# Is this plagiarism?



## Guest (Mar 27, 2015)

I keep a little notebook when I'm reading various novels in my chosen genre and write down words, phrases, sentence and even paragraphs I find scintillating. I leaf through a few pages during my WIP and might use single words here and there if they're better than my draft choices. For the phrases and longer, I write out alternatives, sometimes better, always significantly different. I never use them word for word, but often follow the rhythm of the original. Here's a short paragraph I tagged for use:

From Gil Brewer’s "The Vengeful Virgin": Doom. You recognize Doom easily. It’s a feeling and a taste, and it’s black, and it’s very heavy. It comes down over your head, and wraps tentacles around you, and sinks long dirty fingernails into your heart. It has a stink like burning garbage. Doom.

My changes:

Doom. It comes along with foreboding, a taste of hopeless that’s black, heavy. Jaws coming up over your head like a mask with no holes, razor teeth grinding around your face, piercing any natural optimism in your heart. The crocodile’s breath, a stench like burning rags soaked in urine. Doom. 

I judge this as an acceptable use of inspiration but understand some might call it plagiarism. What do you think?


----------



## Roberto El Duque (Mar 4, 2015)

I'm sorry to be harsh, but that is out and out plagiarism in my view.

More to the point though - Burning rags will no longer be burning once they are soaked in urine!


----------



## I&#039;m a Little Teapot (Apr 10, 2014)

Roberto El Duque said:


> I'm sorry to be harsh, but that is out and out plagiarism in my view.
> 
> More to the point though - Burning rags will no longer be burning once they are soaked in urine!


Bam! Nailed it (on both counts).


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

Is it copyright infringement? Probably not.

Is it plagiarism?  Yes, by definition. Plagiarism is the taking of the underlying idea (which is legal), regardless of whether you rephrase it your own way.

In that sense, plagiarism is basic to all culture -- but this is more so than usual.

But as writer ethics are concerned... this totally depends on other factors.  IMHO (and this is a personal line) you cross the line when you copy down whole sections and then repurpose it as your own. Don't do sections, don't copy down.  Let the emotions settle into your brain. Learn from it how it works. Then abandon it -- completely let it go -- and then just write your story. What you learned will be expressed in the story, but it will be yours.

Camille


----------



## Guest (Mar 27, 2015)

Roberto El Duque said:


> I'm sorry to be harsh, but that is out and out plagiarism in my view.
> 
> More to the point though - Burning rags will no longer be burning once they are soaked in urine!


NO problem Roberto. You weren't harsh. You simply gave your opinion, which is what I asked for. I see you are also a literalist--the context here: a dream scene after the hero was hit over the head and unconscious. In that context, anything imagined can be burning.

And I disagree about "out and out plagiarism" -- to me that would be using the para word for word or changing a couple of words only. Toddlers learn by aping others. Where do you think all the books you've ever read reside in your memory? Subconscious? Here I was influenced by the way the writer added the concept of doom to the tale. It fit the context of my WIP. How would you rephrase or reword the paragraph so as not to be plagiarism by your standard? Would you not use it at all? I'm curious where the line is.


----------



## joyceharmon (May 21, 2012)

My feeling is that whether or not your process meets the legal definition of plagiarism, it is a very unnatural and awkward way to write. This is meta-writing, writing in order to write. What you're conveying to your reader is not a point you're trying to make or a feeling you're trying to invoke or a scene or an event -- you're conveying 'ooh, look at the fancy writing'. It's... well, sorry to be blunt, but it's pretentious.


----------



## I&#039;m a Little Teapot (Apr 10, 2014)

Oh God, is this going to be one of those threads where you ask us for our opinions then argue with us because we're not telling you what you want to hear?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_Opal_Mehta_Got_Kissed,_Got_Wild,_and_Got_a_Life

What you've done is basically what this chick did.


----------



## Guest (Mar 27, 2015)

DanaE said:


> And I disagree about "out and out plagiarism" -- to me that would be using the para word for word or changing a couple of words only.


No, using a paragraph word for word or only changing a couple of words is called INFRINGEMENT, which is illegal.

Plagiarism is the appropriation of another person's thoughts or ideas and passing them off as your own. So yes, what you have done is clearly plagiarism. It is not criminally against the law. It is more considered a gross ethical breach in academic and professional circles.


----------



## Flay Otters (Jul 29, 2014)

The riff that opens 'Money for Nothing and Chicks for Free' is almost a note for note knockoff of 'Jumpin' Jack Flash.'
That was okay.
But the refrain of 'My Sweet Lord' was very similar to 'He's So Fine,' and lawsuits ensued.
It's a fairly subtle thing.
I don't think what you wrote was plagiarism, but why do you feel the need to enhance your writing by paraphrasing another writer.
It was a good paragraph but not earth-shattering.
If you're going to pinch stuff make it really, really good stuff (like they pinched JJ Flash).

I steal stuff all the time, in my contemporary novels. But it's always done as a joke or as a cultural reference.
I also never read in the genre I write.
In fact I haven't read a novel in at least ten years, probably longer.
On the rare occasions I start to read fiction, I quickly get bored and antsy and stop.
I'd rather be writing than reading (I studied literature in three languages so I've read all I need, to get the hang of it).

My opinion, since you asked, stop reading other people's stuff.
They will only ever be average compared to the great writers (that's a simple statistical fact), so why do you want to copy an average writer?

If you feel you need to read in order to 'get it' then read a lot of stuff and let it sink in.
Making a vocabulary book is a good idea if your vocabulary is poor (we always did it in language training) but not whole passages.
Be your own average writer, not a pastiche of another average writer.

