There has been some recent reporting on self-plagiarism and plagiarism scandals from popular authors, and I've seen some rather morally ambiguous approaches to them. In fact I'm disturbed at the amount of "plagiarism is not such a big deal" blog posts by tenured professors at major universities.
1) Self plagiarism is not okay, especially when you take money from one publisher to produce something, and then use something you already sold to another publisher formerly you are acting in bad faith with a business partner. When you submit a work for publication, you are (partially or wholly) giving up the rights to that work. Yes its "yours" in that you created it, but it is also legally the publisher's. You exchanged this for a chance to have many people read your work in print. To self-plagiarize by re-copying your old ideas is to cheat the people who hired you. If you do not agree with this, then publish your work yourself. You have full rights to your material, and you are not misleading anybody. Furthermore, why not use the opportunity to approach your old work from a new angle?
2) Plagiarism investigations are not witch-hunts by non-creative people against creative people. If you were creative to begin with, you would not have plagiarized. These investigations are a legal precedent to protect other creators (and publishers) who have been stolen from. These investigations are serious, and should be treated as such. To avoid them, writers should edit, research, and revise a work many times before trying to publish.
3) Student plagiarism is a serious matter, even student self-plagiarism. When a student enrolls in a class (or at least MY class), they are expected to complete the assignments set before them with recent, original material that they worked to bring up. Photocopying from other students, or from original work in a previous class is done with dishonest intent. I have had student's approach me about using a project they worked on for a previous class, and in the best cases they ended up significantly revising and improving past work through the lens of the course subject. That is of course acceptable, and honest, but it was far from re-printing out a paper and submitting it with a different title. Academically dishonest students should be punished severely, as any act destroys the trust in the student/teacher relationship.
4) Plagiarism is not like the arts and music, where everyone imitates the great masters to learn. That is the dumbest argument I have heard in a long time. We already have people using the works of great writers as practice and performance; its called theater. But even in the arts there is a clear difference between a great performer of works written by others and those great writers and originators.
Plagiarism has many facets. It is theft, laziness, and deceit. It should not be defended, tolerated, or rationalized.
1) Self plagiarism is not okay, especially when you take money from one publisher to produce something, and then use something you already sold to another publisher formerly you are acting in bad faith with a business partner. When you submit a work for publication, you are (partially or wholly) giving up the rights to that work. Yes its "yours" in that you created it, but it is also legally the publisher's. You exchanged this for a chance to have many people read your work in print. To self-plagiarize by re-copying your old ideas is to cheat the people who hired you. If you do not agree with this, then publish your work yourself. You have full rights to your material, and you are not misleading anybody. Furthermore, why not use the opportunity to approach your old work from a new angle?
2) Plagiarism investigations are not witch-hunts by non-creative people against creative people. If you were creative to begin with, you would not have plagiarized. These investigations are a legal precedent to protect other creators (and publishers) who have been stolen from. These investigations are serious, and should be treated as such. To avoid them, writers should edit, research, and revise a work many times before trying to publish.
3) Student plagiarism is a serious matter, even student self-plagiarism. When a student enrolls in a class (or at least MY class), they are expected to complete the assignments set before them with recent, original material that they worked to bring up. Photocopying from other students, or from original work in a previous class is done with dishonest intent. I have had student's approach me about using a project they worked on for a previous class, and in the best cases they ended up significantly revising and improving past work through the lens of the course subject. That is of course acceptable, and honest, but it was far from re-printing out a paper and submitting it with a different title. Academically dishonest students should be punished severely, as any act destroys the trust in the student/teacher relationship.
4) Plagiarism is not like the arts and music, where everyone imitates the great masters to learn. That is the dumbest argument I have heard in a long time. We already have people using the works of great writers as practice and performance; its called theater. But even in the arts there is a clear difference between a great performer of works written by others and those great writers and originators.
Plagiarism has many facets. It is theft, laziness, and deceit. It should not be defended, tolerated, or rationalized.
No comments:
Post a Comment