• Prunebutt@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 hours ago

    There’s more than a legal definition of plagiarism.

    Plagiarism is when you sell the work of others as your own without attribution. There are bucketloads of examples of legal plagiarism.

    I’m pretty sure that everything H. Bomberguy discussed in his plagiarism video was legal, for example.

    • communism@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 hours ago

      No, actually, plagiarism is a legalistic term. If IP law did not exist, neither would plagiarism.

      And if you give someone permission to use your IP, and they go ahead and use that permission, it is not plagiarism neither legally nor by any colloquial understanding of the term. That is what happens when someone uses BSD or MIT code in their proprietary software. It is explicitly allowed, by design, by intention.

      without attribution

      BSD/MIT also don’t allow you to not attribute the author of the BSD/MIT code, so that doesn’t even make sense. You are perhaps thinking of code released public domain, in which case, again, the author specifically chose that over BSD/MIT, and the main practical difference is not needing to give attribution, so that must be what the original author wanted.

      • Prunebutt@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 hours ago

        I think your legalistic view of the world is quite limiting.

        It’s not illegal to rephrase what someone wrote in a book and pass it off as your own work. You can’t “wown” a cultural analysis. It’s still plagiarism.