3 ms·

I'm going to have to go against the prevailing view and say that you guys are being way too harsh. She messed up. She apologized. Maybe it wan't sincere enough

by latch 16y ago

I'm going to have to go against the prevailing view and say that you guys are being way too harsh. She messed up. She apologized. Maybe it wan't sincere enough for you, fine. But in any case, what she did is less horrible than what has since been done to her. I have no doubt that "harass" is the right word, no doubt that her advertisers are being contacted, her voice mail stuffed, and her mailbox filled. Based on what? How's this different than suing companies for silly shit? Its only different because you're the judge. An armchair judge. This should have been handled privately. Like adults. This is drama..a soap opera...stuff of tabloid. Someone has wronged me and I'll unleash the internet on them. Put your pitchforks away.

DanielStraight 16y ago
Her problem isn't that she messed up. Her problem is that she doesn't understand her own business. If she had a long history of honest publishing and the story was that she had two browser windows open, one with a Creative Commons licensed article and one with an unlicensed article, and simply copied from the wrong window, that would be messing up. Not even knowing that copyright is the default state of a written work is not messing up. It's utter ignorance of a fundamental rule in the business of publishing. You can't make something like that go away. No amount of apology is going to change the fact that you don't have the requisite knowledge to be in the publishing business. The only correct response is to go back to the drawing board and learn your shit before you come back to work.
krschultz 16y ago
Copyright is not "silly shit" to a bunch of programmers (especially when many of them work on open source). Programmers make things that are copyrighted. A story about an individual having their work stolen by another invokes the same response among programmers as a story about a violent robbery would invoke in a storm owner. It gets personal. Right or wrong that explains the emotion behind the mob. (Why this doesn't extend to violating copyright on music, movies, and games is beyond me.)

by latch 16y ago

DanielStraight 16y ago

Her problem isn't that she messed up. Her problem is that she doesn't understand her own business. If she had a long history of honest publishing and the story was that she had two browser windows open, one with a Creative Commons licensed article and one with an unlicensed article, and simply copied from the wrong window, that would be messing up. Not even knowing that copyright is the default state of a written work is not messing up. It's utter ignorance of a fundamental rule in the business of publishing. You can't make something like that go away. No amount of apology is going to change the fact that you don't have the requisite knowledge to be in the publishing business. The only correct response is to go back to the drawing board and learn your shit before you come back to work.

krschultz 16y ago

Copyright is not "silly shit" to a bunch of programmers (especially when many of them work on open source). Programmers make things that are copyrighted. A story about an individual having their work stolen by another invokes the same response among programmers as a story about a violent robbery would invoke in a storm owner. It gets personal. Right or wrong that explains the emotion behind the mob. (Why this doesn't extend to violating copyright on music, movies, and games is beyond me.)