I shall contact The Harvard Common Press of Boston, publishers of Robin
Robinson's Vegetarian Chili Cookbook, to notify them of eight violation of
Robinson's copyright.

Copyright laws protect writers' economic interests in their works. Violating
these laws is not a minor offense. Statuatory and other damages can add up very
quickly.

http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/ch5.html

"usual suspect" > wrote in message
...
> I shall contact The Harvard Common Press of Boston, publishers of Robin
> Robinson's Vegetarian Chili Cookbook, to notify them of eight violation of
> Robinson's copyright.
>
> Copyright laws protect writers' economic interests in their works.
Violating
> these laws is not a minor offense. Statuatory and other damages can add up
very
> quickly.
>
> http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/ch5.html

Don't be a Nark.

-Rubystars

Rubystars wrote:
>>I shall contact The Harvard Common Press of Boston, publishers of Robin
>>Robinson's Vegetarian Chili Cookbook, to notify them of eight violation of
>>Robinson's copyright.
>>
>>Copyright laws protect writers' economic interests in their works.
>
> Violating
>
>>these laws is not a minor offense. Statuatory and other damages can add up
>
> very
>
>>quickly.
>>
>>http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/ch5.html
>
>
> Don't be a Nark.

It's not a matter of being a narc (short for narcotics, a reference to an
officer who works to capture those accused of peddling narcotics) in any form.
Copyright infringement is theft -- and you only take issue because the theft is
more abstract than if Jon Lindsay were, for example, "loaning" other persons'
cars without the permission of those car owners. I would similarly notify a
neighbor or appropriate authorities if I witnessed a theft occurring right
before me; I suspect you would, too. This issue is no different.

Rubystars wrote:
<...>
> Don't be a Nark.

Addendum to what I said above. I just read the Harvard Commons website. Jon
Lindsay posted eight recipes from a book which contains eighty recipes. The
book's page on the HC website has five recipes on it. If Ms Robertson did not
authorize Lindsay to publish her recipes online, he has impacted on 10% of her
book's value to readers of newsgroup and the numerous websites which mirror it,
archive it, or re-publish recipes under the name of the poster rather than the
actual author and copyright holder; even the posting of one recipe without the
copyright owner's permission is a violation of national and international law. I
showed you an example of how Lindsay's infringements go far beyond the realm of
this newsgroup about a month ago. ____ refers to Jon Lindsay.

Authors are entitled to protections under the law, including civil
protections which allow them to sue the pants off those who appropriate
their materials without permission or compensation, or who end up taking
credit for the recipes themselves. In ___'s case, search on his
pseudonym and find out how many recipes have been attributed to him
*personally* even though he noted in posts they came from undocumented
cookbooks.

Here's an example. ___ gets credited for posting it, but it's from
'Japanese Cooking: Contemporary & Traditional' by Miyoko Nishimoto
Schinner:

http://www.vegan-food.net/index.cgi?664
___'s original post: http://snipurl.com/6av6

BTW, I've found a lot of my own recipes posted on various websites. I
was never asked if that was okay, except a couple times by Nikitta (and
those were to be posted in Danish). I accept that anything I post to
usenet isn't subject to copyright laws, and that I shouldn't post it to
usenet if I want to protect something by copyrighting it.
http://www.vegan-food.net/index.cgi?965

In that same post, I pointed out:

It's one thing to share a (one) recipe with someone. It's another to go
through someone's copyrighted cookbook and post half the freaking
recipes online without permission or at the very least giving copyright
notices. The point you make about profit ignores the reason for
copyrights: to protect the economic rights of those who devised or
printed the recipes in the first place. Each time ___ posted recipes, he
was decreasing the economic value of those recipes to the authors of the
books from which he was lifting them.

Lindsay has diminshed the value of Ms Robertson's efforts by 10%. Ms Robertson
has every right to know that this has been done and to determine what efforts,
if any, she will take to protect her interests now and in the future. I intend
to go through the last five years (statute of limitations) of Lindsay's posts to
help other authors protect their interests against this serial violator of
copyrights.

"usual suspect" > wrote in message
<snip>
> Lindsay has diminshed the value of Ms Robertson's efforts by 10%. Ms
Robertson
> has every right to know that this has been done and to determine what
efforts,
> if any, she will take to protect her interests now and in the future. I
intend
> to go through the last five years (statute of limitations) of Lindsay's
posts to
> help other authors protect their interests against this serial violator of
> copyrights.

You must have more free time than I do, and I'm not working right now.

-Rubystars

"usual suspect" > wrote in message
...

> > Don't be a Nark.
>
> It's not a matter of being a narc (short for narcotics, a reference to an
> officer who works to capture those accused of peddling narcotics) in any
form.

Off topic I know - but nark is a word. A nark is a person who complains and
spoils other people's enjoyment. Narky means easily annoyed, grumpy - a
person can be described as being narky. It's UK slang.

>
> "usual suspect" > wrote in message
> ...
> > I shall contact The Harvard Common Press of Boston, publishers of Robin
> > Robinson's Vegetarian Chili Cookbook, to notify them of eight violation
of
> > Robinson's copyright.
> >
> > Copyright laws protect writers' economic interests in their works.
> Violating
> > these laws is not a minor offense. Statuatory and other damages can add
up
> very
> > quickly.
> >
> > http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/ch5.html
>
>
While you're at it you better tell them that a suburban housewife in the
mid-west bought the book because Mr. Falafel sampled it in afv. If fact I
buy just about every book Mr. Falafel samples.
Now that Falafel is back, this group can get back on the topic of food.

I have to go to amazon.com now and buy a new book. Bye.
-nancy-

they can find it out themselves without the suspect alarm clock and sue if
it is important to those Boston/Harvard republican types
Let it be
Mr F. is a good guy...
Michael
"usual suspect" > wrote in message
...
> I shall contact The Harvard Common Press of Boston, publishers of Robin
> Robinson's Vegetarian Chili Cookbook, to notify them of eight violation of
> Robinson's copyright.
>
> Copyright laws protect writers' economic interests in their works.
Violating
> these laws is not a minor offense. Statuatory and other damages can add up
very
> quickly.
>
> http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/ch5.html
>

Rubystars wrote:
>>Lindsay has diminshed the value of Ms Robertson's efforts by 10%. Ms
> Robertson
>>has every right to know that this has been done and to determine what
> efforts,
>>if any, she will take to protect her interests now and in the future. I
> intend
>>to go through the last five years (statute of limitations) of Lindsay's
> posts to
>>help other authors protect their interests against this serial violator of
>>copyrights.
>
> You must have more free time than I do,

I don't, but it won't take much time to send a quick note to each publisher.

> and I'm not working right now.

