Plagiarism Lines Blur for Students in Digital Age

[glennnat]

<p>I have self plagirised, in one course I got A in the other I got c and both were 100% based on the written component. I suspect that the secon marker was an athiest or a liberal because I wrote all God-fearing good and decent americans ought fear obamas universal healthcare plan</p>

[Magneto]

<p>thats the most ridiculous thing Ive ever heard of. self plagiarism. if you wrote the paper why cant you use it? really dumb</p>

[nikiNIS]

<p>I feel like someone ought to point out that music-sharing, unlike open-source software, is illegal – a symptom as well as a cause of the blurred lines, if you will.</p>

[Enginearsrfun]

<p>^music sharing is a direct result of the injustice that is the record music industry. I don’t feel the slightest bit of remorse when I download music…bands should earn their keep by touring (if you can play well live then you deserve the money). Unless it is an up and comer then I will make an effort to support.</p>

<p>That being said, that whole article wreaks of psychologists trying to make outlandish socio-academic connections that I don’t think are really there. These kids just seem like they are lazy and don’t feel like coming up with well-written passages on their own. But they did start to make good points towards the end of the article…US high schools definitely do not prepare their students well enough for college-level writing which, IMO, contributes to the plagiarism.</p>

<p>and glennat, I lol’d at that comment cause I thought you were kidding…I hope.</p>

[chaichia]

<p>Everything is plagiarism. Every story, every character, everything. So I get that schools want you to do the ACTUAL work, but it’s ridiculous that they make so many rules on it. Especially if it’s your own paper, turn it in as many times as you want. YOU wrote it.</p>

[Sithis]

<p>

music sharing is a direct result of the injustice that is the record music industry. I don’t feel the slightest bit of remorse when I download music…bands should earn their keep by touring (if you can play well live then you deserve the money). Unless it is an up and comer then I will make an effort to support.

</p>

<p>Music sharing is the direct result of people who feel that they are entitled to free/cheap entertainment. Nothing else. It’s just like movie sharing, sharing of copyrighted software, video games, etc. Some musicians might not like playing live (i.e. they don’t want to have to make a living off of doing live shows). This does not mean that they are “bad” musicians and deserve to fail. Some musicians don’t want to spend the rest of their lives touring to make a living. There’s no pension plan, no 401k. They want royalties from their music (which the record industry sells and markets). Some musicians want special effects, lighting etc. and have to put on very expensive shows, do you think they are going to pay for that out of pocket? Decent recording equipment/studios cost money as well, must bands pay for that out of pocket too? Most, if not all rich and famous musicians would not be where they are today without the record industry. We can pretend that a deserving musician does it just for the making of good music, but stardom and luxury cannot be disregarded as motivators.</p>

<p>Plagiarism is combated so heavily because it is the most heinous academic crime there is.</p>

[zaprowsdower]

<p>

This is trying to get credit for work you did do.

</p>

<p>You already got credit for it. This isn’t even an ethical gray area. If you’re told to write a paper, and you instead hand in something you’d written and gotten credit for in a previous class, you haven’t done the work that was assigned. It’s impossible to believe the assignment meant “write a paper, unless you’d rather just hand in one you already got credit for.”</p>

[oxolojo]

<p>

Music sharing is the direct result of people who feel that they are entitled to free/cheap entertainment. Nothing else. It’s just like movie sharing, sharing of copyrighted software, video games, etc. Some musicians might not like playing live (i.e. they don’t want to have to make a living off of doing live shows). This does not mean that they are “bad” musicians and deserve to fail. Some musicians don’t want to spend the rest of their lives touring to make a living. There’s no pension plan, no 401k. They want royalties from their music (which the record industry sells and markets). Some musicians want special effects, lighting etc. and have to put on very expensive shows, do you think they are going to pay for that out of pocket? Decent recording equipment/studios cost money as well, must bands pay for that out of pocket too? Most, if not all rich and famous musicians would not be where they are today without the record industry. We can pretend that a deserving musician does it just for the making of good music, but stardom and luxury cannot be disregarded as motivators.

</p>

<p>Point one: The musicians that can’t afford nice lighting and decent recording studios aren’t the ones that are being massively file shared. Popular music is popular: it isn’t nearly as likely that an indie band will be downloaded illegally as it is that a popular band would.</p>

<p>Point two: Have you ever seen how much money the MUSICIANS actually make off of record sales? It’s pocket change compared to what they make when they tour, from merch and ticket sales. I remember reading somewhere that the musicians are LUCKY if they even make $0.10 per album sold. So trust me, my downloading of one album for free only makes the record company lose money, and I could not care less about them.</p>

<p>Point three: Downloading music illegally doesn’t affect royalties. If they’re going to be making royalties, it’s going to be from movies or television shows. And since the whole issue going on in this topic is plagiarism, if a movie or television show uses their music without citing, it is plagiarism; hence, they will make royalties off of it.</p>

[Sithis]

<p>

Point one: The musicians that can’t afford nice lighting and decent recording studios aren’t the ones that are being massively file shared. Popular music is popular: it isn’t nearly as likely that an indie band will be downloaded illegally as it is that a popular band would.

