| |
January 2009
| M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
S | |
« May |
«-» |
|
| | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
| 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 |
| 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 |
| 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 |
| 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 |
|
|
|
Back then, I’ve wrote about the threat
of Plagiarism and shared two websites might be of a greater help to you. I
should be moving forward to Chapter 3 but there is still something I am not satisfied
with Chapter 2 in this Protect your content topic.
As we all know, Plagiarism is an act where a person goes into somebody’s website,
extract the contents, does a teeny tiny but of modification and claimed that article
as their own. But what about this scenario? Is this still Plagiarism?
If person A owns a website which is based on similar topics to person B website, reads one of person B’s article, and decided to extract all the contents and published it on his website. But the contents were not modified at all.
All that person A did is add a small remark saying this article was NOT written by him but by person B, and add a back-url to person B website.
Is this, still, called an act of of Plagiarism?
Oh and just so you know, this is the same question that I’ve asked at Yahoo!
Answers. Seriously, in my entire existence at Yahoo! Answers,
this is the first question that was asked and received a massive reply in less
than 5 minutes. I guess people are really aware about the treat that has been
going on, on the internet.
Here’s a few picked answers as based on the scenario above.
Actually most of them are the same replies that are put into a different words.
answered
by description_awesemnity
no, as long as the rightfull creator is given credit and the general public
has easy access to the original work its not
answered
by Nicki H
No, plagiarism is an act of copying someone else’s work as if it is your
own. So if the person does say it’s not his work and is not claiming to have
made it himself, then it is not plagiarism.
answered
by Himanshu Joshi
Depends on how the person B has published his contents. If they are copyrighted
under a free license, then it is not, but the person B should be well informed.
answered
by Himanshu Joshi
Depends on how the person B has published his contents. If they are copyrighted
under a free license, then it is not, but the person B should be well informed.
answered by ALJ
No. unless the author has specifically requested that his work should not be reproduced without his prior permission.
Also you should clearly state your reference and link to the initial articles
answered
by noigmn
Unless there is copyright involved reproducing others work that is already
publicly displayed is okay if it clearly states where it came from and whose
work it is. If he states it isn’t his it can’t be plagiarism. The main legal
issue here is that he didn’t ask for consent from the original owner/writer
of the material. Whether he has to, I don’t know…
answered
by Bronwen
No, it is not plagiarism. He gave credit where credit was due, meaning he
cited the source where he got the information. It’s only plagiarism if you pretend
that the work is your own, and don’t give proper credit to the real author.
Person A added a note recognizing person B as the original author, so he or
she is covered legally and has done nothing wrong.
….and so, there you have it. So if our contents is copied out to another website
with a credit to us, then it’s no longer plagiarism. I guess it would be calling
something else, cause the contents were taken without permission.
For me, if I were to do such stuff, I normally hold my horses and seek the authorization
from the owner first. You may ask, why bother doing so when you’ve already credited
that content to the original user, right? Well, it’s no longer plagiarism… but
now it is a matter of acknowledging and respecting others.
Here on, I am going to concludes chapter 2 for “Protect Your Contents”.
Hope you enjoyed what you’ve read. |
Leave a Reply
|
|
