표절: 두 판 사이의 차이

K-위키
편집 요약 없음
편집 요약 없음
1번째 줄: 1번째 줄:
:<span class="dablink">''For other uses, see [[{{{1|{{PAGENAME}}}}} (disambiguation)]].''</span>
:''<span class="dablink">For Uncyclopedia policies concerning plagiarism, see [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia:Plagiarism|<span title="Uncyclopedia:Plagiarism" style="color: #002bb8">Uncyclopedia:Plagiarism</span>]] and [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia:Copyright violations|<span title="Uncyclopedia:Copyright violations" style="color: #002bb8">Uncyclopedia:Copyright violations</span>]].</span>''


'''표절'''(剽竊)이란 다른 사람이 쓴 문학작품이나 학술논문, 또는 기타 각종 글의 일부 또는 전부를 직접 베끼거나 아니면 관념을 모방하면서, 마치 자신의 독창적인 산물인 것처럼 공표하는 행위를 가리킨다. 표절은 흔히 [[저작권]] 침해와 혼동되는 경우가 많지만, 양자는 맥락과 지향이 서로 다르다. 저작권이 소멸된 타인의 저작물을 출처 표시를 하지 않고 이용하는 경우는 표절에 해당하지만 저작권 침해는 아니다. 표절은 주로 학술이나 예술의 영역에서 활동하는 사람이 갖춰야 할 기본적인 윤리와 관련되는 반면에 저작권 침해는 다른 사람의 [[재산권]]을 침해한 법률적 문제이다.  
'''Plagiarism''', as defined in the 1995 ''Random House Compact Unabridged Dictionary'', is the "use or close imitation of the language and thoughts of another author and the representation of them as one's own [[Fisher Price|original work]]."<ref>qtd. in {{cite book | title = Library plagiarism policies | first = Vera | last= Stepchyshyn | coauthors = Robert S. Nelson | publisher = Assoc of College & Resrch Libraries | year = 2007 | isbn = 0838984169 | page = 65}}p. 65. <br clear=left>[[Wikipedia:International Standard Book Number|<span title="International Standard Book Number" style="color: #002bb8">ISBN</span>]] [[Wikipedia:Special:BookSources/0838984169|<span title="Special:BookSources/0838984169" style="color: #002bb8">0838984169</span>]].</ref> Within [[academia]], plagiarism by students, professors, or researchers is considered [[academic dishonesty]] or academic fraud, and offenders are subject to academic censure, up to and including [[Expulsion (academia)|expulsion]].  In [[journalism]], plagiarism is considered a breach of [[journalistic ethics]], and reporters caught plagiarizing typically face disciplinary measures ranging from suspension to termination of employment. Some individuals caught plagiarizing in academic or journalistic contexts claim that they plagiarized unintentionally, by failing to include [[quotation]]s or give the appropriate [[citation]]. While plagiarism in scholarship and journalism has a centuries-old history, the development of the [[Internet]], where articles appear as electronic text, has made the physical act of copying the work of others much easier.


==표절과 저작권 침해 그리고 인용==
Plagiarism is not the same as [[copyright infringement]]. While both terms may apply to a particular act, they are different transgressions. Copyright infringement is a violation of the rights of a copyright holder, when material protected by copyright is used without consent. On the other hand, plagiarism is concerned with the unearned increment to the plagiarizing author's [[Gossip|reputation]] that is achieved through false claims of authorship.


표절은 다른 사람의 저작으로부터 전거를 충분히 밝히지 않고 내용을 [[인용]]하거나 차용하는 행위이다. 반면에 저작권 침해는 다른 사람의 저술로부터 상당한 부분을 저자의 동의 없이 임의로 자신의 저술에서 사용한 행위를 가리킨다. 그러므로 지식의 확산을 위해 공정하게 사용될 수 있는 정도를 넘는 경우라면 설사 전거를 밝혔더라도 저자의 동의가 없었다면 저작권 침해가 발생할 수 있다. 물론 표절도 출전을 밝히기만 하는 것으로 전부 방지되는 일은 아니다. 자기 이름으로 내는 보고서나 논문에서 핵심내용이나 분량의 대부분이 남의 글에서 따온 것이라면 출전을 밝히더라도 표절이 될 수 있다. 남의 글이나 생각을 베끼거나 짜깁기해서 마치 자신의 업적인 것처럼 공표한 셈이 되기 때문이다.
==Etymology==
저작권 보호가 엄격하게 유지되는 사회일수록 표절에 대한 사회적 규제도 엄격하며, 저작권 보호가 느슨한 사회에서 표절에 대한 규제도 느슨하다는 점에서 바라보면 양자 사이에는 모종의 관계가 전혀 없는 것은 아니다.


한국 행정학회에서는 '표절을 고의적으로나 또는 의도하지 않았다고 해도 출처를 명확하게 밝히지 않은 채, 타인의 지적재산을 임의로 사용하는 것으로 정의한다.' 라고 정의했다.<ref>[http://www.kapa21.or.kr/introduce/introduce_regulation4.htm#top 한국 행정학회 표절규정]</ref>
English ''Plagiarism'' (1615–25), earlier ''plagiary'' (1590–1600), derives from [[Latin]] ''plagiārius'', "kidnapper", equivalent to ''plagium'', "kidnapping", which contains Latin ''plaga'' ("snare", "net"), based on the {{fakelink|Indo-European root}} ''*-plak'', "to weave" (seen for instance in [[Greek language|Greek]] ''plekein'', Latin ''plectere'', both meaning "to weave").<ref>[http://books.google.com/books?id=fsWzg7rTEa4C&pg=PA345&dq=etymology+plaga+net&ei=JVxXSq2_GIiEywS8mPSyBw Google.com] [http://books.google.com/books?id=fsWzg7rTEa4C&pg=PA345&dq=etymology+plaga+net&ei=JVxXSq2_GIiEywS8mPSyBw Google.com]</ref>


== 제재 ==
== Sanctions ==
=== 학계 ===
=== Academia ===
학계에서 학생의 표절은 심각한 [[반칙행위]]로 간주되어 고등학교라면 해당 과제의 0점 처리, 대학교라면 해당 과목의 이수실패라는 처벌을 받을 수 있다. 상습적이거나 정도가 심각한 (예컨대, 논문이나 기고문을 통째로 베끼는 등) 경우에는, 정학이나 퇴학 조치를 당할 수도 있다. 학생들은 흔히 좋은 보고서를 빨리 내야하는 압박에 시달리느라, 현대 [[인터넷]]의 발달 덕분에 여러 출전으로부터 일부씩 복사해서 붙여넣는 식으로 표절할 유혹을 크게 받는다. 그러나 담당 교수나 강사 및 교사가 이를 적발해 내기는 다음과 같은 이유로 대개 어렵지 않다. 첫째, 학생들이 베끼는 출전들이 대개 겹치기 때문에 여러 명의 보고서에 같은 대목이 중첩된다. 둘째, 학생이 자신의 "목소리"로 말하고 있는지 아닌지를 가려내기는 보통 쉬운 일이다. 셋째, 학생들이 주제와 동떨어지거나 부적절한 전거 또는 부정확한 정보를 차용하는 경우도 많다. 넷째, 교수나 강사가 보고서를 낼 때 [[표절검색기]]를 거쳐서 제출하라고 요구할 수 있다.
Many students feel pressured to complete papers well and quickly, however Peter Callaghan would rather you complete papers well, quickly, and without help. With the accessibility of new technology (the Internet) students can plagiarize by copying and pasting information from other sources. This is often easily detected by teachers for several reasons. First, students' choices of sources are frequently unoriginal; instructors may receive the same passage copied from a popular source from several students. Second, it is often easy to tell whether a student used his or her own "voice." Third, students may choose sources which are inappropriate, inaccurate, or off-topic. Fourth, lecturers may insist that submitted work is first submitted to an online plagiarism detector.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.nysun.com/article/56158 |title=Opinion: Why Do They Do It? |author=[http://individual.utoronto.ca/alex_klein/PublicPhil.htm Klein A.] |date=June 8, 2007 |publisher=The New York Sun |accessdate=2007-12-11}}</ref>


