Stealing Words

[@amandadonaldson8748]

This lady basically got some free advertising for her forgotten book. Smarter move would have been to work with the defendants, not against them. When she says she occasionally googles herself... I wonder if she's looking for people to sue.

[@layasaul28]

I agree, she could have worked with them, they certainly meant no harm. Also, as an author, I also google myself to see if there are new book reviews online (which I am always happy to find!! PS I just did google my name and found a new review!). 🙂

[@SteveMichaelson]

Suing the little man will not make me buy the book. He attitude is even worse! Bad publicity

[@JayJay-me8zk]

I'm thinking the same thing!!!!

[@Isa_bell_]

The guy was really polite and sincere.🙌🏽

[@sammhammiam]

The only reason why the author brought them to court was to put her name back out there.

[@BREEZYM6015]

I'm searching for the book online as we speak. 😂

[@Mishel33020]

I was going to because I was interested in it, but she really rubbed me. The wrong way so I don't, I think i'm going to do it ​@BREEZYM6015

[@crystalshaw8744]

​@BREEZYM6015 PLEASE let me know if you find it...giggle

[@Pretty_Brown_Eyez21]

I agree.

[@lorrainemallett1236]

Me too!

[@jamikaparks468]

You didn't DISCOVER their love story, Christina Columbus. Calm down. 😂🙄

[@phoenixrising1242]

😂😂😂😂😂! Love this comment!!!!

[@catherinesaintlove]

😂😂😂😂 Christina Columbus 👏👏👏👏👏👏👏🤣🤣🤣🤣 hilarious love it

[@sosiddity98]

😂😂😂

[@yoshienmanish]

😂😂😂😂😂

[@mochasoqrimey]

🤣🤣🤣

[@robertjonez5]

154 hits is absolutely nothing, how she thinks she can get $5000 for that is laughable.

[@layasaul28]

And some of those were probably bots!

[@bethcarico7549]

And some were her lol who knows how many times she clicked on it.

[@jeanhartely]

The fact that she googles herself all the time (to see if anybody is still interested in her drippy book) pretty much says it all. She should pay them for giving the thing free publicity when it's obviously been out of print for years.

[@missa1goins]

Lol

[@msawmusic]

Anybody who publishes work is going to google it. That’s nothing to be ashamed of

[@joeslinky]

Wait until this lady finds out about ChatGPT

[@lukerinderknecht2982]

@@joeslinky yeah, I was thinking the same

[@sph1226]

😂

[@AmysExquisiteGifts]

😂

[@user-gl9su8du3w]

I’m only 3 min in and I can tell plaintiff is entitled and full of ego - she took offense at bathroom reading ?! It’s a phrase. Chill, lady.

[@miscellaneous037]

Sounds like she should consider publishing her next bathroom book on a scroll with perforations between each story. Then her 8 readers could read and wipe AND the used book market would be nil so she might sell more new copies. 😂

[@rosej5029]

Yeah. A phrase that means her book is something 2 read until ur finished taking a 💩. Plaintiff is clearly overreacting to judge using the phrase.

[@bethcarico7549]

Exactly. JM was ATTEMPTING to compliment her and she's getting offended, you can tell by her facial expressions.

[@jvillebil13]

Sometime when you see these cases you realize one of the parties is an arrogant person and you're pulling for them to lose. Well we got our wish today.

[@bhornannawindeedeigh5007]

😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂👍🏾

[@raeneal3825]

So true

[@Hatokirei]

They aren't even her stories. Jeez. She's clearly just trying to plug her book and quite honestly her attitude really puts me off from even considering purchasing it. That could have been free advertising but she got greedy.

[@miscellaneous037]

Bingo!

[@ugoddessthepoet]

They're not her stories but it's her work!

[@NicoleSimmons-e1s]

Her attitude is why I’m hesitating on buying it.

