Stop The Scourge Of Illegal 'Downwriting'

from the don't-they-have-camera-phones dept

Jon points us to an amusing photo highlighted by Reddit showing two older women sitting in a bookstore copying down recipes. The Daily What amusingly calls this "illegal downwriting."
Just wait until these women discover camera phones.


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  •  
    icon
    Planespotter (profile), Aug 24th, 2011 @ 1:38am

    Good Grief! Barnes and Noble are obviously guilty of facilitating copyright infringment... quick someone get ICE to closedown their website and all bookshops.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Yogi, Aug 24th, 2011 @ 2:03am

    Fines

    I'm seeing a million dollar fine for these criminals and a five year sentence for their enablers, the criminally negligent bookshop that allows people to read before buying.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Aug 24th, 2011 @ 2:18am

    Sorry folks...

    ...everybody knows that recipes aren't subject to copyright protection, right?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Aug 24th, 2011 @ 2:37am

      Re: Sorry folks...

      You don't understand the concept of jokes do you? Any form of satire, parody or wordplay just flies right over your head while you pick your nose.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Planespotter (profile), Aug 24th, 2011 @ 3:14am

      Re: Sorry folks...

      They may not be covered by copyright but I'd like to bet money that just inside that book it says something along the lines of "no copying of this book is permitted without authorisation from the publisher".

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      crade (profile), Aug 24th, 2011 @ 8:36am

      Re: Sorry folks...

      the law is arbitrarily different, but the action identical. Thats what makes it funny.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Aug 24th, 2011 @ 2:24am

    You wouldn't download a casserole, would you?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    G Thompson (profile), Aug 24th, 2011 @ 2:27am

    Thankfully they can not be charged for Uploading, since UpWords is exclusively owned, trademarked, enforced with an iron (yep an iron.. what else use is the monopoly iron for), and must be now classified as a 'rogue name', by Hasbro...

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    darryl, Aug 24th, 2011 @ 2:41am

    fair use.

    fair use, clearly non-commercial, unless those ladies are going to race home and produce their own cook book and sell it for a profit.

    It is limited use for educational purposes, and who is to say that they are copying down information from the book, they might be writing a list of books they intend to buy !

    its people trying to make an issue out of something like this who make it impossible to take you seriously when you do try to address a 'real' issue.

    If you cannot see the difference between market sellers selling bootleg DVD's and ladies copying out some cooking tips then you do not understand the issues, you do yourself a disservice by trying to press such weak arguments.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      The eejit (profile), Aug 24th, 2011 @ 2:56am

      Re: fair use.

      Satire. You can't haz it.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Richard (profile), Aug 24th, 2011 @ 3:00am

      Re: fair use.

      If you cannot see the diff... ctrl H ctrl H ctrl H ctrl H Joke

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Evil Goonies, Aug 24th, 2011 @ 8:23am

        Re: Re: fair use.

        Dear Sir,

        We the Terminal Emulation Committee of America, have within our possession several copypatentrightmarks concerning the very keystroke combination to which you have just made (an admittedly skilled) allusion too.

        Unfortunately, regardless of the skill and fair use nature of your usage, we feel it necessary to protect our intellectual property in regards to this matter.

        Therefore, We request that you cease from using our Intellectual Property, further we request that you refrain from using said Intellectual Property in the future. Also, as may be required by law, we demand that you remove, retroactively if necessary, any and all references to our intellectual property from any form of paper or electronic document including but not limited to: Newspapers, Magazine Articles, Blogs and/or their comments, Books, Scientific & Medical Publications, Religious Documents, Volatile or Non-Volatile Electronic Memory, or Educational Publications.

        Thank you.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          HothMonster, Aug 24th, 2011 @ 10:29am

          Re: Re: Re: fair use.

          Dear Sir,

          We of the Council for Threatening Letters find that your above letter violates our letter design patent and many of our wordrights. Please Cease and Desist......

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Aug 24th, 2011 @ 3:36am

      Re: fair use.

      i'm glad that at last you can see the difference between copying and selling bootlegs.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      IronM@sk, Aug 24th, 2011 @ 3:39am

      Re: fair use.

      I just downloaded Pirates of the Carribean.

      fair use, clearly non-commercial, unless you are going to race home and produce your own bootleg DVD's and sell it for a profit.