표절이 발각되면 이미 받은 학위나 상이라도 취소하는 대학도 많다.
In the academic world, plagiarism by students is a very serious offense that can result in punishments such as a failing grade on the particular assignment (typically at the high school level) or for the course (typically at the college or university level).<sup class="noprint">&#91;[[Uncyclopedia:Accuracy|''<span title="The material in the vicinity of this tag needs references to reliable sources." style="white-space: nowrap;">citation needed</span>'']]&#93;</sup> For cases of repeated plagiarism, or for cases in which a student commits severe plagiarism (e.g., submitting a copied piece of writing as original work), a student may be suspended or expelled. In many universities, academic degrees or awards may be revoked as a penalty for plagiarism.  


교수나 연구원의 표절은 신뢰도나 성실성의 손상은 물론이고 정직 또는 파면의 사유가 될 수 있다. 교수나 학생에 대한 표절 혐의는 구성원들의 동의에 따라서 설치된 학내 징계위원회에서 다뤄지는 것이 보통이다. 학자가 학술지에 논문을 발표하고 이중 일부를 비학술지에 발표하거나 외국어로 번역하여 외국에서 발표하는 경우, 눈문을 자신의 저서에 포함시키는 경우, 학위논문을 분할하여 발표하는 경우 등의 행위는 윤리적으로 비난받아야 하는 표절행위에 해당하는지 분명하지 않다.
There is little academic research into the frequency of plagiarism in high schools. Much of the research investigated plagiarism at the post-secondary level.<ref>Hart, M.; Friesner, Tim (December 15, 2004). ''[http://www.ejel.org/volume-2/vol2-issue1/issue1-art25.htm research Plagiarism and Poor Academic Practice – A Threat to the Extension of e-Learning in Higher Education?]''. Electronic Journal of E-Learning. Retrieved 2007-12-11.</ref> Of the forms of cheating, (including plagiarism, inventing data, and cheating during an exam) students admit to plagiarism more than any other.<sup class="noprint">&#91;[[Uncyclopedia:Accuracy|''<span title="The material in the vicinity of this tag needs references to reliable sources." style="white-space: nowrap;">citation needed</span>'']]&#93;</sup> However, this figure decreases considerably when students are asked about the frequency of "serious" plagiarism (such as copying most of an assignment or purchasing a complete paper from a website).  Recent use of plagiarism detection software (see below) gives a more accurate picture of this activity's prevalence.


=== 언론계 ===
For professors and researchers, plagiarism is punished by sanctions ranging from suspension to termination, along with the loss of credibility and integrity.<ref>[[Ned Kock|Kock, N.]] (1999). [http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=306594 A case of academic plagiarism]. ''Communications of the ACM'', 42(7), 96-104.</ref><ref>[[Ned Kock|Kock, N.]], & Davison, R. (2003). [http://www.misq.org/archivist/vol/no27/Issue4/Kock.html Dealing with plagiarism in the IS research community: A look at factors that drive plagiarism and ways to address them]. ''MIS Quarterly'', 27(4), 511-532.</ref> Charges of plagiarism against students and professors are typically heard by internal disciplinary committees, which students and professors have agreed to be bound by.<ref>Clarke, R. (2006). [http://aisel.aisnet.org/jais/vol7/iss1/5/ Plagiarism by academics: More complex than it seems]. ''Journal of the Association for Information Systems'', 7(2), 91-121.</ref>
어떤 언론지가 유통되려면 공중의 신뢰를 받아야 하기 때문에, 기자가 전거를 정직하게 밝히지 않는다면 해당 신문이나 방송의 도덕성이 훼손되고 신뢰도가 무너진다. 기자가 표절 혐의를 받게 되면 일단 보도업무가 정지되고, 사내에서 조사위원회가 구성되는 것이 보통이다. [[전자문서]]를 쉽게 얻어서 편집할 수 있게 됨에 따라 표절의 유혹을 받는 기자들도 많아졌다. "복사해서 붙여넣기"를 통해 표절했다가 적발된 사례가 많다.


=== 온라인 표절 ===
=== Journalism ===
인터넷 웹사이트나 블로그에서 내용을 복사해다가 붙여넣는 것을 컨텐트 스크레이핑이라고 한다. 한국어에서는 [[퍼나르기]] 또는 [[펌질]]이라고 불린다. 영어 문서에서 표절을 찾아내는 도구는 무료로 온라인에서 이용할 수 있다. 아울러 오른 클릭을 봉쇄하거나 저작권 경고를 띄우는 등, 온라인 복사를 제한하는 방법도 다양하게 개발되었다. 저작권 침해와 결부되는 표절의 경우에는 컨텐트의 정당한 소유자가 가해 사이트 소유자 또는 사이트가 개설된 도메인 서버 관리자에게 법적 대응을 할 수도 있다. 미국의 경우 [[DMCA]]가 이에 해당한다.
Since journalism's main currency is public trust, a reporter's failure to honestly acknowledge their sources undercuts a newspaper or television news show's integrity and undermines its credibility. Journalists accused of plagiarism are often suspended from their reporting tasks while the charges are being investigated by the news organization.<ref>[http://www.famousplagiarists.com/journalism.htm List of cases of plagiarism among journalists]</ref>


글의 내용을 복사할 때만 표절인 것은 아니다. 다른 사람의 관념이나 생각을 마치 자신의 것인 양 제시하면 표절이 된다. 반면에 표절 검색기는 대부분 글내용을 노골적으로 그대로 베낀 경우만 잡아낼 수 있다.
The ease with which electronic text can be reproduced from online sources has lured a number of reporters into acts of plagiarism:  Journalists have been caught "copying-and-pasting" articles and text from a number of websites)<sup class="noprint">&#91;[[Uncyclopedia:Accuracy|''<span title="The material in the vicinity of this tag needs references to reliable sources." style="white-space: nowrap;">citation needed</span>'']]&#93;</sup>.


