You are either not logged in or not registered with our community. Click here to register.
May 27, 2018, 07:18:30 AM

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Click here if you are having problems.
Default Wide Screen Beige Lilac Rainbow Black & Blue October Send us your theme!

Wiki Blogs Dicebot

Author Topic: Magazine editor steals writer's work, says it's okay because the article was on  (Read 2687 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Callie Del NoireTopic starter

Sorry i had just woke up when I replied to Oniya's post. Pre0-caffeinated posts aren't always so clear. Sorry MT.. didnt' mean to step on your tail. (Metaphorically)

Offline mystictiger

No worries at all.

What's your take on her 'defence'?

I find the witch-hunt that's been directed against her a little hypocritical. I wonder how many of the swarm of facebook people mocking her have torrented anything?

Offline Callie Del NoireTopic starter

I think she forgot the first rule of the internet. Everything is there FOREVER. She put her foot in it, looked down her nose at the author she had stolen from and assumed since she was an EDITOR of a minor nowhere magazine that the author would buy what she was selling and crawl back into a hole like a good little minion.

Clearly she isn't used to being quoted.

Offline Oniya

As at least one person has pointed out, the torrenters generally aren't trying to download Independence Day and claim that they wrote it.

Offline mystictiger

As at least one person has pointed out, the torrenters generally aren't trying to download Independence Day and claim that they wrote it.

She didn't. She gave credit for all the articles she used. All she did was use them without permission.

Still, copyright violation is copyright violation. You don't get gradiations in this regard.

Online Lilias

  • La Que Sabe ~ Shamaniac ~ Melino√ę ~ The Unforgiving
  • Oracle
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Aug 2008
  • Location: Broc√©liande
  • Gender: Female
  • Faith should, hope could, love would.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 2
She didn't. She gave credit for all the articles she used. All she did was use them without permission.

Her stance towards the author who complained, though ('you should be grateful we didn't just take it and put someone else's name on it'), shows that such a thing wouldn't have been beneath her.

Well, it might have been, but with such cavalier attitude, who would believe her? Way to ruin your own reputation...

As someone who systematically reposts other people's articles - with full credit - on a (non-commercial) blog, I've found there's some gradation in the cases of copyright infringement. I've had writers leave me comments thanking me for the extra exposure; in only one case have I been asked to take down an article because the rights belonged to the publisher, not the author (she expressly said that if it were up to her, she'd have been fine with it). The big beef in the case we're looking at here is that the Briggs woman was making money - perhaps not much, but it was still a commercial publication - out of the stuff she yoinked from other people's sites.

Offline mystictiger

What I mean by violation or not is purely in terms of copyright law. You either reproduce something with the permission of the holder of the copyright, or you don't. You either have a legitimate copy of Independence Day on your computer or you don't - it's a binary thing. It is no defence to say "I illegally downloaded this movie, but didn't claim that it was my own work".

Granted, the permission can be given after the fact. And yes, her attitude stinks.

This whole story reminds me of various Harry Potter-themed parties being stomped on by IP lawyers.

Offline Callie Del NoireTopic starter

You know I understand coming down on the Harry Potter sourcebooks (kinda), and I know that Rowling has taken a LOT of folks into court for varying degrees of plagarism (I recall one russian author doing almost a verbatim copy of her books), but the draconian measures of going after stuff like parties, websites and such? That seems a bit harsh.

Of course I wish she'd get the broomstick out of a certain point of her anatomy on the matter of ebooks. I've wanted her books on my kindle and out of respect for authors (given my own meager attempts in writing) I try very very hard NOT to go to the darkside and get torrents of the books that aren't available (looking at you Heinlen estate and Stephen Hunter!)

Offline despickable

  • I'm A Sex Object Whenever I Ask For Sex They Object
  • Knight
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: May 2009
  • Location: Australia
  • Gender: Male
  • This is some personal text. There are many like it, but this one is mine!
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
As one who has a recipe thread on here I do have some concern about pics posted on the thread. It isn't a money making venture tho so it isn't a big issue just a concern. I know that jokes don't have a copywrite as such cos the source of the joke is in dispute, as they germinate from other jokes and have been reworked and reworded so many times it is difficult to retrace their origin. I also impresonated a famous movie franchise movie character and made money from it, I am sure that this could have been a problem had it been seen as an infringement I was  doing the character as a promo as well for my own gain and wonder if I would've got in the deep poo over that . Television reports are plagiarised often, re-voiced BBC reports done with an American or an Australian voice over and often not sourced back to the original. in the world of journalism it is far too common. It appears this woman at least claimed her source, it's still not kosher to steal  and be a smart ass about it with the emails .

Imitation is a form of flattery but still not nice to do.
Some see taking from millionaires like rock stars to download content is fair game, and hard to police. I think our journalist friend however might have tossed her cookies on this one and soiled a reputation, but it wont stop other s doing the same again some other time

Offline SuperHans

Initially, this was a source of rage for me just as anyone else. But assuming the last statement about FB hacking isn't true and Judith Griggs really did write the response letter, it takes you to the fourth or fifth read before realising that this is actually pretty hilarious. She has stuck to her guns, whether they be horrifically plagiaristic guns or not. And she's unleashed internet fury in a way that even the most creative trolls could never concieve doing in their wildest imagination. Horrendous copywrite issues aside, I think it's pretty funny.