Was this supposed to challenge any one of my contentions? Because I don’t see how it does.</p>

<p>

Point two: Have you ever seen how much money the MUSICIANS actually make off of record sales? It’s pocket change compared to what they make when they tour, from merch and ticket sales. I remember reading somewhere that the musicians are LUCKY if they even make $0.10 per album sold. So trust me, my downloading of one album for free only makes the record company lose money, and I could not care less about them.

I would like to see an actual statistical report of this, one that indicates that this is an industry-wide phenomenon. Also, who do you think manages tours, pays for them, gets the merchandise made and marketed, etc.? Your downloading an album for free doesn’t make anyone “lose” money because apparently they were never going to get it in the first place. How is it relevant how much money I get from one source vs the next? If I’m an artist and want to make all my money from record sales, I should be able to do it. I should not be forced to give it out for free because people think they are entitled to have it for free, or because people have some sort of beef with my record company.</p>

<p>See: [HowStuffWorks</a> “How Record Labels Work”](<a href=“http://entertainment.howstuffworks.com/record-label.htm]HowStuffWorks”>How Record Labels Work | HowStuffWorks) and tell me that record companies are useless leeches who don’t deserve any income. I would posit that artists that work with record companies on average have more money than those who work independently.</p>

<p>

Point three: Downloading music illegally doesn’t affect royalties. If they’re going to be making royalties, it’s going to be from movies or television shows. And since the whole issue going on in this topic is plagiarism, if a movie or television show uses their music without citing, it is plagiarism; hence, they will make royalties off of it.

I am talking about royalties from sales of music, whether it be CDs, internet downloads, etc., not just performance royalties.</p>

[soccerguy315]

<p>the real problem with turnitin is they are benefiting from submitted content without the consent and/or monetary compensation of the submitter.</p>

<p>think about it… you write a paper, and then turnitin uses your paper to create/sell their service.</p>

[glennnat]

<p>turnitin if a prof send my work to them and found plagirism, they would be sued with the school and turnitin and the prof for violation of privacy-professors are not allowed to give your work to 3rd parties, for unauthorized use of original materials- professors are not authorized to copy my work, they are only authorized by me to mark it.</p>

[Sithis]

<p>Interesting find related to this on the turnitin.com site:
<a href=“http://turnitin.com/static/pdf/us_Legal_Document.pdf[/url]”>http://turnitin.com/static/pdf/us_Legal_Document.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>

1. Does Turnitin infringe on students’ copyrights in their work?
   No. A claim that the use of the Turnitin service results in an infringement of students’ copyrights in
   their work has been directly addressed and rejected by a court of law.
   Specifically, in 2007, four high school students commenced a lawsuit in the United States District
   Court for the Eastern District of Virginia against iParadigms LLC, the creator of the Turnitin Plagiarism
   Prevention service, claiming that the archiving of papers in the Turnitin system constituted copyright
   infringement. The district court dismissed plaintiffs’ claims finding that the archiving of the
   papers fell within the fair use exception to copyright infringement, 17 U.S.C. § 504.
   The high school students appealed the decision and, on April 16, 2009, the United States Court
   of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit unanimously affirmed the decision of the district court that Turnitin’s
   archiving of plaintiffs’ work was not a copyright infringement because it fell within the fair use
   exception to copyright infringement. A copy of the Fourth Circuit decision can be found at A.V. et
   al. v. iParadigms, LLC, 562 F.3d 630 (4th Cir. 2009). On May 12, 2009, the United States Court of
   Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied plaintiffs’ request for rehearing and rehearing en banc (by
   the full court). No appeal has been taken to the Supreme Court of the United States, so the
   decision of the Fourth Circuit is final and binding.

</p>

<p>

3. Is it OK for Turnitin to use a student’s work for later reference in originality
   evaluations of others’ work?
   Yes. As explicitly recognized by the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia
   and the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in A.V. et al. v. iParadigms, LLC,
   562 F.3d 630 (4th Cir. 2009), iParadigms’ use of a student’s work for later reference in originality
   evaluations of other students’ works is a fair use under the Copyright Act. Stated differently, Turnitin’s
   use for originality evaluations is not a copyright infringement.
   Moreover, Turnitin is explicitly granted the right to make such use of students’ works in the clickthrough
   agreement entered into between Turnitin and the person submitting his or her work.</p>

<ol>
<li>Is it OK for Turnitin to keep an archived copy of a student’s work in its digital
repository (i.e., for later reference in originality evaluations of others’ work)?
Yes. As stated above, both the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia
and the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit found that Turnitin’s archiving of a
student’s work for later reference in originality evaluations of other students’ works is a fair use
under the Copyright Act.

