Plagiarism Laws and Regulations - Research Paper Example

Plagiarism Laws and Regulations Introduction Imagine a criminal, doing two criminal actions (actus Reus) with one criminal intention in his mind (mens rea). For instance, a criminal, goes to a house and robs money and jewelry from it. However, during the process of stealing, he has been identified by the inmates of the house and would be able to recognize him as they do know his name. Hence, he decides to kill the inmate who has recognized him immediately so that he may not be caught and imprisoned. Likewise in plagiarism, there are 2 ‘crimes’ that are committed and there is one ‘criminal’ intention behind it. The two actus reus elements that are present in plagiarism are the actual act of copying the content of the work (one positive action), and avoiding attributing the real author who has done the work (one negative action). The mens rea portion may be difficult to understand but it may be different in different situations (Green 2002 pg 173). As per the Honor Code, it may be due to two reasons (usually one of them in each instance of plagiarism), which include the intention to deceive (making others believe that they have done the work although they have not done) or having a reckless disregard (presenting a significant amount of other’s work as one’s own) (WM People 2010). Although the Honor Code does not take into consideration, accidental plagiarism, it can still be a problem as it appears to be plagiarism, ultimately. The mens rea behind accidental plagiarism include failure to properly frame or paraphrase other’s content, being sluggish in the manner of properly adapting other’s work, or finally and most frequently noted is to fail to differentiate between expressing one’s own thoughts and others and in the process mixing content and finally presenting it as plagiarized or poorly adapted content (Wheeler 2006). Hence, the real mind behind plagiarism may either be intention to deceive, being reckless without regard, or accidental plagiarism. After giving a short introduction to the dynamics behind plagiarism, in this paper, we shall study, what exactly constitutes plagiarism, the various violations that it would create, and the manner in which it can effectively be prevented. Body What constitutes plagiarism? According to the Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary (9th Edition), plagiarism refers to “…to steal and pass off (the ideas or words of another) as one's own: use (a created production) without crediting the source vi: to commit literary theft: present as new and original an idea or product derived from an existing source…” Students in general have a very blurred idea of what constitutes plagiarism. This may not entirely be the problem with students but may also be with the general concept of plagiarism and the manner in which it is portrayed. In different environments, plagiarism may be perceived in different ways (Green 2002, pg 174). In one particular environment, the process of repeating is considered vital in the process of learning and students are not taught how to give reference or to cite other works. For example, a student in the school would simple have to reproduce content that he or she would be learning from the textbooks, and by the time the student comes to the university, he or she would continue with the same practice without actually understanding the implications of the same. Firstly, for such student, the concept of plagiarism once introduced would seem to be very strange, and often difficult to avoid. Secondly, for students who have free and ready access to content in electronic form, the very ease and convenience of copying. A student may consider that anything available on the internet is free to be used. They would find it difficult to find the author’s or the source’s name, and hence attribution would be questionable. Thirdly, students do not have the experience and the skill set to apply the principles of plagiarism, when they need to apply it to the most. For example, in a survey conducted at the Josephson Institute of Ethics in 2004 amongst High School students, about 35% had reported that they had at some point resorted to plagiarism. Students may find it difficult to create or re-create than to copy and hence indulge in plagiarism. Fourthly, some of the students are under the impression that any content that has been sufficiently attributed would not contribute towards plagiarism and hence feel that they are free to use others content as long as it has been attributed (Geraldt 2006, pg. 4-8). The concept of plagiarism goes much more beyond this and includes all the don’ts that are mentioned above. A student should work and have a coordinated understanding of what constitutes plagiarism and the manner in which it should be avoided (Harvard 2012). Plagiarism in most jurisdictions may not be illegal but can be considered as an immorality as opposed to the idea of originality. The concept and the morality of plagiarism arose during the 18th century when the Romantic Movement in Europe authors and artistic were encouraged to create their own work having virgin ideas rather than resembling the masters as previously suggested in the earlier decades. By itself, plagiarism may not be a crime, but on ethical and moral grounds it has gained a lot of disproval from the academic and the corporate quarters. Cases of plagiarism may or may not actually be violations of copyright and other intellectual property right laws (Green 2002, pg 175). According to the Harvard University, drawing or getting inspired by another person’s idea without actually crediting that person would constitute plagiarism. The source may not include