Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Plagiarism

notes.unwieldy.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 326 posts

Re: Plagiarism

#311

Post by crumblan »

petercooper wrote: post #3

The old adage is you can't copyright facts and there was certainly no requirement for TNW to do any "original research" to share these findings. However, when you copy/use facts, you wade into hot water if you also copy the structure and the way those facts were originally expressed. The original TNW article shown here seems to step over that line with a barely masked copy of the original paragraphs. What bothers me…

"Sourced" is what they call it now? So if I torrent a bunch of movies, at the lawsuit I can just say, "no I sourced those, 50% of all movies are scenes sourced from other movies," and it's fine, right?

Re: Plagiarism

#312

Post by eli »

beedogs wrote: post #294
eli wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You think otherwise he might not know people disagree? Voting really shouldn't be punitive to people with unpopular opinions.

Why shouldn't it? The only way to get rid of bad ideas is to shame them out of existence.

Really? That's the only way?

Re: Plagiarism

#313

Post by 3143 »

ktizo wrote: post #290
dkokelley wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not the text contrast that bothers me. It's that we're effectively trying to censor someone directly related to the article, if only for the fact that we believe him to be wrong. I would prefer that his comments are perceived as most relevant to the discussion at hand, and upvoted (or at least left alone) so that the comment can stand on its own. Zee's 'punishment' shouldn't come in the form of mass downvoting a…

How are his comments censored? I managed to read them perfectly fine. Censoring would be removal of a comment, not changing the font colour.

The whole point of voting is that higher-rated comments are brought to the top of the page, making them more visible. Most people don't read every comment.

Re: Plagiarism

#315

Post by mcherm »

petercooper wrote: post #3

The old adage is you can't copyright facts and there was certainly no requirement for TNW to do any "original research" to share these findings. However, when you copy/use facts, you wade into hot water if you also copy the structure and the way those facts were originally expressed. The original TNW article shown here seems to step over that line with a barely masked copy of the original paragraphs. What bothers me…

My basic question is this: may _I_ copy content from TheNextWeb without crediting it and publish it myself? After all, "50% of all publications is content sourced from other publications".

Re: Plagiarism

#316

Post by [deleted] »

zeedotme wrote: post #154
jacquesm wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You really don't get it do you? > If it ever does happen, I assure you that all it takes is one email to office@thenextweb.com and we'll have it resolved. I'm sure it does. But the point is that you should ensure through process and not through policy that you do not end up with other people's stuff on your site without attribution or compensation. The fact that you'll take it down to avoid further damage is not enou…

We do have processes AND policy in place to make sure this doesn't happen. But it can still happen unintentionally and when it does, we react activity and proactively.

[deleted]

Re: Plagiarism

#317

Post by devgutt »

beedogs wrote: post #294
eli wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You think otherwise he might not know people disagree? Voting really shouldn't be punitive to people with unpopular opinions.

Why shouldn't it? The only way to get rid of bad ideas is to shame them out of existence.

What is bad idea to you could not be a bad idea to me

Re: Plagiarism

#318

Post by Prophasi »

Fuzzwah wrote: post #287
tlrobinson wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I refuse to shorten words to "SMS speak", even on Twitter. I can't stand when supposedly intelligent adults do it.

I used to be like you, then I realised that the English language has been ever evolving. Being prejudiced against efficiency has rarely turned out well.

Eh, I still agree with the prejudiced guy.

Re: Plagiarism

#319

Post by davesims »

Interesting to note that exactly a month ago today, thenextweb pointed out a far less egregious or even obvious offense:

http://thenextweb.com/media/2012/04/15/netflix-amazon-apple-...

"And finally…

Nobody likes plagiarism, but an interesting nugget emerged this week. Poynter reported on a Fast Company blogger who said that he meant to steal from someone else when he was accused of plagiarism.

Author Josh Linkner was busted for stealing the opening lines of a blog post by Chris Dixon. Now, Linkner did respond on Twitter and moves were made to amend the ‘mistake’, but the comment he posted to explain/justify the non-attributed use of someone else’s text sounded a little…schoolboy-ish – he said a friend had sent him the excerpt. So let’s assume a friend did send him the excerpt…why wasn’t it attributed to him?

We’ll let you decide what really happened…"

Re: Plagiarism

#320

Post by dkokelley »

ktizo wrote: post #290
dkokelley wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not the text contrast that bothers me. It's that we're effectively trying to censor someone directly related to the article, if only for the fact that we believe him to be wrong. I would prefer that his comments are perceived as most relevant to the discussion at hand, and upvoted (or at least left alone) so that the comment can stand on its own. Zee's 'punishment' shouldn't come in the form of mass downvoting a…

How are his comments censored? I managed to read them perfectly fine. Censoring would be removal of a comment, not changing the font colour.

I think that's a rather narrow definition of censorship. Maybe you would prefer the term 'suppressed'. Either way, the intent is to signal to readers, "the community consensus is that this comment is not valuable, or does not add to the discussion. It is likely not worth your time to read".
Post reply on HN