Cooks Source: gasoline and a match on plagiarism

The Washington Post has an interesting story on the "public domain" aspects of plagiarism. The magazine Cooks Source re-worked material from an article found online, "A Tale of Two Tarts."

The Washington Post noted:

Bad enough. But when the original author, Monica Gaudio, spotted the copy and e-mailed the magazine to ask for an apology and a $130 donation to the Columbia School of Journalism, she did not get a helpful reply. As recounted on her blog, Cooks Source editor Judith Griggs send back a tone-deaf response. It first offered a tepid apology -- "It was 'my bad' indeed" -- and then plunged right off a cliff:

But honestly, Monica, the web is considered "public domain" and you should be happy we just didn't "lift" your whole article and put someone else's name on it! It happens a lot, clearly more than you are aware of, especially on college campuses, and the workplace. If you took offence and are unhappy, I am sorry, but you as a professional should know that the article we used written by you was in very bad need of editing, and is much better now than was originally.

LBE of IPBiz had someone lift an article word-for-word, and place a different author name on top. The funny part was the plagiarist didn't remove LBE's bio at the end of the article. Fark picked up the story. Punchline:


Helpful hint: when plagiarizing an article just go ahead and skip the last paragraph if it is a bio of the real author

see
"This blatant rip-off is unacceptable, even for a blogger."

***For a not-to-funny satire, see

The Cooks Source, plagiarism, and the Great Gatsby