ethical use of quotations in sigs - Writers Forum

mammamaia · 07-15-2006, 08:36 PM

since we were asked to take this off-topic topic out of the thread it became mired in, here it is...

i'll repeat what i said there:

it is highly unethical, immoral, and quite possibly even illegal to put a quotation/excerpt in your sig that is not your own writing, if proper attribution is not included!

period.

there are no ifs, ands, or buts about this... ignorance of such a 'just-about-forever' rule/law/moral precept is no excuse... especially for any who want to consider themselves 'writers'...

how would those who do it feel if i and other members put some of their best lines in our sigs w/o saying whose they were, thus directly suggesting to all who see our posts, that we wrote them?... i'm sure they'd suddenly agree with me and all in the publishing industry and legal world, that any such quotes must have their sources cited...

i wish the powers-that-be here would include this info in the stickies on forum rules 'n regs and guidelines re proper forum posting behavior, if it's not already there... and i hope those same 'powers' would start leaning on all who don't cite the authors of quotations used in their sigs... to me, that's at least as, and in many cases even more important, than censoring what's posted in the messages themselves...

whether nobel laureate or teenaged newbie, an author's work is sacred!... no part of it is to be claimed by others as their own... that's what those with unattributed sig quotes are doing... and all who do it and/or gripe at me for griping about this should know that... if some don't, or don't want to go along with it, then appropriate steps should be taken by those in charge... it seems only logical, on a forum devoted to writers and the art of writing...

'nuff said... over and out...

[edited by me, to soften tone and (hopefully) avoid offending anyone]

imrhati · 07-15-2006, 09:23 PM

mama, you do have a good point but i think you should leave it up to the writers themselves to protect their work and mind your own business. just my opinion mind you.

valeca · 07-15-2006, 09:36 PM

So, which is the real point you're trying to make here? The use of signature lines, or taking a shot at the owner and staff of WF?

Edited for my silly mistake of 'your'. Can't believe I did it, but I did.

kad barma · 07-15-2006, 10:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by imrhati

mama, you do have a good point but i think you should leave it up to the writers themselves to protect their work and mind your own business. just my opinion mind you.

i agree wholeheartedly with mama, and disagree vehemently with the suggestion that it's up to a writer him or herself alone to protect their own work.

question: if someone is robbing a bank that isn't your bank, should you call the cops?

kad barma · 07-15-2006, 10:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by valeca

the real point your trying to make here?

not having the benefit of familiarity with the prior thread, and simply taking this post at face value, i find none of it a "shot" against "the owner and staff of WF". i read this as a simple and correct objection to plagiarism.

and i think the homonym you were going for here would have "you're"...

(now THAT's a shot)...

valeca · 07-15-2006, 11:04 PM

LOL, so it was. I freely admit the misuse of 'your'. What's worse is I'd just complained about the misuse of there, their and they're, as well as the you're and your, to another writer. Eesh. Thanks, Kad.

mwd · 07-15-2006, 11:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kad barma

question: if someone is robbing a bank that isn't your bank, should you call the cops?

Yes, because forgetting to attribute a quote from a well known (dare I say infamous) article written almost 60 years ago (if you weren't aware, this thread was prompted when some newbie quoted from http://www.gazetteofthearts.com/writer3.htm and forgot to attribute it) is exactly the same as robbing a bank. Those hardened copyright criminals are ruining our society.

It seems to me that this issue has been blown out of proportion. It's true that failing to cite a source generally violates fair use (At least in the U.S. I'm not sure where the WF server is hosted, but I'll assume U.S.), but instead of yelling at people, maybe a friendly PM would be a wiser route?

I haven't seen that many signatures like this. Surely it can be resolved on a case by case basis ...

Kamisama · 07-15-2006, 11:59 PM

I've been on the web for over 12 years. All I can say is that the Internet is a land of Anarchy. Just don't piss off the government. If someone is dirt poor, people can't do much of anything to him or her. People can try suing, but it's not going to do any good. That's the greatest thing about the Internet: anyone can be anybody.

It would be kind to source the obtained quote, but it's not necessary unless you take the writing and claim it as your own. Once you claim something as your own, then you have hit the line of legality. This law is known online and offline. If I remember legal situations correctly, one must be given a warning, and, then legal action can be taken against him or her. In an academic setting, however, such "stealing" of work is called plagiarism, which we all know is unethical.

In all truth, I don't care about someone stealing my work. As long as I obtain the grade for it first, I don't give an expletive. It's the petty writers with selfish ambition who concern themselves with materialism and recognition. Yet you'll have to question the current example of ebaumsworld.com. The owner of the website isn't getting thrown in jail; yet he steals from artists. The artists are angry, but are they angry about their hard work being stolen; or is it the recognition? I believe the one with true ambition will set aside petty arguments in a sociopathic attempt to destroy others, instead of this game of rivalry. These people want recognition, money, or other in a false belief that these things equate to power.

