Food Magazine Lifts Article, Tells Writer "You Should Be Happy"

How Publishing Really Works:

In 2005 a writer called Monica Gaudio wrote a great article called A Tale Of Two Tarts, which discussed (among other things) apple pie's Americanism (or not) and its evolution from a sugarless mixture of fruit and spices, cooked in a coffin (no, not THAT sort of coffin: read the article!) to its current sweet pastried form.

Roll on five years. Ms Gaudio had pretty much forgotten about her article until a friend of hers congratulated her on her piece about apple pies which she had just read in Cooks Source Magazine (I'm itching to put an apostrophe in there: anyone else?). Cooks' Source (sorry, I couldn't hold out any longer) isn't just a website: it is also a money-making print magazine, which has a whole stable of advertisers which contribute to its finances.

Read the whole story: How Publishing Really Works

Comments

[zingdaddy]

09:04 AM on 11/08/2010

I've come across so many Judith Griggs, who believe all creative content is free for them to use or abuse as they see fit. I spent some time as an expert witness against one editor who would commission works from artists, have her mom copy them exactly, and then reject the artist's work for some error...often without returning the work. The mom's art would then appear in its stead. My favorite were editors who, upon delivery of the work, would decide that it "didn't meet their standards" rage a bit that the deadline was so close they had to use the work anyway, and then announce they would pay less than a quarter of what was promised in the contract due to my "violation". Then, when I refused to accept the new terms, they published the work without any payment at all, claiming later it was a "work for hire" and that not only did they own the work, but I wasn't owed any payment because I'd refused it. Charming, eh? Thank heavens for organizations like California Lawyers for the Arts.

Good luck to Monica and the other people Griggs has stolen from. After a letter such as the one mentioned, it's best not to waste your time; just have your attorney send a letter.

[julie34]

07:10 AM on 11/08/2010

This my friends is the way Judith Griggs roles. Should something come of this and old writers and employees be interviewed they will all say the same thing. What surprises me is the magazine folded in the late 90's and when she brought it back to life she had the same core advertisers. She has a fantastic idea for a business, it satisfies a niche locally, but as before Judith Grigg's personality always gets in the way.

Good luck Monica Gaudio! I hope you pursue this and receive a just reward.

[taddles]

05:22 AM on 11/08/2010

So wait, Ms. Griggs, says she edited the original and chastised the original author, but the edits were to correct spelling from the original recipe dated from the 1400's? Seriously? How can one be that dim and be an editor of a magazine?

[Gronkie]

03:17 PM on 11/07/2010

It sounds like the beginning of the end for Cooks Source. I can't imagine that too many advertisers will continue to support this outfit after this.

[01202009]

02:02 PM on 11/07/2010

Adding insult to insult this editor takes it upon herself to *improve* the work without the author's permission.

[overcat]

11:44 PM on 11/06/2010

OH MY GAWD!!!! A food writer friend tipped me off about this earlier today. I have been having the most hilariously entertaining rainy Saturday afternoon I can recall following this issue. The FB action has just been full on over the top nonstop fun 'n games. She threw herself to the wolves, and the wolves are in a pretty foul, unforgiving mood. Times aren't too great for a lot of freelance creators, and she's put herself out there as the embodiment of every smug, self serving editor that any freelance creator has inevitably dealt with AT LEAST once. She's being pilloried, and she's playing along, making it too easy. The net is vicious....

[Cleo Creech]

09:27 PM on 11/06/2010

As someone who writes web content, this attitude that writers should be grateful for a "portfolio" piece and that overused cliché about "expanding one's brand and digital footprint" has gotten wayyyy out of hand. If writers can't get paid for an online article, just what is it that portfolio is building towards?

There really does need to be some sort of crackdown on copyright abuses and plagiarism, we can't really afford for this sort of attitude to become institutionalized and become business-as-usual.

[overcat]

12:24 AM on 11/07/2010

Yep, and it's not just about writers, but creators in general, and it's been going on forever. Anyone who freelances their creative talent, whether words, images or any role in creating them, has dealt with the "this is a great opportunity" for exposure/portfolio etc. routine. And in some circumstances, that can indeed be the case. I've given talent/steep discounts to nonprofit or barely profitable ventures. But then again, it was always when I decided it was good for me, not when someone who stood to gain something from my work assured me that that was the case. And it was never after the fact.

What'll happen in this case is that the heavy hitters - Martha Stewart, Paula Deen, Disney, etc. - will nail this, and maybe the small fry will ride coattails, or maybe not. It will send a message.

[karlahomolka]

10:52 AM on 11/06/2010

Cooks Source editor, reacts to claims of copyright violation
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YC-tVHLM99w

[overcat]

11:47 PM on 11/06/2010

Yeah, you know you've truly arrived when there is a Hitler parody of your situation on Youtube.

[Hawise]

09:01 AM on 11/06/2010

Just to mention that Monica Gaudio is a well-respected medievalist and long-time member of the SCA. The Society for Creative Anachronisms may be about the Middle Ages but it has members who have been on the internet from the days when you had to write your own code. She had a lot of support to start with and it doesn't hurt that she is on the right side of the law in this case.

[elcerritan]

07:13 PM on 11/05/2010

What cracks me up is that the idiot at Cooks [sic] Source smugly claimed that the flap over Ms. Gaudio's article resulted in them getting more Facebook "Friends," but judging from the comments over there, most of the newcomers "Friended" Cooks [sic] Source so they could post snark. LOL! I'm tempted to do it myself. The initial copyright infringement was bad enough, but the subsequent gall of the woman is beyond belief.

[deweydecimal]

10:25 PM on 11/06/2010

Maybe she's a huge gallophile, eh eh eh?

[BluebirdofUnhappiness]

01:03 PM on 11/05/2010

Hey, what's a little article aggregation among professionals?

[frank day]

12:26 PM on 11/05/2010

Bet they're wishing they'd just paid up.

How many other authors have they 'helped'?

[ipinkgirl]

12:30 PM on 11/05/2010

They've also "helped" Martha Stewart, Food Network and NPR...

[frank day]

12:38 PM on 11/05/2010

class action lawsuit?

[kareemachan]

06:10 PM on 11/06/2010

Paula Deen...

[JScott]

11:56 AM on 11/05/2010

Just like potentially Facebook could own all your content that you put on your facebook account and use it any way they wanted and not compensate you..

Something to think about.

[overcat]

11:51 PM on 11/06/2010

But not really "just like" that at all. Griggs has blatantly lifted original content from copyrighted works and used it for a for profit enterprise. No compensation, no consent, nothing. People voluntarily post on FB. None of the people whose copyright Griggs violated consented to anything to do with what she did.

[spuggy]

08:30 AM on 11/07/2010

By posting on fb you are giving them the licence to use content/images but you are NOT giving them corpyright (it's written in the terms of agreement).

As overcat stated, it's "not like" at all. This author did not sign any agreement or give permission for her work to be used.

[kareemachan]

11:01 AM on 11/05/2010

Just for kicks, I went to CS' website. It seems that Griggs also has another magazine called 'Travel Source'. I think travel writers should start investigating its articles as well...

[kareemachan]

10:58 AM on 11/05/2010

Wow, the hit has really fit the shan over at Cooks Source. Notice that its editor has "apologized" with a statement that rivals Republican "apologies" in its non-apologetic tone and snarkiness.

[flamenco]

07:34 PM on 11/09/2010

Yes! A true non-apology apology. Of course, being plagiarists in the first place, they shift the blame from themselves, and blame those mean, mean Facebook fans for hurting the farmers that the "magazine" is trying to help. She's almost sociopathic in her cluelessness and inability to accept responsibility.