Are you looking?

Fiona wrote:
>>>Don't be a Nark.
>>
>>It's not a matter of being a narc (short for narcotics, a reference to an
>>officer who works to capture those accused of peddling narcotics) in any
> form.
>
> Off topic I know - but nark is a word. A nark is a person who complains and
> spoils other people's enjoyment. Narky means easily annoyed, grumpy - a
> person can be described as being narky. It's UK slang.

So what. Rubystars is Texan, not British.

Momzilla wrote:
>>>I shall contact The Harvard Common Press of Boston, publishers of Robin
>>>Robinson's Vegetarian Chili Cookbook, to notify them of eight violation
> of
>>>Robinson's copyright.
>>>
>>>Copyright laws protect writers' economic interests in their works.
>>Violating
>>>these laws is not a minor offense. Statuatory and other damages can add
> up
>>very
>>>quickly.
>>>
>>>http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/ch5.html
>>
> While you're at it you better tell them that a suburban housewife in the
> mid-west bought the book because Mr. Falafel sampled it in afv.

Sure you did. You can send a copy of your receipts to Harvard Commons and tell
them yourself.

> If fact I buy just about every book Mr. Falafel samples.

I bet you buy them all; now it's time to discuss the sale of a bridge. Even if
you were to buy one book, it doesn't diminish his repeated infringement of
copyrights.

> Now that Falafel is back, this group can get back on the topic of food.

This group dealt with the issue of food is Lindsay's absence.

> I have to go to amazon.com now and buy a new book. Bye.

Suuuuuuuuure you do.

Michael Balarama wrote:
> they can find it out themselves

Through telepathy?

> without the suspect alarm clock and sue if
> it is important to those Boston/Harvard republican types

My guess that Robin Robertson is not a Republican-type since she writes vegan
cookbooks. I just looked at her website (and now have an e-mail address to
contact her directly) and she has links to all kinds of AR groups including FARM
and PeTA. I also doubt her publisher leans to the right in the aggregate.

> Let it be

No. I would tell you if I saw someone drive off in your car without permission.
This is the same thing.

> Mr F. is a good guy...

He's a serial copyright violator. Copyright holders need to know that he's
diminishing the value of their rights and choose what to do, if anything.

if he gives the author credit-there is no legal liability-
I think the whole thing is hogwash-and putting recipes on the net-big
deal-if Harvard chumps need the dough-tough luck-they should and probably
are honored that all 50 maybe people that read this group can get the
recipe--
I am a guy-I would never very buy a cook book-might find a recipe in the
newspaper or mag..
Leave Mr F alone-he is an avid vegan who is spreading the message-we are a
small family-we need to stick together...forget your differences...big
deal--I am not going to go-but tomarrow Clemens and Prior is tempting...
I live 20 minutes from the stadium..(I have to work)
Michael
"usual suspect" > wrote in message
...
> Michael Balarama wrote:
> > they can find it out themselves
>
> Through telepathy?
>
> > without the suspect alarm clock and sue if
> > it is important to those Boston/Harvard republican types
>
> My guess that Robin Robertson is not a Republican-type since she writes
vegan
> cookbooks. I just looked at her website (and now have an e-mail address to
> contact her directly) and she has links to all kinds of AR groups
including FARM
> and PeTA. I also doubt her publisher leans to the right in the aggregate.
>
> > Let it be
>
> No. I would tell you if I saw someone drive off in your car without
permission.
> This is the same thing.
>
> > Mr F. is a good guy...
>
> He's a serial copyright violator. Copyright holders need to know that he's
> diminishing the value of their rights and choose what to do, if anything.
>

Michael Balarama wrote:
> if he gives the author credit-there is no legal liability-

Yes, there is. Re-read Ms Robertson's copyright.

> I think the whole thing is hogwash-

Is that your trained legal opinion? lol

> and putting recipes on the net-big deal-

It's not about putting recipes on the net. I do that. MY OWN. Ms Robertson
published a book. She copyrighted its contents. It is her intellectual property.
She is entitled to copyright protections, and when her rights are violated she
is entitled to recompense under the law.

> if Harvard chumps need the dough-tough luck-

It isn't about needing dough. It's about legally protected intellectual property
rights.

> they should and probably are honored

As honored as musicians are when you steal their work without proper compensation?

> that all 50 maybe people that read this group can get the
> recipe--

As I showed Rubystars before, it's not limited to these groups. Other websites
mirror the posts in this group, and Google and other sites archive them.
Additionally, one website collects recipes and gives credit to the poster rather
than the actual author. Here's an example:
Lindsay gets credited for posting it, but it's from
'Japanese Cooking: Contemporary & Traditional' by Miyoko Nishimoto
Schinner:
http://www.vegan-food.net/index.cgi?664
Lindsay's original post: http://snipurl.com/6av6

> I am a guy-

What does that have to do with this issue?

> I would never very buy a cook book-

Other guys do. C James Strutz buys them.

> might find a recipe in the newspaper or mag..

And the author of such a recipe may grant permission to a newspaper or magazine
to reprint a recipe. That's done in compliance with copyright laws, not in
violation of them.

> Leave Mr F alone-

I'm going to let authors know of copyright infringements.

> he is an avid vegan

So are Robin Robertson and many of the other authors whose copyrights he
repeatedly violates.

> who is spreading the message-

What message -- that vegans are above the law?

> we are a small family-

All the more reason for him not to violate the copyright laws of others, vegan
or not.

> we need to stick together...

No, we need to respect the law and the rights of others.

> forget your differences...

It's not about differences. It's about right and wrong. What he does in posting
copyrighted material without permission is wrong.

> big deal--

I think you'd think it was a big deal if he were stealing your work of that of
one of your clients. Perhaps you should refresh your memory on copyright law,
counselor, before encouraging someone to violate them.

> I am not going to go-but tomarrow Clemens and Prior is tempting...
> I live 20 minutes from the stadium..(I have to work)

I live about three hours (give or take with traffic) from the stadium and I have
to work, too. As usual, it's on tv so I can watch from the comfort of my living
room just as I am now (hope Dotel can hold this one).

> Michael
> "usual suspect" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>Michael Balarama wrote:
>>
>>>they can find it out themselves
>>
>>Through telepathy?
>>
>>
>>>without the suspect alarm clock and sue if
>>>it is important to those Boston/Harvard republican types
>>
>>My guess that Robin Robertson is not a Republican-type since she writes
>
> vegan
>
>>cookbooks. I just looked at her website (and now have an e-mail address to
>>contact her directly) and she has links to all kinds of AR groups
>
> including FARM
>
>>and PeTA. I also doubt her publisher leans to the right in the aggregate.
>>
>>
>>>Let it be
>>
>>No. I would tell you if I saw someone drive off in your car without
>
> permission.
>
>>This is the same thing.
>>
>>
>>>Mr F. is a good guy...
>>
>>He's a serial copyright violator. Copyright holders need to know that he's
>>diminishing the value of their rights and choose what to do, if anything.
>>
>
>
>

"Michael Balarama" > wrote in message
...
> if he gives the author credit-there is no legal liability-
=================
Really? Even when he has not given credit to the proper person?

