Why Plagiarism Matters

[spectrum49]

Okay, I'll bite. So what is your basic premise, or where might you have discussed it here?

TLC: Please FIRST SEE my comment at the Topic on "1Co 12-14", and then (as I am still composing it) my thread at your Topic on "oikonomia". Thanks!

Edited February 5, 2016 by spectrum49

[Bolshevik]

Link with update on TWI's Research Department HERE.

[spectrum49]

"Ooh, book idea.

Plagiarize the way books whole sale. Just word for word. Instead of crediting VPW or whoever, credit the original authors. I wonder if twi would try to take any legal action, and if so, if it would hold up.

I know, a great big, who cares? but the irony appeals to me"

..................................................................................

The Way books are protected by copyright. Go figure. So much for the "Oh, it's from God so it should belong to everyone." mantra.

WAYSIDER:

I thought you might enjoy this ..especially if you have never heard it. (It's a spoof on plagiarism.) Tom Leher was a real genius...and way ahead of his time, too! (And you thought I was sarcastic and witty --- I ain't got nothing on this guy!)

Perhaps this wasn't one of his "best little ditties"....

...But I believe you would laugh your a** off at some of his other songs! Among my favorites are:

"My Home Town"

"I Hold Your Hand in Mine"

AND --- I know you will LOVE this one! ... "The Vatican Rag"

Please listen to these, and tell me what ya think!

Spec

Edited February 7, 2016 by spectrum49

[spectrum49]

"lambano, laballo, ballo, throw the ball, throw it out"

Yeah, yeah---That's it

Throw the whole thing out!

Waysider:

That was the funniest thing I ever remember you saying, My side ended up hurting SOOOO BAD!!

SPEC

Edited February 7, 2016 by spectrum49

[Rocky]

WAYSIDER:

I thought you might enjoy this ..especially if you have never heard it. (It's a spoof on plagiarism.) Tom Leher was a real genius...and way ahead of his time, too! (And you thought I was sarcastic and witty --- I ain't got nothing on this guy!)

Very funny... thanks for posting.

[waysider]

I liked The Vatican Rag. "It's got a good beat and it's easy to dance to." I give it about a 73.

[Twinky]

Hiliarious, Spec. Love the Plagiarize song. Don't often laugh out loud, but that one gave me a real belly-laugh.

[MRAP]

Plagiarism is a pill hard to swallow when speaking from the Bible, if we quote book, chapter and verse are we excluded of plagiarism? Or is it only plagiarism if some still alive or recently alive person "wrote about it". Think about it, we quote and repeat the words of Jesus and the apostles from the gospels, epistles, proverbs, psalms, etc. without giving credit. I guess then we plagiarise on a consistent basis. Where do you draw the line? Yes, vpw's stuff was not original, did he steal it and if vpw took it from someone else, well, who did that person take it from.

I find this whole topic of Biblical plagiarism an imploding concept. Really, who cares if truth be known.

Yes, I get it: VPW acted as though he "found" some great revelation from the Bible and not from someone else; yes, vpw was a turd for not giving credit, I get it but in the bigger picture lets just be thankfull we have available the Bible in its' many versions. Be thankfull you don't live in the middle east, we would be killed for these conversations - let that sink in a bit.

[MRAP]

"Ooh, book idea.

Plagiarize the way books whole sale. Just word for word. Instead of crediting VPW or whoever, credit the original authors. I wonder if twi would try to take any legal action, and if so, if it would hold up.

I know, a great big, who cares? but the irony appeals to me"

..................................................................................

The Way books are protected by copyright. Go figure. So much for the "Oh, it's from God so it should belong to everyone." mantra.

[MRAP]

I think I get your idea Waysider: let's plagiarize those who Plagiarize, who do the lawyers go after - well, they would go after all of us. Do you think Jesus would go after us for plagiarizing him? It's rhetorical, no need to answer unless you want to.

I think I get your idea Waysider: let's plagiarize those who Plagiarize, who do the lawyers go after - well, they would go after all of us. Do you think Jesus would go after us for plagiarizing him? It's rhetorical, no need to answer unless you want to.

[Bolshevik]

Plagiarism is a pill hard to swallow when speaking from the Bible, if we quote book, chapter and verse are we excluded of plagiarism? Or is it only plagiarism if some still alive or recently alive person "wrote about it". Think about it, we quote and repeat the words of Jesus and the apostles from the gospels, epistles, proverbs, psalms, etc. without giving credit. I guess then we plagiarise on a consistent basis. Where do you draw the line? Yes, vpw's stuff was not original, did he steal it and if vpw took it from someone else, well, who did that person take it from.

I find this whole topic of Biblical plagiarism an imploding concept. Really, who cares if truth be known.

