A half-baked magazine editor gets her just desserts.

[ardeegee]

A print magazine plagiarizes a blog, when the blogger complains, the editor supplies only snark. Payback for the editor is being a bit of a female pup, as one would expect.

Many articles on it can be found by googling for "Judith Griggs" (the name of the editor), but here's Boingboing's:

http://www.boingboing.net/2010/11/04...justice-d.html

And more:

http://www.edrants.com/the-cooks-sou...fits-on-theft/

[mrscoach]

Judith is getting raked over the coals on the Facebook page. The internet is public domain? Really???? Nutcase.

[desertgrandma]

Originally Posted by mrscoach

Judith is getting raked over the coals on the Facebook page. The internet is public domain? Really???? Nutcase.

Well, that ought to answer the is it legal to download from the darkside, or strip drm" questions!

[mrscoach]

And it was also put out today that somebody had lost their third court case and has to pay $1.5mil for putting something like 24 songs on a file sharing site.

Wonder what this woman will have to pay for lifting copyrighted material and using it, without crediting the source? Most of these places probably would have given permission, if she had just asked.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by desertgrandma

Well, that ought to answer the is it legal to download from the darkside, or strip drm" questions!

.

[dsvick]

It seemed to me that she was having trouble expressing herself in her reply - I translated it for her:

Originally Posted by Judith Griggs

But honestly Monica, the web is considered "public domain" and you should be happy we just didn't "lift" your whole article and put someone else's name on it!

What she really meant to say was: We can take anything we want to from anyone on the web and we're doing them a favor by not giving them credit.

Originally Posted by Judith Griggs=Judith Griggs

It happens a lot, clearly more than you are aware of...

What she really meant to say was: You're stupid and don't know how the real world works.

Originally Posted by Judith Griggs

... you as a professional should know that the article we used written by you was in very bad need of editing,
and is much better now than was originally. Now it will work well for your portfolio.

What she really meant to say was: You're a crappy writer.

Originally Posted by Judith Griggs

For that reason, I have a bit of a difficult time with your requests for monetary gain, albeit for such a fine (and very wealthy!) institution.

What she really meant to say was: There is no way in heck I'm giving anyone any money, especially some place that doesn't need it anyway.

Originally Posted by Judith Griggs

We put some time into rewrites, you should compensate me! I never charge young writers for advice or rewriting poorly written pieces, and have many who write for me... ALWAYS for free!

What she really meant to say was: I'll counter sue you if you push this. You're young and, let me point out again, not a very good writer - I did you a favor and you should be grateful.

[kacir]

Well, I am not a big fan of aggressive protection of someones intellectual property when it comes to cooking recipes.
BUT.
It is one thing to find an interesting recipe for a cake or pulled pork and share it with a few friends and another thing entirely when you balantly, systematically steal articles AND make profit. What makes this really bad is the super snarky and patronizing answer the original writer got when she rightfully demanded a *very* modest compensation for her work.

At this moment an angry crowd at Facebook is assembling a very long list of *other* articles and images stolen from lots of other sources.

I can practically hear lawyers cackling with glee ...

[mrscoach]

Judith can claim all she wants that the article that started this was 'poorly written', but what about all the others she lifted? There is also the photos used without credit or permission.

Yes, the lawyers are probably cackling, while circleing Judith on their brooms, waiting to throw evil spells (C&Ds, suits, etc) at her.

I don't think her advertisers will be too happy, either.

[ShortNCuddlyAm]

I can't find the source (it's at home), but apparently some of the "bad writing" that needed fixing or editing were the original spellings from around the 16th century - ah - found one reference: http://nihilistic-kid.livejournal.com/1553538.html

And also this: http://www.smartbitchestrashybooks.com/judithgriggs/

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by ShortNCuddlyAm

I can't find the source (it's at home), but apparently some of the "bad writing" that needed fixing or editing were the original spellings from around the 16th century - ah - found one reference: http://nihilistic-kid.livejournal.com/1553538.html

And also this: http://www.smartbitchestrashybooks.com/judithgriggs/

[beachwanderer]

Originally Posted by ShortNCuddlyAm

And also this: http://www.smartbitchestrashybooks.com/judithgriggs/

I guess that one could last. Like the "streisand effect".

[Sandra Edwards]

Originally Posted by ShortNCuddlyAm

And also this: http://www.smartbitchestrashybooks.com/judithgriggs/

Now that is funny!

Sandy

[Seanette]

I've seen discussion of this on other fora I read. Seems that among the entities plagiarized from are Disney and Martha Stewart.

[ardeegee]

Now the Cook's Source site has up a recipe for crow:

http://www.cookssource.com/index.html

[phenomshel]

Originally Posted by ardeegee

Now the Cook's Source site has up a recipe for crow:

http://www.cookssource.com/index.html

Doesn't say if Ms. Griggs is still employed, though.