I'm not an artist anymore because of the petty look-at-me-child-routine of fame. It's stupid. I only write non-fiction for academic purposes.

I'm the kind of person who believes no identity is the best identity. Some fear a world of people with no identity. That's what most human reaction is based on: fear. Go ahead and quote me. I'll admire it. But just don't list my name. I don't want to be known.

Kamisama · 07-16-2006, 12:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kad barma

i agree wholeheartedly with mama, and disagree vehemently with the suggestion that it's up to a writer him or herself alone to protect their own work.

his or her own work*

Idiot. But nice try.

I love Internet fighting; it makes me feel special.
And you can take that to the bank.

By writing standards, a person is to source another if he or she uses another's work. Ignorance is justification for not actively participating in this rule; however, ignorance is becoming a harder thing to plead in court these days. Lol. This is going to start a fight. Mods should have killed this thread.

Mike C · 07-16-2006, 01:20 AM

Passing off somebody else's words as your own, whether by accident or design, is wrong.

In the sig line that started this - Gundampilotspaz's - I assumed it was his/her own words. It was only during the course of the thread that Gundampilotspaz admitted that he/she was quoting Heinlein.

On the broader issue, we see many paranoid posts in here along the lines of "I don't dare post my work in case someone steals it" and yet people think nothing of quoting other people's words unattributed. Not everybody, not even very many, but a few. And whichever way you look at it - whether it's intentional or accidental - it's down to sheer ignorance.

Selorian · 07-16-2006, 10:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mammamaia

since we were ordered by a mod/mentor/whatever to take this off-topic topic out of the thread it became mired in, here it is...

i wish the powers-that-be here would include this info in the stickies on forum rules 'n regs and guidelines re proper forum posting behavior, if it's not already there... and i also wish those who exercise their powers as moderators or official mentors would start leaning on all who don't cite the authors of quotations used in their sigs... to me, that's at least as, and in many cases even more important, than censoring what's posted in the messages themselves...

then appropriate steps should be taken by those in charge... to not do so, imo, is a flarant dereliction of duty, for any who are running a forum devoted to writers and the art of writing...

and having it ignored by those charged with keeping this site on the straight and narrow...

I believe each of the quotes (properly credited) above shows a true shot at the owner and staff of WF. Period. Enough said.

I agree with the sentiments, but I also agree that it could have been handled by PM. When the PM system is chosen not to be used, it leaves only posting on the boards to get the message out. And even though it does seem to have been blown out of proportion, removing the thread will only accomplish it being viewed as censoring.

When noticed or pointed out, signature violations are dealt with in private like all moderation is suppose to be dealt with. That is what the little button in the lower left corner of a post is for, reporting a post to staff. It seems a simple enough concept.

If this is a time to rant, I have two issues that bug me. First, people ignoring rules (like not hijacking threads) while complaining about others' infractions. Two, not trying to write properly while on a writing site (an entire post that's all one long sentence without periods or capitalization
grates on the nerves). And yes, those can be considered shots.

FrankBlissett · 07-16-2006, 10:30 AM

Quote:

mama, you do have a good point but i think you should leave it up to the writers themselves to protect their work and mind your own business.

I have to disagree with this sentiment. For one, it's impracticle for most people to rigirously protect their works if they so chose. More to the point, though, I didn't read Maia's thoughts as primarily serving to protect writers, but about the ethics of the practice in the first place.

Quote:

It would be kind to source the obtained quote, but it's not necessary unless you take the writing and claim it as your own.

The problem is that many readers will assume an unatributed post (especially on a writer's board) are from the author of the post. We've heard the phrase "lie of omission" - this is often the case with unattributed quotes.

Personally, I would be satisfied with "author unknown" as an attribution - that would be perfectly ethical, IMHO.

-Frank

[edit] Regarding the quote that prompted this discussion, *I* thought it was the poster's own words. I had no reason to believe otherwise.

Anne Lacey · 07-16-2006, 11:20 AM

I agree with mama. Is it really that hard to put a dash and the person's name next to the quote? Come on, people, don't be so lazy and then blame the one who calls you on it. Unless a quote is truly anonymous, there should be a name next to it.

Mike C · 07-16-2006, 12:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anne Lacey

Unless a quote is truly anonymous, there should be a name next to it.

And if it is truly anonymous, 'anon' will suffice.

Anne Lacey · 07-16-2006, 04:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike C

And if it is truly anonymous, 'anon' will suffice.

Exactly. Thanks for clarifying for me. I haven't been sleeping well...