Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
The Internet The Media Your Rights Online

Cooks Source Magazine Apologizes — Sort Of 290

Posted by timothy
from the helping-budding-writers-everywhere dept.
taco8982 writes "Cooks Source has published a statement in response to the uproar over claiming the web is public domain a couple of weeks ago. While it does contain an apology, I'll leave it to individual readers to determine how apologetic it actually is." It also seems that the publisher has decided to cease publication entirely.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Cooks Source Magazine Apologizes — Sort Of

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 17, 2010 @09:08AM (#34253162)

    He's lucky she bothered to actually notify him...I don't bother talking to people anymore, it's straight to the DMCA take downs and damages claims, idiots like this have made the 'civilized' approach ineffective.

  • by Dragoness Eclectic (244826) on Wednesday November 17, 2010 @10:59AM (#34254326)

    Well, if you follow the blogs of the first-round of commentators, they dug up some local newspaper articles with her name on them. Seems she's in and out of the local small-town politics, holding various town and county positions... and has the same stupid, defensive attitude when she performs badly there, too.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 17, 2010 @11:15AM (#34254504)

    So she apologizes... albeit in a way you don't like... and then folds the publication because she basically agrees with all you... I wonder how many of you same people would be screaming the same way for copyright protection on a story about pirated audio or movies. You're nothing but hypocritical pricks and trolls with nothing better to do than assert your laughable tough guy attitudes on whatever strikes you as an injustice at the moment.

    I agree that taking the article was wrong. I also think they could have both done a better job of working it out.

    But if you think I would want this sniveling little shit that jumps off the diving board when she doesn't get a response in an hour to write for me, or represent my business you're frankly as stupid as you made yourself sound with this post

  • Re:But but (Score:4, Interesting)

    by pthisis (27352) on Wednesday November 17, 2010 @02:22PM (#34257422) Homepage Journal

    Petr Chelický had Zwingli beat by decades. Of course, Wycliffe got there a century earlier than Petr.

    And various other small-p protestant movements go back almost as far as the Catholic Church--Valentinus, Basilides, and others were writing schismatic texts in the 2nd century AD--Valentinus being not just theologically different, but also reformationist in the sense of being opposed to institutional corruption in the Church (e.g. nepotism in the appointment of bishops). A massive schism resulted between the Catholic Church and the early protestant Gnostics. Many reforms in the Church, numerous theological responses*, and even ecumenical councils were responses to early reformers.

    Heck, even the Nicene and Apostle's Creeds used by modern Protestant (and Catholic) churches are themselves repudiations of earlier protestant sects--the whole "We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, the maker of heaven and earth, of things visible and invisible. And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the begotten of God the Father, the Only-begotten..." creed was an attempt to stamp out early Christian sects with different theological interpretations than those endorsed by Rome.

    *e.g. Irenaeus' "Against Heresy" c. 180 AD and "Philosophumena" of Hippolytus (trad. Origen)

"Success covers a multitude of blunders." -- George Bernard Shaw

Working...