[@leech1355]

It’s her intellectual property. To insist otherwise is nonsense

[@mahailiabrown3972]

She came to make a fool out of him and ended up looking like the biggest fool I've seen this year

[@MsBabadee]

And the year just started smh

[@lauemm2]

I would think this caused some people to be interested and purchase the book. It interested me but seeing the greedy nature of the author totally put me off. I won’t be buying the book. She maybe writing about love but she comes across as mean. I agree with the judge’s ruling.

[@juliecranford534]

I feel the exact same way! In the beginning, I was very interested in this book and seeing about her second. By the end-no thanks! The defendant was gracious and apologetic and likable even though they made a mistake. Interesting case.

[@missa1goins]

I wonder if JM had second thoughts.

[@lauemm2]

@@missa1goinsI don’t think so she explained how she applied the law . I think she ruled fairly and by the letter of the law. While I can understand the authors concern -I think she exaggerated her claims Again I am an avid reader and I was interested at first in the book. Unfortunately after seeing the behavior of the author she won’t be receiving my patronage.

[@missa1goins]

@lauemm2, sorry I meant if JM had second thoughts on purchasing the book after seeing the author attitude

[@HHH-ye1ro]

You asked him to take it down, and I took it down. It was clicked on 154 times. The judge should throw this out immediately. What a complete waste of time. You can tell that the plaintiffs are retired, and have nothing better to do.

[@missa1goins]

@HHH-ye1ro, I've seen it. People retire and get bored, get ideas...

[@sonjaray9169]

I bet that was a pleasant trip home!

[@debbiem6406]

You know those are her friends sitting in front row behind her.

[@crimsonxxspawn8613]

She grabbed stories from well-known people, so how is she entitled to sue this guy if she did the same thing.

[@Emily89420]

Exactly!!! It's not even her story to tell in the first place!

[@MagnolyiaGrace]

At the end she tries to explain how she worked with some of their publishers for permission to use content in her book. Have you ever done that? Lots of work and sometimes not free. Why is it fair that the defendant can simply swipe the same content for their blog to promote their business that only the plaintiff got permission to use? The judge seemed to get irate when the plaintiff started talking about that. You can tell this was new territory for her and didn't like that complicated twist. The judges decision suggested it is legal to use copyrighted material for your business but only if you didn't profit which seems absurd.

[@Fribee83]

@@MagnolyiaGrace The judge is right and this wasn't "new territory"; Fair Use was created in the 70s so she was likely be taught about Fair Use while she was in college so this wasn't her first time hearing about it. Yes, it is legal to use copyrighted material for your business under the fair use doctorine within reason. If someone makes a KZbin video and includes a 10-second clip from a movie in a review of said movie, then it's protected as fair use. Do you think that everyone that makes a response TikTok to another has to get permission by the original creator or does it fall under fair use? The plantiff shared excerpts from a book, credited the author while writing blogs; that's protected under fair use. Did you get permission from the creator of your lighthouse profile picture?

[@aerotaken5357]

​@@Fribee83👏 👏 👏 EXACTLY

[@josephcatsanchez6590]

Did she get permission from those that she wrote stories about? Public knowledge is up for grabs

[@MrMatteNWk]

Lauren Bacall, yes. Adam & Eve? I think she'll be hearing from their lawyer on that.

[@airbornepimp]

The type of woman who would demand a royalty if she found her book at a yard sale

[@bhornannawindeedeigh5007]

Facts! 😂

[@aerotaken5357]

😂😂😂 probably not far off. "Judge, I want my percentage of the $1 yardsale proceeds" 😂

[@nightsky3981]

😂😂😂😂​@@aerotaken5357

[@firetomd]

a book published so long ago, no one read, and complains about free advertising. greedy,

[@MegaCuddlesworth]

I bet this lady was 100 of those hits, and the wife herself was another 50.

[@lukerinderknecht2982]

According to GoodReads the lady did not publish a sequel book.

[@Fribee83]

I don't doubt it. 365 stories about love and weddings; that's a lot of research and I've got a feeling she was scratching the bottom of the barrel halfway through. It's gimmicky book, the kind of coffee table thing you'd find for 75% at Barnes and Noble the day of release.