Yes, I get it: VPW acted as though he "found" some great revelation from the Bible and not from someone else; yes, vpw was a turd for not giving credit, I get it but in the bigger picture lets just be thankfull we have available the Bible in its' many versions. Be thankfull you don't live in the middle east, we would be killed for these conversations - let that sink in a bit.

There are those who argue the Bible itself is plagiarized from other, earlier religions (just to point out yes, we can argue this ad infinitum ).

Your are expected to cite verses that you're quoting, I believe. You can't present the Bible as your own work. A google search might clear that up.

I'm also thankful many of us don't have the hardships like many who live in the middle east. If the Bible helps you navigate life, use it.

But, I don't see how that dismisses what VPW did. He was fully capable to understand what he did, know it wasn't right, and did it. I think you agree.

The plagiarism should raise an eyebrow and lead to more questions.

I think I get your idea Waysider: let's plagiarize those who Plagiarize, who do the lawyers go after - well, they would go after all of us. Do you think Jesus would go after us for plagiarizing him? It's rhetorical, no need to answer unless you want to.

I think I get your idea Waysider: let's plagiarize those who Plagiarize, who do the lawyers go after - well, they would go after all of us. Do you think Jesus would go after us for plagiarizing him? It's rhetorical, no need to answer unless you want to.

Jesus flipped over the money changer tables, if I remember correctly.

[MRAP]

Not tracking your thought process here Bolshevik, especially with Jesus and the money changers. Maybe you took my reference to lawyers as being the "Biblical" lawyers, no, I was speaking in present day bottom feeders.

[Bolshevik]

Not tracking your thought process here Bolshevik, especially with Jesus and the money changers. Maybe you took my reference to lawyers as being the "Biblical" lawyers, no, I was speaking in present day bottom feeders.

It appeared to me you'd connected past and present by bringing up Jesus, unless you're bringing up a present day Jesus, but I don't think that changes much.

Maybe I'm still missing your meaning. Sorry if I do.

[Steve Lortz]

At the School of Theology, all of our writing has to conform to the standards of the eighth edition of Kate Turabian's A Manual for Writers of Research Papers, Theses and Dissertations. The manual is 448 pages long, and the whole thing is about avoiding plagiarism. Section 17.5.2 is dedicated to citing "The Bible and Other Sacred Works."

So, yes... it is possible for a person to plagiarize the Bible itself, if that person copies something from the Bible and claims that she wrote it herself.

And, yes... there are standards for citation in place to avoid plagiarizing the Bible, or any other sacred literature.

Other organizations may use other manuals. The "hard sciences" use the APA style.

Love,

Steve

[waysider]

So, by sacred literature, do you mean like The Blue Book? :biglaugh:/>

Edited February 9, 2016 by waysider

[Rocky]

So, by sacred literature, do you mean like The Blue Book? />

Good one... worth a chuckle. ;)

[chockfull]

Plagiarism is a pill hard to swallow when speaking from the Bible, if we quote book, chapter and verse are we excluded of plagiarism?

By definition yes we are excluded. We are giving the reference right in the quote. Plagiarism would be trying to pass off "I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me" as our own words without citing the reference.

[skyrider]

Plagiarism is a pill hard to swallow when speaking from the Bible....

How about when someone plagiarizes another's class?

How about when someone plagiarizes the same examples from another's class?

How about when someone plagiarizes the same examples from another culture from that class?

Maggie Muggins, the Canadian

[MRAP]

How about when someone plagiarizes another's class?

How about when someone plagiarizes the same examples from another's class?

How about when someone plagiarizes the same examples from another culture from that class?

Maggie Muggins, the Canadian

I think I stippulated appropriatley Skyride, don't take part of what I said out of the whole context. I thought I was clear between what's in the Bible and what someone wrote about stuff in the Bible.

[Oakspear]

Plagiarism is a pill hard to swallow when speaking from the Bible, if we quote book, chapter and verse are we excluded of plagiarism? Or is it only plagiarism if some still alive or recently alive person "wrote about it".

Plagiarism does not depend on whether the plagiarized work is by a living person. If you pass of another's words as your own then it's plagiarism

Think about it, we quote and repeat the words of Jesus and the apostles from the gospels, epistles, proverbs, psalms, etc. without giving credit. I guess then we plagiarise on a consistent basis. Where do you draw the line?

Are "we" passing off the words from the bible as our own? That's where the line is

Yes, vpw's stuff was not original, did he steal it and if vpw took it from someone else, well, who did that person take it from.

It's prett clear that in some instances Wierwille publsihed things under his own name that were word-for-word taken from another's work

I find this whole topic of Biblical plagiarism an imploding concept.

What do you mean by that?

Really, who cares if truth be known.