=== 기타 맥락 ===
=== Online plagiarism ===
표절이란 흔히 느슨한 의미에서 도둑질 또는 절도라고 지칭되지만, 사법적인 의미에서 [[형사문제]]로 다루는 관행은 확립되어 있지 않다. 보통법의 관점에서도 표절이 형사상 범죄로 간주되지는 않는다. 표절의 문제는 민사사건과 관련된다. 표절에 해당하는 행위는 때때로 [[저작권]] 침해, 불공정 경쟁, 도덕적 권리의 침해, 등과 같은 명목 아래 법정에서 사건이 될 수 있다. 정보기술의 발전으로 말미암아 지식재산의 활용도가 높아지면서 저작권 침해도 형사범죄로 다루어야 하는 것이 아니냐는 논쟁이 일어나는 추세이다.
Content scraping is a phenomenon of copy and pasting material from Internet websites, affecting both established sites <ref>Authorship gets lost on Web. [http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/2006-07-31-net-plagiarism_x.htm?POE=TECISVA USA Today]</ref> and blogs<ref>Online plagiarism strikes blog world. [http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2006/05/08/online_plagiarism_strikes_blog_world/ Boston.com]</ref>


== 자기표절 ==
Free online tools are becoming available to help identify plagiarism, <ref>[http://news.com.com/8301-10784_3-5663303-7.html CNET.com] [http://www.webpronews.com/topnews/2005/08/30/copyscape-searches-for-scraped-content Webpronews.com]</ref> and there is a range of approaches that attempt to limit online copying, such as disabling [[Right-click#Common_mouse_operations|right clicking]] and placing warning banners regarding copyrights on web pages. Instances of plagiarism that involve copyright violation may be addressed by the rightful content owners sending a [[DMCA]] removal notice to the offending site-owner, or to the [[Internet|ISP]] that is hosting the offending site.
'''자기표절'''(Self-plagiarism)이란 자신의 저작 가운데 상당한 부분을 똑같이 또는 거의 똑같이 다시 사용하면서 원래의 출전을 밝히지 않는 경우를 말한다. 이런 행위는 중복게재 또는 중복출판이라고도 불린다. 원저의 저작권이 다른 주체에게 양도되어 있다면 법률적인 문제도 될 수 있고, 그렇지 않다면 윤리적인 문제로 그친다. 보통 자기표절이 문제되는 경우는 학자들의 연구업적이나 학생들의 과제물처럼 출판된 결과가 새로운 문건이라는 주장을 함축할 때이다. 저작권 침해와 같은 법률적인 문제를 수반하지 않는 한, 신문이나 잡지에 기고되는 시사적, 문화적, 전문적 평론에서는 자기표절이 해당하지 않는다.


이전 저작에서 따와서 다시 사용하는 정도가 얼마나 되어야 자기표절에 해당하는지는 경계가 모호하다. 모든 저작물에서 일부 내용을 따다가 사용하는 일 자체는 공정한 범위 안에서 법률적으로나 윤리적으로나 허용되기 때문이다. [[ACM|컴퓨터 학회]]와 같은 전문가단체에서는 자기표절을 다루기 위한 방침을 정해놓고 있다. 그러나 표절에 비해 자기표절에 대한 외부규제는 당사자의 양식에 맡겨지는 경우가 많다. 자기표절의 문제는 아예 규제하지 않기로 정한 대학이나 편집위원회도 일부 있다. 자신의 저작에서 훔친다는 말이 자체로 형용모순이라는 이유에서이다.
Plagiarism is not only the mere copying of text, but also the presentation of another's ideas as one's own, regardless of the specific words or constructs used to express that idea. In contrast, many so-called plagiarism detection services can only detect blatant word-for-word copies of text.


자기표절 논란을 방지하기 위한 최선의 권고에는 다음과 같은 사항들이 포함된다.
=== Other contexts ===
Generally, although plagiarism is often loosely referred to as theft or stealing, it has not been set as a criminal matter in the courts.<ref><span class="plainlinks" style="color: #3366bb">[http://faculty.law.lsu.edu/stuartgreen/pdf/j-green2.pdf Louisiana State University]http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20100708124535/uncyclopedia/images/9/9e/PDF_Icon.png</span></ref> Likewise, plagiarism has no standing as a ''[[crime|criminal]]'' offense in the [[Law|common law]]. Instead, claims of plagiarism are a [[Law|civil law]] matter, which an aggrieved person can resolve by launching a lawsuit. Acts that may constitute plagiarism are in some instances treated as [[copyright infringement]], {{fakelink|unfair competition}}, or a violation of the doctrine of [[Moral|moral rights]].  The increased availability of [[intellectual property]] due to a rise in technology has furthered the debate as to whether copyright offences are criminal.<sup class="noprint">&#91;[[Uncyclopedia:Accuracy|''<span title="The material in the vicinity of this tag needs references to reliable sources." style="white-space: nowrap;">citation needed</span>'']]&#93;</sup>


* 종전에 출판된 내용이 이번 저작에 들어있음을 서문같은 곳을 통해 분명하게 밝힌다.
==Defenses==
* 종전에 출판한 저작의 소유권자로부터 허락을 얻는다든지 해서, 저작권 시비를 방지한다.
* 종전에 출판된 내용이 인용될 때마다 출전을 명시한다.


자기표절이란 폄훼의 뜻을 가진 수사어로서, 종전에 출판된 문건을 다시 사용하는 모든 경우에 붙여질 수는 있지만, 그 가운데에는 정당한 경우도 없지 않다. 표절이나 자기표절은 보통 특정 학문분야의 윤리강령에서 논의되는 안건이고, 저작권 침해는 각 나라의 실정법과 관련되는 문제로서 구분될 필요가 있다.
<table align="center" class="metadata plainlinks ambox ambox-content" style="padding: 2px; background-color:#f9f9f9; padding-left: 15px; border-left: 10px solid #f28500; border-right: 1px solid black; border-top: 1px solid black; border-bottom: 1px solid black; width: 80%">
<tr>
<td class="mbox-image">
<div style="width: 52px;">http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/f4/Ambox_content.png</div>
</td>
<td class="mbox-text" style="">This article '''may contain excessive, poor or irrelevant examples'''. You can [{{SERVER}}{{localurl:{{NAMESPACE}}:{{PAGENAME}}|action=edit}} improve the article] by adding more descriptive text. See Uncyclopedia's [[HTBFANJS|guide to writing better articles]] for further suggestions.</td></tr></table>


=== 정당한 재사용 ===
A famous passage of [[That Guy|Laurence Sterne]]'s 1767 ''[[That Guy|Tristram Shandy]]'', condemns plagiarism by resorting to plagiarism.<ref>[[That Guy|Laurence Sterne]] ''[[That Guy|Tristram Shandy]]'', Vol V, Chap. 1</ref><ref>Mark Ford [http://www.lrb.co.uk/v26/n23/mark-ford/love-and-theft Love and Theft] {{fakelink|london Review of Books}} Vol. 26 No. 23 · 2 December 2004
자기가 전에 출판한 저작을 재사용하더라도 자기표절의 혐의에서 면제해 줄 요인들을 파멜라 사뮤엘슨이 1994년에 정리한 바 있다. 이 요인들은 법률적인 영역을 별도로 치부하고, 순전히 윤리적인 차원에 국한된다. 이 주제에 관해 공간되어 있는 것으로는 아마 가장 이치에 맞고 설득력이 있다고 볼 수 있기 때문에 살펴 볼 가치가 있다.
pages 34-35 | 4103 words</ref> [[That Guy|Oliver Goldsmith]] commented:<ref>[[That Guy|Oliver Goldsmith]] [http://books.google.com/books?id=qEMVAAAAYAAJ The vicar of Wakefield: a tale, Volume 5] p.xviii</ref>