</li>
</ol>

<p>

5. Does the above answer change if the student’s teacher submitted the work
   without the student’s permission?
   No. As stated above, both the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia
   and the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit found that Turnitin’s archiving of a
   student’s work for later reference in originality evaluations of other students’ works is a fair use
   under the Copyright Act. The courts did not directly address the issue of who submitted the paper,
   but since the courts found that the archiving itself, in the educational context, is a fair use, it does
   not matter who submits the work.

</p>

<p>

6. Am I bound to the Turnitin click-through agreement? What if I’m a minor?
   Yes. The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia found that the on-line
   click-through agreement on the Turnitin site is an enforceable agreement, even against minors.
   Parental consent or the consent of a guardian is required for a minor to set up an account with
   Turnitin and the agreement is therefore binding.

</p>

<p>

7. Can a teacher compel me to submit my paper to Turnitin with the threat of a failing
   grade if I attend private school? Public school?
   Yes in both cases. If you attend a private school you have agreed to abide by the school’s policies,
   and you are, of course, free to change private schools or attend public school if you don’t agree
   with the school’s policies.
   With respect to public school, as the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia
   has recognized in rejecting four students’ claim that they were improperly compelled to submit
   their papers to Turnitin or face a failing grade, “[s]chools have a right to decide how to monitor and
   address plagiarism in their schools and may employ companies like iParadigms to help do so. As
   the Supreme Court has recognized in the constitutional context, ‘the rights of students in public
   school are not automatically coextensive with the rights of adults in other settings’ and the ‘rights
   of students must be applied in light of the special characteristics of the school environment.’”
   Of course, a student at a public school could elect to attend private school if he or she does not
   agree with the school’s policies.

</p>

<p>

8. Is Turnitin’s archiving of student work ethical?
   The fair use defense codified in Section 107 of the Copyright Act has been recognized as an
   “equitable rule of reason.” In considering whether a use is a fair use, courts often analyze whether
   the use is beneficial to society as a whole (as part of a determination of whether a use is transformative)
   and whether the user has “clean hands.” The District Court and Fourth Circuit both held
   that the archiving of student works in the educational context is a fair use. In so holding, the
   courts did not find that Turnitin’s use of student works was in any respect unethical.

</p>

<p>I guess that settles all those objections.</p>

[virtuscience]

<p>^ Slam dunk for Turnitin.com.</p>

<p>There are more important things to worry about. For example: what are you going to do in the real world if you can’t deal with writing an original paper? The entire point of writing the paper is to improve yourself, and you’re only harming yourself if you don’t do it.</p>

<p>Most of us can and do write original, new, papers for every assignment; I think those who don’t should feel ashamed.</p>

[lollol2]

<p>so would i also not get in a good college? because my friend asked me if i needed help and i said yes and he did my poem for me. later did i find out he copied it from the internet and my teacher said i plagiarized and i told her no because i didnt think he would do that to me. now they brought it to my dean and someone told me it goes on your permint records. im freaking out because i dont know what to say. i also dont know my friends last name so i cant tell them i had him do my poem for me. so would i be able to get into Le Moyne College or onondaga community college. i live in new york state btw</p>

[Charlie87star]

<p>It is easier to plagiarize now because people don’t even have to rewrite it and there is so much more access to differed sources. But I don’t think it is actually happening significantly more often, just that people are being caught more often because of things like turnitin so it seems that it’s happening more</p>

[sopranokitty]

<p>@ lolol2: since you had your friend write the poem for you, that’s still plagiarism. Even if he hadn’t copied a poem he found on the internet, it’s STILL plagiarism because it’s not YOUR own work, but someone else’s. Tough luck.</p>

[b_r_um]

<p>Has anyone mentioned that academic standards vary dramatically between fields?</p>

<p>Computer science students are allowed to re-use subroutines from other code they have written. Math majors can freely re-use their old TeX-files without quoting themselves. And it’s not just that we don’t have to quote ourselves - we don’t have to credit other mathematicians for their work either. How many people credit Gauss, Riemann and Lebesgue every time they use an integral? And that’s not just for 19th century stuff. Even mathematics that was developed a decade ago is quickly turning into “common knowledge.”</p>

<p>What’s the lesson here? It’s fine if you are a computer scientist but not if you are a sociologist.???</p>

<p>P.S. I only now realized that this is an old thread that’s long been dead. I decided to let my comment stand as food for thought because my point doesn’t seem to have come up before.</p>

[gaiou37]

<p>I have reused an old paper before, and I would do it again in a heartbeat. In my book, it’s not plagiarism if I reuse my own work. If other people think it’s wrong, that’s fine with me, they are entitled to their own opinions, but they really don’t have to be judgmental and impose their opinions on others. Just because you think it’s wrong doesn’t mean everyone feels the same lol</p>