[@samvaldes2682]

Im confused, didnt the defs wife cite her? its not like the defs wife took credit. she quoted and cited the author.

[@CowboyBlueTO]

Quoting is one thing, but taking large sections of the text is copyright. She should have gotten something for this copyright infringement.

[@minhduong1484]

Copyrighted work is still protected regardless if the work is cited in the use. Fair Use has to be assessed as to whether the use was allowed. I can't post the studio recordings of the White Album by the Beatles on my website even if I cite that it was the Beatles and list the songs. In this analysis the amount used was small enough for the judge to determine it was Fair Use.

[@minhduong1484]

@@CowboyBlueTO The problem is the it was "large" in your opinion. In the judge's analysis, 7 out of 300+ stories is not necessarily a large amount.

[@thebookwasbetter3650]

Citing doesn't do anything from a legal standpoint. Its more of an etiquette thing

[@back-corner-turnings]

If you ask me the plaintiff should be paying the defendants for a possible increase in sales. There’s a chance that people that view the blog and read those passages will be interested enough to actually go out and buy her otherwise forgotten book!😂

[@thefonzkiss]

It’s out of print anyway.

[@ericbedenbaugh7085]

She didn't even write it. She just took true stories and published them.

[@lukerinderknecht2982]

@@ericbedenbaugh7085 by that definition there are zero nonfiction writers

[@ericbedenbaugh7085]

@@lukerinderknecht2982 Not at all, I'm reading a non-fiction book right now. Hers in a compilation of stories, not a work that has been researched, experts interviewed and conclusions drawn.

[@lukerinderknecht2982]

@@ericbedenbaugh7085 she still had to research and wrote the stories into a compelling narrative. You're saying the stories just were floating out there in space or something and she copied and pasted them?

[@ericbedenbaugh7085]

That what it sounds like.

[@lawriesaxton7645]

The P keeps interrupting. She just wants to hear herself talk.

[@bhornannawindeedeigh5007]

She's QUITE OBNOXIOUS. 😂

[@MrMatteNWk]

A person who Googles herself all the time wants to hear herself talk? Well I never!

[@rockobill7637]

@@bhornannawindeedeigh5007 and so's her old man...as she looks to him to do something

[@ugoddessthepoet]

Her and Milian have a lot in common

[@bhornannawindeedeigh5007]

@@rockobill7637 100% agree.

[@cindyoconnell2471]

When the guy bends down, it looks like the top of his head is a scary spider!

[@mymonkey10]

LOL... I thought the same thing!!!

[@cflournoy1529]

That’s what I thought toooooo!!!!😂😂😂😂😂

[@jncuttie]

Lmao!

[@teresalapier9354]

His hair style is odd. Very.

[@missa1goins]

Yes

[@jaz19000]

She’s definitely a piece of work. She took other peoples lives to make next to nothing. You’re not an author if you document history. You’re an historian, and you don’t own history. She also documented a wedding that didn’t exist, so she’s a loony tune.

[@Goldengurl704]

Fair judgement.

[@michelleharper2940]

Ugh. The plaintiff is cringe 🙄 no one cares lady. All those couples SHE wrote about took their stories. Hopefully they sue 😂 what a clown

[@wgmyler]

At the beginning of this clip I was thinking of buying the book. By the end, I decided I didn't want to give one cent to such an irrational and entitled person. Since they cited the author, there's just as much a chance them putting it on the blog INCREASED attention and sales of her book. Her pride got in the way of possibly selling copies of her book. She could've asked them to simply add a hyperlink to the Kindle version of the book. But she'd rather throw a childish fit on national TV.

[@ashleycarr4974]

Exactly same here!! She just needs to be glad some one published some of her stuff to make her relevant again!!

[@lukerinderknecht2982]

Happy Hump Day y'all. 🐫 FINALLY a case that's not about a rental deposit, dog bite or bad car purchase.

[@christopherramon-reid2000]

…or a car being towed, a woman giving a man money after being in a relationship for 5 minutes.

