Live data from Hacker News

A Follow-Up to "The Web is Public Domain"

cookssource.com

51–60 of 120 posts

Re: A Follow-Up to "The Web is Public Domain"

#51

Bleary-eyed I didnt notice it was copy written and reordered some of it. Copyright is the default, not the exception. Unless there's an explicit declaration that copying is OK (e.g. Creative Commons, other licenses ), you should assume you can't copy it. She gets no sympathy from me. In fact, her comments just push me further from her side.

That is true for the US, not necessarily the rest of the world. Not disagreeing with your point, just want to help out anyone that would take away what you said as hard fact.

The US, where Cooks Source seems to be based, is a signatory of the Berne Convention[1]. From Wikipedia:

The Berne Convention requires its signatories to recognize the copyright of works of authors from other signatory countries (known as members of the Berne Union) in the same way as it recognises the copyright of its own nationals. For example, French copyright law applies to anything published or performed in France, regardless of where it was originally created.

Additionally, The Berne Convention makes copyright automatic in countries which observe it. This image, also from Wikipedia, shows the Berne signatories in blue: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Berne_Convention_signatori...

While my post is "not necessarily [true] for the rest of the world," it is true for an awful large portion of it.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berne_Convention_for_the_Protec...

Re: A Follow-Up to "The Web is Public Domain"

#53
post #47
post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Maybe "she" deserves a serious wake-up call, but "they" most certainly do not. Being a two-person operation is probably why they ripped off most if not all of their content. "Craftier Internet denizens started to research more of Cooks Source's publications, discovering that other articles could be lifted from The Food Network, Martha Stewart, NPR and even Disney." http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/299928 Not j…

"Because the writer in question had a copyright on her website where the article can be found, the content of the website is under copyright law." Ouch. Surely there must be a better source than some junk written by a clueless "digital journalist" with the sole purpose of flooding search engines?

Wade through at your leisure.

http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?uid=196994196748&topic...

Same primary source regardless of what outlet covers it.

NPR: http://www.npr.org/blogs/monkeysee/2010/11/05/131091599/the-...

Economist: "A host of Facebook and other denizens have traced over 100 other articles that have appeared in the magazine to The Food Network, NPR, Martha Stewart, Sunset, and others. A Google Docs spreadsheet maintains the list."

http://www.economist.com/blogs/babbage/2010/11/internet_sham...

The list:

https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=0AmTaIPHPnkSedGFhbHo...

Over 160 entries just from recent issues that people could find copies of.

Re: A Follow-Up to "The Web is Public Domain"

#54
post #25

It's really amazing how utterly contemptible this editor's responses have been. Rip off everyone else knowingly for months or years, then claim innocence and that it was an isolated mistake. Blame everyone else for your own actions and pretend that your apology was fake because people were mean FIRST, when actually the fake apology came first and THAT is what made them mad. Be offered a chance to make it up, denigrat…

If I recall correctly—I could be mistaken—some of the parts of the article that were supposedly "...in need of editing..." were the verbatim historical recipes, which used the archaic spellings found in the original documents (e.g. "To make pies of grene apples.") Which would make it even more entertaining, in a schadenfreude-filled sort of way.

That's correct! A real editor with 3 decades' experience would have understood things like English has changed over time.

Re: A Follow-Up to "The Web is Public Domain"

#55

The editor's response reveals a lot about her understanding (or lack thereof) of the business she's in. Normally I'm willing to overlook small typos in blog posts -- but when you are an editor, and you are writing an important response on an important issue, it's not wise to get the punctuation wrong on the very first word . (It should be "it's sad", not "its sad".) That she continues not to use apostrophes throughou…

She also could have taken the negative and turned it around. If a restaurant gets closed for violating health codes (which is not usually permanent, from my understanding), that's a perfect time to put big glass windows on the kitchen, issue a sincere mea culpa, and say "look guys, we learned our lesson and are the cleanest restaurant in town now!". It worked for Jack in the Box after the e. coli scare.

While this obviously created a huge furor, I'd say at least 100x more people know about Cooks Source than did before. Instead of figuring out a way to relaunch the site, she basically committed suicide with a "they'll be sorry when I'm gone", poor-me kind of letter.

Re: A Follow-Up to "The Web is Public Domain"

#56
post #8

Hopefully she'll have learned a bit about how to interact with people on the Internet by the time she starts her next venture (if this one is going down the tubes as a result of her previous actions). Sadly that response tells me she's learned nothing from all of this and can't see beyond her own bloodied nose.

It is indeed going down the 'tubes' http://www.gazettenet.com/2010/11/16/cooks-source-calls-it-q...

