August 24, 2004

stop! thief!

I'm being plagiarized!

Dear Plagiarist,

Two thousand people read my website every day. Two thousand people will now know you did not write, "Is that a Hickey."

If you continue to try passing my writing off as yours, very bad things will happen. Take it down RIGHT now. I will not be nice about this.

Fuck you very much,


Posted by This Fish at August 24, 2004 03:15 PM

nothing short of a public flogging!!

Posted by: shelley at August 24, 2004 03:24 PM

tequila mockingbird might be able to help you... I know she has been plagarized as well in the last year. I'm guessing you are protected under a creative commons license. Good luck!

Posted by: kimmikim at August 24, 2004 03:28 PM

Wow.....that's an exact copy of your post. How ballsy!

They say copying someone is the highest form of flattery. If you're not flattered I say send the lady an e-mail and ask her why. Otherwise the public flogging works!

Posted by: DF at August 24, 2004 03:38 PM

What??? Tar and feathering might be in order here! There's no excuse for that!

Posted by: The Lobster at August 24, 2004 03:41 PM

the san francisco gate.
esquire magazine.

her theft knows no bounds. knows no shame.

let me know if you want to go with me to tp her house.

also: two thousand?! dude. you're an internet rock star. even more than i already thought. what do i have to do to get a permanent link on this thing, anyway? damn, gina...i gave the big heads up on the plagiarism thing...isn't that permanent-link-worthy? ;)

file that complaint with blogger. asap.

Posted by: julia at August 24, 2004 04:00 PM

Oh, Julia, you DO have one. It's just hiding down there... I shall move it up post haste!

Posted by: Fish at August 24, 2004 04:03 PM

i meant more than a recipro-link. like a place-of-honor link.


okay, when you have to go back and clarify your joke, it really wasn't worth the effort.

please disregard previous efforts at humor.

thanks much.

Posted by: julia at August 24, 2004 04:03 PM


Posted by: kat at August 24, 2004 04:06 PM

i like the note you wrote... keep us posted on the response, please. it's just so base and classless on her part! i want to know what she has to say for herself.

Posted by: lara at August 24, 2004 04:08 PM


Posted by: Lady Crumpet at August 24, 2004 04:16 PM

Deep fried.

With the basket and everything.

Posted by: Paul Gutman at August 24, 2004 04:19 PM

I was led here through all the bad shit happening w/ lack of original ideas and I really like this place. Good things do come from bad at times.

Posted by: Mish at August 24, 2004 04:20 PM

For SHAME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Over heard at the library my ass! No one can pretend to be Fish, not no one, not no how!!!!!!!

I say we find her and send her lots of nasty emails........

Posted by: Iferlynn at August 24, 2004 04:23 PM

Yours isn't the only site she's plagiarized. I looked at some of her recent entries, and her july 26th entry belongs to someone else too.

Posted by: Judy at August 24, 2004 04:24 PM

She needs a good smiting.

What a retard. I mean really, a total oxygen thief.

Shes kind of a troll too.

Posted by: girlpunch at August 24, 2004 04:28 PM

What's odd is that pre-dates (this stems from the comment above that emu is plagiarizing someone else. Who knows, emu's entire blog could be plagiarized from other blogs).

Maybe emu just wants the traffic.

(I'm anon. cos I'm a little embarrassed about having too much time to look into this.)

Posted by: anon at August 24, 2004 04:45 PM

definately a troll

Posted by: alice at August 24, 2004 04:46 PM

btw, how did you know she stole it in the first place?

Posted by: alice at August 24, 2004 04:46 PM

What friggen nerve. All your readers should link to your post about her post, so everyone knows. Maybe that will shame her into silence.

I'm gonna.

Posted by: Steph at August 24, 2004 04:50 PM

oh.. to anon... BTW.
On blogger you can change the date to anything you want. So I could post today, but put the date as January 1. Even though I didn't start my blog until April of this year, I would have a post in January.

It's possible. That's how you can claim someone else's work as your own.

Posted by: Steph at August 24, 2004 04:58 PM

Hey Anon- I have way too much time to look into this too.