      Thanks darryl!! Finally you are admitting that clearly non-commercial use is acceptable. I do not intend to make and sell bootleg DVD's! How did it take us so long to get here?

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Just John (profile), Aug 24th, 2011 @ 3:49am

      Re: fair use.

      I think your brain just died.

      Do we have a doctor here who can call the time of death?

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      RD, Aug 24th, 2011 @ 5:14am

      Re: fair use.

      "fair use, clearly non-commercial, unless those ladies are going to race home and produce their own cook book and sell it for a profit. "

      Oh, you mean like the non-commercial nature of file sharing? You mean how when someone shares a song, they arent doing it for financial gain? And dont say "file sharers avoid paying for it so its a financial gain" because that would be exactly what these ladies are doing, and you just said that that doesnt count.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        chris (profile), Aug 24th, 2011 @ 7:26am

        Re: Re: fair use.

        Oh, you mean like the non-commercial nature of file sharing? You mean how when someone shares a song, they arent doing it for financial gain?

        using the internet to save money that rightfully belongs to a large corporation is piracy:

        making a phone call through the internet to save on mobile minutes: piracy.

        telecommuting instead of buying gas to drive to work: piracy.

        And dont say "file sharers avoid paying for it so its a financial gain" because that would be exactly what these ladies are doing, and you just said that that doesnt count.

        these are little old ladies at a bookstore, not punk teenagers on the internet. the two cases are completely different.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          icon
          egghead (profile), Aug 24th, 2011 @ 8:16am

          Re: Re: Re: fair use.

          How is it possible to function with that irrational brain? I hope that was sarcasm, my filter has been on the fritz lately.
          using the internet to save money that rightfully belongs to a large corporation is piracy
          My money rightfully belongs to me, not some corporation. I guess downloading coupons and using coupon codes is piracy then.
          making a phone call through the internet to save on mobile minutes: piracy
          Starting to sound like sarcasm. I paid for my internet connection and I can choose to voice chat with whomever I want; besides, the voice quality is way better than with a phone call.
          telecommuting instead of buying gas to drive to work: piracy
          Here's where the sarcasm flag billowed out and waved in all its glory. Regardless, someone might just take this line of thinking as serious, so I'll refute it. Again, I paid for my internet connection and my employer has agreed to allow me to attach my computer to their network remotely in order for me to perform my duties while reducing the load on their air conditioners and power grid.

          Thank you, and good day.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          icon
          IrishDaze (profile), Aug 24th, 2011 @ 8:43am

          Re: Re: Re: fair use.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          icon
          IrishDaze (profile), Aug 24th, 2011 @ 8:44am

          Re: Re: Re: fair use.

          Please, please, PLEASE tell me this was a humour attempt. It's so deadpan, I can't tell.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Cowardly Anon, Aug 24th, 2011 @ 5:49am

      Re: fair use.

      Obvious troll is obvious.

      That being said, it's OK for them to copy out the recipes they want. It would be OK if they took pictures with their phone of the recipes they wanted. It would be wrong to take pictures of all the pages of the cook book. It would be illegal to download the book and print off the recipes you want.

      At the end of the day, it's all for 'limited use for educational purposes' it's just how they gained access to that use that seems to be the problem.

      But...you're a troll and don't understand any of that.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Gabriel Tane (profile), Aug 24th, 2011 @ 6:06am

      Re: fair use.

      Just because I haven't had fun at darryl's expense in so long...

      "fair use, clearly non-commercial, unless those ladies are going to race home and produce their own cook book and sell it for a profit. "
      You really need to go read up on Fair Use... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use

      It doesn't say anything about personal use or non-commercial gain. Now, the 'fair use' would come in if they were copying down recipes that were not of the author's own creation. If I write a book that is nothing but a compilation of others' recipes, then I don't hold the copyright on those recipes.

      Example: a local company in my town asks for recipes from its business partners, compiles and prints them, and distributes the book back to those partners. They do not own the copyright on those recipes.


      "It is limited use for educational purposes, and who is to say that they are copying down information from the book, they might be writing a list of books they intend to buy !"
      Who's to say? Probably the guy who took the picture who was probably watching them for a few minutes to figure out what they were doing.

      But you're right... they could be making a list of books. They could be college students on a special project to dress as old ladies, get books, and count the number of words in each.