[@bhornannawindeedeigh5007]

​@@christopherramon-reid2000 Oy vey! 😂

[@MrMatteNWk]

Next case: This woman is suing God for destroying a bunch of her unsold books during Hurricane Sandy

[@TooLooze]

I was hoping for a cell phone case.

[@bhornannawindeedeigh5007]

@@TooLooze 🤣 Nice word play!

[@tphipps7665]

The author, (very unlikable), should THANK them for mentioning her book on their blog. The writer is so arrogant. She should be grateful for the free exposure. What an ego!

[@sufferedlearnedchanged]

All she did was compile stories from people. Not her own stories.

[@moniqueengleman873]

The law is the law. From her to Dump. Though this seems very small.

[@LoveNicolette.]

Desi cheated on Lucy all the time and he had a drinking problem. They got divorced, twice.

[@Mimi197-f2z]

THE plaintiff is annoying!!

[@Emily89420]

These arent her stories to tell in the first place! She has some nerve sueing!

[@thebookwasbetter3650]

You try writing Bogey and Bacalls love story and see if its interesting enough to buy. She wasnt writing wikipedia articles.

[@momjeansasmr]

These love stories are from other people’s lives! 😂 they aren’t her personal stories. She’s just profiting off of them.

[@hhusher]

Uh, no. It's called nonfiction

[@lukerinderknecht2982]

@@momjeansasmr she still wrote them and published it

[@momjeansasmr]

@@hhusher some of them are nonfiction but is her assuming what “Adam and Eve’s wedding” is non fiction?

[@GregorySD]

This is what privilege and entitlement looks like.

[@scotthewitt258]

And they will steal again, because the "judge" said it was "okay".....

[@BREEZYM6015]

Don't be a Downer Greg. 😂

[@jj-vu5ov]

in what world does this have to do with entitlement or privilege? or is that just what a radical lefty spouts every time they dont like something

[@her_imperius_condessy]

She published the letters and interviews and stuff. None of that is her own intellectual property to begin with in the first place. And she picked some pretty toxic couples.

[@jeanm9521]

Defendant basically advertised plantiff book and it's very possible that at least some who looked at these purchased plantiff book.

[@jmfallert]

Finally a different type of case

[@NicoleSimmons-e1s]

Ugh, the plaintiff’s attitude has stopped me from even wanting to read the book.

[@ja49jr]

Her book was old and stopped selling years ago. She was after a payday, that's all. The defendants did her a favor and gave her publicity. The plaintiff should pay them.

[@superduperkid3143]

If anything it drove traffic to her work. What an idiot.

[@hadley407]

The plaintiff suffered no damages.. The website might have actually made some people want to buy her book to read more of the stories.

[@AmysExquisiteGifts]

The thing is they didn’t steal her work because they gave her credit. I wish someone would use some of my book and advertise to their audience The defendant was a real class act. It obviously bothered him that she was hurt by the situation and didn’t try and bash her.

[@imjustadrummer]

she's mad her book isn't selling.

[@hhusher]

Books rarely sell like hotcakes after so much time. That said, this is not "fair use"

[@ChasRiaStJohn]

I don’t t think so. she’s upset that someone just took her work and tried to get paid for it. She spent a lot of time and work creating the book in the first place and now someone just took it and is trying to profit off of it. It’s like music. Artists have sued for songs that sound just like their songs all the time.

[@BREEZYM6015]

​@@ChasRiaStJohnIt's still under "fair use" whether you like it or not.

[@imjustadrummer]

@@ChasRiaStJohn lmmfao it is NOTHING like music.

[@VladmirPoopN]

Marilyn and the plaintiff trying to talk over each other had me 😂

[@pmabrouk]

copyright is an important and complex subject. fair use is complicated! you cannot use other people’s intellectual property without permission. You must license their work.

[@nicolewilliams9391]

Someone thinks they are way more important and relevant than they actually are

[@kitkatt24]

This old lady was crazy. She was just trying to make some money. Do you know how many times I quoted someone on my papers for school and college? Plus, these are all facts, not fiction. These could be looked up anywhere. There was no case.

