George Orwell found innocent on all accounts, by the truest communists. I'm pretty sure the Soviets had a methodology for remembering who wrote what book, and ensuring credit.
If not, I am the director of Solaris (1972). AMA and give me money.
I welcome evidence of any successful leftist state project that did not give credit to authors, filmmakers, etc. Legitimately curious to see what that would look like.
you'd have to describe the difference, I could be. I'm talking about when someone thinks they own an idea and can control how others use that idea (for example, requiring that person to acknowledge the original author of the work). Sort of like being a landlord over that idea and renting it out. Sometimes for a fee, sometimes just for recognition. If that's not right then yeah I'm probably mistaken. I think it's wrong to take domain over an idea to the point where you would try and control how someone else uses it. Let it go. But I understand people who feel otherwise (in housing as well as in intellectual property).
So I'm strongly against copyright, IP, etc. I'm also not talking about vague ideas, but rather a specific combination of words someone put together in order to make a functional joke.
For the term plagiarism I am using this particular definition:
the practice of taking someone else's work or ideas and passing them off as one's own.
I think there's benefit in knowing who wrote what specific book, what song, etc. I like following bands and authors, I like knowing whose work were influential and why, and I like knowing that my doctor didn't just copy the test notes from the guy next to him. In this sense the concept of plagiarism is important to me.
Your landlord example would be apt for my purposes. Just as people once just lived on land, posters here are simply vibing and entertaining, educating, and helping each other. Reposting, rephrasing a joke - great. :dead-dove-1: is my favorite example of this on the site.
The landlords here would be those who take those ideas and then exploit them for profit, resulting in a much higher standard of living than the original "author." These podcasts are all subject to copyright, branding, etc. The Chapo guys, strictly as an example, have stated they're against piracy of their "special" projects. That means the free things generated in leftist spaces are now part of that brand.
I think there’s benefit in knowing who wrote what specific book, what song, etc
It's when you stop other people from acting in order to obtain this benefit that crosses the line for me. I think it's a great if you want to know the original author of a work, and I wish you could get that information in a way that didn't involve punishing folks for their behavior. But it doesn't seem to me like those things can be separated.
Stealing answers on a test isn't plagiarism it's cheating you should respect the difference if you're discussing in good faith.
I think it’s a great if you want to know the original author of a work, and I wish you could get that information in a way that didn’t involve punishing folks for their behavior. But it doesn’t seem to me like those things can be separated.
Again, I'm talking about a verbatim copy with no new material. I sincerely, in good faith, am trying to believe you do not think an ideal world is one where there's 8000 people claiming to have authored the exact same copy of Lord of the Rings. We need this to understand history; who said what, and why.
I do not understand why putting somewhere, anywhere, on your art "original idea by whoever" is such a big ask. You can even say "The rapist, George Orwell, came up with this initially and we fixed it." I do not care.
Stealing answers on a test isn’t plagiarism it’s cheating you should respect the difference if you’re discussing in good faith.
Okay, fine, you're right. But how about xeroxing a thesis or dissertation, and passing it off as your own?
Plagiarism is just stolen valor for nerds
Okay, but you're failing to address the implications of what you're suggesting.
George Orwell found innocent on all accounts, by the truest communists. I'm pretty sure the Soviets had a methodology for remembering who wrote what book, and ensuring credit.
If not, I am the director of Solaris (1972). AMA and give me money.
Well if the soviets did it I'm sure it's fine
I welcome evidence of any successful leftist state project that did not give credit to authors, filmmakers, etc. Legitimately curious to see what that would look like.
A country without landlords would look cool yeah
Are you confusing copyright with acknowledgement of original work, maybe?
you'd have to describe the difference, I could be. I'm talking about when someone thinks they own an idea and can control how others use that idea (for example, requiring that person to acknowledge the original author of the work). Sort of like being a landlord over that idea and renting it out. Sometimes for a fee, sometimes just for recognition. If that's not right then yeah I'm probably mistaken. I think it's wrong to take domain over an idea to the point where you would try and control how someone else uses it. Let it go. But I understand people who feel otherwise (in housing as well as in intellectual property).
So I'm strongly against copyright, IP, etc. I'm also not talking about vague ideas, but rather a specific combination of words someone put together in order to make a functional joke.
For the term plagiarism I am using this particular definition:
I think there's benefit in knowing who wrote what specific book, what song, etc. I like following bands and authors, I like knowing whose work were influential and why, and I like knowing that my doctor didn't just copy the test notes from the guy next to him. In this sense the concept of plagiarism is important to me.
Your landlord example would be apt for my purposes. Just as people once just lived on land, posters here are simply vibing and entertaining, educating, and helping each other. Reposting, rephrasing a joke - great. :dead-dove-1: is my favorite example of this on the site.
The landlords here would be those who take those ideas and then exploit them for profit, resulting in a much higher standard of living than the original "author." These podcasts are all subject to copyright, branding, etc. The Chapo guys, strictly as an example, have stated they're against piracy of their "special" projects. That means the free things generated in leftist spaces are now part of that brand.
It's when you stop other people from acting in order to obtain this benefit that crosses the line for me. I think it's a great if you want to know the original author of a work, and I wish you could get that information in a way that didn't involve punishing folks for their behavior. But it doesn't seem to me like those things can be separated.
Stealing answers on a test isn't plagiarism it's cheating you should respect the difference if you're discussing in good faith.
Plagiarism is just stolen valor for nerds
Again, I'm talking about a verbatim copy with no new material. I sincerely, in good faith, am trying to believe you do not think an ideal world is one where there's 8000 people claiming to have authored the exact same copy of Lord of the Rings. We need this to understand history; who said what, and why.
I do not understand why putting somewhere, anywhere, on your art "original idea by whoever" is such a big ask. You can even say "The rapist, George Orwell, came up with this initially and we fixed it." I do not care.
Okay, fine, you're right. But how about xeroxing a thesis or dissertation, and passing it off as your own?
Okay, but you're failing to address the implications of what you're suggesting.