You're not really a lawyer, are you?


> I think the whole thing is hogwash-and putting recipes on the net-big
> deal-if Harvard chumps need the dough-tough luck-they should and probably
> are honored that all 50 maybe people that read this group can get the
> recipe--
> I am a guy-I would never very buy a cook book-might find a recipe in the
> newspaper or mag..
> Leave Mr F alone-he is an avid vegan who is spreading the message-we are a
> small family-we need to stick together..
================
Regardless of the felony commited? We've seen that before when protecting
arsonists, bombers, and other assorted AR terrorists.
Thanks for proving yet again that "the" religion is all that matters, and
laws mean nothing.


..forget your differences...big
> deal--I am not going to go-but tomarrow Clemens and Prior is tempting...
> I live 20 minutes from the stadium..(I have to work)
> Michael
> "usual suspect" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Michael Balarama wrote:
> > > they can find it out themselves
> >
> > Through telepathy?
> >
> > > without the suspect alarm clock and sue if
> > > it is important to those Boston/Harvard republican types
> >
> > My guess that Robin Robertson is not a Republican-type since she writes
> vegan
> > cookbooks. I just looked at her website (and now have an e-mail address
to
> > contact her directly) and she has links to all kinds of AR groups
> including FARM
> > and PeTA. I also doubt her publisher leans to the right in the
aggregate.
> >
> > > Let it be
> >
> > No. I would tell you if I saw someone drive off in your car without
> permission.
> > This is the same thing.
> >
> > > Mr F. is a good guy...
> >
> > He's a serial copyright violator. Copyright holders need to know that
he's
> > diminishing the value of their rights and choose what to do, if
anything.
> >
>
>

"usual suspect" > wrote in message
...
> Fiona wrote:
> >>>Don't be a Nark.
> >>
> >>It's not a matter of being a narc (short for narcotics, a reference to
an
> >>officer who works to capture those accused of peddling narcotics) in any
> > form.
> >
> > Off topic I know - but nark is a word. A nark is a person who complains
and
> > spoils other people's enjoyment. Narky means easily annoyed, grumpy - a
> > person can be described as being narky. It's UK slang.
>
> So what. Rubystars is Texan, not British.

I meant nark in the sense of being a tattle tale, but it's interesting to
know the word has other meanings.

-Rubystars

"usual suspect" > wrote in message
...
> Rubystars wrote:
> >>Lindsay has diminshed the value of Ms Robertson's efforts by 10%. Ms
> > Robertson
> >>has every right to know that this has been done and to determine what
> > efforts,
> >>if any, she will take to protect her interests now and in the future. I
> > intend
> >>to go through the last five years (statute of limitations) of Lindsay's
> > posts to
> >>help other authors protect their interests against this serial violator
of
> >>copyrights.
> >
> > You must have more free time than I do,
>
> I don't, but it won't take much time to send a quick note to each
publisher.
>
> > and I'm not working right now.
>
> Are you looking?

Yes.

-Rubystars

"Momzilla" > wrote in message >...
> >
> > "usual suspect" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > I shall contact The Harvard Common Press of Boston, publishers of Robin
> > > Robinson's Vegetarian Chili Cookbook, to notify them of eight violation
> of
> > > Robinson's copyright.
> > >
> > > Copyright laws protect writers' economic interests in their works.
> Violating
> > > these laws is not a minor offense. Statuatory and other damages can add
> up
> very
> > > quickly.
> > >
> > > http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/ch5.html
> >
> >
> While you're at it you better tell them that a suburban housewife in the
> mid-west bought the book because Mr. Falafel sampled it in afv. If fact I
> buy just about every book Mr. Falafel samples.
> Now that Falafel is back, this group can get back on the topic of food.
>
> I have to go to amazon.com now and buy a new book. Bye.
> -nancy-


Exactly my point. I certainly won't be charging the authors of these
fine cookbooks for the free advertising that I'm giving them.

Or, how about if I just change one small item of the recipe and then
call it my own without crediting the author? That's perfectly legal
but wouldn't be very ethical, would it?

MrFalafel = free targeted advertising for veggie cookbooks.
Publishers! Send your submissions / suggestions to me at

Rubystars wrote:
<...>
> I meant nark in the sense of being a tattle tale,

It's not being a tattletale. It's reporting an offense which has both civil and
criminal implications.

<...>

MrFalafel wrote:

<...>
>>While you're at it you better tell them that a suburban housewife in the
>>mid-west bought the book because Mr. Falafel sampled it in afv. If fact I
>>buy just about every book Mr. Falafel samples.
>>Now that Falafel is back, this group can get back on the topic of food.
>>
>>I have to go to amazon.com now and buy a new book. Bye.
>> -nancy-
>
> Exactly my point.

It isn't your point to make. It's the copyright holder's.

> I certainly won't be charging the authors of these
> fine cookbooks for the free advertising that I'm giving them.

You're not advertising. You're flagrantly infringing upon their copyrights.

> Or, how about if I just change one small item of the recipe and then
> call it my own without crediting the author? That's perfectly legal

No, it is not.

> but wouldn't be very ethical, would it?

Neither is what you're doing now, Mr Lindsay.

> MrFalafel = free targeted advertising for veggie cookbooks.

More like, Jon Lindsay = serial copyright violator.

> Publishers! Send your submissions / suggestions to me at
>

I suspect you'll be contacted very soon, quite likely by attorneys representing
the authors and publishers whose copyrights you've infringed.