* 두 번째 저작을 통해서 새로이 기여하는 내용을 위한 바탕으로서 종전에 발표한 내용이 다시 개진될 필요가 있을 때.
:<span style="font-family: verdana; font-size: 11px">Sterne's Writings, in which it is clearly shewn, that he, whose manner and style were so long thought original, was, in fact, the most unhesitating plagiarist who ever cribbed from his predecessors in order to garnish his own pages. It must be owned, at the same time, that Sterne selects the materials/ of his mosaic work with so much art, places them so well, and polishes them so highly, that in most cases we are disposed to pardon the want of originality, in consideration of the exquisite talent with which the borrowed materials are wrought up into the new form.</span>
* 새로운 증거나 논증을 논의하기 위해서 종전에 출판한 내용이 다시 제시되어야 할 때.
* 두 출판물이 겨냥하는 독자층이 워낙 달라서 공표하려는 내용을 전하기 위해서는 재출판이 불가피할 때.
* 저자가 느끼기에 전에 발표한 내용이나 방식이 아주 좋아서 다르게 말해야 할 필요가 전혀 없을 때.  


같은 내용을 다시 말하는 일은 일반적으로 피해야 하지만, 특정한 사정에서 이러한 요인들이 있다면 과거 문건의 재사용이 필요하다고 인정될 수 있을 것이다.
On December 6, 2006, [[That Guy|Thomas Pynchon]] joined a campaign by many other major authors to clear [[That Guy|Ian McEwan]] of plagiarism charges by sending a typed letter to his British publisher, which was published in the ''[[Daily Telegraph]]'' newspaper.<ref>Pynchon, Thomas. [http://web.archive.org/web/20061207214105/http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/graphics/2006/12/05/nwriter06big.gif Letter to the ''Daily Telegraph'' newspaper], December 6, 2006.</ref>


사뮤엘슨은 "기술적인 내용의 논문을 그다지 많이 고치지 않고 - 각주 몇 개를 추가하고 한 대목을 첨가하는 정도로써 - 다른 법률지에 기고한" 자신의 사례를 언급했다.<ref>^ Pamela Samuelson(1994). "Self-Plagiarism or Fair Use?" ''Communications of the ACM'', 37(August): 21-25. </ref> 그 법률지를 구독하는 독자들이 종전의 기술적인 논문에 접하게 될 가능성이 사실상 전무하다고 볼 수 있기 때문에, 이는 정보의 확산을 위해 필요하다는 말이다.
Playwright [[That Guy|Wilson Mizner]] said "If you copy from one author, it's plagiarism. If you copy from two, it's research."<ref>Quoted by Stuart B. McIver, Dreamers, Schemers and Scalawags, Pineapple Press, Sarasota, Florida, 1994. ISBN 1-56164-034-4.</ref>


== 주석 ==
American author [[That Guy|Jonathan Lethem]] delivered a passionate defense of the use of plagiarism in art in his 2007 essay "The ecstasy of influence: A plagiarism" in ''[[That Guy|Harper's]]''. He wrote: "The kernel, the soul—let us go further and say the substance, the bulk, the actual and valuable material of all human utterances—is plagiarism" and "Don't pirate my editions; do plunder my visions. The name of the game is Give All. You, reader, are welcome to my stories. They were never mine in the first place, but I gave them to you."<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.harpers.org/archive/2007/02/0081387 |author=Jonathan Lethem|title=The ecstasy of influence: A plagiarism|date=February 2007|magazine=Harper's Magazine|postscript=<!--None-->}}</ref>
<references/>


== 같이 보기 ==
== Self-plagiarism ==
* [[대필작가]]
* [[오마주]]
* [[인용]]
* [[저작권]]
* [[저작권 침해]]
* [[공정 이용]]
* [[패러디]]
* [[패스티시]]


== 바깥 고리 ==
'''Self-plagiarism''' (also known as "recycling fraud" <ref>See for example Dellavalle, Robert P., Banks, Marcus A. and Ellis, Jeffrey I. (2007). "Frequently asked questions regarding self-plagiarism: How to avoid recycling fraud." ''Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology'', Vol. 57 (3), September, pp.527. doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2003.10.071</ref>) is the reuse of significant, identical, or nearly identical portions of one’s own work without acknowledging that one is doing so or without citing the original work. Articles of this nature are often referred to as duplicate or {{fakelink|multiple publication}}. In addition to the ethical issue, this can be illegal if copyright of the prior work has been transferred to another entity. Typically, self-plagiarism is only considered to be a serious ethical issue in settings where a publication is asserted to consist of new material, such as in academic publishing or educational assignments <ref>See [http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=26&storycode=402598&c=2 ''Allow me to rephrase, and boost my tally of articles'', by Rebecca Attwood, Times Higher Education Supplement, 3 July 2008] </ref>. It does not apply (except in the legal sense) to public-interest texts, such as social, professional, and cultural opinions usually published in newspapers and magazines.
{{공용분류|Plagiarism}}
* {{언어고리|en}} [http://plagiarism.org/ plagiarism.org] - 표절의 정의


[[분류:표절| ]]
In academic fields, self-plagiarism is when an author reuses portions of their own published and copyrighted work in subsequent publications, but without attributing the previous publication.<ref>{{cite web | author = Hexham, I. | year = 2005 | title = Academic Plagiarism Defined | url = http://www.ucalgary.ca/~hexham/study/plag.html}}</ref> Identifying self-plagiarism is often difficult because limited reuse of material is both legally accepted (as [[fair use]]) and ethically accepted.<ref name="Samuelson, Pamela. (1994)">[[Pamela Samuelson|Samuelson, P]]. (1994). "Self-Plagiarism or Fair Use?" ''Communications of the ACM'', 37(August): 21-25.</ref>
 
It is common for university researchers to rephrase and republish their own work, tailoring it for different academic journals and newspaper articles, to disseminate their work to the widest possible interested public. However, it must be borne in mind that these researchers also obey limits: If half an article is the same as a previous one, it will usually be rejected. One of the functions of the process of [[Uncyclopedia:Pee Review|peer review]] in academic writing is to prevent this type of "recycling".
 
===The concept of self-plagiarism===
The concept of "self-plagiarism" has been challenged as self-contradictory or an [[oxymoron]] <ref>Broome, Marion E. (2004). "Self-plagiarism: oxymoron, fair use, or scientific misconduct?" ''Nursing Outlook'', Vol. 52 (6), November, pp.273-274. [http://www.nursingoutlook.org/article/S0029-6554(04)00147-2/abstract]</ref>. 
 
For example, Stephanie J. Bird <ref>[http://www.springerlink.com/content/w4r30223m162h804/ Self-plagiarism and Dual and Redundant Publications: What Is the Problem?]</ref> argues that self-plagiarism is a misnomer, since by definition plagiarism concerns the use of others' material. 
 
