I made it better so I can steal it
I don't get the difficulty in understanding what constitutes plagiarism. I'm amazed at the justifications for it. The latest posted on Dear Author in which the magazine Cook's Source lifts a blogger's article, makes some changes and calls it their own. When the blogger calls them out, it's all ~sniff, sniff~ and the reasoning that if it's on the net it's free for the taking. WTF?
http://dearauthor.com/wordpress/2010/11/04/thursday-midday-links-be-grateful-you-are-plagiarized/
ETA: Correction. I started reading the comments section in DA. Cook's Source did name the blogger as the author of the piece. So copyright infringement, not plagiarism. Still, what a crappy thing to do someone and their response...
And of course, a little art for this morning:
http://whren.deviantart.com/gallery/#/d322by0
http://dearauthor.com/wordpress/2010/11/04/thursday-midday-links-be-grateful-you-are-plagiarized/
ETA: Correction. I started reading the comments section in DA. Cook's Source did name the blogger as the author of the piece. So copyright infringement, not plagiarism. Still, what a crappy thing to do someone and their response...
And of course, a little art for this morning:
http://whren.deviantart.com/gallery/#/d322by0