I drive a few miles over the speed limit-In this recipe fiasco-no one is
really hurt-It is not like OJ getting off with murder-Law is a law-Do as you
wish-I am no longer practicing law..too dirty for me..
"rick etter" > wrote in message
nk.net...
>
> "Michael Balarama" > wrote in message
> ...
> > if he gives the author credit-there is no legal liability-
> =================
> Really? Even when he has not given credit to the proper person?
>
> You're not really a lawyer, are you?
>
>
> > I think the whole thing is hogwash-and putting recipes on the net-big
> > deal-if Harvard chumps need the dough-tough luck-they should and
probably
> > are honored that all 50 maybe people that read this group can get the
> > recipe--
> > I am a guy-I would never very buy a cook book-might find a recipe in the
> > newspaper or mag..
> > Leave Mr F alone-he is an avid vegan who is spreading the message-we are
a
> > small family-we need to stick together..
> ================
> Regardless of the felony commited? We've seen that before when protecting
> arsonists, bombers, and other assorted AR terrorists.
> Thanks for proving yet again that "the" religion is all that matters, and
> laws mean nothing.
>
>
> .forget your differences...big
> > deal--I am not going to go-but tomarrow Clemens and Prior is tempting...
> > I live 20 minutes from the stadium..(I have to work)
> > Michael
> > "usual suspect" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > Michael Balarama wrote:
> > > > they can find it out themselves
> > >
> > > Through telepathy?
> > >
> > > > without the suspect alarm clock and sue if
> > > > it is important to those Boston/Harvard republican types
> > >
> > > My guess that Robin Robertson is not a Republican-type since she
writes
> > vegan
> > > cookbooks. I just looked at her website (and now have an e-mail
address
> to
> > > contact her directly) and she has links to all kinds of AR groups
> > including FARM
> > > and PeTA. I also doubt her publisher leans to the right in the
> aggregate.
> > >
> > > > Let it be
> > >
> > > No. I would tell you if I saw someone drive off in your car without
> > permission.
> > > This is the same thing.
> > >
> > > > Mr F. is a good guy...
> > >
> > > He's a serial copyright violator. Copyright holders need to know that
> he's
> > > diminishing the value of their rights and choose what to do, if
> anything.
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

"usual suspect" > wrote in message
...

> > I would never very buy a cook book-
>
> Other guys do. C James Strutz buys them.

Haven't bought one for awhile but I do have a nice collection of them.

> And the author of such a recipe may grant permission to a newspaper
or magazine
> to reprint a recipe. That's done in compliance with copyright laws,
not in
> violation of them.

Have you ever reproduced in any way (photocopy, etc.) anything with a
copyright notice and without the author's written permission? Have you
ever recorded music that was copyrighted? Have you ever scanned
somebody else's photographs or artwork? Have you ever copied or used
copyrighted software without permission? If 'yes' to any of my
questions, then what moral ground do you have for the litany of
charges against Mr. Falafel? Somehow, it seems more personal with you
than you simply imposing yourself as the a.f.v police. Have you
published copyrighted material? Please explain.

C. James Strutz wrote:
>>>I would never very buy a cook book-
>>
>>Other guys do. C James Strutz buys them.
>
> Haven't bought one for awhile but I do have a nice collection of them.

Yes, you've told us already.

>>And the author of such a recipe may grant permission to a newspaper
> or magazine
>>to reprint a recipe. That's done in compliance with copyright laws,
> not in
>>violation of them.
>
> Have you ever reproduced in any way (photocopy, etc.) anything with a
> copyright notice and without the author's written permission?

Beyond what's generally considered fair use, no.

> Have you ever recorded music that was copyrighted?

Absolutely not.

> Have you ever scanned
> somebody else's photographs or artwork?

No, I don't even have a scanner.

> Have you ever copied or used
> copyrighted software without permission?

No.

> If 'yes' to any of my
> questions, then what moral ground do you have for the litany of
> charges against Mr. Falafel?

Plenty. Even if I've broken copyright laws myself, two wrongs don't make it
right. Dispense with your tu quoque fallacy. What he does is wrong regardless of
the behavior of others.

> Somehow, it seems more personal with you
> than you simply imposing yourself as the a.f.v police. Have you
> published copyrighted material? Please explain.

I generally don't give out personal information, but I'll admit that I (and my
family) hold copyrights. I also diligently protect them.

"C. James Strutz" > wrote in message >...
> "usual suspect" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> > > I would never very buy a cook book-
> >
> > Other guys do. C James Strutz buys them.
>
> Haven't bought one for awhile but I do have a nice collection of them.
>
> > And the author of such a recipe may grant permission to a newspaper
> or magazine
> > to reprint a recipe. That's done in compliance with copyright laws,
> not in
> > violation of them.
>
> Have you ever reproduced in any way (photocopy, etc.) anything with a
> copyright notice and without the author's written permission? Have you
> ever recorded music that was copyrighted? Have you ever scanned
> somebody else's photographs or artwork? Have you ever copied or used
> copyrighted software without permission? If 'yes' to any of my
> questions, then what moral ground do you have for the litany of
> charges against Mr. Falafel? Somehow, it seems more personal with you
> than you simply imposing yourself as the a.f.v police. Have you
> published copyrighted material? Please explain.

This has nothing to do with copyright laws. This is more about a
certain persons lack of social skills than anything else. I've been
posting recipes on this newsgroup using this and other monikers since
something like 1995. During that time I've seen internet cranks come
and go. This is just another sad person who doesn't have a social life
and therefore has to create percieved hysteria on a newsgroup in a
pathetic attempt at a type of human interaction.

I'm sure the authorities will stop chasing after people trading music
files, pirated movies, snuff films and out and out fraud to kick down
my door and arrest me for advertising cookbooks.

MrFalafel wrote:
<...>
> This has nothing to do with copyright laws.

It's *everything* to do with them.

> This is more about a
> certain persons lack of social skills than anything else.

You mean your own scofflaw attitudes toward the legally protected rights of others.

> I've been posting

OTHER PEOPLE'S COPYRIGHTED

> recipes on this newsgroup using this and other monikers since
> something like 1995.

Too bad the statute of limitations is only five years.

> During that time I've seen internet cranks come
> and go. This is just another sad person who doesn't have a social life

Don't you wish my life was as boring as yours.

> and therefore has to create percieved hysteria on a newsgroup in a
> pathetic attempt at a type of human interaction.

This isn't hysteria, it's about respecting the rights of others -- and you
apparently think you're above such rights and the laws which protect those
rights. If you're really concerned about my level of "human interaction," stop
worrying. I get plenty of it -- including with fellow writers, photographers,
musicians, artists, and other creative types who take exception when uncreative,
self-appointed "advertisers" (I cannot believe you'd call yourself that in the
flagrant commission of a felony!) decide to post the copyrighted works of other
people with neither permission or compensation.

> I'm sure the authorities will stop chasing after people trading music
> files, pirated movies, snuff films and out and out fraud to kick down
> my door and arrest me for advertising cookbooks.

I doubt your door will be kicked down, especially in the UK, but you are liable
for the loss suffered by those whose rights you've repeatedly infringed.

