The web is public domain? Thanks for the info, Cooks Source magazine!

Some more clueless morsels from her interview.

Really? I haven’t seen an apology yet where you haven’t been trying to shift blame or make excuses. It’s not your advertisers you’re trying to protect darlin.

Shortcomings? Gray areas? Let me know how that works out when the process servers start knocking at your door. Any of our legal eagles care to weigh in on the “ignorance of the law” defense?

Snerk.

Kkkk…

BWAHAHAHA!!

Quit it! Yer killin me here!

Okay. Now that I’ve stopped laughing enough that I can see to type. While there may be no December issue, I’d recommend at least distributing one final flier. I’m sure the creator/author of Schadenfreude Pie would consent to letting you use his work.

I know the pie was linked earlier, but it was worth repeating.

Well, that interview does pretty much align with what’s on the page. Some people really are that dumb, it seems.

How do people think they can get away with this stuff. You publish a couple zillion copies of someone else’s work, that means you have a couple of zillion people one of whom might know the source of the thing.

For a professional editor, I’m surprised she doesn’t realise that contractions require an apostrophe.

That’s not the least of her errors in that rambling non-apology. It’s also littered with comma splices, misspellings/typos, improper punctuation, etc.

And anyone claiming to be an editor of any stripe who uses the term “copy written” where “copyrighted” should be . . .

What an idiot.

“Copyrighted” also sounds really wrong to me. Can you even use that word as a verb?

I copyrighted her mom last night. Twice.

Sure. Sounds fine to my ears and the dictionary agrees.

In Missouri, your mom copyrights you!

It’s correct grammatically, but people who know anything about copyright law use it sparingly because it carries misleading implications.

Wow. Pretty much screams “I’m batshit insane, and a terrible mom!”

What’s H.A.R.R.P., and their signal that might make folks “confused, crazy, stupid, or otherwise…” all about?

Poor Curtis.

I think they mean “HAARP”.

Oh, that makes sense then. Thanks!

http://www.gazettenet.com/2010/11/16/cooks-source-calls-it-quits

The “Daily Hampshire Gazette” offers another piece of fine journalism which makes La Griggs out to be the victim. The gist is that Cooks Source is now defunct. RIP, plagiarized recipes.

I hate this shit: They claim this whole mess “has fueled a furious debate about intellectual property rights.” What debate? Where is this debate? Nobody has taken Cooks Source’s side in this crap, unless you think the maundering nonsense Griggs occasionally shits out qualifies as debating.

Seriously. We could have a debate over whether it was justifiable to execute the high-ranking Nazi war criminals and it would have more genuine disagreement than any of the commentary I’ve seen regarding Cooks Source.

This kind of lazy ‘balance’ that creates controversy by pretending marginal idiots matter is one of the big reasons I don’t trust traditional news media anymore.

There was no mention of actions by NPR, Disney et al to enforce their intellectual property rights either. I suspect that their actions had more to do with the demise of Cooks Source than anything else.

I’m guessing it “sounds wrong” because you’re thinking of it as copywrited and not copyrighted.

No, it’s just that I don’t think of the word as a verb. It just sounds better to me as a noun (as in “protected by copyright”).

Ah, gotcha–it’s not the form of the verb so much as the fact of the verbing.