Re: A Follow-Up to "The Web is Public Domain"

#57

The editor's response reveals a lot about her understanding (or lack thereof) of the business she's in. Normally I'm willing to overlook small typos in blog posts -- but when you are an editor, and you are writing an important response on an important issue, it's not wise to get the punctuation wrong on the very first word . (It should be "it's sad", not "its sad".) That she continues not to use apostrophes throughou…

I couldn't agree more that this editor's fate is deserved and that this is an "apology" only in the traditional meaning of that word (an attempted defense and not a mea culpa), and a poor one at that. I also have been critical of her unbelievably tone-deaf approach to the subject of handling the complaint of an innocent person whom she had wronged (see http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1870300).

Yet, at some level, I do feel sorry for this person in a sense that I can best describe through an anecdote.

I once had to fire one of my employees (an attorney) who had been with me no more than a few weeks and who produced atrociously bad work when measured by the standards that apply to legal work in the startup area (which must technically meet high standards or else). This employee was a very nice person but, as I saw her work in various contexts, I realized that she was basically in way over her head. The details are not important, except to note the following: as I was explaining the reasons for having to fire her, she had this astonished look in her eyes, as if, all through her schooling and prior work experiences, no one had ever been straight with her about her shortcomings. In essence, she truly didn't have what it took ever to be good in this field (I did not put it to her that bluntly, of course). As I talked with her and tried to encourage her in any way I could about her future, I was literally grieved to realize that this young lady had essentially been coddled all the way through the school system in a way that left her to hit a cold wall of reality only after having likely wasted all kinds of time and money in pursuing a career for which she was not at all suited. This was one of the saddest encounters I have ever had. Though I was the one who had been short-changed in the relationship, and hurt financially owing to incompetent work, I could not help but feel profoundly sorry for that young lady.

I would say that this editor too is a sadly misplaced person for her chosen field and that this whole episode has essentially exposed that fact in a very public way. There is something quite tragic in all this, even as it is hard to sympathize either with her position taken in this fiasco or with her clumsy (and unwise) attempts to defend the indefensible. Above all, this must have been a severe embarrassment and humiliation for this editor, whether or not deserved, and at a human level I am truly sorry for her.

Re: A Follow-Up to "The Web is Public Domain"

#58
post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Phoning to say "you're an utter asshole", while not a nice thing to do, is still not exactly the same as lynching someone. Tone down the hyperbole a bit, please.

Sure, but thousands of people phoning in to say “you’re an utter asshole” — leading to the site’s closure — isn’t simply “not a nice thing to do,” though. They got what they deserved, but if it ain’t “mob justice,” I don’t know what else to call it. The Internet, en masse, certainly has a pulse and life of it’s own.

Mobs don't always bring justice, but I have trouble feeling bad when they do. I mean, so far this mob has a better record than the legal system does in bringing copyright claims to a reasonable conclusion, so it's not as though there's a bulletproof alternative.

Re: A Follow-Up to "The Web is Public Domain"

#59
post #3

Wow, reading this didn't give me any sympathy for her at all. I'm reminded of the episode of South Park where Cartman feels bad only about getting punished, no actual guilt or remorse for his crime, and fails to understand how the other kids can feel bad in any way other than because of punishment. She steals someone else's work, gets caught and sends an arrogant, rude email with absurd claims (web is public domain)…

I completely lost any possible sympathy for her when she posted this to Facebook, a day or so after the story broke: ------------ Hi Folks! Well, here I am with egg on my face! I did apologise to Monica via email, but aparently it wasnt enough for her. To all of you, thank you for your interest in Cooks Source and Again, to Monica, I am sorry -- my bad! You did find a way to get your "pound of flesh..." we used to ha…

For what it's worth, the person who wrote that was not the real Judith--someone created a fake Facebook account and made several posts like (and including) this one.

Re: A Follow-Up to "The Web is Public Domain"

#60
post #3

Wow, reading this didn't give me any sympathy for her at all. I'm reminded of the episode of South Park where Cartman feels bad only about getting punished, no actual guilt or remorse for his crime, and fails to understand how the other kids can feel bad in any way other than because of punishment. She steals someone else's work, gets caught and sends an arrogant, rude email with absurd claims (web is public domain)…

If that list of plagiarized articles is accurate, she certainly seemed to have it coming, but you'll have to forgive me if I can't feel awesome about the victory of asymmetrical internet mob justice over a small-time regional magazine. God forbid they ever smell blood in the water you're swimming in.

Actually the so-called "mob justice" was a HUGE FAVOR. I'll explain.

How would you feel if your start-up was ripped off? Would you want HN people to rally around you, or would that be "mob justice"?

And what if it turned out the same people were also ripping off, say, Microsoft and Apple and several other large corporations?

If everyone had been so civil and polite, they wouldn't have felt pressured to shut down.

I don't know about you, but I'll take Facebook comments and phone calls over getting served with papers from half a dozen massive legal departments any day.

Lawsuits are expensive even when you're innocent.

If the penalties are draconian for not even distributing but just "making available" mp3s with NO commercial intentions whatsoever, what do you think the penalties are going to look like for massive distribution of hundreds or thousands of discrete willful infringements for profit?

This so-called mob justice is immeasurably nicer than what the actual legal system would have done to them.

Post reply on HN