just a book, but may also include another student, the teacher, a website, a journal or another organization. In academic situations taking another person’s idea can be considered stealing whether done intentionally or accidentally (Harvard 2012). The University of Miami considers rephrasing, quoting others content without quotations, use of different wordings, and other such acts as plagiarism. The University of Miami also gives importance to qualitative plagiarism, wherein key words or content would by copied rather than quantitative (University of Miami, Dept of Biology, 2012). Plagiarism as violation of copyright infringement A plagiarism may also be a copyright infringement, and the later is a legal violation and can be enforced by law. Though both plagiarism and copyright infringement are almost similar, there are a huge number of differences between copyright infringement and plagiarism (Logie 2005). Copyright infringement is infringing upon the otherwise exclusive rights of the copyright holder without seeking consent of the holder, and the copyright holder can sue the person infringing for enforcement of the rights. Plagiarism includes using another person’s work or ideas without giving attribution and presenting the work or idea in such a way that it is one’s own idea. Copyright offence may be considered as a legal as well as an ethical offence, whereas as plagiarism is considered an ethical and moral offence, but may or may not be considered as a legal offence. Some of the acts that come under copyright infringement include copying another person’s work, presenting the other person’s work, making copies of the work, adapting or translating the work, or doing any task with relation to the work, even though clearly citing the work. There may be instances where the offender could be plagiarizing, but not copying, copying but not plagiarizing, and both copying and plagiarizing simultaneously (University of Connecticut 2007). Plagiarism is more about not giving credit or citing another person for his or her idea, whereas copyright is more to do with not taking authorization or providing compensation for another person for his or her work. Plagiarism may be prohibited through the university code whereas; the copyright infringement may be forbidden federal and state laws or even case laws and international treaties (such as TRIPS and the Berne Convention). Most often the penalty imposed for plagiarism is failing the student, expulsion from the course, and reworking on the thesis papers. The penalty for copyright infringement includes injunction, payment of damages, destruction of infringing copies, and imprisonment. The enforcement of plagiarism may be done by public critics and institutional penalties, where enforcement of copyright violation is done civil and criminals codes (Logie 2005). Plagiarism as a violation of unfair competition Plagiarism bears close resemblance to several of the unfair competition law doctrines including the doctrine of reverse passing off and the doctrine of misappropriation. These bear close resembles to several concepts of trademark laws. Passing off is the process of selling goods of one trader as if they belong to another trader, and is a civil wrong considered under tort laws (Green 2002). For example, if a trader instead of putting his label over the goods, removes his label and puts that of another company doing well, it can be considered as passing off, even if the other trader does not have a trademark that is a registered trademark. Reverse passing off or palming off is the removal of a popular brand label and substituting it with one’s own brand. For example, if a trader uses the products of a popular brand, but removes the label and substitutes it within his own is called as palming off. Likewise in plagiarism, the student removes the name of the original author and instead puts his own name (Guy 2006). Another process of unfair competition arises from the concept of misappropriation. Even though copyright statutes do not apply to ideas per se, plagiarism involves using one’s ideas without giving appropriate credit or citing another person’s idea. This clause is much different from the ethical clause of plagiarism (Whitbeck 2010). Misappropriation can be applied even to ideas, information, designs and artistic works (intangible properties). According to the concept of misappropriation, one party cannot make commercial gains or benefit from the hard work, labor and the skills of another party and without giving due credit to the other party. A classic case of misappropriation is INS vs. Associated Press 248 US 215 (1918). During the World War 1, the INS was prevented from getting news of the war in the US. So INS rewrote the news content that was printed by Associated Press and the later tried to sue INS for theft of its content. The content did not actually meet the criteria for confidential information or copyright infringement, but instead the court considered this to be a new form of infringement called as misappropriation. This involves appropriating another person’s property without actually compensating or paying the other party (Green 2002). Plagiarism as a violation of moral rights Under European Union law, plagiarism may be considered as a violation of the moral rights of the author. The copyright provides the author with several moral rights including the right to integrity, the right to disclosure and the right to attribution or paternity. According to the right to integrity, another person cannot destroy one’s work by altering or changing the work. According to the right to disclosure, the author can decide when the work should be provided to the public and the manner