      They could be space aliens who are using the bookstore activity as a cover for their covert military planning.

      But I think we'll stick with the most likely scenario: the guy who took the pic knew what was going on. Sound good to you?


      "its people trying to make an issue out of something like this who make it impossible to take you seriously when you do try to address a 'real' issue."
      Someone already took the "satire fail", so I'm going to sail on...


      "If you cannot see the difference between market sellers selling bootleg DVD's and ladies copying out some cooking tips then you do not understand the issues, you do yourself a disservice by trying to press such weak arguments."
      We can see the difference just fine... it's the MPAA and RIAA who lump them all in the same group that can't see the difference. And it's you who doesn't see the similarities between a couple of old ladies 'sharing' (did you notice that word there?) some recipes (a practice as old as cooking) and me letting a friend of mine borrow some of my music so he can become a friend and support that artist.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        MrWilson, Aug 24th, 2011 @ 7:34am

        Re: Re: fair use.

        "then I don't hold the copyright on those recipes. "

        No one owns the copyright on those recipes since, without unique commentary, recipes by themselves do not qualify for copyright since they are mere factual lists of ingredients and artless instructions.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          icon
          Gwiz (profile), Aug 24th, 2011 @ 8:19am

          Re: Re: Re: fair use.

          No one owns the copyright on those recipes since, without unique commentary, recipes by themselves do not qualify for copyright since they are mere factual lists of ingredients and artless instructions.

          I for one wouldn't be surprised if someone tried to patent the "process" of a some recipe and got it approved.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            icon
            AR (profile), Aug 24th, 2011 @ 9:11am

            Re: Re: Re: Re: fair use.

            Maybe i'm just being ignorant, but if there is no copyright on recipes then haw can cooks and restaurants make any money? I mean if everyone is sharing then you can end up competing against yourself for the right to sell food. If someone could download the recipe from the Internet, then they would never go out to eat. Thus putting the restaurants, cooks, waiters, dishwashers, and all, out of work. If everyone is downloading then nobody can make any money and no one will innovate new dishes. Can you imagine the consequences of Gordan Ramsey yelling obscenities on a street corner while holding a "will work for food" sign? The horror!!! This must be stopped immediately before these two old ladies stop innovation,put everyone out of work, and kill the economy!!!!!! Chefs are artist to ya know.

            /SARC

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            •  
              icon
              AR (profile), Aug 24th, 2011 @ 10:51am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: fair use.

              Edit []

              Maybe i'm just being ignorant, but if there is no copyright on recipes [music] then how can cooks [musicians] and restaurants [labels] make any money? I mean if everyone is sharing then you can end up competing against yourself for the right to sell food [music]. If someone could download the recipe [song] from the Internet, then they would never go out to eat [to concerts/buy albums]. Thus putting the restaurants [labels], cooks [musicians], waiters [promoters], dishwashers [stagehands], and all, out of work. If everyone is downloading then nobody can make any money and no one will innovate new dishes [music]. Can you imagine the consequences of Gordan Ramsey [Ozzy]yelling obscenities on a street corner while holding a "will work for food" sign? The horror!!! This must be stopped immediately before these two old ladies [teenagers] stop innovation, put everyone out of work, and kill the economy!!!!!! Chefs {musicians}are artist to ya know.

              /SARC

               

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Loki, Aug 24th, 2011 @ 7:26am

      Re: fair use.

      Well aside from the fact the very large majority understand this is satire, if this were a piece on file sharing a good copyright maximalist would argue against most of these claims:

      fair use, clearly non-commercial, unless those ladies are going to race home and produce their own cook book and sell it for a profit.

      Fair use, as consistently argued by the entertainment industry is either a) nonexistant, or b) so narrow in scope as to certainly not apply in this situation. Furthermore, as has been pointed out, some would argue that totality of the recipe (ingredients and directions) are covered by copyright, and even if they aren't by being printed in the book they are still covered by copyright (no part of this book may be reproduced, copied, yadda yadda blah blah without the express written consent of the publisher and so on and so forth".

      From the viewpoint of an extemist, copying a recipe from a book is no different than copying a paragraph from a news article or downloading an MP3. Using the logic of the entertainment industry, the refusal of these women to buy the book is a lost sale that hurts the author and recipe makers, Using their own arguements, this is THEFT, pure and simple, and should be subject to the full criminal penalties.