Jon Lindsay, scofflaw, wrote:

> "C. James Strutz" > wrote in message >...
>
>>"usual suspect" > wrote in message
...
>>
>>
>>>>I would never very buy a cook book-
>>>
>>>Other guys do. C James Strutz buys them.
>>
>>Haven't bought one for awhile but I do have a nice collection of them.
>>
>>
>>>And the author of such a recipe may grant permission to a newspaper
>>
>> or magazine
>>
>>>to reprint a recipe. That's done in compliance with copyright laws,
>>
>> not in
>>
>>>violation of them.
>>
>>Have you ever reproduced in any way (photocopy, etc.) anything with a
>>copyright notice and without the author's written permission? Have you
>>ever recorded music that was copyrighted? Have you ever scanned
>>somebody else's photographs or artwork? Have you ever copied or used
>>copyrighted software without permission? If 'yes' to any of my
>>questions, then what moral ground do you have for the litany of
>>charges against Mr. Falafel? Somehow, it seems more personal with you
>>than you simply imposing yourself as the a.f.v police. Have you
>>published copyrighted material? Please explain.
>
>
> This has nothing to do with copyright laws.

It has EVERYTHING to do with it, scofflaw:

In general, you should treat everything on the
Internet as if it were copyrighted. E-mail and
usenet news postings are technically copyrighted by
the persons writing the messages, not the persons
receiving them. The catch phrase "you own your own
words" explains this concisely. Do not assume that
because something is on the Internet is in the
public domain. Much of the information on the
Internet is in flagrant violation of international
copyright law. For example, there are sites that
post song lyrics and ***recipes taken from published
cookbooks***: these are in violation. [emphasis added]
http://www.alamopc.org/pcalamode/misc/net498-3.html

> This is more about a
> certain persons lack of social skills than anything else. I've been
> posting recipes on this newsgroup using this and other monikers since
> something like 1995.

If you were stealing them from copyrighted cookbooks,
which mostly you have been, you were violating
copyright law.

> During that time I've seen internet cranks come
> and go. This is just another sad person who doesn't have a social life
> and therefore has to create percieved hysteria on a newsgroup in a
> pathetic attempt at a type of human interaction.
>
> I'm sure the authorities will stop chasing after people trading music
> files, pirated movies, snuff films and out and out fraud to kick down
> my door and arrest me for advertising cookbooks.

You may, as the typical leftwing sophist that you are,
try to minimize your willful violation of copyright law
as "advertising" the cookbooks. It's worth noting that
the overwhelming majority of the recipes you've posted
over the years are UNATTRIBUTED, so you hardly were
advertising cookbooks with them. You also may wish to
pretend that you violation is small and unimportant.
It's a violation all the same, and your scofflaw's
attitude is disgusting.

Jonathan Ball wrote:

> Jon Lindsay, scofflaw, wrote:
>
>> "C. James Strutz" > wrote in message
>> >...
>>
>>> "usual suspect" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>
>>>
>>>>> I would never very buy a cook book-
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Other guys do. C James Strutz buys them.
>>>
>>>
>>> Haven't bought one for awhile but I do have a nice collection of them.
>>>
>>>
>>>> And the author of such a recipe may grant permission to a newspaper
>>>
>>>
>>> or magazine
>>>
>>>> to reprint a recipe. That's done in compliance with copyright laws,
>>>
>>>
>>> not in
>>>
>>>> violation of them.
>>>
>>>
>>> Have you ever reproduced in any way (photocopy, etc.) anything with a
>>> copyright notice and without the author's written permission? Have you
>>> ever recorded music that was copyrighted? Have you ever scanned
>>> somebody else's photographs or artwork? Have you ever copied or used
>>> copyrighted software without permission? If 'yes' to any of my
>>> questions, then what moral ground do you have for the litany of
>>> charges against Mr. Falafel? Somehow, it seems more personal with you
>>> than you simply imposing yourself as the a.f.v police. Have you
>>> published copyrighted material? Please explain.
>>
>>
>>
>> This has nothing to do with copyright laws.
>
>
> It has EVERYTHING to do with it, scofflaw:
>
> In general, you should treat everything on the
> Internet as if it were copyrighted. E-mail and
> usenet news postings are technically copyrighted by
> the persons writing the messages, not the persons
> receiving them. The catch phrase "you own your own
> words" explains this concisely. Do not assume that
> because something is on the Internet is in the
> public domain. Much of the information on the
> Internet is in flagrant violation of international
> copyright law. For example, there are sites that
> post song lyrics and ***recipes taken from published
> cookbooks***: these are in violation. [emphasis added]
> http://www.alamopc.org/pcalamode/misc/net498-3.html
>
>> This is more about a
>> certain persons lack of social skills than anything else. I've been
>> posting recipes on this newsgroup using this and other monikers since
>> something like 1995.
>
>
> If you were stealing them from copyrighted cookbooks, which mostly you
> have been, you were violating copyright law.
>
>> During that time I've seen internet cranks come
>> and go. This is just another sad person who doesn't have a social life
>> and therefore has to create percieved hysteria on a newsgroup in a
>> pathetic attempt at a type of human interaction.
>>
>> I'm sure the authorities will stop chasing after people trading music
>> files, pirated movies, snuff films and out and out fraud to kick down
>> my door and arrest me for advertising cookbooks.
>
>
> You may, as the typical leftwing sophist that you are, try to minimize
> your willful violation of copyright law as "advertising" the cookbooks.
> It's worth noting that the overwhelming majority of the recipes you've
> posted over the years are UNATTRIBUTED

Here's one, Jon: http://tinyurl.com/3xt6l It's for
something called Thai Veggie Rolls. It's undoubtedly
from a cookbook, but it's UNATTRIBUTED. Just how did
the cookbook's author and publisher benefit from your
copyright violation, Jon?

> so you hardly were advertising
> cookbooks with them. You also may wish to pretend that you violation is
> small and unimportant. It's a violation all the same, and your
> scofflaw's attitude is disgusting.
>

Mr.Falafel wrote:

>This has nothing to do with copyright laws. This is more about a
>certain persons lack of social skills than anything else. I've been
>posting recipes on this newsgroup using this and other monikers since
>something like 1995. During that time I've seen internet cranks come
>and go. This is just another sad person who doesn't have a social life
>and therefore has to create percieved hysteria on a newsgroup in a
>pathetic attempt at a type of human interaction.
>
>I'm sure the authorities will stop chasing after people trading music
>files, pirated movies, snuff films and out and out fraud to kick down
>my door and arrest me for advertising cookbooks.

Zowie... haven't read the group in ages and come back to this....as far as
copyrights and recipes go, you can't copyright the list of ingredients used in
the recipe, only the way in which the directions are written. As long as you
put the directions into your own words you're not violating copyright. I
include the source even when I alter the ingredients out of respect for the
cookbook author and also to let folks know where they can get the original
recipe as well as a book full of other good recipes.

Time to take this newsgroup back from the x-posters and morons....

