Paul Bernhardt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in sci.stat.edu:
>I'm willing to admit that maybe I don't fully understand the subtlties of
>plagiarism, but it seems to me that plagiarism is the use of other's work
>without attribution *or their permission*.
Plagiarism is the presenting of someone else's work as one's own.
Permission is kind of irrelevant. Even if I give you permission to
present my work as your own, you still commit plagiarism on anyone
to whom you present it.
Copyright violation is the republication of someone else's work
without permission of the copyright owner -- even the republication
of your own work can be a copyright violation if you are not the
copyright owner.
There's considerable overlap, but they are distinct issues. "I had
permission" (if true) is an absolute defense against copyright
violation but no defense against plagiarism; "I attributed my source
fully" is an absolute defense against plagiarism but not against
copyright violation.
--
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Cortland County, New York, USA
http://OakRoadSystems.com/
"People that read tabloids deserve to be lied to."
-- Jerry Seinfeld, on /60 minutes/
.
.
=================================================================
Instructions for joining and leaving this list, remarks about the
problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES, and archives are available at:
. http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/ .
=================================================================