From what I can tell, the vast majority of inflatable emu is stolen from other places. The post I mentioned above was posted by emu in July of 2004, when the one she stole it from was posted August 2003. I thought the same thing at first glance.

I emailed kellybean and let her know- you might want to email her Fish and see if she wants to join forces. I for one have sent blogger an email about emu, as plagiarism violates Blogger's terms of service.

Posted by: Judy at August 24, 2004 04:59 PM

Even the posts that are mostly quotes are stolen!

Posted by: emily at August 24, 2004 05:06 PM

Weird. It's like some creepy scene from Single White Female. Why would someone do this? Do they think they'll get away with it? Really, I want to know.

Posted by: NEIN at August 24, 2004 05:26 PM

Oh, after reading a few other posts, I think I see why.

Posted by: NEIN at August 24, 2004 05:29 PM

that sneaky, stealing, unscrupulous little emu isn't going to know what's hit her... i noticed she doesn't have a comments feature (or she has since disabled it)... i think i fear being plagiarized more than i have hated to have been the subject of public ridicule (and still am to this day) on a website. anything you need from me to rally behind you, girl, and you know you've got it.

Posted by: sassylittlepunkin at August 24, 2004 05:53 PM

I got started reading blogs (yours, "the bird," Sour Bob, Blog on the Run) around the time "the bird" was dealing with the Brian Lamb situation. It is unbelievable that someone would do that.

I'll watch with continued interest.

Posted by: jw at August 24, 2004 06:26 PM

She calls herself intelligent in her profile--more like an intellectual property thief. Takes no brains to cut and paste and to then think that she'd not be caught.

I am so sorry this happened to you--she deserves to have her site taken down, as such stealing should not be tolerated.

Posted by: Rachel at August 24, 2004 06:41 PM

Even her profile is plagiarized (from and
and This should give us an idea of her level of "intelligence."

- A reader for a while now.

Posted by: lbc at August 24, 2004 07:16 PM

crazy. how embarrassing to be her.

Posted by: em at August 24, 2004 07:50 PM

Oh. My. God.

Must say, you don't even need to do a search to tell she's plagiarized half her content - the writing style's completely different. As in, half of it doesn't suck...

Go get her, Fish.

Posted by: Dani at August 24, 2004 07:55 PM

if i weer going to plagiarize, i would also post a picture of someone much hotter to claim as my own.

Posted by: susan at August 24, 2004 08:02 PM

um, that is, if i WERE going to, not weer...

Posted by: susan at August 24, 2004 08:03 PM

the little skank!
i'm with steph on this one, i'm linking to this post on my bloggie.
what a blatant rip-off! and she doesn't even have the balls to enable comments on her site...
(or perhaps she doesn't have the, erm, intelligence? hey, i figured it out and i'm a web-illiterate wee thing)

Posted by: eroica at August 24, 2004 08:24 PM

This from a girl who plagiarizes U2 in the title of her blog. Fuck YOU very much, you hypocrite. You're so lame. And your blog reads like a bad Sex and the City Spec.

Posted by: aric at August 24, 2004 08:44 PM

Wow, verbatim too - I wonder why she did that.... sad though... i feel sorry for her.

you should put yourself down for Creative Commons License - i've been meaning to do that..

How did you find the plagiarizing post, curiously enough?

Posted by: writersbloc gal at August 24, 2004 08:48 PM

She's a fool.

Posted by: Cristina at August 24, 2004 09:27 PM


Okay, first, are you fucking serious?! U2 ripped "Fish needs bicycle" off a famous feminist from the 1960's... who is QUOTED and GIVEN CREDIT in the headline of my blog. Ass fuck.

Posted by: Fish at August 24, 2004 09:33 PM

fish - you rock.

Posted by: tlc at August 24, 2004 09:45 PM

oh good god.

i was going to say ... u2 stole that phrase! heheh.

Posted by: kasey at August 24, 2004 11:22 PM

and from the plagiarizer's website, i offer this wonderful tidbit from her profile:

'so, let's see...somewhat conscientious'

what the hell kind of exams have proven her intelligence?

gracious me. she's so totally uncool. you, fish, are the best!