      It is limited use for educational purposes, and who is to say that they are copying down information from the book, they might be writing a list of books they intend to buy !

      I don't really see a major difference between this and the silly "but we have an IP address" argument I see bantered about all the time.


      its people trying to make an issue out of something like this who make it impossible to take you seriously when you do try to address a 'real' issue.

      Again, it is called satire. And what makes it so effective is it simply uses the same reasoning that we hear from the entertainment industry and copyright maximalists all the time.

      If you cannot see the difference between market sellers selling bootleg DVD's and ladies copying out some cooking tips then you do not understand the issues, you do yourself a disservice by trying to press such weak arguments.

      WE see the difference very, very clearly. Now, perhaps, YOU have a better understanding (but most likely not) why the rest of us think the RIAA/MPAA and the rest of the entertainment industry is a complete and utter joke. This is the exact same argument we have been listening to from THEM, for close to a decade now.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      crade (profile), Aug 24th, 2011 @ 9:23am

      Re: fair use.

      Indeed. Non-commercial old granny. The standard fine of 3 zillion dollars please.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      ChrisB (profile), Aug 24th, 2011 @ 11:44am

      Re: fair use.

      Sweet! darryl just became pro-download!

      > If you cannot see the difference between market sellers
      > selling bootleg DVD's and ladies copying out some cooking
      > tips then you do not understand the issues

      Private copying for personal use is OKAY! -darryl

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Jacob Cooper (profile), Aug 24th, 2011 @ 3:02am

    Mike, be prepared to receive a "request" from their lawyer demanding you take down their picture for violating their publicity rights.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    abc gum, Aug 24th, 2011 @ 4:39am

    When someone copies a recipe rather than purchasing the book, it is obviously a lost sale, why can't you freetards see that?

    These sweet old ladies should simply cough up the money, because living upon a fixed income is easy street. And if they are still working, they will certainly be able to afford the upcoming increase in payroll taxation.

    /s

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Aug 24th, 2011 @ 5:42am

    Don't copy that the cake recipe is a myth.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Gabriel Tane (profile), Aug 24th, 2011 @ 5:46am

    Missed a great joke

    There was a great little quote tagged on that on The Daily What (seriously, if you don't read that... DO! www.thedailywh.at):

    "If only there were a place where I could rent books for free! Oh..."

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    RadialSkid (profile), Aug 24th, 2011 @ 5:51am

    Don't copy that biscotti!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Jim D (profile), Aug 24th, 2011 @ 6:18am

    re: recipes are not protected under copyright law

    While this is true in a limited sense of recipes as a list of ingredients, this is not often the case in the context of an entire recipe complete with instructions as found in a cookbook: The description of the recipe, along with the instructions/explanation for prepping the dish, may be covered by copyright. http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl122.html

    So, death penalty for the old ladies, but only if they're copying out the part that reads something like "be sure to sift the flower slowly to ensure proper blending and smoothness of the dough"

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    loaderboy (profile), Aug 24th, 2011 @ 8:19am

    It doesn't really qualify....

    as satire unless someone doesn't get it.


    Bravo

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    David (profile), Aug 24th, 2011 @ 8:44am

    This is why recipe publishers love e-books

    in the e-book versions of the books I use in culinary school, I wondered at first why the ingredient lists in the recipes in the book were images instead of text. It made it harder to copy and paste them, when I was working on my recipe cards for class.

    Then I realized... as images, the ingredient lists can get around the exception in copyright law about factual information not being covered. Any image of anything may be copyrighted bu the person who created it...

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    A non-mouse, Aug 24th, 2011 @ 9:56am

    Stealing recipes

    Great, now the book store is stuck with these cook books full of blank pages because these ladies stole the recipes!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Kogito, Aug 24th, 2011 @ 11:09am

    Does anyo ne else see a parallel between this and oh say, copyright enfringement from music downloading? Oh, nevermind! There's no collective of corporate recording interests or greedy artists of no talent yelling about this. I wonder what would happen if book publishers and cookbook authors were as vain as the recording industry folks. Someone might actually put grandma in jail for a real crime. Now to uncover the seedy world of vagrant grandma recipe sharing as a reality show... I sense AWESOME!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Aug 24th, 2011 @ 1:15pm

    We must find a way to plug the graphite hole.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This