[TAG] A case of copyright violation / plagiarism?

[Neil Youngman]

On or around Monday 09 October 2006 14:20, Benjamin A. Okopnik reorganised a 
bunch of electrons to form the message:
>
> [sigh] Neil, I've been to Washington and breathed the same air as Bush.
> I've also used some of the same words in English that he has used. This
> does not make me responsible for the war in Iraq. By the same token, not
> using any terms that RIAA has used has never been an explicit goal of
> mine.
>
> I disagree with their position on intellectual property - and still
> consider plagiarism as theft.
>
> > In the term "Intellectual Property",
> > property is only an analogy, which gets badly abused. Use of these terms
> > promotes an over simplistic view of the complex legal issues
> > surrounding "Intellectual Property".
> >
> > As I recall, theft is "taking of property with intent to permanently
> > deprive the owner of that property". The author is not being deprived of
> > his IP when it is copied, although in this case he may be deprived of the
> > credit for it.
>
> Yes - and that credit *IS* the property under discussion. Thus, my
> entire point.

Well if we're talking about credit being taken, theft is not an unreasonable 
term, it's just that too many people will read it as "copyright violation is 
theft". I only bother making the distinction because people are abusing the 
language to get politicians to agree to stupid laws.

> > While the word "theft" makes the point very strongly, it is best avoided
> > in these debates. Could we please avoid such loaded terms as "theft" and
> > "piracy" and stick to "plagiarism" and "copyright violation" please?
>
> Neil, let me recap the situation: Amit implied that he was ignorant of
> the issue. How, exactly, would you explain plagiarism by using only
> "plagiarism"?

"Taking credit for someone else's work is wrong." 

Cheating is probably the right word here, if you need a replacement for theft.

I realise that this is hair splitting, but when the head of the RIAA claims 
that "watching TV without watching the ads is theft", then it's time to take 
a stand on how the word is used.  I don't have the exact quote to hand and 
may not have it right. 

Of course I'm not accusing you of supporting the RIAA and I wouldn't normally 
bother with such hair splitting but under current circumstances, I feel 
justified in asking, nicely, if we could use other terms, at least if we're 
publishing this exchange.

Neil