Posted by: mickey g at August 24, 2004 11:46 PM

Oh man, the nerve of some people! She should have put "over read at the fish blog" instead of overheard at the library. Bah....I guess she thought with all the blogs running around that she could get away with it. Please, do let us know!

Posted by: Woman of Scorn at August 24, 2004 11:51 PM

I'm not going to repeat what's been said above. The clear message is that given what I read in Entertainment Weekly this week, it's ALL ABOUT THE FISH:

"A jerk dukes it out with a stud for a girl in Beverly Hills, 90210 alumnus Brian "A." Green's directing debut FISH WITHOUT A BICYCLE."

Posted by: Esther at August 25, 2004 01:04 AM

Thank you Fish, for geting to Aric first.

hey Aric, what are you, TWELVE? Let me guess, you probably also think that the new Starsky and Hutch movie is an original.


Things DID happen before 1985 you dolt.

Ok, that's all. Fish, you are copied because noone coulda said it better themselves. Unfortunately though, it's still a lame-ass thing to do, and I will cut her if you want...

Posted by: Angie at August 25, 2004 01:12 AM

How strange. I don't get the point of it all? I always thought the point of blogging was that it was an opportunity to tell your story your way. She clearly doesn't quite understand the nature of the internet. Australia isn't that far away. Underneath it all, is it just a little bit flattering? I know she hasn't stolen anything from ME, because I don't writ so good.

Posted by: mr mcmuffin at August 25, 2004 02:26 AM

did anyone else notice there are no comments on the theif's page? wonder why that is?

Posted by: chewy at August 25, 2004 02:32 AM

My wife pointed out your blog and the plagarism complaint. There is recourse, if you're interested in taking it that far.

You can always lodge an official copyright complaint against that person. The Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA) set specific requirements on web publishers; in this case Google.

Google's copyright policy is provided at:

It is pretty much the same policy given at Yahoo! and all other web sites like that. If you'd like to compare them, Yahoo!'s copyright policy is at:

I'm not a lawyer, but it seems you have sufficient evidence supporting your claim, based on edit dates provided by the system. Most likely, the other person wouldn't contest your complaint and would just remove the post.

The downsides to making a DMCA complaint is that, from my understanding, the person you are complaining about would have your address. That is required by the law. They could also file a counter notification signing under penalty of perjury that you're wrong. Then you'd need to go to court to prove your case.

Of course, I'm probably simplifying things though I'm probably not too far off. A couple of good sites about the DMCA on both sides of the debate are:
and and .

Personally, I'd continue what you're doing. Write about your experiences with being plagarized. Contact the blogger her and let her know that you'd appreciate the credit you're due. Let her know you're aware of the DMCA and the recourse it offers and that if she continues her dirty tricks you'll go forward with an official complaint. If anything, an actual DMCA complaint to Google should scare her.

Hope that helps.


Posted by: Dan at August 25, 2004 02:46 AM

Wow. That's nervy.

And double-wow to Aric. That's just stupid.

Posted by: Beverly at August 25, 2004 03:08 AM

Weird. Why would anyone bother to do that?

And Aric is some sort of freakish masochist if he/she/it continues to read and comment on someone's blog that so obviously pisses him/her/it off so much.

Posted by: Lisa at August 25, 2004 08:16 AM

this is just amazingly weired

Posted by: lassy at August 25, 2004 08:28 AM

Strange story. Even when starting her blog, this emu-girl did steal most of the content. She didn't write her own introduction, either! Compare the archive 06/20/2004 with and The only genuine text of this week is 'The Road Trip That Was'. Guess she wants to impress some guy or her friends...

Posted by: Gray at August 25, 2004 08:30 AM

Maybe the whole point of her blog is to plagiarize other blogs. It's a gimmicky sort of thing to do, don't you think? If EVERY single one of her posts is stolen, then she could have some sort of performance art thing in mind. You know? And then, by plagiarizing well-read blogs, she'd get lots of hits. Like the ones we all gave her today by reading her blog from Fish's link. I too was outraged, and looked for a comments button to say "STOP!!!!" but found not a one. I say we all notify Blogger, though.

This is definitely NOT tolerable.

