|
"In my day" (insert cranky old fart voice here), you'd really have to jump through hoops to plagiarize. I mean, research consisted of reading at the library, interviewing people, etc. Unless you intentionally copied, by hand, a chunk of text from an article or a book you found at the library, then typed it into your own book or article, you were most likely not going to end up plagiarizing. It used to be a conscious decision.
Now, with the ease of the Web, we can look up a million articles, and cut and paste from someone else's work with a minimum of effort, and not think anything of it.
Personally, I don't have a problem with lawyers being able to look up precedents and use them, but if they lifted some other attorney's closing arguments for a similar case and just changed the names and specifics of the circumstances, THEN there'd be a problem.
I guess, to answer your last question, plagiarism is kind of a gray area, and it depends on how much you pick up and how identical it is (and whether you did it on purpose). However, it's hard to prove you did it by accident--remember, George Harrison got nailed for using three of the same musical notes as the Chiffons. And plagiarism of ideas and writing patterns is harder to prove than lifting actual words.
I guess I should be grateful that my idiot clients lifted the very words. The novelist e-mailed me, "After I heard from you, I ran the text through Copyscape, and it told me that only 80 words were the same." I had a dickens of a time trying to get him to understand that 80 words is 80 words too many!
|