We're very proud of our work here at IB, and apparently other folks like it, as well. We get requests to reprint our work, which we almost always grant. That's fair, and it's also right: contrary to what some folks believe, being "on the web" doesn't mean "in the public domain." Unfortunately, that's not evident to the purported editor of Cooks Source Magazine (which offers both online and "dead tree" versions, both of which are supported by paid advertisers).
Back in '05, food writer and Medieval connoisseur Monica Gaudio reprinted her adaptations of 14th and 17th century apple pie recipes, in the original ("Ye Olde") English. One imagines Mr Chaucer enjoying a slice or three.
Fast forward 5 years, and these recipes, "edited" to "correct' the "awful writing" appear in the pages of Cooks Source Magazine. To her credit, the editor does name Monica as the source. To her discredit, she neither sought nor obtained Ms Gaudio's permission to reprint - let alone "correct" - the post. Ms Gaudio was notified of this situation by a friend, and promptly wrote to CSM's editor, a Ms Judith Griggs. After some back-and-forth, Ms Gaudio indicated that all she really wanted was a public acknowledgment and apology, and for CSM to make a modest donation to a journalism school.
What she received in reply is priceless (and by "priceless," we mean "epically asinine"):
"Yes Monica, I have been doing this for 3 decades, having been an editor at The Voice, Housitonic Home and Connecticut Woman Magazine. I do know about copyright laws ... 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!"
Really? Do go on...
"I am sorry, but 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 ... you should compensate me!"
Gentlemen, I believe we have found a winner for the "New Definition of Chutzpah Award."
As one might imagine, this was not well-received, and the blogosphere is aflame today with recriminations. If you're interested - and you should be, if you ever post original content on, for example, a blog - this post provides an excellent starting point.
Back in '05, food writer and Medieval connoisseur Monica Gaudio reprinted her adaptations of 14th and 17th century apple pie recipes, in the original ("Ye Olde") English. One imagines Mr Chaucer enjoying a slice or three.
Fast forward 5 years, and these recipes, "edited" to "correct' the "awful writing" appear in the pages of Cooks Source Magazine. To her credit, the editor does name Monica as the source. To her discredit, she neither sought nor obtained Ms Gaudio's permission to reprint - let alone "correct" - the post. Ms Gaudio was notified of this situation by a friend, and promptly wrote to CSM's editor, a Ms Judith Griggs. After some back-and-forth, Ms Gaudio indicated that all she really wanted was a public acknowledgment and apology, and for CSM to make a modest donation to a journalism school.
What she received in reply is priceless (and by "priceless," we mean "epically asinine"):
"Yes Monica, I have been doing this for 3 decades, having been an editor at The Voice, Housitonic Home and Connecticut Woman Magazine. I do know about copyright laws ... 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!"
Really? Do go on...
"I am sorry, but 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 ... you should compensate me!"
Gentlemen, I believe we have found a winner for the "New Definition of Chutzpah Award."
As one might imagine, this was not well-received, and the blogosphere is aflame today with recriminations. If you're interested - and you should be, if you ever post original content on, for example, a blog - this post provides an excellent starting point.
Posts