Cheers,

Fritz

Jonathan Ball wrote:

> Jonathan Ball wrote:
>
>> Jon Lindsay, scofflaw, wrote:
>>
>>> "C. James Strutz" > wrote in message
>>> >...
>>>
>>>> "usual suspect" > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> I would never very buy a cook book-
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Other guys do. C James Strutz buys them.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Haven't bought one for awhile but I do have a nice collection of them.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> And the author of such a recipe may grant permission to a newspaper
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> or magazine
>>>>
>>>>> to reprint a recipe. That's done in compliance with copyright laws,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> not in
>>>>
>>>>> violation of them.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Have you ever reproduced in any way (photocopy, etc.) anything with a
>>>> copyright notice and without the author's written permission? Have you
>>>> ever recorded music that was copyrighted? Have you ever scanned
>>>> somebody else's photographs or artwork? Have you ever copied or used
>>>> copyrighted software without permission? If 'yes' to any of my
>>>> questions, then what moral ground do you have for the litany of
>>>> charges against Mr. Falafel? Somehow, it seems more personal with you
>>>> than you simply imposing yourself as the a.f.v police. Have you
>>>> published copyrighted material? Please explain.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> This has nothing to do with copyright laws.
>>
>>
>>
>> It has EVERYTHING to do with it, scofflaw:
>>
>> In general, you should treat everything on the
>> Internet as if it were copyrighted. E-mail and
>> usenet news postings are technically copyrighted by
>> the persons writing the messages, not the persons
>> receiving them. The catch phrase "you own your own
>> words" explains this concisely. Do not assume that
>> because something is on the Internet is in the
>> public domain. Much of the information on the
>> Internet is in flagrant violation of international
>> copyright law. For example, there are sites that
>> post song lyrics and ***recipes taken from published
>> cookbooks***: these are in violation. [emphasis added]
>> http://www.alamopc.org/pcalamode/misc/net498-3.html
>>
>>> This is more about a
>>> certain persons lack of social skills than anything else. I've been
>>> posting recipes on this newsgroup using this and other monikers since
>>> something like 1995.
>>
>>
>>
>> If you were stealing them from copyrighted cookbooks, which mostly you
>> have been, you were violating copyright law.
>>
>>> During that time I've seen internet cranks come
>>> and go. This is just another sad person who doesn't have a social life
>>> and therefore has to create percieved hysteria on a newsgroup in a
>>> pathetic attempt at a type of human interaction.
>>>
>>> I'm sure the authorities will stop chasing after people trading music
>>> files, pirated movies, snuff films and out and out fraud to kick down
>>> my door and arrest me for advertising cookbooks.
>>
>>
>>
>> You may, as the typical leftwing sophist that you are, try to minimize
>> your willful violation of copyright law as "advertising" the
>> cookbooks. It's worth noting that the overwhelming majority of the
>> recipes you've posted over the years are UNATTRIBUTED
>
>
> Here's one, Jon: http://tinyurl.com/3xt6l It's for something called
> Thai Veggie Rolls. It's undoubtedly from a cookbook, but it's
> UNATTRIBUTED. Just how did the cookbook's author and publisher benefit
> from your copyright violation, Jon?

And to further demonstrate how such violations are perpetrated, someone else
using the pseudonym "Mendi" posted the same recipe to another newsgroup five
days after Lindsay did last time (Lindsay posted it three times; click on the
Complete Thread link in your link above):
http://snipurl.com/72ww

The same recipe also ends up (no surprise) on websites like the following (which
usually attributes authorship to Lindsay even when he manages to cite a source
but didn't this time):
http://www.vegan-food.net/index.cgi?556

>> so you hardly were advertising cookbooks with them. You also may wish
>> to pretend that you violation is small and unimportant. It's a
>> violation all the same, and your scofflaw's attitude is disgusting.
>>
>

Michael Balarama wrote:

> did contracts for oil company-

If you went to law school, you had to have learned copyright law.

> never took the bar in Texas-

No offense, but it's probably best that you didn't.

<...>

T5NF wrote:

>>This has nothing to do with copyright laws. This is more about a
>>certain persons lack of social skills than anything else. I've been
>>posting recipes on this newsgroup using this and other monikers since
>>something like 1995. During that time I've seen internet cranks come
>>and go. This is just another sad person who doesn't have a social life
>>and therefore has to create percieved hysteria on a newsgroup in a
>>pathetic attempt at a type of human interaction.
>>
>>I'm sure the authorities will stop chasing after people trading music
>>files, pirated movies, snuff films and out and out fraud to kick down
>>my door and arrest me for advertising cookbooks.
>
>
> Zowie... haven't read the group in ages and come back to this....as far as
> copyrights and recipes go, you can't copyright the list of ingredients used in
> the recipe, only the way in which the directions are written. As long as you
> put the directions into your own words you're not violating copyright.

Would you rest your own money on that?

> I
> include the source even when I alter the ingredients out of respect for the
> cookbook author and also to let folks know where they can get the original
> recipe as well as a book full of other good recipes.

You have more ethics than the OP. Then again, so does Bill Clinton and Larry
Flynt. Combined.

<...>

usual suspect wrote:
> Jonathan Ball wrote:
>
>>
>> Here's one, Jon: http://tinyurl.com/3xt6l It's for something called
>> Thai Veggie Rolls. It's undoubtedly from a cookbook, but it's
>> UNATTRIBUTED. Just how did the cookbook's author and publisher
>> benefit from your copyright violation, Jon?
>
>
> And to further demonstrate how such violations are perpetrated, someone
> else using the pseudonym "Mendi" posted the same recipe to another
> newsgroup five days after Lindsay did last time (Lindsay posted it three
> times; click on the Complete Thread link in your link above):
> http://snipurl.com/72ww
>
> The same recipe also ends up (no surprise) on websites like the
> following (which usually attributes authorship to Lindsay even when he
> manages to cite a source but didn't this time):
> http://www.vegan-food.net/index.cgi?556

Ha ha ha, I recognized that site right away. Someone
posted a recipe for "Indian Spiced Potato Salad" in
alt.food.vegan that I tried and really liked, and I
responded in a.f.v. that "This is the best potato salad
I've ever eaten": http://tinyurl.com/ytrgz

The recipe, and the quote *attributed to me*, later
showed up in that "vegan" recipe site:
http://www.vegan-food.net/index.cgi?1275. It was
submitted to the site by the author of the post in
a.f.v., who may well be the originator of the recipe; I
don't know. I had to chuckle at the irony of being
cited as a knowledgeable critic on "vegan" food.