However, the phrase is used to refer to specific forms of potentially unethical publication.
Bird identifies the ethical issues sometimes called "self-plagiarism" as those of "dual or redundant publication." She also notes that in an educational context, "self-plagiarism" may refer to the case of a student who resubmits "the same essay for credit in two different courses."  As David B. Resnik clarifies, "Self-plagiarism involves dishonesty but not intellectual theft." <ref>See Resnik, David B. (1998). ''The Ethics of Science: an introduction'', London: Routledge. p.177, notes to chapter six, note 3. [http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=zMn2KxPQyk8C&lpg=PA177&dq=%22self-plagiarism%22&lr=&pg=PA177 Online via Google Books]</ref>
 
According to Patrick M. Scanlon <ref>[http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=plag;view=text;rgn=main;idno=5240451.0002.007 Scanlon, Patrick M. (2007). "Song from myself: an anatomy of self-plagiarism." ''Plagiary: cross-disciplinary studies in plagiarism, fabrication and falsification'', Vol. 2 (1), pp.1-11]</ref>:
 
:<span style="font-family: verdana; font-size: 11px">“Self-plagiarism” is a term with some specialized currency. Most prominently, it is used in discussions of research and publishing integrity in biomedicine, where heavy publish-or-perish demands have led to a rash of duplicate and “salami-slicing” publication, the reporting of a single study’s results in “{{fakelink|least publishable units}}” within multiple articles <ref>Blancett, Flanagin, & Young, 1995; Jefferson, 1998; Kassirer & Angell, 1995; Lowe, 2003; McCarthy, 1993; Schein & Paladugu, 2001; Wheeler, 1989</ref>. Roig (2002) offers a useful classification system including four types of self-plagiarism: duplicate publication of an article in more than one journal; partitioning of one study into multiple publications, often called salami-slicing; text recycling; and copyright infringement." </span>
 
===Self-plagiarism and codes of ethics===
 
Some academic journals have codes of ethics which specifically refer to self-plagiarism. For example, the ''Journal of International Business Studies''. <ref>[http://palgrave-journals.com/jibs/jibs_ethics_code.html JIBS Code of Ethics]</ref>
 
Some professional organizations like the {{fakelink|Association for Computing Machinery}} (ACM) have created policies that deal specifically with self-plagiarism.<ref>{{cite web | month = October | year = 2006 | title = ACM Policy and Procedures on Plagiarism | url=http://www.acm.org/publications/policies/plagiarism_policy}}</ref> 
 
Other organisations do not make specific reference to self-plagiarism: 
 
The American Political Science Association (APSA) has published a code of ethics which describes plagiarism as "deliberate appropriation of the works of others represented as one's own."  It does not make any reference to self-plagiarism.  It does say that when a thesis or dissertation is published "in whole or in part", the author is "not ordinarily under an ethical obligation to acknowledge its origins."<ref>American Political Science Association, <span class="plainlinks" style="color: #3366bb">[http://www.apsanet.org/imgtest/ethicsguideweb.pdf]http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20100708124535/uncyclopedia/images/9/9e/PDF_Icon.png</span> Section 21.1</ref>
 
The American Society for Public Administration (ASPA) has published a code of ethics which says its members are committed to:  "Ensure that others receive credit for their work and contributions," but it does not make any reference to self-plagiarism.<ref>American Society for Public Administration, [www.aspanet.org/scriptcontent/index_codeofethics.cfm]</ref>
 
=== Factors that justify reuse ===
[[Pamela Samuelson]] in 1994 identified several factors which excuse reuse of one's previously published work without the culpability of self-plagiarism.<ref name="Samuelson, Pamela. (1994)"/>  She relates each of these factors specifically to the ethical issue of self-plagiarism, as distinct from the legal issue of fair use of copyright, which she deals with separately. Among other factors which may excuse reuse of previously published material Samuelson lists the following:
# The previous work needs to be restated in order to lay the groundwork for the contribution in the second work.
# The previous work needs to be restated in order to lay the groundwork for a new contribution in the second work.
# Portions of the previous work must be repeated in order to deal with new evidence or arguments.
# The audience for each work is so different that publishing the same work in different places was necessary to get the message out.
# The author thinks they said it so well the first time that it makes no sense to say it differently a second time.
 
Samuelson states she has relied on the "different audience" rationale when attempting to bridge interdisciplinary communities.  She refers to writing for different legal and technical communities, saying:  "there are often paragraphs or sequences of paragraphs that can be bodily lifted from one article to the other.  And, in truth, I lift them." She refers to her own practice of converting "a technical article into a law review article with relatively few changes--adding footnotes and one substantive section" for a different audience.<ref name="Samuelson, Pamela. (1994)"/> 
 
Samuelson describes misrepresentation as the basis of self-plagiarism. She seems less concerned about reuse of descriptive materials than ideas and analytical content.<ref name="Samuelson, Pamela. (1994)"/> She also states “Although it seems not to have been raised in any of the self-plagiarism cases, copyrights law’s fair use defense would likely provide a shield against many potential publisher claims of copyright infringement against authors who reused portions of their previous works."<ref name="Samuelson, Pamela. (1994)"/>
 
== As a practical issue ==
In addition to legal and ethical concerns, plagiarism is frequently also a practical issue, in that it is frequently useful to consult the sources used by an author, and plagiarism makes this more difficult. There are a number of reasons why this is useful:
* An author may commit an error in how they interpret or use a source, and consulting the original source allows these errors to be detected.
* Authors generally only supply the portions of prior works that are directly relevant to the work at hand. Other portions of their sources are likely to be relevant to later extensions and generalizations of their work.
* As modern automated indexing methods become prevalent, references between works provide valuable information about their authoritativeness and how closely works are related; this helps to locate relevant works.
 
== Organizational publications ==
Plagiarism is presumably not an issue when organizations issue collective unsigned works since they do not assign credit for originality to particular people. For example, the {{fakelink|American Historical Association's}} "Statement on Standards of Professional Conduct" (2005) regarding textbooks and reference books states that, since textbooks and encyclopedias are summaries of other scholars' work, they are not bound by the same exacting standards of attribution as original research and may be allowed a greater "extent of dependence" on other works.<ref name=AHA>{{cite web | url = http://www.historians.org/PUBS/Free/ProfessionalStandards.cfm | title = Statement on Standards of Professional Conduct | date = 2005-01-06 | accessdate=2009-04-16 | publisher = American Historical Association}}</ref> However, even such a book does not make use of words, phrases, or paragraphs from another text or follow too closely the other text's arrangement and organization, and the authors of such texts are also expected to "acknowledge the sources of recent or distinctive findings and interpretations, those not yet a part of the common understanding of the profession."<ref name=AHA/>
 
Within an organization, in its own working documents, standards are looser but not non-existent. If someone helped with a report, they may expect to be credited. If a paragraph comes from a law report, a citation is expected to be written down.  Technical manuals routinely copy facts from other manuals without attribution, because they assume a common spirit of scientific endeavor (as evidenced, for example, in [[free software|free]] and [[Open source|open source software]] projects) in which scientists freely share their work.
 
