Okay -- I thought I was done.
Nov. 16th, 2010 @ 09:01 am
Johnny pointed out to me today the newest update from Cooks Source and from what I've read, I am portrayed as a big meanie. I should, really...like 100x really... just ignore it and move on with my life as arguing with people over the internet -- lame -- and yet I can not seem to help myself.
For the record, I will happily post all the email exchanges between myself and Ms. Griggs if Ms. Griggs gives me permission.
I contacted Cooks Source five times: by voicemail October 28th, by email October 28th, by email again October 28th, by email November 2nd and by voicemail November 2nd. I believe that was giving Ms. Griggs a chance.
Not once did Cooks Source offer to pay me in any of those email exchanges -- or donate to CSJ. The apology Cooks Source gave me in an email was "If you want an apology, So Sorry, Monica!" -- I took that as sarcasm. As for my emails being rude -- I was demanding that "this" be fixed. I had one line of my own email that was borderline - "I am somewhat confused that I have to explain copyright to a magazine editor."
I do not think of myself as a big meanie in all of this -- I think of myself as a woman as mad as hell for having her work stolen and then being talked down to like I was a child. As I said, again, it was the principle of the thing -- my work was republished without my permission, my copyright was violated and I stuck up for myself.
Pay the writer.
Be nice to people.
AND on this, I hope, really really really, -- I'm out.
I just went to the Cooks Source site, and as I read it, I started hearing Linda Rondstadt's voice in my head. She was singing "Poor Poor Pitiful Me."
|Date:||November 16th, 2010 09:20 pm (UTC)|| |
As someone who has tried and struggled to make a living as a freelance writer, what really gets me steamed about her response is how she defends her publication by saying that "all" of her writers work for free and that she "gives" them pieces for their portfolio. It is "editors" like this who make profits off of other peoples free writing that drive down fees for writers who struggle to make ends meet. We have to take assignments that pay pennies per word because there is always someone out there who is willing to write for free and thinks it's worth it. Not only is Griggs unaware of basic editorial issues her entire business practice is disrespectful to people who make a living off of writing.
*hugs* At this point, you might want to consider a lawyer. Otherwise, you will have to just walk away and ask people to stop updating you on it. You are worth so much more than this kind of abuse, it makes me so mad.
Honesty Monica, I see you putting together an excellent class on how Copyright, Attribution of source material, and Fair Use play into SCA documentation. As much as this whole business sucks, I can say that it is something I have been able to discuss at length with my kids, and it now informs the way they think about communicate information to other people.
That is a most excellent idea. :)
Okay, but you left out that you were RUDE AND MEAN to her for stealing your stuff! OBVIOUSLY she had to be completely horrible back!
|Date:||November 17th, 2010 12:22 am (UTC)|| |
My thoughts on the matter are here
|Date:||November 17th, 2010 12:45 am (UTC)|| |
|Date:||November 17th, 2010 12:54 am (UTC)|| |
...there is not a single person on the planet (apart from Ms. Griggs herself) who thinks you did anything wrong at all, and that won't change no matter how many weird, misspelled, deluded posts she makes. Monica, you rock. Go have a beautiful, fulfilling, happy life! :)
|Date:||November 17th, 2010 01:15 am (UTC)|| |
I don't think I have said much here other than friending you to see how the case expands and bellows.
Miss Griggs here has, again, written and shown the world how shallow and insipid she really is. As the net has ended up churning out, she has not only breached copyright in your case, but in many many cases as well. The way she has depicted it, it was as if it was only once, and in your case, that she was just tired and did a google on something to put up on in her little small town magazine.
you were right to feel indignant enough to ask for compensation. As far as I am concerned, you probably also did not expect this whole thing to blow up so much over the internet. I myself have posted indignant post that didn't go very far beyond my scope of friends, even though they were public posts.
how it turned out was, really, her choice of words in her email to you.
Don't let it get to you, her house of cards have fallen and that has caused her to constantly lashed out in lies and the need to find sympathy and strength from others. you are mighty.
|Date:||November 17th, 2010 01:19 am (UTC)|| |
This woman is unbelievable
What a persecution complex she must have. I hope the whole fiasco is driving her crazy - she deserves it.
|Date:||November 17th, 2010 01:23 am (UTC)|| |
Yeah, let it go
This is going to be one of those "do as I say, not as I do" comments. I think it's probably best to ignore her. (However, if it were me, I'd "leak" the email exchange to a media outlet, just because Judith really ticks me off.)
No one I've spoken with thought of you as a meanie for one second. Quite the contrary. We were all so appalled at yet another mindless, blathering, poorly-punctuated statement attacking you that we simply stared in shock. And then felt disgusted with JG all over again.
If we're lucky, she'll take down her site in a week like she promised and disappear into the ether of lost memes. If not, the Internet still has your back :)
Re: Yeah, let it go
|Date:||November 17th, 2010 01:23 am (UTC)|| |
The way I look at it
Even if you were terse with them you were quite within your rights.
If I came home to discover burglars cleaning out my house, I suppose the things I said could be considered "rude", but the burglars, like Griggs have no right to the moral high ground.
Your attempts to contact them and get it sorted out via emails seems the "polite" thing to do, when really she could have expected the lawyers knocking at her door.
I don't care how tired and cranky she was - she was the thief, she was in the wrong - she doesn't have a leg to stand on in the holier than thou stakes.
|Date:||November 17th, 2010 01:51 am (UTC)|| |
I find her "this woman--Monica" wording to be eerily similar to Bill Clinton's famous "I did not have sex with that woman--Miss Lewinsky."
|Date:||November 17th, 2010 01:53 am (UTC)|| |
There weren't any macadamias in that pie recipe they stole were there?
|Date:||November 17th, 2010 02:06 am (UTC)|| |
Wow. Just when you think she's stopped digging... sheesh.
Though Staffan would argue that he has more right than I to offer this, I would happy to stand as your second if you just want to challenge this woman to a duel.
Desks at 20 paces, with a 9th grade grammar exam?
Oh yes. Oh YES. I would pay BIG MONEY to see that!