Jonathan Ball wrote:

> usual suspect wrote:
>
>> Jonathan Ball wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Here's one, Jon: http://tinyurl.com/3xt6l It's for something called
>>> Thai Veggie Rolls. It's undoubtedly from a cookbook, but it's
>>> UNATTRIBUTED. Just how did the cookbook's author and publisher
>>> benefit from your copyright violation, Jon?
>>
>>
>>
>> And to further demonstrate how such violations are perpetrated,
>> someone else using the pseudonym "Mendi" posted the same recipe to
>> another newsgroup five days after Lindsay did last time (Lindsay
>> posted it three times; click on the Complete Thread link in your link
>> above):
>> http://snipurl.com/72ww
>>
>> The same recipe also ends up (no surprise) on websites like the
>> following (which usually attributes authorship to Lindsay even when he
>> manages to cite a source but didn't this time):
>> http://www.vegan-food.net/index.cgi?556
>
>
> Ha ha ha, I recognized that site right away. Someone posted a recipe
> for "Indian Spiced Potato Salad" in alt.food.vegan that I tried and
> really liked, and I responded in a.f.v. that "This is the best potato
> salad I've ever eaten": http://tinyurl.com/ytrgz
>
> The recipe, and the quote *attributed to me*, later showed up in that
> "vegan" recipe site: http://www.vegan-food.net/index.cgi?1275. It was
> submitted to the site by the author of the post in a.f.v., who may well
> be the originator of the recipe; I don't know. I had to chuckle at the
> irony of being cited as a knowledgeable critic on "vegan" food.

By the way, it really IS outstanding potato salad. Not
being "vegan", of course, I just used real mayonnaise.

Jonathan Ball wrote:

> usual suspect wrote:
>
>> Jonathan Ball wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Here's one, Jon: http://tinyurl.com/3xt6l It's for something called
>>> Thai Veggie Rolls. It's undoubtedly from a cookbook, but it's
>>> UNATTRIBUTED. Just how did the cookbook's author and publisher
>>> benefit from your copyright violation, Jon?
>>
>>
>>
>> And to further demonstrate how such violations are perpetrated,
>> someone else using the pseudonym "Mendi" posted the same recipe to
>> another newsgroup five days after Lindsay did last time (Lindsay
>> posted it three times; click on the Complete Thread link in your link
>> above):
>> http://snipurl.com/72ww
>>
>> The same recipe also ends up (no surprise) on websites like the
>> following (which usually attributes authorship to Lindsay even when he
>> manages to cite a source but didn't this time):
>> http://www.vegan-food.net/index.cgi?556
>
>
> Ha ha ha, I recognized that site right away. Someone posted a recipe
> for "Indian Spiced Potato Salad" in alt.food.vegan that I tried and
> really liked, and I responded in a.f.v. that "This is the best potato
> salad I've ever eaten": http://tinyurl.com/ytrgz
>
> The recipe, and the quote *attributed to me*, later showed up in that
> "vegan" recipe site: http://www.vegan-food.net/index.cgi?1275. It was
> submitted to the site by the author of the post in a.f.v., who may well
> be the originator of the recipe; I don't know. I had to chuckle at the
> irony of being cited as a knowledgeable critic on "vegan" food.

Heh! That IS funny.

Jonathan Ball wrote:

> Jonathan Ball wrote:
>
>> usual suspect wrote:
>>
>>> Jonathan Ball wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Here's one, Jon: http://tinyurl.com/3xt6l It's for something
>>>> called Thai Veggie Rolls. It's undoubtedly from a cookbook, but
>>>> it's UNATTRIBUTED. Just how did the cookbook's author and publisher
>>>> benefit from your copyright violation, Jon?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> And to further demonstrate how such violations are perpetrated,
>>> someone else using the pseudonym "Mendi" posted the same recipe to
>>> another newsgroup five days after Lindsay did last time (Lindsay
>>> posted it three times; click on the Complete Thread link in your link
>>> above):
>>> http://snipurl.com/72ww
>>>
>>> The same recipe also ends up (no surprise) on websites like the
>>> following (which usually attributes authorship to Lindsay even when
>>> he manages to cite a source but didn't this time):
>>> http://www.vegan-food.net/index.cgi?556
>>
>>
>>
>> Ha ha ha, I recognized that site right away. Someone posted a recipe
>> for "Indian Spiced Potato Salad" in alt.food.vegan that I tried and
>> really liked, and I responded in a.f.v. that "This is the best potato
>> salad I've ever eaten": http://tinyurl.com/ytrgz
>>
>> The recipe, and the quote *attributed to me*, later showed up in that
>> "vegan" recipe site: http://www.vegan-food.net/index.cgi?1275. It was
>> submitted to the site by the author of the post in a.f.v., who may
>> well be the originator of the recipe; I don't know. I had to chuckle
>> at the irony of being cited as a knowledgeable critic on "vegan" food.
>
>
> By the way, it really IS outstanding potato salad. Not being "vegan",
> of course, I just used real mayonnaise.

It's probably much better that way, too.

usual suspect wrote:
>
>
> Jonathan Ball wrote:
>
>> Jonathan Ball wrote:
>>
>>> usual suspect wrote:
>>>
>>>> Jonathan Ball wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Here's one, Jon: http://tinyurl.com/3xt6l It's for something
>>>>> called Thai Veggie Rolls. It's undoubtedly from a cookbook, but
>>>>> it's UNATTRIBUTED. Just how did the cookbook's author and
>>>>> publisher benefit from your copyright violation, Jon?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> And to further demonstrate how such violations are perpetrated,
>>>> someone else using the pseudonym "Mendi" posted the same recipe to
>>>> another newsgroup five days after Lindsay did last time (Lindsay
>>>> posted it three times; click on the Complete Thread link in your
>>>> link above):
>>>> http://snipurl.com/72ww
>>>>
>>>> The same recipe also ends up (no surprise) on websites like the
>>>> following (which usually attributes authorship to Lindsay even when
>>>> he manages to cite a source but didn't this time):
>>>> http://www.vegan-food.net/index.cgi?556
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Ha ha ha, I recognized that site right away. Someone posted a recipe
>>> for "Indian Spiced Potato Salad" in alt.food.vegan that I tried and
>>> really liked, and I responded in a.f.v. that "This is the best potato
>>> salad I've ever eaten": http://tinyurl.com/ytrgz
>>>
>>> The recipe, and the quote *attributed to me*, later showed up in that
>>> "vegan" recipe site: http://www.vegan-food.net/index.cgi?1275. It
>>> was submitted to the site by the author of the post in a.f.v., who
>>> may well be the originator of the recipe; I don't know. I had to
>>> chuckle at the irony of being cited as a knowledgeable critic on
>>> "vegan" food.
>>
>>
>>
>> By the way, it really IS outstanding potato salad. Not being "vegan",
>> of course, I just used real mayonnaise.
>
>
> It's probably much better that way, too.