Not you, apparently, but many of us do

Yes, I get it: VPW acted as though he "found" some great revelation from the Bible and not from someone else; yes, vpw was a turd for not giving credit,

No...I don't think that you do...

I get it but in the bigger picture lets just be thankfull we have available the Bible in its' many versions. Be thankfull you don't live in the middle east, we would be killed for these conversations - let that sink in a bit.

This is the logical fallacy of the red herring

[krys]

Plaigerism has time constraints. Let me explain: After a period of time most written material passes into what's called "public domain" where it "belongs to no one in particcular and everyone in general. I'm not sure of the time period, but I believe it's 75 years, The honest thing to do is always give credit to the author, but the rules are a lot looser as to how much material you can use. The items discussed above as having been plaigerised were all used within that period of time.

There are some things that can never be anything but in the public domain. The Bible (most religious writings), and dictionaries are a couple of items that I can think of right now.

I'm not contradicting Steve's post from the previous page. The writing he's doing is for the specific purpose of preparing a thesis and nothing may be brought into that work that is NOT his own unless it is properly notated. The same is true in sceintific Research. In the case of Science, however, since it is knowledge built upon pre-existing knowledge....there is a point where it's not necessary to cite every individual item as some of them will be so well known to the readers, that it is not necessary.

edited for clarity and spelling.

Edited February 10, 2016 by krys

[WordWolf]

Plagiarism does not have time-constraints. COPYRIGHT has time-constraints.

When Ralph Woodrow wrote "Babylon Mystery Religion", he took Alexander

Hislop's book "the Two Babylons" and rewrote it into a reader-friendly, modern book.

Hislop's book was no longer under copyright. That meant that Woodrow did not

have to pay royalties to a copyright holder for use of the contents.

He could use 100% of the contents without paying a cent- which is what he did.

What he DID have to do, however, was CITE HIS SOURCES. All over the book are

endnotes for each chapter where he correctly cites Hislop's book.

"The Three Musketeers by Alexander Dumas" is a book that's no longer under

copyright. So, any publishing company can print the book-

but they have to correctly credit Alexander Dumas for writing it.

That's why you can get a print copy fairly cheap, relative to the size of

the book.

====================

Furthermore, any dictionary can have a copyright- and they do.

There's no copyright on "dictionary" or "Webster's Dictionary."

So any printing company can use either phrase, but they'd need to make up

their own dictionary. Merriam-Webster and American Heritage are 2 companies

that make up their own, and they're fine pieces of work.

The original dictionary by Noah Webster, however, should be public domain.

You could reprint the entire thing, so long as NW's name was on it.

Shakespeare's works are all public domain by now. Lots of things have been

based on them without paying for their use. However, Shakespeare still has to

get credit for his work-you're required to CITE SOURCES.

[krys]

I stand corrected. Thank you WordWolf.

[Rocky]

I think I stippulated appropriatley Skyride, don't take part of what I said out of the whole context. I thought I was clear between what's in the Bible and what someone wrote about stuff in the Bible.

You think you stipulated appropriately? Is that the same as you believing you made your point adequately clear?

If somebody doesn't understand the message you intended to send, whose responsibility is it to clarify... in the event the reader/listener asks for clarification or otherwise indicates that what they understood you to mean is not what you intended to say?

[skyrider]

I think I stippulated appropriatley Skyride, don't take part of what I said out of the whole context. I thought I was clear between what's in the Bible and what someone wrote about stuff in the Bible.

Okay.....Here is your full paragraph, MRAP:

"Plagiarism is a pill hard to swallow when speaking from the Bible, if we quote book, chapter and verse are we excluded of plagiarism? Or is it only plagiarism if some still alive or recently alive person "wrote about it". Think about it, we quote and repeat the words of Jesus and the apostles from the gospels, epistles, proverbs, psalms, etc. without giving credit. I guess then we plagiarise on a consistent basis. Where do you draw the line? Yes, vpw's stuff was not original, did he steal it and if vpw took it from someone else, well, who did that person take it from."

So, let me ask you again....

1) If someone plagiarizes the SAME verses, in the SAME order, highlighting the SAME points,

defining the SAME discernment, with SAME Maggie-muggings character, with SAME style and

length of class, with SAME type of "listening with a purpose questions, and intends to

proceed forth with SAME class-based format as Leonard's class.....is THAT plagiarism?

2) Isn't it the height of plagiarism....when someone, not only steals their class and format,

but ALSO the well-known Canadian characterization used in that class?

3) And, then......for this plagiarist [wierwille] to harp to his students to "make it your own"

when wierwille himself NEVER did just exposes him as this plagiarist empty suit that he was.

4) Not only was vpw's "stuff" NOT original.......the pfal class was STOLEN outright.