Posted by: Kim at August 25, 2004 08:59 AM

What I suggest is that everyone outraged write to blogger something like this email I just sent them. (It's not plagiarism if the original writer suggests you copy it!)
Go to this link:

and write:

Dear Blogger:
The blogger at the following link is plagiarizing (blatantly) other blogs.

The post which has alerted me to this plagiarism was written by a blogger I have read for a year, who has very original content, and whose blog entry matches her style much more than this EMU person. Also, if you look at the comments at the post that alerted me to this, you'll see that other people who have investigated the EMU blog have seen that she has plagiarized many other blogs-- in fact, she probably hasn't written a single original word, since even her profile appears to be stolen. Since this is a violation of Blogger TOS, you ought to shut her down. This is intolerable.

Thank you.

::insert your own name here::

Posted by: Kim at August 25, 2004 09:05 AM

The crew over at have had about ten posts stolen by Inflatable Emu. They've also cracked the mystery surrounding Caroline's identity:

Posted by: Flashman at August 25, 2004 09:39 AM

Oops, should have made that last one a link:

Here it is again

Posted by: Flashman at August 25, 2004 09:40 AM

as per above, that sucks big hairy ones

would just like to apologise on behalf of all australians. if i see her walking down the street i'll be sure to king-hit her for you.

Posted by: cara at August 25, 2004 09:59 AM

What a maniac! Let me know if you desire her head on a platter....

Posted by: Stimulant at August 25, 2004 10:30 AM

It's getting deeper by the minute.

Posted by: Shan at August 25, 2004 10:30 AM

What a crackhead.

Posted by: Li at August 25, 2004 10:32 AM

What an ass. She is freaky. People need to get thier OWN life not yours!

Posted by: Chigirl at August 25, 2004 11:09 AM

From what I know, this girl is a criminal. She is in the US illegally, and is trying to get a job as an au pair in the Chicago area. She owes money to many of the families she worked for, lies on her resume, gets friends to be her own references, and is on the "most wanted list" at She not only plagiarizes, she victimizes little kids. Horrible.

I read your blog almost daily. Hope you don't mind my comments. Go Fish! I hope you get this straightened out.

Posted by: M at August 25, 2004 11:40 AM

and her most recent entry about using brit phrases? i know i read that somewhere else. i just can't remember where at the moment.

Posted by: becky at August 25, 2004 11:56 AM

Jesus - she is a wackjob.

This was one of her first posts:

" My Definition of Adulthood

Quick thought before bedtime following a discussion I had this evening.

For my money, you're officially an adult when your If-I-Won-the-Lottery fantasies stop beginning with the phrase "First, I'd buy..." and start beginning instead with the words, "First, I'd pay off..."

posted by - C - at 12:01 AM "

Those who don't recognize it, look here:

I know a couple of you already mentioned Bob, but I didn't think she was that stupid to plagarize HIS LAST POST. Seriously - Bob gets PISSED about this stuff too. Someone tell him he's been 'Lamb'ed again.

Posted by: Angie at August 25, 2004 12:34 PM

Criminey! She doesn't even have the balls to have comments.

Posted by: GrumpyBunny at August 25, 2004 01:16 PM

great censorship! any critism directed towards your site regarding this matter has been conveniently deleted. great job!

Posted by: Dave at August 25, 2004 01:28 PM

No, 'Dave' that's not the case.
Any comment left under false pretenses has been deleted. Do not leave a comment under MY name. It will be deleted EVERY time without regard for its content. No exceptions.
Why don't you put that in your Zen pipe and smoke it?

Posted by: Fish at August 25, 2004 01:49 PM

Geez. People are insane. Sorry that you have to deal with this shit, Fish.

Posted by: Daniella at August 25, 2004 02:16 PM

That is utter bullshit. Shame on her for rippin' you off. After reading through her pages, I noticed that the post from August 15th re: cell phones is directly copied and pasted from Mark Morford's columb in the S.F. Gate.

Compare: (FAKE!) and (REAL!)

What a jerk.

Posted by: Meredith at August 25, 2004 02:37 PM

THe most recent post is:


Posted by: Li at August 25, 2004 03:29 PM

This girl in un-f'ing believable! I'm been reading all the comments & links & just can't believe the GALL this woman has. Fish, you are awesome. Anything I can do to help. Although, I don't have any ideas, but let me know.