[@fjb-fjb3128]

I think it gives her exposure to her book. How many did she sell whenever it was in the peak 50?

[@markkoeppel7932]

Really didn't see what she was expecting to get from suing them.

[@MBRHUB]

The thing that works against the author/plaintiff is she did 365 stories, so the use of 7 stories is less than 2% of her content.

[@gregshell8570]

The internet is filled with this practice. Her book is old and she put her info out to the public. She loses.

[@deantrujillo9109]

She is very angry at the court system

[@gummybear-wx1vr]

There was absolutely no reason to try and make the defendants look bad; she got free advertising for making a compilation of OTHER people’s relationships 🙄 GREEDY

[@GlockBlocked19]

The plaintiff is literally a nobody. She should be grateful 150 people gave her a moment of their time 😂

[@0LadyV0]

How do want to control all access to other people's stories, that anyone could come across, doing the same research she did? Especially historical figures. She's reaching.

[@leofredette19]

A passion project is why she is so upset.

[@LIVEINPEACE2023]

The book is currently on Amazon!

[@johnmccree8941]

Plaintiff has a spider 🕷️ on his head.

[@missa1goins]

@johnmccree8941, defendant

[@johnmccree8941]

@missa1goins Yeah...I realized that after I sent it. Figured it might go unoticed. What i get for figgerin '... lol 😆

[@toddgrooten700]

How many people heard of the plaintiff's book before this case? They should have asked permission to use her work, but she's making a mountain out of a molehill. I doubt they made millions in wedding officiating fees because they used it. She's just some bitter old Karen. How many of the hits were from her looking at their website?

[@jasonbowman709]

What an absolute Karen.

[@magicworld3242]

I don't understand "The Plaintiff". Why is she suing anybody ? She didn't write anything. All she did was research and copied the stories of other couples. She's just greedy. You could buy that book for a dollar online. Good Bye Lady. Stop being ridiculous.

[@rezotydnic]

Ridiculous

[@christopherramon-reid2000]

Free advertising!

[@WillemLeeuwenhart]

A 10 to 15 year old book. Hello, lady, there is non-value there. Sorry. (How many copies of her original book did she sell anyway…?) This is a case of a blown up ego.

[@gummybear-wx1vr]

🤣🤣🤣 she wants to cry 😆👏🏽

[@LeeJ90]

The judge wanted the lawyer to speak so she could have someone to argue with 😂

[@ShanetteLewis]

she should be glad someone read that crap!

[@nunya8010]

If your saying its fair use then why keep saying they were in the wrong, its either fair use or it isn't,even at the end the judge says don't put it back up...but its fair use!?

[@kenma8806]

As a Photographer, I understand the argument, as with Facebook, IG, TT and everything else, "fair use" is a thing and at the same time you need to protect your art.. I have many times sent out notes to either the Social Media site or directly to the person or entity to remove posts.. But then many times people ask me if they can post it, and those people I will give limited rights to so they could post something on their own page... It is always best to contact the author, creator or artist for permission.. Many times they will give that.. All that said, I love when this subject comes up on here or other shows..

[@phoenixrising1242]

Cases hasn't started and I am already lmao at the karen plaintiff. 😂😂😂😂

[@MikeNelli-uq2wl]

There was nobody buying your book for a $170. It's just not true

[@billyjobobb]

She had a giant platform to sell more copies of her book, and copies of her next book. She came across as someone I don’t want to support by buying her work…

[@SIG442]

She puts love stories from other people on paper, distributes it as if it were her own ideas. That would indicate that she used what doesn't belong to her to gain profits. That means she is just as guilty as the other party of the very same thing.

[@donseiler1307]

The plaintiff is rude.

[@YayAvocados]

The plaintiffs should have been happy for the free advertising on the defendant’s blog! What a piece of work she is 🙄

[@thefonzkiss]

So it’s not even for sale anymore! She said it’s only available from used book sellers!

