Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I write a blog. Not a very good one, but I enjoy it. I even have a whopping 52 subscribers on Substack!
What I sometimes like to do is write a partial blog post on Facebook and broadcast it out to my friends before I finalize it on Substack. I do this because I realize that I might have some holes in my arguments and since I have friends who are all over the political spectrum, as well as friends from every continent on Earth, I like it when they challenge my views. Basically, I want to see if my arguments hold up to scrutiny.
In this recent post, a Facebook friend (not a real friend) mentioned a fact that I hadn't thought of, so it's causing me to make a small change to the final blog post. Actually, the argument hasn't changed much, but this fact has been useful. Long story short: their scrutiny helps me to either strengthen, clarify or even change my arguments.
My wife thinks that this is plagiarism. She thinks that the blog post has gone from MY post to something that is no longer mine because I'm supposedly using their ideas. She thinks I should just publish it and then allow people to challenge it in the comments. I still plan to do that, but I want to publish something with the strongest possible argument I can make.
I try to tell her that I'm not stealing their ideas, but just seeing if my arguments hold up. And if they don't hold up to scrutiny, it allows me to reevaluate my views before I publish the blog post.
So tell me why my wife is wrong
Moderator's note: In order to frame this as a debate, we will presume that the premise is this: "What the OP has described here and contends is that he is not committing plagiarism. Debate either for or against this premise.
Your wife is wrong because those who publish have a duty to their readers to supply the best possible version of their writing. What you're doing on FB and with friends is research. I wouldn't subscribe to any blog or newsletter if I felt the writer wasn't doing any research.
I write a blog. Not a very good one, but I enjoy it. I even have a whopping 52 subscribers on Substack!
What I sometimes like to do is write a partial blog post on Facebook and broadcast it out to my friends before I finalize it on Substack. I do this because I realize that I might have some holes in my arguments and since I have friends who are all over the political spectrum, as well as friends from every continent on Earth, I like it when they challenge my views. Basically, I want to see if my arguments hold up to scrutiny.
In this recent post, a Facebook friend (not a real friend) mentioned a fact that I hadn't thought of, so it's causing me to make a small change to the final blog post. Actually, the argument hasn't changed much, but this fact has been useful. Long story short: their scrutiny helps me to either strengthen, clarify or even change my arguments.
My wife thinks that this is plagiarism. She thinks that the blog post has gone from MY post to something that is no longer mine because I'm supposedly using their ideas. She thinks I should just publish it and then allow people to challenge it in the comments. I still plan to do that, but I want to publish something with the strongest possible argument I can make.
I try to tell her that I'm not stealing their ideas, but just seeing if my arguments hold up. And if they don't hold up to scrutiny, it allows me to reevaluate my views before I publish the blog post.
So tell me why my wife is wrong
Moderator's note: In order to frame this as a debate, we will presume that the premise is this: "What the OP has described here and contends is that he is not committing plagiarism. Debate either for or against this premise.
This is a refreshingly different sort of topic. Have fun!
What you are doing is called learning. It is not plagiarism. social media platforms allow for debate and the consideration of ideas. Altering your initial view because you have been educated by open debate in a public forum is the reason open and respectful debate is a good thing. Now if you are just cut and pasting someone else's written product into your own is plagiarism, even if you change a few words here and there. But changing your position and modifying your existing work to include your updated opinions is not. Good luck!
I write music for a living, and while I am not the world's foremost expert, I have a good handle on what plag is and is not.
a Facebook friendmentioned a fact that I hadn't thought of, so it's causing me to make a small change to the final blog post
This is what your wife thinks is plag? It's not. You can not copyright nor trademark an idea; you can only copyright or trademark the implementation of an idea.
Section 102(b) of the Copyright Act states: "In no case does copyright protection for an original work of authorship extend to any idea, procedure, process, system, method of operation, concept, principle or discovery, regardless of the form in which it is described, explained, illustrated or embodied in such work."
So if I take your idea on xyz and make it my own, that is not infringement. If I take your idea on xyz and copy your implementation, that IS infringement... with the understanding that the legal standard for infringement is striking similarity. It needn't be identical, but it has to be really, really close.
If you are simply taking someone else's idea and making it your own, that is not infringement. If on the other hand, you take someone else's words and use them exactly (or really close), that might be infringement... however, you are already in the territory of fair use, where you can use someone else's work, as long as: you are not profiting directly from it, it is a small/not significant portion of the work, if you cite the author and the work, and if it is for the purposes of scholarship and research, news reporting, a parody, and commentary or criticism - the latter of which is what you are doing.
But you are apparently not using someone else's work; just their idea(s), which again, is not plag.
Your friend mentioned a fact. I assume you then verified that fact before including it in your blog, and correctly attributed the source - based upon those assumptions, you have not plagiarized.
If you simply included his fact without any scrutiny, that’s terrible journalism, but it’s still not necessarily plagiarism.
I think your wife’s perspective is that because it wasn’t part of your initial thoughts, you don’t have the right to adapt and include it in your blog. That’s an odd thing, because I would bet absolutely nothing you included in the blog is an original thought or opinion, and that they have all stemmed from others ideas, facts and so on. I mean that purely as a statement of how we as humans learn - not to discredit your writing.
The only exception to this is if you conducted your own research yadda yadda in which case maybe you included some original thought… but even then you would seek out supporting literature to cite for additional credibility
Anyone who researches or reads will come in contact with new thoughts or ideas that they can put into a body of work. If I see plumber with a new tool for clearing pipes and I think to copy it and use it myself, I should credit the plumber. If I see the plumber with a new tool for cleaning pipes and think to myself, this would also work well for clearing out long stemmed vases...then it is original work.
That said, there are 2 rules I am not properly attributing to the authors because it is a board, and nobody wants real information on here.
1. In marriage, the correct answer is always "yes dear."
2. When a man is wrong and admits being wrong, he is courageous. When a man is not wrong and admits being wrong, he is married.
Why not just cite your sources? I teach a first-year writing class and that is what I constantly tell my students. I don’t know what is difficult about that?
Last edited by Rachel NewYork; 05-30-2022 at 08:59 PM..
Reason: Edited out unnecessary caps/shouting. Please read Great Debates rules. Thank you.
Why not just cite your sources? I teach a first-year writing class and that is what I constantly tell my students. I don’t know what is difficult about that?
I agree.
The person you engaged might have stimulated your thought but its still your thought even if you give the cat credit for inspiration & influence.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