Posted by: Scarlett at August 25, 2004 04:06 PM

I do believe if you did choose to censor your site, that's perfectly acceptable...

As for Ms. Inflatable-Emu, not only is she a sub-par speller, she's also an idiot. Like we wouldn't ALL know you really wrote that entry.

Posted by: Mandy at August 25, 2004 04:12 PM

What a blog-stalker?!? Semi-qouted from the god father, 'tonight she sleeps with the fishes'.

As for Aric, dude think before you speak so you don't look like an ass. The truth can be a powerful thing.

Posted by: azzy at August 25, 2004 04:14 PM

I'm amazed!!!!! It was once suggested to me that I should create a blog that is a compilation of blogs that I love (since I'm constantly linking people such blogs). But I didn't want to take away from the universe that it is blogs and make it somehow something that belongs to me; after all, it does not. But this is taking it to a 'whole new level. And, Aric ("get-a-clue aric" from this moment forward), fish not only did not plagiarize as she explains the source boldly and accurately, but for anyone who has studied American Feminist Thought 101, gives persons seeking entertaining blogs an immediate point of reference about who she is and her level of education (indeed, by your comment aric, so have you; you might want to supplement yours for that matter). The plagiarist, on the other hand, has taken fish’s words and made them her own. That is unforgivable. Inasmuch as we all know whose words they are, including the plagiarist, she will have to live knowing she’s a fake and a fraud. Is there any worse punishment?

Posted by: therese at August 25, 2004 04:42 PM

That's so BAD BAD BAD. WE DON'T LIKE her.

Notice how she starts her bio with talk about being self-centered? Gah!

Posted by: Shiz at August 25, 2004 05:44 PM

Whoa! She's plagarizing EVERYTHING.

Her Aug 10 post is from:
Her Aug 10th post is from here:
Her Aug 9th post is found here:

What a beeatch.

Posted by: Shiz at August 25, 2004 05:49 PM

who cares? I mean in the big scheme of things with all the words that are out there, who the hell really cares? You know you wrote it...she knows she didn't. Who cares? I think I'll steal every entry here and make it mine because in the end...who cares????

Posted by: k at August 25, 2004 08:12 PM

Regarding Emu, what everyone else already said. It pissed me off when I heard she was yanking from Tequila Mockingbird. It pisses me off all over again after seeing she's doing it to many.

But the real reason I commented: 2,000 daily readers? Damn! I get excited when I get into double-digits. Now I have major counter envy.

Posted by: Robert at August 25, 2004 10:35 PM

wow. it's one of those things were you get defeated by your own anger b/c she is a piece of shit and I clicked your link to her and now I saw her site and I wish I had not. It's like that dirty 70s porn that was so freaky you wish you looked away before the image was implanted in your brain.

Posted by: PeeKay at August 25, 2004 11:23 PM

I agree with k, you know you wrote it, she knows she didn't, GET OVER IT! I read this site often, it is ussually rather good so please dont think of me as some troll who is just trying to start a fight, but come on now, get over yourself, geez.

Posted by: dave at August 25, 2004 11:25 PM

holy hell. that girl is dumber than dumber. if I was going to do something like that, I would at least PRE_DATE the entry!!!! sheesh!!! and make YOU look like the imposter. she can't be all that clever at all.

Posted by: Crackpot at August 25, 2004 11:25 PM

it matters because there is a line between posting someone's work and crediting them and between passing it off as your own. if she is simply an admirerer of fish's work (as many of us are!) she should have attributed the piece to her and provided a link, or she should have printed a copy out and pasted it in her scrapbook if it meant so much to her. but to sign her crafty little 'c' to it is nothing short of fraudulent and plagiaristic, and absolutely without a doubt matters. there is little precedent for incidents such as this, being as we are practically all writing the code book on electronic publishing, literature and communication daily as bloggers and blog-readers. but there is such a thing as ethics, and standards, and a simple concept known as right and wrong. to pass something off as your own is simply wrong. and that matters.

Posted by: sassylittlepunkin at August 26, 2004 12:55 AM

The intelligent replies by sassy and fish are really just one more reason they are both loved and respected. And right.