[@dance4life1208]

This book doesn’t sound interesting why would I want to read about prominent peoples relationships that we can just google

[@crystalshaw8744]

What an interesting kind of boring case.

[@LisetteOlds]

She really missed an opportunity to market her product.

[@babsdolson]

What a fool. Who cares where you see something?

[@DanLee8884]

As a preacher, I find this case extremely confusing. They gave her credit, gave her free publicity, and basically encouraged her readers, be it 150 people, to buy her book if they like the stories. Someone liked it enough to use her work. Isnt this shooting yourself in the foot or cutting your nose off to spite your face? This is no where near copyright infringement or no one in the world would be able to quote anyone in anything. I take copyright infringement very seriously. I have heard some preacher who dont. Their "personal experiences" sound the same as others I have heard elsewhere...very fishy and lacks integrity. My professor use to say, "when in doubt, site it..." I have even had contact with some authors and they all responded humbly that someone quoted them. Like others said, in this particular case, she may have written them down but these stories don't even belong to her. She really needs to understand this...edit: if the defendant is using whole stories verbatim, 7 of them, but citing them, that might not be consider plagerism, maybe it is just lazy writing? I do think still that the harm here is negligible and the plaintiff comes off very entitled.

[@lukerinderknecht2982]

This isn't quite fair use, just republished 3000 words, entire chapters, from this lady's work - not a few sentences. Having said that, the damages here are basically nothing.

[@DanLee8884]

@lukerinderknecht2982 yeah I took a walk after seeing this and I had second thoughts. I am assuming it is random sentences here and there but if she is quoting large sections and doing this 7 times, the defendants wife needs to read other books and include other examples. I have written many sermons and papers and I have never quoted the same author 7 times let alone large, entire stories. She is married, she should use her own life examples. People love that but then you have to ask ur spouse for permission.

[@1967davethewave]

This gal should have been happy to get the publicity. People going the wedding website might have liked the 7 stories and actually gone a purchased the whole book to get the rest. She thinks writing about another person's love story is so unique. It isn't, it's just high school book report with a fancy cover.

[@taurussho86]

She sounds kinda rude

[@chrissygoodrich1856]

The defendant was so sincere! But if this case was happening now; he might have had to pay something. No one knew, then, the marketing capabilities of social media.

[@wezzman1]

If the book was recent i would be on the plaintiff side, but the thing is decades old and on eBay of £1. Get over yourself love.🙄

[@heyokakoyeh]

The wife should have just created her own content about the people she featured on her site and skipped crediting the book that their stories were published in.

[@goingrogue2236]

Honestly, there are now 154 more people who know about her ancient manuscript. NOTHING in here writing is privileged information that couldn't be found from a Google search.

[@noelhine3794]

The lady is just made that she believes in her book so much... And sucks that it's not making her any profit 😭

[@broeheemed32]

Wait a minute. These aren't the plaintiff's stories..... they're stories of things that happened to OTHER PEOPLE. She stole their stories, and profited from them. Maybe they should all sue her. One million. Each!

[@warrenmooney9422]

The plaintiff is ridiculous and wasn't damaged one bit and if anything was helped.

[@MomIrregardless]

um, doesnt the guy making reference to her book give her free advertising? i would think she should be grateful for the exposure.....

[@zoeg7985]

Interestingly enough their posting it may have pointed potential purchasers to her book. Certainly the interest the judge showed made people aware of her book. And it was a bit disingenuous of the defendant to say his wife was a person of faith, she’s an officiant who can simply get their “license” online

[@donseiler1307]

Did the plaintiff pay the subjects for their stories? Did she get permission?

[@KEBinAZ]

Defendant reminds me of Mark Ruffalo! And Plaintiff wrote a forgotten book that most people have never heard of and wants $5K.

[@margaretakins6829]

She got free advertising with the 154 clicks.

[@danielledudley3520]

Can someone explain to me what part of what they did was wrong? They gave her credit when they cited her name in the article. Wouldn't that bring more traffic to purchase her book? Confused.