Comments on: Who Gets to Plagiarize?

By: dollmansion

dollmansion — Fri, 15 Jan 2010 09:36:54 +0000

We are BJD (ball joint dolls) accessories manufacturer in Hong Kong, China, our brand [dollmansion]. Here are many new accessories for bjd dolls; Shoes, Wig, Hat, Bag, Clothing, Furniture, Bird cage, Watch, Musical instrument and so on. Welcome to visit our site.

[dollmansion] primary objective: Providing customers with high quality products, Customer satisfaction.

http://www.dollmansion.net

www dollmansion net

By: Sarah TX

Sarah TX — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 16:03:50 +0000

It really saddens me (but does not surprise me) when plagiarism by the successful is hand-waved away. My undergraduate institution had very strict punishments for a variety of ethical violations, including plagiarism. If it was discovered, even 10 years later, that someone had plagiarized a dissertation (required for graduation) to the extent shown here, that person would have their diploma revoked and their current employer would be notified. This man should undeniably have his Ph.D. revoked if a dissertation was part of his Ph.D. acceptance work.

By: dms

dms — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 00:02:05 +0000

I find it fascinating that no one wants to take the president out of his position, but accusations of plagiarism (which were researched, and were unfounded) caused Ward Churchill of University of Colorado @ Boulder to be suspended… And he was said to have plagiarized significantly less text! Of course, Churchill had said a LOT of unpopular things at that point, so there was more momentum to try to remove him. Still, I’m really struck by the difference in the treatment of these 2 men.

By: FNC

FNC — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 01:18:28 +0000

Lance, I don’t think I’m missing the point, so correct me if I’m wrong. The question, as stated, has an obvious answer, namely, the one I gave. Moreover, even supposing the question is “how do you tell your students that it’s not ok to plagiarize, when the president of the university has gotten away with it,” the answer ought to remain the same. Your explanation for why it’s not acceptable to plagiarize–your justification for plagiarism being a moral transgression–need not have anything to do with whether there are or fail to be consequences for the action.

Take your example. Clearly, at least it seems to me, you do not mean to suggest that your pointing out to your student that Charles Manson is being punished for his crime constitutes a reason for his crime or action being immoral. No. His action is immoral, irrespective of whether he’s punished for it or not. So, I think my point stands: one does not tell one’s student that she ought to avoid it because she may get in trouble for it. One tells the student that she should avoid it because it’s immoral, and maybe add a fie to Meehan for being immoral.

By: Lance

Lance — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 19:29:50 +0000

FNC, I fear you’re missing a major part of the point there, which is not that someone in authority transgressed, but that someone in authority transgressed without consequences. Taking your “murder” substitution and modifying it in that regard: “How do you tell your students that they can’t murder people, but admit that some person in a position of authority murdered someone and when the murder was discovered, it was overlooked or brushed aside as unimportant?”

If a student says to me, “I murdered someone and took their homework–but Charles Manson murdered someone, so that’s acceptable, right?” I can happily point out that, no, he in fact is being punished for that action, and also please wait here while I call the police. But if a student says to me, “I plagiarized someone–but William Meehan plagiarized, so that’s acceptable, right?”, I can try to explain that no, it’s not acceptable for Meehan to have done it, but as long as there are no consequences for Meehan, it undermines my claim that it’s not acceptable.

By: FNC

FNC — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 09:46:58 +0000

In your conclusion you wrote: “how do you tell your students they can’t plagiarize but admit that the president’s dissertation was largely copied?”

The answer is so obvious that it’s a stupid question: one tells one’s students that plagiarism is dishonest, and punishable, and that they are forbidden from doing it, and that just because some people transgress, doesn’t make it alright for them to transgress. Imagine substituting for “plagiarism” the word “murder”. Would this be an interesting question? No: how do you tell your students that they can’t murder people, but admit that some person in a position of authority murdered someone?

Plagiarism is a moral transgression. One ought not plagiarize. But that obviously doesn’t entail, as your question suggests, that people don’t in fact do it, and, in particular, that people with elevated social statuses don’t do it, a question that has no bearing on whether you or me or your student ought to do it.

By: Elena

Elena — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 08:32:19 +0000

For a recent, visual example of plagiarism: it’s been recently discovered by members of the ball-jointed dolls community (BJDs are fairly expensive articulated resin dolls, which are heavily customized by the owner to the point that most of them are unique, with personalized painted features, wigs and clothes) that the Dutch artist Mijn Schatje has been tracing without permission company and owner photos of dolls and passing her traced vector art as a wholly original illustration. The comparisons are damning:

http://www.radiotrash.org/mijn/

By: NancyP

NancyP — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 04:43:21 +0000

Duran may be right in a limited sense. When one is part of a work unit in a company, the work product is what matters most, and “intellectual property” rights are generally held by the company and not by individuals within the company. Some plagiarism within company documents may be mandated – “canned” phrases used for adverts and for correspondence with customers, to ensure a uniform message. Legal boilerplate may be used as a template for related documents. The issue of credit for a particular piece of intellectual work is not handled by publication, and needs to be negotiated differently in the corporate world. Frequently people commit the moral equivalent of plagiarism within the bounds of the company – falsely claiming to be the originator of an idea or the main writer of an important plan or document, in order to gain promotion, and failing to acknowledge that some other employee really came up with the idea and did the work. In light of this, it is important for the worker to time-stamp documents and preserve written communications within the team, in order to be able to support a claim of authorship. Of course, it is possible to plagiarize from copyright protected outside sources, which is considered legally actionable as violation of intellectual property rights.

By: aka

aka — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 04:19:05 +0000

I was always paranoid about accidentally plagiarizing something during college. I was afraid that I would read an idea or phrase that would stick with me and pop into my head later when writing. As far as I know, I never did, but the fear made me far more meticulous about citing sources.

Its sad to realize how many people just don’t care about thingslike plagiarism.

By: Ellen

Ellen — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 04:14:45 +0000

My point was that it is kinda hard to punish dead and retired people. MLK gets a pass because he is dead. He got away with it because he died before anyone found out. So yes, if you think it is valid, the dead can be a part of who gets away with it. But I don’t think that is who Gwen had in mind with this post.

And why does anyone pay attention to Duran. He is the definition of the word troll.

But to his point, that is why business is so often mediocre.

By: Cycles

Cycles — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 00:58:34 +0000

So MLK gets a pass just because he may have been responsible for one of the country’s greatest social movements?

Yes, as far as “people” in general are concerned, that seems to be the behavior.

Ellen said: People like to venerate and forget the faults of dead people.

I don’t think Ellen herself was specifically endorsing or condemning MLK’s plagiarism. Just noting a tendency of humans to gloss over faults of people they admire. Hence the question of this post: who gets to plagiarize (and get away with it)?

By: Larry C Wilson

Larry C Wilson — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 00:26:20 +0000

So MLK gets a pass just because he may have been responsible for one of the country’s greatest social movements?

By: Cycles

Cycles — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 00:20:09 +0000

I’m always surprised to read about blatant straight-up plagiarism like this. You’d think, at the very least, the plagiarist would consult a thesaurus for words ahere and there, and change the structure of sentences. In fact, I wonder how many plagiarists actually do that and never get caught because they create patchworks of “original” sentences out of existing material.

By: gwen

gwen — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 00:11:51 +0000

Oops, fixed the link.

By: macon d

macon d — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 00:09:21 +0000

Interesting post, but I don’t think the link to Orange Crate Art is right?

I especially like the sardonic point made in gwen’s last sentence.