The ''Microsoft Manual of Style for Technical Publications'' Third Edition (2003) by Microsoft does not even mention plagiarism, nor does ''Science and Technical Writing: A Manual of Style'', Second Edition (2000) by Philip Rubens. The line between permissible literary and impermissible source code plagiarism, though, is apparently quite fine. As with any technical field,  computer programming makes use of what others have contributed to the general knowledge.
 
== See also ==
<table align="right" class="metadata plainlinks mbox-small" style="font-size: 11px; border:1px solid #aaa; background-color:#f9f9f9; padding: 1px; width: 15%">
<tr>
<td class="mbox-image" style="padding-left: 5px">http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/91/Wikiversity-logo.svg/40px-Wikiversity-logo.svg.png</td>
<td class="mbox-text" style="padding-left: 5px">Uncycloversity has learning materials about '''''[[Wikipedia:Plagiarism|Plagiarism]]'''''</td></tr></table>
 
*[[Copyright]]
*[[Copyright infringement]]
*[[Unfair use|Fair use]]
== External links ==
* [http://www.historians.org/pubs/free/professionalstandards.cfm American Historical Association, "Statement on Standards of Professional Conduct" (2005)]
* [http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0511/p14s01-lire.html?s=hns What is the price of plagiarism?] A ''The Christian Science Monitor'' article
* The [http://ahe.cqu.edu.au Assessment in Higher Education] web site's plagiarism page contains links to a variety of resources (articles, books, cheat sites, etc).
* [http://www.plagiary.org/ "Plagiary: Cross-disciplinary Studies in Plagiarism, Fabrication, and Falsification."] journal: [http://quod.lib.umich.edu/p/plag/ Journal website and online archive]
* [http://www.jiscpas.ac.uk The Plagiarism Advisory Service funded byJISC] Provides advice and guidance to UK learning institutions.
* [http://cip.law.ucla.edu/caselist.html Copyright Infringement archive] at {{fakelink|UCLA School of Law}}
*[http://www.garfield.library.upenn.edu/papers/demandcitationvigilance012102.html Citation Plagiarism]
*[http://spore.swmed.edu/dejavu/ Deja Vu: A Database of Duplicate Citations in the Scientific Literature]
*[http://video.yahoo.com/playlist/102174857 Public radio host reading from Wikipedia] Examples of transmedia content scraping.
 
[[Category:Plagiarism| ]][[Category:Crime]][[Category:Long articles that ramble on about nothing]][[Category:Pages that look like the things they're about]][[Category:Things that may give you bad grades]][[Category:Wikipedia]]
<div id="catlinks" style="position: relative; top: 50px; z-index: 5"><p class="catlinks">[[Special:Categories|Categories]]: </p></div>
[[ar:سرقة فكرية]]
[[bg:Плагиатство]]
[[cs:Plagiát]]
[[da:Plagiat]]
[[de:Plagiat]]
[[es:Plagio]]
[[eo:Plagiato]]
[[fa:انتحال]]
[[fr:Plagiat]]
[[ko:표절]]
[[hr:Plagijat]]
[[id:Plagiarisme]]
[[it:Plagio (diritto d'autore)]]
[[he:גניבה ספרותית]]
[[lv:Plaģiāts]]
[[lt:Plagijavimas]]
[[hu:Plágium]]
[[ms:Ciplak]]
[[nl:Plagiaat]]
[[ja:盗作]]
[[no:Plagiat]]
[[pl:Plagiat]]
[[pt:Plágio]]
[[ro:Plagiat]]
[[ru:Плагиат]]
[[simple:Plagiarism]]
[[sk:Plagiát]]
[[fi:Plagiointi]]
[[sv:Plagiat]]
[[th:โจรกรรมทางวรรณกรรม]]
[[tr:İntihal]]
[[uk:Плагіат]]
[[zh:抄袭]]

2015년 9월 6일 (일) 18:43 판

For other uses, see 표절 (disambiguation).
For Uncyclopedia policies concerning plagiarism, see Uncyclopedia:Plagiarism and Uncyclopedia:Copyright violations.

Plagiarism, as defined in the 1995 Random House Compact Unabridged Dictionary, is the "use or close imitation of the language and thoughts of another author and the representation of them as one's own original work."[1] Within academia, plagiarism by students, professors, or researchers is considered academic dishonesty or academic fraud, and offenders are subject to academic censure, up to and including expulsion. In journalism, plagiarism is considered a breach of journalistic ethics, and reporters caught plagiarizing typically face disciplinary measures ranging from suspension to termination of employment. Some individuals caught plagiarizing in academic or journalistic contexts claim that they plagiarized unintentionally, by failing to include quotations or give the appropriate citation. While plagiarism in scholarship and journalism has a centuries-old history, the development of the Internet, where articles appear as electronic text, has made the physical act of copying the work of others much easier.

Plagiarism is not the same as copyright infringement. While both terms may apply to a particular act, they are different transgressions. Copyright infringement is a violation of the rights of a copyright holder, when material protected by copyright is used without consent. On the other hand, plagiarism is concerned with the unearned increment to the plagiarizing author's reputation that is achieved through false claims of authorship.

Etymology

English Plagiarism (1615–25), earlier plagiary (1590–1600), derives from Latin plagiārius, "kidnapper", equivalent to plagium, "kidnapping", which contains Latin plaga ("snare", "net"), based on the 틀:Fakelink *-plak, "to weave" (seen for instance in Greek plekein, Latin plectere, both meaning "to weave").[2]

Sanctions

Academia

Many students feel pressured to complete papers well and quickly, however Peter Callaghan would rather you complete papers well, quickly, and without help. With the accessibility of new technology (the Internet) students can plagiarize by copying and pasting information from other sources. This is often easily detected by teachers for several reasons. First, students' choices of sources are frequently unoriginal; instructors may receive the same passage copied from a popular source from several students. Second, it is often easy to tell whether a student used his or her own "voice." Third, students may choose sources which are inappropriate, inaccurate, or off-topic. Fourth, lecturers may insist that submitted work is first submitted to an online plagiarism detector.[3]

In the academic world, plagiarism by students is a very serious offense that can result in punishments such as a failing grade on the particular assignment (typically at the high school level) or for the course (typically at the college or university level).[citation needed] For cases of repeated plagiarism, or for cases in which a student commits severe plagiarism (e.g., submitting a copied piece of writing as original work), a student may be suspended or expelled. In many universities, academic degrees or awards may be revoked as a penalty for plagiarism.

There is little academic research into the frequency of plagiarism in high schools. Much of the research investigated plagiarism at the post-secondary level.[4] Of the forms of cheating, (including plagiarism, inventing data, and cheating during an exam) students admit to plagiarism more than any other.[citation needed] However, this figure decreases considerably when students are asked about the frequency of "serious" plagiarism (such as copying most of an assignment or purchasing a complete paper from a website). Recent use of plagiarism detection software (see below) gives a more accurate picture of this activity's prevalence.