Oh, wait. Let me say that again.


Which are three things people who do what she did seem to want most badly in a world that will never give it to them but will never be able to understand why. We all have a basic right to say what we want. But no one has a right to take what others say and pretend it's their own. And nothing anyone can say will ever convince me of that.

Especially badly written and misspelled anonymous comments.

Posted by: Jen at August 26, 2004 02:01 AM

Sit back, H.

I got this one.

Posted by: Sour Bob at August 26, 2004 04:49 AM

Oh, man, Fish. Sour Bob is on the case. This is gonna be FUN.

Posted by: Lex at August 26, 2004 06:24 AM

Seems she has more problems than just ganking off peoples' websites:

Posted by: Elizabeth at August 26, 2004 08:39 AM

Yes WE know Fish wrote it, yes WE know Sourbob wrote it, yes WE know Julia wrote it (and others)- thats not the point - if we aren't vigilant now about protecting digital copyright - regardless of where the infraction occurs or however insignificant it might seem, whats going to stop someone from passing off entries in a creative writing class, or in a more traditional publishing medium. Just because its the web and copy/paste/publish is so damn easy doesn't mean its okay to take liberties with the rights of a author/artist. Caroline is stealing - plain and simple - and thats always wrong regardless of the medium.

and OH.MY.GOD. hell hath no fury like SourBob scorned.

Posted by: tlc at August 26, 2004 09:01 AM

YAY! I'm so glad to see Sour Bob on the case!

The issue sometimes my students don't understand about intellectual property theft.

Plagiarism is that. It steals someone else's ideas. Sure, on a blog, or a poem, or whatever, it's not an idea that right now is making a million bucks or something. But what if I took my computer software, scribbled out Bill Gates' address and said "Kim Wells Microsore ScreenDoors". And tried to say "well, yeah, I invented this. And my copy is only 5.99." Then everyone would see what was wrong with that-- you're stealing people's livelihood, money right out of their pocket.

Writers make a living with their words, their ideas, their clever turns of phrase. It DOES matter when and if someone steals it. It matters just as much as if they walk into your house and take your checkbook, taking all the money out of your bank account. If stealing is wrong, and we pretty much all say it is, then stealing IDEAS is wrong too.

Quite clearly, it matters, because otherwise, why would 85 people (give or take the few trolls) be commenting? There are usually between 10 & 20 comments on this blog. I keep checking back because it gives me a sick feeling to see that smug face on the cheater stealer liar's website "getting away with it." And I want her to take the damn thing down!

Tequila Mockingbird's post said it really well: you don't HAVE to have a blog. (this is my interpretation of TM's post) It's not like someone has a gun to your head and forces you to put together this entity known as an internet diary/journal. You don't have to steal someone else's life to post on a blog you claim as your own. Why do it? It IS sick in that Single White Female sort of way. Sick. Sick. And if you don't get that, then imagine someone knocking you on the head and taking your life away from you. Your thoughts, your livlihood, etc. Taking whatever is your most precious possession away. That is what our thoughts are to writers-- one of our most precious possessions. If you don't get that-- then there's little hope you'll understand. But those of us who do are all for this Emu chick getting her comeuppance.

Posted by: Kim at August 26, 2004 10:31 AM

To those of you who think Fish is making much ado about nothing . . . Ideas are a fundamental aspect of intellectual property rights. Fish has every right to be angry (if not litigious) about such a theft. Indeed, she wouldn’t be the righteous woman we’ve all grown to love were she not so angry. Until you’ve had your ideas (much less words) stolen, perhaps you shouldn’t judge a person for recognizing entitlement to their own. But first, my friend, you’ll have to come up with some ideas worth stealing.

As a part of the blog audience, I CARE when someone plagiarizes another bloger's work. I wouldn’t be interested in reading the blog of a person who fraudulently steels the life and ideas of another and passes them off as her own (talk about S.W.F.). It defeats the whole purpose of having a blog –where you log your daily exploits, feelings, experiences and ideas (or whatever else you want to do with it). What makes fish’s blog so interesting is she takes her precious little NYC time to write what we’re thinking and feeling (and then some). She has the courage to share it with those of us who either don’t have a clue, or don’t have the time, creativity, or inclination (but still need to feel like we’re not alone). Indeed, caring is what blogs are all about -- caring, exploring, creating and sharing. So for all of you who don’t give a rat’s ass about integrity in blogging, perhaps you should log off.