in which it has to be displayed or portrayed. The right to attribution involves rightfully attributing the author for his or her work, and avoiding attributing another author for work that may belong to a different author. For example, if the student attributes himself to be the author for a particular work, and avoids giving the real author attribution, then it would constitute plagiarism. The Berne Convention aims to protect the moral rights of the author for his or her work (Green 2002). Effectively managing plagiarism Any organization or institution that would be handling work that could be protected through various intellectual property right tools should develop a policy in order to manage and prevent plagiarism. In order to manage plagiarism in a holistic manner, the plagiarism policy should start off with a values and beliefs statement of the need to avoid plagiarism. All terms concerning plagiarism should be appropriately defined and the expectations of the student are mentioned (Bramer 1996). The responsibilities of the student should be clearly chalked out. The responsibilities of the teachers should also be identified and mentioned in the plagiarism policy. The organization has several responsibilities with the need to prevent plagiarism, including training the staff, publishing procedures, developing codes, ensuring records are kept and counseling students. It is important that the organization creates greater awareness of plagiarism considering that there are a lot of grey matters in the areas, and students often may find it difficult to find out what constitutes plagiarism. Hence spreading greater light on plagiarism and providing students with guidelines in order to avoid the same. All cases of plagiarism should be handled in a special manner, basically with the intention of not penalizing but spreading greater awareness of means by which it can be avoided. Lastly, the institutional policy on plagiarism should be monitored and modified based on the noted limitations (Kristina 2008). Conclusion Students should closely follow the guidelines that the institution provides to them on how to avoid and prevent plagiarism. Plagiarism may be different from copyright infringement, but there may be vital differences between the two, meaning that what constitutes a copyright infringement may not constitute plagiarism, and what constitutes plagiarism may actually not constitute a copyright infringement. On the other hand, there may be situations where copyright infringement and plagiarism may go hand in hand. However, greater attention is given to plagiarism for this ethical and moral abuse of the rights of the author of the work. In general, plagiarism involves combining 2 actus rea with 1 mens rea and the mens rea that may be present may include accidental, reckless disregard or the intention to deceive the author. Further plagiarism may not merely include copyright violations, but also unfair competition (Under the Lanham’s Act and misappropriation) and violating the moral rights of the author. Students in order to avoid plagiarism should give more importance to expr4essing own ideas and rightfully crediting others for their ideas. Works Cited AE Guy. G30 Plagiarism and Community. Across the Disciplines. 2006. CCCC. 17 April 2012. http://wac.colostate.edu/atd/reviews/cccc2006/g30.cfm C Whitbeck. Misappropriation of Ideas does count as plagiarism. 2012. Ethical Discussion. http://www.ethicscasediscussions.org/forum/show_post/102 Deborah R. Gerhardt. ‘Plagiarism In Cyberspace: Learning The Rules Of Recycling Content With A View Towards Nurturing Academic Trust In An Electronic World’. Richmond Journal of Law & Technology. 12(2006): 1-20. http://jolt.richmond.edu/v12i3/article10.pdf Harvard College. What Constitutes Plagiarism. 2012. Harvard College Guide. 17 April 2012. http://isites.harvard.edu/icb/icb.do?keyword=k70847&pageid=icb.page342054 J Logie. Plagiarism and Copyright—What Are the Differences? 2005. The Council Chronicle. 17 April 2012. http://www.google.co.in/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=plagiarism%20violation%20of%20copyright&source=web&cd=28&ved=0CGkQFjAHOBQ&url=http%3A%2F%2Fweb.ics.purdue.edu%2F~epflugfe%2FPlagiarism%2520Pedagogies%2FCopyright%2520and%2520Plagiarism%2520handout.doc&ei=jaCNT8TzIoyJrAfB-aiqCQ&usg=AFQjCNGzo05DHG0BSiWQp-RvtzGHw3PzLA K Wheeler. Accidental Plagiarism: It Could Happen to You. 2006. CN. 17 April 2012. http://web.cn.edu/kwheeler/documents/Accidental_Plagiarism.pdf Kristina. What needs to be in a policy for managing plagiarism?. 2010. CSC. 17 April 2012. http://www.csc.kth.se/~kristina/plagiat/docs/sem5/What%20needs%20to%20be%20in%20a%20policy%20for%20managing%20plagiarism.pdf SE Bramer. What is Plagiarism. 1996. Widener University. 17 April 2012. http://science.widener.edu/svb/essay/plagiar.html Stuart P. Green. ‘Plagiarism, Norms, and the Limits of Theft Law: Some Observations on the Use of Criminal Sanctions in Enforcing Intellectual Property Right’. 2002. J Green 2. 17 April 2012. http://faculty.law.lsu.edu/stuartgreen2/j-green2.pdf University of Connecticut. Plagiarism Vs. Copyright Infringement. 2007. University Library. 17 April 2012. http://www.lib.uconn.edu/copyright/plagiarismVsCopyright.html University of Connecticut. Plagiarism vs. Copyright Infringement. 2007. Libraries. 17 April 2012. http://www.lib.uconn.edu/copyright/plagiarismVsCopyright.html University of Miami. What Constitutes Plagiarism? 2012. Department of Biology. 17 April 2012. http://www.bio.miami.edu/dana/161/plagiarism.html WM People. The Honor Code: Plagiarism and Journals. 2010. Chartered 1693. 17 April 2012. http://wmpeople.wm.edu/asset/index/lawhonor/journalpresentation Read More