For professors and researchers, plagiarism is punished by sanctions ranging from suspension to termination, along with the loss of credibility and integrity.[5][6] Charges of plagiarism against students and professors are typically heard by internal disciplinary committees, which students and professors have agreed to be bound by.[7]

Journalism

Since journalism's main currency is public trust, a reporter's failure to honestly acknowledge their sources undercuts a newspaper or television news show's integrity and undermines its credibility. Journalists accused of plagiarism are often suspended from their reporting tasks while the charges are being investigated by the news organization.[8]

The ease with which electronic text can be reproduced from online sources has lured a number of reporters into acts of plagiarism: Journalists have been caught "copying-and-pasting" articles and text from a number of websites)[citation needed].

Online plagiarism

Content scraping is a phenomenon of copy and pasting material from Internet websites, affecting both established sites [9] and blogs[10]

Free online tools are becoming available to help identify plagiarism, [11] and there is a range of approaches that attempt to limit online copying, such as disabling right clicking and placing warning banners regarding copyrights on web pages. Instances of plagiarism that involve copyright violation may be addressed by the rightful content owners sending a DMCA removal notice to the offending site-owner, or to the ISP that is hosting the offending site.

Plagiarism is not only the mere copying of text, but also the presentation of another's ideas as one's own, regardless of the specific words or constructs used to express that idea. In contrast, many so-called plagiarism detection services can only detect blatant word-for-word copies of text.

Other contexts

Generally, although plagiarism is often loosely referred to as theft or stealing, it has not been set as a criminal matter in the courts.[12] Likewise, plagiarism has no standing as a criminal offense in the common law. Instead, claims of plagiarism are a civil law matter, which an aggrieved person can resolve by launching a lawsuit. Acts that may constitute plagiarism are in some instances treated as copyright infringement, 틀:Fakelink, or a violation of the doctrine of moral rights. The increased availability of intellectual property due to a rise in technology has furthered the debate as to whether copyright offences are criminal.[citation needed]

Defenses

A famous passage of Laurence Sterne's 1767 Tristram Shandy, condemns plagiarism by resorting to plagiarism.[13][14] Oliver Goldsmith commented:[15]

Sterne's Writings, in which it is clearly shewn, that he, whose manner and style were so long thought original, was, in fact, the most unhesitating plagiarist who ever cribbed from his predecessors in order to garnish his own pages. It must be owned, at the same time, that Sterne selects the materials/ of his mosaic work with so much art, places them so well, and polishes them so highly, that in most cases we are disposed to pardon the want of originality, in consideration of the exquisite talent with which the borrowed materials are wrought up into the new form.

On December 6, 2006, Thomas Pynchon joined a campaign by many other major authors to clear Ian McEwan of plagiarism charges by sending a typed letter to his British publisher, which was published in the Daily Telegraph newspaper.[16]

Playwright Wilson Mizner said "If you copy from one author, it's plagiarism. If you copy from two, it's research."[17]

American author Jonathan Lethem delivered a passionate defense of the use of plagiarism in art in his 2007 essay "The ecstasy of influence: A plagiarism" in Harper's. He wrote: "The kernel, the soul—let us go further and say the substance, the bulk, the actual and valuable material of all human utterances—is plagiarism" and "Don't pirate my editions; do plunder my visions. The name of the game is Give All. You, reader, are welcome to my stories. They were never mine in the first place, but I gave them to you."[18]

Self-plagiarism

Self-plagiarism (also known as "recycling fraud" [19]) is the reuse of significant, identical, or nearly identical portions of one’s own work without acknowledging that one is doing so or without citing the original work. Articles of this nature are often referred to as duplicate or 틀:Fakelink. In addition to the ethical issue, this can be illegal if copyright of the prior work has been transferred to another entity. Typically, self-plagiarism is only considered to be a serious ethical issue in settings where a publication is asserted to consist of new material, such as in academic publishing or educational assignments [20]. It does not apply (except in the legal sense) to public-interest texts, such as social, professional, and cultural opinions usually published in newspapers and magazines.

In academic fields, self-plagiarism is when an author reuses portions of their own published and copyrighted work in subsequent publications, but without attributing the previous publication.[21] Identifying self-plagiarism is often difficult because limited reuse of material is both legally accepted (as fair use) and ethically accepted.[22]

It is common for university researchers to rephrase and republish their own work, tailoring it for different academic journals and newspaper articles, to disseminate their work to the widest possible interested public. However, it must be borne in mind that these researchers also obey limits: If half an article is the same as a previous one, it will usually be rejected. One of the functions of the process of peer review in academic writing is to prevent this type of "recycling".

The concept of self-plagiarism

The concept of "self-plagiarism" has been challenged as self-contradictory or an oxymoron [23].

For example, Stephanie J. Bird [24] argues that self-plagiarism is a misnomer, since by definition plagiarism concerns the use of others' material.

However, the phrase is used to refer to specific forms of potentially unethical publication. Bird identifies the ethical issues sometimes called "self-plagiarism" as those of "dual or redundant publication." She also notes that in an educational context, "self-plagiarism" may refer to the case of a student who resubmits "the same essay for credit in two different courses." As David B. Resnik clarifies, "Self-plagiarism involves dishonesty but not intellectual theft." [25]

According to Patrick M. Scanlon [26]:

“Self-plagiarism” is a term with some specialized currency. Most prominently, it is used in discussions of research and publishing integrity in biomedicine, where heavy publish-or-perish demands have led to a rash of duplicate and “salami-slicing” publication, the reporting of a single study’s results in “틀:Fakelink” within multiple articles [27]. Roig (2002) offers a useful classification system including four types of self-plagiarism: duplicate publication of an article in more than one journal; partitioning of one study into multiple publications, often called salami-slicing; text recycling; and copyright infringement."

Self-plagiarism and codes of ethics

Some academic journals have codes of ethics which specifically refer to self-plagiarism. For example, the Journal of International Business Studies. [28]

Some professional organizations like the 틀:Fakelink (ACM) have created policies that deal specifically with self-plagiarism.[29]

Other organisations do not make specific reference to self-plagiarism:

The American Political Science Association (APSA) has published a code of ethics which describes plagiarism as "deliberate appropriation of the works of others represented as one's own." It does not make any reference to self-plagiarism. It does say that when a thesis or dissertation is published "in whole or in part", the author is "not ordinarily under an ethical obligation to acknowledge its origins."[30]

The American Society for Public Administration (ASPA) has published a code of ethics which says its members are committed to: "Ensure that others receive credit for their work and contributions," but it does not make any reference to self-plagiarism.[31]

Factors that justify reuse

Pamela Samuelson in 1994 identified several factors which excuse reuse of one's previously published work without the culpability of self-plagiarism.[22] She relates each of these factors specifically to the ethical issue of self-plagiarism, as distinct from the legal issue of fair use of copyright, which she deals with separately. Among other factors which may excuse reuse of previously published material Samuelson lists the following:

  1. The previous work needs to be restated in order to lay the groundwork for the contribution in the second work.
  2. The previous work needs to be restated in order to lay the groundwork for a new contribution in the second work.
  3. Portions of the previous work must be repeated in order to deal with new evidence or arguments.
  4. The audience for each work is so different that publishing the same work in different places was necessary to get the message out.
  5. The author thinks they said it so well the first time that it makes no sense to say it differently a second time.

