Thread: A very interesting article about plagiarism

This is from the Guardian:

Cooks Source: US copyright complaint sparks Twitter and Facebook storm

Web users take up case of blogger whose work was allegedly lifted by magazine – which then told her she should be grateful

A US student blogger has found herself at the centre of a Twitter storm after a magazine allegedly lifted her work – and then told her she should be grateful it had done so.

Monica Gaudio was congratulated by a friend when an article she had written for Gode Cookery website appeared in Cooks Source magazine with her byline. However, she said she had never heard of the magazine, or given it permission to use her work.

Here is the rest of the article: Cooks Source: US copyright complaint sparks Twitter and Facebook storm | Media | guardian.co.uk

There have been a few posts about plagiarism in the last couple of weeks.

This is exactly why, with all due respect to WF, I post nothing anywhere on the Internet, including on my own Web page, that is of potential commercial value. While the Internet is not public domain, it is very very public. What we put here is an open book for the world to read and possibly copy.

The publisher of that magazine does not believe that a college student is going to pursue a case against him in court. Perhaps she should, or perhaps a reputable attorney should offer services pro bono. As for the editing alleged to have been provided by the magazine, the original writer never asked for that and the fact of the editing should in no wise affect any legal action.

^^^ Yes, that's the wisest course to follow with one's own writing, especially if the hope is to sell it. The young lady should have thought twice about putting so much of her good work out there, of course, but it's not her fault that some greedy jerk made the poor decision to steal it from her. I hope at least that the bad publicity shames the plagiarists.

People with the attitude of that magazine editor have no shame. I've known a few in my life and their attitude is that they have the right to do whatever they can get away.

This is out of order but it should be pointed out that it is not plagiarism as credit is given to the original author.

^^ Hah, that's right, they just basically c/p'ed it. Good point. Like I said, I don't think the writer is completely without fault here; if her words were that important to her, she should have known better.

The publisher's reply was really the focus of the article for me.

That is really not an unusual thing for publishers (esp publishers dealing in web content) to do, and the attitude of "When I cop your stuff I'm actually HELPING you" is extremely prevalent.

I liken it to a person who thinks that when he allows his purebred dog to run rampant through the neighborhood, impregnating his neighbors' b1tches, he's actually doing everybody a favor because it "improves the bloodline".

I don't think this is a case of plagiarism but rather breach of copyright as the magazine that published the work did not claim the work was their own, but in fact gave credit the works author if not the fee she was due!

The magazine must give all issues away for free, or pay the author for her work. As R.Craig says, it's a copyrights issue. They profit from her work, and that's stealing.

edit: after reading the original article, these are some pretty shady basterds that need to be shut down.