Nov 5, 2010 5:42 PM

Cooks Source Copyright Infringement Becomes an Internet Meme

An internet firestorm is brewing over a small New England magazine accused of publishing recipes and articles lifted from the web without permission. The dust-up began when food blogger Monica Gaudio discovered that Cooks Source had published a 6-year-old online article she wrote about apple pie, titled “A Tale of Two Tarts.” Gaudio e-mailed the magazine’s editor, […]

An internet firestorm is brewing over a small New England magazine accused of publishing recipes and articles lifted from the web without permission.

The dust-up began when food blogger Monica Gaudio discovered that Cooks Source had published a 6-year-old online article she wrote about apple pie, titled "A Tale of Two Tarts." Gaudio e-mailed the magazine's editor, Judith Griggs, to complain, asking Cooks Source to post a public apology on its Facebook page and make a $130 donation to Columbia School of Journalism.

It was Griggs' response that set off the still-raging internet backlash.

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. Now it will work well for your portfolio. For that reason, I have a bit of a difficult time with your requests for monetary gain, albeit for such a fine (and very wealthy!) institution. We put some time into rewrites, you should compensate me! I never charge young writers for advice or rewriting poorly written pieces, and have many who write for me… ALWAYS for free

Gaudio posted Griggs' response to her blog, and the editor's unapologetic and legally flawed comments were soon sweeping the web. The Twitter hash tag "#buthonestlymonica" sprang to life, while Cooks Source's Facebook page accumulated thousands of "fans" overnight posting mocking comments. "Cooks Source taking care of my pets while I was out of town, and when I got back my cat was pregnant, and someone had drunk all of my soy sauce." Another said "Cooks Source text messages during movies. " Another: "Cooks Source did not have sexual relations with that woman."

More ominously for the magazine, critics began using the Cooks Source Facebook page as a organizing forum for a crowdsourced comparison of the publication's archive against other articles and recipes online. The effort turned up more than a few additional apparent infringements, and the now Food Network is reportedly investigating how some of its content wound up in the magazine.
The magazine removed its phone number from its website, and the line is now disconnected. An e-mail to Cooks Source from Wired.com bounced Friday.

Cooks Source's circulation numbers were not immediately known, as the magazine does not report numbers to the Audit Bureau of Circulation or BPA Worldwide, the leading publishing auditors.

Now that Cooks Source is a full-blown American Dog Poop Girl, the magazine and its editor may start getting a little sympathy. At least one Twitter commenter thought the reaction was too heavy. "Hell hath no fury like a food blogger ripped off by a two-bit print mag."

See Also: