Comments | illadore: Okay -- I thought I was done.

illadore

Okay -- I thought I was done.

Nov 16, 2010 09:01

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 ( Read more... )

Leave a comment

Back to all threads

ext_311719 November 16 2010, 19:10:49 UTC

To: Monica Gaudio
From: The Internets
RE: Judith Griggs

Monica, please don't feel that you owe any further explanation. Many of us have seen the spreadsheet (created by a wonderful group of people on Facebook) that details all the stories Ms. Griggs has borrowed from other sources. When Paula Deen and the Food Network are discussing matters with lawyers, Judith's "Oh it was only once and I was tired!" crap falls flat.

We know she's full of it. She knows she's full of it. She's casting you as the bad guy to try and save face. It's not going to work, and I (and many others) will enjoy hearing about the lawsuits presented against her in the future.

Best,
Ysabiau

illadore November 16 2010, 20:03:27 UTC

*grin*

Thank you. ;)

Paula Deen, Food Network, etc. ext_322495 November 16 2010, 20:30:28 UTC

I keep hearing people say things like the above ("When Paula Deen and the Food Network are discussing matters with lawyers..."), and I have to admit I'm not convinced that Judith is facing a flood of lawsuits. For one thing, I doubt she has very deep pockets, and it looks like Cooks Source is going down the tubes.

I could see them all issuing cease-and-desists and demanding that the offending issues be pulled from circulation, along with any copyright-infringing articles on the Cooks Source web site (assuming it doesn't just disappear completely), but I don't see them suing her into oblivion.

Or am I missing something? Monica, do you have any insight?

Re: Paula Deen, Food Network, etc. thespian November 16 2010, 20:45:31 UTC

a lot of them will just let it drop, but The Mouse likes to make and example of people. Even if the suit is a dead loss on costs, they consider it very much worth their while to kick people until they stay down.

Re: Paula Deen, Food Network, etc. willowisp November 16 2010, 22:05:44 UTC

From what I understand, and IANAL, if a company lets something like that slide, they are considered to have let the copyright and/or trademark slip. Classic cases include Xerox, Kleenex, and Fax, among others. Based on that, it is feasible that they would make a big deal out of it, simply to make a show of protecting their property.

Re: Paula Deen, Food Network, etc. ext_322495 November 17 2010, 00:20:35 UTC

Sounds like you're referring to trademarks, not copyrights. As far as I know, you don't have to defend copyrights to keep them from slipping into the public domain. Yes, if you let everyone infringe on your copyright, I suppose an argument could be made that you're letting your work slide into the public domain. I'm sure an attorney could put together a persuasive argument to that effect ( ... )

Back to all threads