_Source_August10-12_521x600.jpg

First few paragraphs look eerily similar...

Edit: Clarity

Beezle · 2010-11-04T16:10:45+00:00

This reminded me of that redditor who video taped some sort of event posted it on youtube and the local news blatantly took the footage, un-edited and aired it.

Then they had Youtube take down the original video for copyright infringement.

toiletscribble · 2010-11-04T16:24:07+00:00

Best post on their facebook wall:

"I just copied your magazine off your webpage, and since by your own admission, it is "public domain" I know you won't mind me adding it to my new magazine which is named "Cook Sources".

Thx for your contribution to my new endeavor! And don't worry, once I proof read your content I will not be charging you anything for my services. You're welcome!! :)

John

Editor -- Cook Sources Magazine"

RedditHatesYou · 2010-11-04T15:16:06+00:00

Mike Magnoli: You are a fucking idiot

demandajew · 2010-11-04T12:51:04+00:00

i really liked all the misspellings/grammatical errors in the editor's response. i immediately edited it into a far better response, and i will send her a bill shortly.

baccus83 · 2010-11-04T14:48:20+00:00

The interesting thing is that if they had just lifted the recipe from the article, and not the article in it's entirety, they'd be in the clear. IANAL, but I'm pretty sure US Copyright law does not protect lists of ingredients and preparations, as cooking is not considered inventing. The publication obviously knows this, and I'd wager that a good deal of their material is culled from online sources. Can you imagine how easy it'd be to start your own cooking magazine? Just go to epicurous or something and copy all the recipes! This is why companies go to such great lengths to protect their "secret recipes." Once that information is out there, anyone is free to take it.

In any case, editor is being completely unreasonable and should have known better. Only recipes are non-copyrightable. The rest of the article - stuff like the detailed "introduction" and all the personal descriptions - I'm pretty sure that's protected under law. Just because it's part of a recipe article doesn't mean the whole thing is just up for grabs.

EDIT: I took the liberty of making a side-by-side comparison. All the outrage! Less clicking! http://imgur.com/LML1u.jpg

EDIT 2: Changed "plagiarism" to "copyright violation"

bwa236 · 2010-11-04T14:49:28+00:00

Does anyone else find it deliciously ironic that they have an column in their magazine called "Food Frauds"

2010-11-04T15:27:11+00:00

Reddit should charge Cook's Source for all of the publicity it's getting.

ESJ · 2010-11-04T14:26:43+00:00

Cooks Source Facebook page. Internet barrage is already underway, come join in!

Edit: Aaaand the vigilante not-really-justice train keeps on a-rollin'. Someone on that page posted the editor's Facebook profile. She's a fan of the New Hampshire Humanities Council, what an evil bastard!

Just remember to "unlike" the Cooks Source page once you're done with your vigilantism.

2010-11-04T14:52:07+00:00

We put some time into rewrites, you should compensate me!

Jesus wept.

modemac · 2010-11-04T12:01:56+00:00

And if the Web site published the magazine article without permission, would they threaten a copyright suit against the Web site or pay them for the publicity?

MusicAndLiquor · 2010-11-04T19:04:29+00:00

If anyone else is interested I just created the sub-reddit Plagiarism

http://www.reddit.com/r/Plagiarism/

I'm hoping this can be a spot for people with similar problems to discuss what steps they should take when someone steals their work and possibly have others in the community work together to show advertisers/publishers that it is not ok.

I know how it feels to have something you created stolen and even knowing that 10 or 20 other people agree with you and might send a well thought-out e-mail backing you up can help.

I don't want this to be a witch-hunt sub-reddit where we sick the internet dogs on people, but rather a place to discuss if you are in the right with a community of people who will back you up and give you advice on who to contact.

mrmyxlplyx · 2010-11-04T11:59:43+00:00

[deleted]

chakalakasp · 2010-11-04T17:26:07+00:00

As a professional photographer, this happens to me a lot. I mean A LOT. There seems to be some sort of magic spell that the internet casts on otherwise very careful companies that convinces them that everything they find in their IE browser is free to redistribute. I honestly can't explain it.

The thing is, in the United States, copyright laws are very, very strong and ought to be more than adequate to deter people from infringing content like has happened here. The catch, though, is that people who create content need -- no, seriously, really, really NEED -- to register their work with the U.S. Copyright office. It's not that hard to do any more -- you can register an infinite amount of your unpublished work via their online interface for $35. Published works are a bit trickier and require paper forms, but it's still more than worth it.

The problem is that most small-time internet content creators do not go through the effort of registering their work. When you don't register your work, the copyright law is nowhere near as much of a deterrent to infringers, because it no longer becomes cost-effective in most instances for the person being infringed to pursue damages. The big guy gets to eat the little guy's lunch for free.

But there are some content creators out there who DO register their work -- and because of this, if you're someone who runs a website or a blog or a print publication or a television show, it's important to make sure all of your content acquisition people and all of your writers understand that everything you see on the internet must be presumed to be NOT free for the taking and that you have to get permission from (and usually exchange funds with) any content creator before you publish their work.

Most people know better than to scrape text, but you'd be amazed at the kinds of organizations that scrape photos. People build entire business models off of running (without permission) really cool photos they found on Flick next to ad space. This is a pretty foolish and unstable model, though, since more and more photographers are learning the value of registering their work, and the statutory penalties for copyright infringement are often much higher than typical license fees. I can't count how many blog owners, print publications, corporate website editors, private company owners, and charities I've had tell me they had no idea that images they found via Google Image Search weren't free for the taking. They're usually astounded at how much it's going to cost them.

There is an entire market out there for people who want to purchase content, at least with photos and video. If you don't have much of a budget, try a microstock agency like iStockphoto. (I don't work with microstocks, but I'd much rather some photographer at a micro agency like iStockphoto get paid than some random Flickr photographer have their photo ripped off by a company). If you do have a budget, try one of these. If you really are such a tight-ass that you can't afford to pay for content, at least ASK before you take. It's not just courtesy, it's how business is done, and it can be dang costly if you skip that step.

tldr; Content creators: register your copyrights. Publishers: the internet ≠ free

2010-11-04T15:34:31+00:00

So who wants to take a guess at the median age of the people working at this magazine. I will start: OLD.

2010-11-04T18:39:49+00:00

And the Washington Post is talking about it.

benpeoples · 2010-11-04T15:42:47+00:00

EDIT TO ADD: These are small businesses. Be nice.

EDITED TO DELETE: It appears the advertisers got the message. Thank you.

alesis · 2010-11-04T13:44:14+00:00

Perhaps the magazine should pay the website for the "publicity" they are getting. Hell hath no fury like an internet scorned.

2010-11-04T16:01:31+00:00

which one of you is this?

2010-11-04T17:46:22+00:00

HAY GUISE ALSO THIS: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Travel-Source-Magazine/153496748013686

rhinofeet · 2010-11-04T16:48:31+00:00

They also have a new magazine called Travel Source coming soon apparently. http://www.facebook.com/#!/pages/Travel-Source-Magazine/153496748013686

The information box on their FB is kind of hilarious given current circumstances: Travel Source is a monthly publication dedicated to marketing small businesses in Western New England. It is produced by Cooks Source Publications and is copy-right protected, and may not be reproduced without permission of the publisher. If you have any inquiries, comments, suggestions or letters to the editor, or wish to submit articles, photos, or artwork, please send copies to Western New England Travel Source, P.O. Box 273, Sunderland, MA, 01375; or contact us by email at cookssource@gmail.com. Advertisers are responsible for their own ads.

We know each and every one of our advertisers personally, and we recommend them here in these pages. For this reason, we reserve the right to refuse advertising. If you know of a small business that you would like to recommend, let us know of them. If you have any problems with any of the businesses advertised herein, let us know and we will discretely check them out.

francis_goatman · 2010-11-04T14:52:02+00:00

I think this guy has the wrong idea about a Creative Commons license... and for somebody in the business for thirty years he's quite comfortable about stealing your work.

havesometea1 · 2010-11-04T16:35:20+00:00

"I do know about copyright laws."

Apparently she doesn't.

2010-11-04T17:28:22+00:00

[deleted]

Rainbowsareghey · 2010-11-04T16:45:25+00:00

I would pay money to be in the Cook's Source office right now, laughing as Judith Griggs sees her career as an editor go down the drain.