Posted by: therese at August 26, 2004 10:52 AM

Amen, Therese!

Posted by: Sara at August 26, 2004 11:04 AM

My friend Naho and I are both Illustrators. Imagine my surprise one day when I got an email from Naho in Tokyo (I'm in NYC too fish) telling me that her ENTIRE site had been ripped off by this girl: - not only had she ripped off Naho's site she had taken all sorts of things from mine as well and used them to promote herself as a self-trained illustrator.

I was so pissed off I cannot even tell you. However, few angry emails did the trick. I'm going to that girl's blog right now to post a message telling her not to plagarize. It's just wrong.

Posted by: Sally at August 26, 2004 11:43 AM

Just a second... {bangs in a nail} ...There.

The Bryan Lamb wing of the Robert Service Memorial Gulag for Web Trolls is now open for business. I just hope that there's enough left of her to incarcerate when Sourbob is done.

To all above who explained why this is wrong with such beauty and passion, thanks. Yah meet the classiest people in this joint.

Posted by: Coelecanth at August 26, 2004 11:51 AM

there's a nice hotmail address begging for hatemail posted on her self-promo website here:

Posted by: Grooviegirlie at August 26, 2004 12:35 PM

i would like to point OUT that the "k" who posted was not me.

Posted by: k at August 26, 2004 02:00 PM

I didn't see any contact info. on her blog so I wrote to blogger.

Posted by: sally at August 26, 2004 05:15 PM

dear fish,

without bothering with the DMCA (an obnoxious piece of legislation) you should know that you *already* have a copyright in your piece, and if you register that copyright (and a few other minor details), you have a right to sue. while suing is more time, effort, and cash than its probably worth in this case, registering copyright on your pieces might not be--your pieces are quite marketable and it might be a wise business move. this is the copyright office's website--it has a helpful faq and instructions to register: As a law student, I think I have to say this is not "real legal advice from a lawyer," but I think it's good practical advice from a reader ;o)

Posted by: joi at August 26, 2004 09:39 PM

1. Been reading this blog for some time now and really enjoy it

2. I have absolutely fuck all better to do with my time at the moment so with a little googling discovered several plagiarized posts and sent emails or left comments to let them know.

3. Clearly, I have no life, but I still wouldn't STEAL to create the appearance of a life from others. I don't even steal links without giving credit where credit is due.

Keep up the good work.

Posted by: Miss Lis at August 27, 2004 01:37 AM

ironic that on a comment about thievery I should get my url wrong and direct to a website that's not mine...

Posted by: Miss Lis at August 27, 2004 02:13 AM

why am I not suprised that comes back as a 404. Or is that just my server that allows me to see every site but his?

I'm shocked. Shocked, I say.

Posted by: Jen at August 28, 2004 03:03 AM

erm. and, go fish! you have more backing you up than not. I would direct you to this....

which, frankly, surprised me. I guess that those of us who get very little feedback don't feel what you and dooce and sassy and alex do.

What I am completely flabbergasted by, is the amount of sad and pathetic people who are just not 'picking up what you're putting down'.

Don't worry though, even though we seem to not say it as much as 'them' all of you are loved and cherished. Remember that.

and each of us will do our best to remove those people from the internetweb who do not have the ability to be open-minded and .... happy with themselves.

Peace, fish, you are more important than we tell you, more often than we tell you.

And that is more about our fear of being great bigasskissers than it is about your talent and your ability to affect each and every one of us in a good way.

because you do. every day.

Posted by: Jen at August 28, 2004 03:11 AM

The plagiarist's blog is gone.

Heavens to betsy.

Posted by: Sour Bob at August 30, 2004 01:21 PM

I know...and it's a damn shame too since I was looking forward to the wrath of Sour Bob

Posted by: Brian, the 646 Guy at August 30, 2004 05:04 PM

Umm, I think that was the wrath of Sour B.

Posted by: NEIN at September 1, 2004 02:34 PM