Plagiarism on This Site - Page 6 - Writers Forum

CZ · 03-31-2006, 04:32 AM

When you come onto a writing site and profess your support for plagiarism, you shouldn't expect to be welcomed with open arms.

You can talk all you like about these grand notions of everything relating to everything else anyway, but it's still going to be the same old song and dance that people perform on occasion when books like Eragon are discussed.

Out of the 20+ articles I have had published you're not going to find plagiarism because every source is valid and stands behind what they said. If you want to make the argument that an article about John Q. Smith donating $100,000 to a random cause is plagiarized from an earlier article about Suzy Jones donating $200,000 to a different random cause, then feel free... but you'll be wrong.

plagiato · 03-31-2006, 05:45 AM

I see we are speaking about different things

"unfortunatly" I don`t know a man who lives from copy/paste works!

I`m still naive and I see this in a romantic way

Verisimilitude · 03-31-2006, 11:41 AM

This is obviously just a case of miscommunication. I don't believe Plagiato is saying it's okay to copy/paste other people's work; but that it's okay to use ideas you've read about.

petitions author · 03-31-2006, 01:47 PM

Hi,

I believe that Plagiato is just messing with everyone to prove a point.
Ideas have been around for a long time. Our craft is trying to come up with new ways to arrange them, and that is the 'so-called' protected expression.
He has also unwittingly, or not, proven my points.
Plagiarism is way to easy, and people do it all the time.
Actual copying and usage does happen.
A plagiarist will usually act like a friend, that's how I got caught up in all of this in the first place. I think he's just looking for material to write on 'Plagiarism.' I hope I'm right.

Good luck on your projects, and have a great day! p.a.

Added note to plagiarismtoday. The new Bill may be under Title 18, not 17. You'll just have to check. They've probably slipped something into both. p.a.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

mammamaia · 03-31-2006, 05:53 PM

there are no new ideas... only new and different ways of building stories around them... and doing that is not 'plagiarism,' plagiato... it's 'creativity'...

you need to learn the definition of the word/act you profess to espouse... plagiarism is when you take the actual words of another and claim them as your own... NOT when you merely use the same basic plot idea and build your own story around it...

i can make certain allowances for you, since english is clearly not your native tongue, but you should have enough respect for others to learn what it is you are approving of, before you say it's ok to steal other writers' work...

petitions author · 04-06-2006, 06:39 PM

Hi,
I thought I'd update everyone on the Petition.
Moving it to care2.com seems to have been the right move. It's getting signatures now.
For all of you that have signed it, it is greatly appreciated!
Thanks!

Good luck on your projects, and have a great day! p,a.

mammamaia · 04-06-2006, 06:51 PM

what does that have to do with this thread, pa?

petitions author · 05-13-2006, 03:41 AM

If you believe this Protection at conception process, you're wrong. It gives you the confidence to write and expose your work to theft for the 'Promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts.'
Read the highlighted closely. We are not to expect payment, and it appears to me that we are supposed to donate for the greater good.

Look at this:

"No. 01-

IN THE

Supreme Court of the United States

Eric Eldred, et al. ,

Petitioner,

v.

John D. Ashcroft , In his official capacity
as Attorney General,

Respondent.

On Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the
United States Court of Appeals for the
District of Columbia Circuit

petition for a writ of certiorari

Copyright and Patent Clause gives Congress the power:

To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times, to Authors and Inventors, the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.

U.S. Const., art. I, § 8, cl. 8.

-----------------Eldred v Ashcroft-------------------------
Plaintiffs File Petition for Certiorari to Supreme Court

Frantz Mfg. Co. v. Phenix Mfg. Co., 457 F.2d 314, 327 n.48 (7th Cir. 1972) (emphasis added)(quoting Lee v. Runge, 404 U.S. 887, 890 (1971) (Douglas, J., dissenting from denial of certiorari)).

The Seventh Circuit, etc...

The court held, by “focus[ing] on how well the test promotes the primary objective of the Act. This objective is not to reward an author for her labors, but ‘to promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts.’” Erickson v. Trinity Theatre, 13 F.3d 1061, 1069 (7th Cir. 1994). See also J.L. Mott Iron Works v. Clow, 82 F. 316, 320 (7th Cir. 1897)
(“Under the constitution, the power lodged with congress is not unlimited, but is restricted to the promotion of the progress of science and useful arts.”).

The Ninth Circuit, etc...

In Aalmuhammed v. Lee, 202 F.3d 1227, 1235 (9th Cir. 1999),
“[t]he Constitution establishes the social policy that our construction of the statutory term ‘authors’ carries out. The Founding Fathers gave Congress the power to give authors copyrights in order ‘to promote the progress of Science and useful arts.’”

The Second Circuit,etc...

[the] purpose [‘to promote the Progress of Science’], ‘courts in passing upon particular claims of infringement must occasionally subordinate the copyright holder’s interest in a maximum financial return to the greater public interest in the development of art, science, and industry.’” Rosemont Enter. Inc. v. Random House, Inc., 366 F.2d 303, 307 (2d Cir. 1966)(citing Berlin v. E.C. Publs., 329 F.2d 541, 544 (2d Cir. 1964) (Kaufman, J.))."

(The above was Compiled by the Harvard School of Law)

My notes:
I still have not found a 'Constitutional Amendment' stating that the 'Owner' ( Not Author) of a Copyrighted work should be protected, but they seem to be the only ones that are.

'Works' made for hire have a longer Protection than the creative works of the Authors and Inventors. Why is this? This promotes 'Big Business', not the Arts and Sciences. Infringement in my opinion, stems from this type of greed.

If a Corporation is Infringing instead of Inventing or writing, etc..., how does this 'Promote Progress' when it makes it 'unsafe' for the Talented to use their skills.
In essence, our Laws seem to contribute to, and sometimes even reward Plagiarism.

Have a great weekend! Respectfully and sincerely, p. a.

petitions author · 05-13-2006, 03:47 AM

The above was compiled by The Harvard School of Law. Edit didn't work so I couldn't add the credit.

Mike C · 05-13-2006, 05:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mammamaia

what does that have to do with this thread, pa?

Self promotion.

mammamaia · 05-13-2006, 06:04 PM

fer shur!