I think I had a taste of some "vegan" "mayonnaise" once
- bleaaggghhhh. I had some Trader Joe's "fat free"
mayonnaise, or some such effin' thing one time, and it
was disgusting. Of course, used in a strongly spiced
recipe like this one, you wouldn't be able to tell that
it was phony mayonnaise.

Jonathan Ball wrote:

> usual suspect wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Jonathan Ball wrote:
>>
>>> Jonathan Ball wrote:
>>>
>>>> usual suspect wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Jonathan Ball wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Here's one, Jon: http://tinyurl.com/3xt6l It's for something
>>>>>> called Thai Veggie Rolls. It's undoubtedly from a cookbook, but
>>>>>> it's UNATTRIBUTED. Just how did the cookbook's author and
>>>>>> publisher benefit from your copyright violation, Jon?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> And to further demonstrate how such violations are perpetrated,
>>>>> someone else using the pseudonym "Mendi" posted the same recipe to
>>>>> another newsgroup five days after Lindsay did last time (Lindsay
>>>>> posted it three times; click on the Complete Thread link in your
>>>>> link above):
>>>>> http://snipurl.com/72ww
>>>>>
>>>>> The same recipe also ends up (no surprise) on websites like the
>>>>> following (which usually attributes authorship to Lindsay even when
>>>>> he manages to cite a source but didn't this time):
>>>>> http://www.vegan-food.net/index.cgi?556
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Ha ha ha, I recognized that site right away. Someone posted a
>>>> recipe for "Indian Spiced Potato Salad" in alt.food.vegan that I
>>>> tried and really liked, and I responded in a.f.v. that "This is the
>>>> best potato salad I've ever eaten": http://tinyurl.com/ytrgz
>>>>
>>>> The recipe, and the quote *attributed to me*, later showed up in
>>>> that "vegan" recipe site: http://www.vegan-food.net/index.cgi?1275.
>>>> It was submitted to the site by the author of the post in a.f.v.,
>>>> who may well be the originator of the recipe; I don't know. I had
>>>> to chuckle at the irony of being cited as a knowledgeable critic on
>>>> "vegan" food.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> By the way, it really IS outstanding potato salad. Not being
>>> "vegan", of course, I just used real mayonnaise.
>>
>>
>>
>> It's probably much better that way, too.
>
>
> I think I had a taste of some "vegan" "mayonnaise" once - bleaaggghhhh.
> I had some Trader Joe's "fat free" mayonnaise, or some such effin' thing
> one time, and it was disgusting.

Vegan and fat-free are not the same thing. You'd probably notice the lingering
soy aftertaste of the vegan one more than anything, and it would probably not be
fat-free since "vegan mayonnaise" usually contains tofu and lots of oil.

> Of course, used in a strongly spiced
> recipe like this one, you wouldn't be able to tell that it was phony
> mayonnaise.

I might give it a try later this week.

usual suspect wrote:
> Jonathan Ball wrote:
>
>> usual suspect wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Jonathan Ball wrote:
>>>
>>>> Jonathan Ball wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> usual suspect wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Jonathan Ball wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Here's one, Jon: http://tinyurl.com/3xt6l It's for something
>>>>>>> called Thai Veggie Rolls. It's undoubtedly from a cookbook, but
>>>>>>> it's UNATTRIBUTED. Just how did the cookbook's author and
>>>>>>> publisher benefit from your copyright violation, Jon?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And to further demonstrate how such violations are perpetrated,
>>>>>> someone else using the pseudonym "Mendi" posted the same recipe to
>>>>>> another newsgroup five days after Lindsay did last time (Lindsay
>>>>>> posted it three times; click on the Complete Thread link in your
>>>>>> link above):
>>>>>> http://snipurl.com/72ww
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The same recipe also ends up (no surprise) on websites like the
>>>>>> following (which usually attributes authorship to Lindsay even
>>>>>> when he manages to cite a source but didn't this time):
>>>>>> http://www.vegan-food.net/index.cgi?556
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Ha ha ha, I recognized that site right away. Someone posted a
>>>>> recipe for "Indian Spiced Potato Salad" in alt.food.vegan that I
>>>>> tried and really liked, and I responded in a.f.v. that "This is the
>>>>> best potato salad I've ever eaten": http://tinyurl.com/ytrgz
>>>>>
>>>>> The recipe, and the quote *attributed to me*, later showed up in
>>>>> that "vegan" recipe site:
>>>>> http://www.vegan-food.net/index.cgi?1275. It was submitted to the
>>>>> site by the author of the post in a.f.v., who may well be the
>>>>> originator of the recipe; I don't know. I had to chuckle at the
>>>>> irony of being cited as a knowledgeable critic on "vegan" food.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> By the way, it really IS outstanding potato salad. Not being
>>>> "vegan", of course, I just used real mayonnaise.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> It's probably much better that way, too.
>>
>>
>>
>> I think I had a taste of some "vegan" "mayonnaise" once -
>> bleaaggghhhh. I had some Trader Joe's "fat free" mayonnaise, or some
>> such effin' thing one time, and it was disgusting.
>
>
> Vegan and fat-free are not the same thing.

I know; I just figured whenever you start taking the
legitimate ingredients out of a classic concoction,
you're left with bleaaggghhh.

> You'd probably notice the
> lingering soy aftertaste of the vegan one more than anything, and it
> would probably not be fat-free since "vegan mayonnaise" usually contains
> tofu and lots of oil.
>
>> Of course, used in a strongly spiced recipe like this one, you
>> wouldn't be able to tell that it was phony mayonnaise.
>
>
> I might give it a try later this week.
>

"usual suspect" > wrote in message
...
> Michael Balarama wrote:
>
> > did contracts for oil company-
>
> If you went to law school, you had to have learned copyright law.
Some -But I was a Haight Asbury-LA antiestablishment flower power musician
type -whose sister got him a job with an oil company in Texas

>
> > never took the bar in Texas-
>
> No offense, but it's probably best that you didn't.

Could have been a wealthy alcoholic vegetarian contender
it is all in my waaaaay past...
>
> <...>
>

Michael Balarama wrote:
>>>did contracts for oil company-
>>
>>If you went to law school, you had to have learned copyright law.
>
> Some -But I was a Haight Asbury-LA antiestablishment flower power musician
> type -whose sister got him a job with an oil company in Texas

Which law school did you attend?

>>>never took the bar in Texas-
>>
>>No offense, but it's probably best that you didn't.
>
> Could have been a wealthy alcoholic vegetarian contender
> it is all in my waaaaay past...

Not very punny.