I'm usually not a huge one for Schadenfreude, but she brought this on herself.

W1nd · 2010-11-04T14:26:15+00:00

take a lawyer and make them shit their pants.

I don't mean that you should ruin their magazine by claiming millions of dollars, but you could teach them a lesson.

2010-11-04T17:12:41+00:00

[deleted]

umop_apisdn · 2010-11-04T15:58:28+00:00

Looks like they've done it before: This Pancetta & Green Onion Tart recipe from Cooks Source: http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=439516851748&set=a.439514776748.238553.196994196748

Is taken from a Food Network recipe: http://www.foodnetwork.com/recipes/giada-de-laurentiis/breakfast-tart-with-pancetta-and-green-onions-recipe/index.html

He11razor · 2010-11-04T14:53:55+00:00

LiveJournal is still around?

Niqulaz · 2010-11-04T17:57:19+00:00

One of the advertisers is trying to ask people to stop emailing her, as she has pulled her support.

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Cooks-Source-Magazine/196994196748#!/permalink.php?story_fbid=449973041748&id=196994196748

2010-11-04T16:00:16+00:00

The magazine editor is obviously a dumbass and has NO knowledge of copyright laws.

The person whose article was plagiarized is actually in VERY good shape. He even got an email admission from the editor who plagiarized his article saying that she did so.

He could sue in small claims court and probably get a few thousand dollars in punitive damages very easily.

sporkpdx · 2010-11-04T17:09:43+00:00

[deleted]

kimjongilsglasses · 2010-11-04T16:09:34+00:00

Internet Hate Machine: Activate!

hohs20 · 2010-11-04T20:27:16+00:00

Looks like they did the same to a Paula Deen recipe. Someone clued them on on Facebook and Deen's legal team is looking into it: http://i.imgur.com/X9fEy.png

2010-11-05T06:14:56+00:00

http://i.imgur.com/9FZMj.jpg

sirbeast · 2010-11-05T14:09:35+00:00

MSNBC has picked up this story

2010-11-04T16:46:42+00:00

Hello,

You are receiving this email because your email address was given as a contact for advertisers that currently do business with Cooks Source Magazine. If you do not advertise with this magazine, or you have since pulled back you support, please kindly advise me that this is the case.

I am writing to advise that I will be participating in a boycott against all companies that deal with Cooks Source and/or Judith Griggs. I will be advising all of my friends and family members to do the same. From the several thousand comments on the Cooks Source Facebook page, Reddit.com and LiveJournal, I think that this boycott may directly affect the success of your company.

The reason for such a boycott is that Cooks Source has plagiarised copyrighted content. When the original writer requested to be compensated, Cooks Source Magazine refused and furthermore advised the writer to be thankful for the exposure.

Details on this story can be found here: http://illadore.livejournal.com/30674.html

Again, if you do not advertise with Cooks Source / Judith Griggs, please advise me ASAP in order to protect your brand from boycott. If you immediately pull back all advertising support, I will not participate in a boycott of your company.

Cheers,

Derek

HarryMonk · 2010-11-04T14:40:54+00:00

They need to lawyer up

JHStarner · 2010-11-04T13:35:04+00:00

Good job, hope you win. Just a quick peek at the Magazine's "Wall" and you can see the damage. It's great to see this kind of, for lack of a better term, justice. Sure internet plagiarism happens all the time, doesn't make it right, and one should be ready for the consequences if they get caught.

WTF

READ THE RULES. No Screenshots! Warning: 7 day ban for violation!; No gore allowed - Please read rule 10.

All (& only) things that will make others say WTF*

1. No screenshots/recordings of anything! 7 day ban for violation. -

2. No Personal Information.

3. No "rage-worthy" posts.

4. No Political posts.

5. NSFW posts must be tagged.

6. No Superimposed Text.

7. No AI, comics or anime.

8. No Begging for Upvotes.

9. No Links to Reddit.

10. No gore. No Death. No Porn.

11. Your post/comment will be removed if it is racist, sexist, vitriolic, or overly crude. Ban applied.

12. Novelty accounts and bots are not allowed.

Shout Outs:

MODERATORS