Samuelson states she has relied on the "different audience" rationale when attempting to bridge interdisciplinary communities. She refers to writing for different legal and technical communities, saying: "there are often paragraphs or sequences of paragraphs that can be bodily lifted from one article to the other. And, in truth, I lift them." She refers to her own practice of converting "a technical article into a law review article with relatively few changes--adding footnotes and one substantive section" for a different audience.[22]

Samuelson describes misrepresentation as the basis of self-plagiarism. She seems less concerned about reuse of descriptive materials than ideas and analytical content.[22] She also states “Although it seems not to have been raised in any of the self-plagiarism cases, copyrights law’s fair use defense would likely provide a shield against many potential publisher claims of copyright infringement against authors who reused portions of their previous works."[22]

As a practical issue

In addition to legal and ethical concerns, plagiarism is frequently also a practical issue, in that it is frequently useful to consult the sources used by an author, and plagiarism makes this more difficult. There are a number of reasons why this is useful:

  • An author may commit an error in how they interpret or use a source, and consulting the original source allows these errors to be detected.
  • Authors generally only supply the portions of prior works that are directly relevant to the work at hand. Other portions of their sources are likely to be relevant to later extensions and generalizations of their work.
  • As modern automated indexing methods become prevalent, references between works provide valuable information about their authoritativeness and how closely works are related; this helps to locate relevant works.

Organizational publications

Plagiarism is presumably not an issue when organizations issue collective unsigned works since they do not assign credit for originality to particular people. For example, the 틀:Fakelink "Statement on Standards of Professional Conduct" (2005) regarding textbooks and reference books states that, since textbooks and encyclopedias are summaries of other scholars' work, they are not bound by the same exacting standards of attribution as original research and may be allowed a greater "extent of dependence" on other works.[32] However, even such a book does not make use of words, phrases, or paragraphs from another text or follow too closely the other text's arrangement and organization, and the authors of such texts are also expected to "acknowledge the sources of recent or distinctive findings and interpretations, those not yet a part of the common understanding of the profession."[32]

Within an organization, in its own working documents, standards are looser but not non-existent. If someone helped with a report, they may expect to be credited. If a paragraph comes from a law report, a citation is expected to be written down. Technical manuals routinely copy facts from other manuals without attribution, because they assume a common spirit of scientific endeavor (as evidenced, for example, in free and open source software projects) in which scientists freely share their work.

The Microsoft Manual of Style for Technical Publications Third Edition (2003) by Microsoft does not even mention plagiarism, nor does Science and Technical Writing: A Manual of Style, Second Edition (2000) by Philip Rubens. The line between permissible literary and impermissible source code plagiarism, though, is apparently quite fine. As with any technical field, computer programming makes use of what others have contributed to the general knowledge.

See also

ar:سرقة فكرية bg:Плагиатство cs:Plagiát da:Plagiat de:Plagiat es:Plagio eo:Plagiato fa:انتحال fr:Plagiat ko:표절 hr:Plagijat id:Plagiarisme it:Plagio (diritto d'autore) he:גניבה ספרותית lv:Plaģiāts lt:Plagijavimas hu:Plágium ms:Ciplak nl:Plagiaat ja:盗作 no:Plagiat pl:Plagiat pt:Plágio ro:Plagiat ru:Плагиат simple:Plagiarism sk:Plagiát fi:Plagiointi sv:Plagiat th:โจรกรรมทางวรรณกรรม tr:İntihal uk:Плагіат zh:抄袭

  1. qtd. in 틀:Cite bookp. 65.
    ISBN 0838984169.
  2. Google.com Google.com
  3. Klein A. (June 8, 2007). Opinion: Why Do They Do It?. The New York Sun. 2007년 12월 11일에 확인.
  4. Hart, M.; Friesner, Tim (December 15, 2004). research Plagiarism and Poor Academic Practice – A Threat to the Extension of e-Learning in Higher Education?. Electronic Journal of E-Learning. Retrieved 2007-12-11.
  5. Kock, N. (1999). A case of academic plagiarism. Communications of the ACM, 42(7), 96-104.
  6. Kock, N., & Davison, R. (2003). Dealing with plagiarism in the IS research community: A look at factors that drive plagiarism and ways to address them. MIS Quarterly, 27(4), 511-532.
  7. Clarke, R. (2006). Plagiarism by academics: More complex than it seems. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 7(2), 91-121.
  8. List of cases of plagiarism among journalists
  9. Authorship gets lost on Web. USA Today
  10. Online plagiarism strikes blog world. Boston.com
  11. CNET.com Webpronews.com
  12. Louisiana State Universityhttp://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20100708124535/uncyclopedia/images/9/9e/PDF_Icon.png
  13. Laurence Sterne Tristram Shandy, Vol V, Chap. 1
  14. Mark Ford Love and Theft 틀:Fakelink Vol. 26 No. 23 · 2 December 2004 pages 34-35 | 4103 words
  15. Oliver Goldsmith The vicar of Wakefield: a tale, Volume 5 p.xviii
  16. Pynchon, Thomas. Letter to the Daily Telegraph newspaper, December 6, 2006.
  17. Quoted by Stuart B. McIver, Dreamers, Schemers and Scalawags, Pineapple Press, Sarasota, Florida, 1994. ISBN 1-56164-034-4.
  18. 틀:Cite news
  19. See for example Dellavalle, Robert P., Banks, Marcus A. and Ellis, Jeffrey I. (2007). "Frequently asked questions regarding self-plagiarism: How to avoid recycling fraud." Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology, Vol. 57 (3), September, pp.527. doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2003.10.071
  20. See Allow me to rephrase, and boost my tally of articles, by Rebecca Attwood, Times Higher Education Supplement, 3 July 2008
  21. Hexham, I. (2005). Academic Plagiarism Defined.
  22. 22.0 22.1 22.2 22.3 22.4 Samuelson, P. (1994). "Self-Plagiarism or Fair Use?" Communications of the ACM, 37(August): 21-25.
  23. Broome, Marion E. (2004). "Self-plagiarism: oxymoron, fair use, or scientific misconduct?" Nursing Outlook, Vol. 52 (6), November, pp.273-274. [1]
  24. Self-plagiarism and Dual and Redundant Publications: What Is the Problem?
  25. See Resnik, David B. (1998). The Ethics of Science: an introduction, London: Routledge. p.177, notes to chapter six, note 3. Online via Google Books
  26. Scanlon, Patrick M. (2007). "Song from myself: an anatomy of self-plagiarism." Plagiary: cross-disciplinary studies in plagiarism, fabrication and falsification, Vol. 2 (1), pp.1-11
  27. Blancett, Flanagin, & Young, 1995; Jefferson, 1998; Kassirer & Angell, 1995; Lowe, 2003; McCarthy, 1993; Schein & Paladugu, 2001; Wheeler, 1989
  28. JIBS Code of Ethics
  29. ACM Policy and Procedures on Plagiarism (2006 October).
  30. American Political Science Association, [2]http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20100708124535/uncyclopedia/images/9/9e/PDF_Icon.png Section 21.1
  31. American Society for Public Administration, [www.aspanet.org/scriptcontent/index_codeofethics.cfm]
  32. 32.0 32.1 Statement on Standards of Professional Conduct. American Historical Association (2005년 1월 6일). 2009년 4월 16일에 확인.