Maybe you'll be better than average if you let yourself go.


----------



## William Meikle (Apr 19, 2010)

DanaE said:


> I judge this as an acceptable use of inspiration but understand some might call it plagiarism. What do you think?


How you judge it isn't the point. It's plagiarism.


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

williammeikle said:


> How you judge it isn't the point. It's plagiarism.


This.

Stop doing it.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> No, using a paragraph word for word or only changing a couple of words is called INFRINGEMENT, which is illegal.
> 
> Plagiarism is the appropriation of another person's thoughts or ideas and passing them off as your own. So yes, what you have done is clearly plagiarism. It is not criminally against the law. It is more considered a gross ethical breach in academic and professional circles.


And, actually on reading closer, I realize that the examples COULD be considered actual copyright infringement. Because it isn't just the idea, it really is aping the actual expression of the idea, and the courts are finding more and more for that these days.

The question is how much of the work was made up of the work is really original.

This is NOT NOT NOT a matter of learning by aping, or a matter of 'influence.' This is just trying to do what the author did by changing words in such as way as to evade law, or plagiarism bots.

Learning by aping and influence would be to take, say, the structure of the bit. Pick a different theme, say "Hope" or "irritation" and write about that in the same way that the original author wrote about "doom." Or using single words at beginning and end to make a point, but doing it in a different context. Or just using visceral physical descriptions as similes for an idea.

Now, that said:

If you were just writing this as an exercise in your diary, that's not plagiarism. That is just playing around with words and ideas to learn. Like baby talk, when the baby is not trying to communicate, but talking to himself to practice.

It becomes plagiarism if you use it in your actual work.

Camille


----------



## Roberto El Duque (Mar 4, 2015)

SevenDays said:


> Oh God, is this going to be one of those threads where you ask us for our opinions then argue with us because we're not telling you what you want to hear?


Was going to write something like this ^ but as I am new here I will simply respond by haiku:

Plagiarism:
One man's meat
Small potatoes


----------



## Lydniz (May 2, 2013)

You took a paragraph and jiggled a few words around and want to know whether it's plagiarism. Yes, it is.


----------



## George Applegate (Jan 23, 2013)

To me, the line is crossed when the author or a reader of the original work would recognize the similarity. Unless the average literate reader could be expected to recognize it as homage - such as if it paraphrased something from the bible or an important passage by Shakespeare - then a red flag goes up. Once accused of plagiarism, that's a bell that can't be unrung.


----------



## HAGrant (Jul 17, 2011)

DanaE said:


> I keep a little notebook when I'm reading various novels in my chosen genre and write down words, phrases, sentence and even paragraphs I find scintillating. I leaf through a few pages during my WIP and might use single words here and there if they're better than my draft choices. For the phrases and longer, I write out alternatives, sometimes better, always significantly different. I never use them word for word, but often follow the rhythm of the original. Here's a short paragraph I tagged for use:
> 
> From Gil Brewer's "The Vengeful Virgin": Doom. You recognize Doom easily. It's a feeling and a taste, and it's black, and it's very heavy. It comes down over your head, and wraps tentacles around you, and sinks long dirty fingernails into your heart. It has a stink like burning garbage. Doom.
> 
> ...


I looked up plagiarism in my Pocket Style Manual by Diana Hacker and Nancy Sommers, which is used in current college English classes. It spells out English basics, from MLA and APA styles to plagiarism and other issues.

On pg 166 it says there are 3 types of plagiarism: "(1) failing to cite quotations and borrowed ideas, (2) failing to enclose borrowed language in quotation marks, and (3) failing to put summaries and paraphrases in your own words."

You borrowed the ideas, even though you changed many of the words. If you were taking an English class in college, you would have to credit the original source. Professors specifically say that if a student uses someone else's material, they must credit it, even if the material is rewritten in the student's own words.


----------



## Fishbowl Helmet (Jan 12, 2014)

daringnovelist said:


> Plagiarism is the taking of the underlying idea (which is legal), regardless of whether you rephrase it your own way.


Just to be contrarian in what's doubtless going to be an amazing train wreck of a thread... that's not what plagiarism is.

Plagiarism is taking another's work (as in their actual words, i.e. the execution of the underlying idea) and copying it without citing the source. Trying to pass off another's work as one's own. To barely rewrite another's work to pass it off as one's own is still plagiarism, but it's got nothing to do with the underlying idea. It's the actual words on the page that matter. I agree that the passages above are blatantly plagiaristic, but I'm just pointing out that it's not connected to the underlying idea of anything at all.

The underlying idea of the Avengers movie is that a disparate group of superheroes get together to fight a menace none of them could face on their own. That's the basic premise of damn near every ensemble action/adventure movie that's ever been made, but that's not plagiarism as it's functioning on the idea-level rather than the words-on-the-page level.


----------



## sngraves (Aug 10, 2014)

DanaE said:


> Toddlers learn by aping others.


You're not a toddler, and toddlers don't try to sell what they mimic.

I used to do this all the time when I was a kid. In fact I would completely, word for word, transfer books that I liked into notebooks to learn the cadence and proper sound of good writing. All that work was practice, learning exercises. You don't try to turn your learning exercises that are built off the expert prose of another. It's unethical, and readers will figure you out, and the outcry will make you regret it.


----------



## Rykymus (Dec 3, 2011)

This is why I stopped reading when I decided to start writing.

Think of it like this. Murder requires intent. Manslaughter does not. The fact that you made conscious effort to write down particular passages and then rewrite them to avoid being a word for word copy pretty much proves intent. You were just trying to hide the fact.

I understand what you meant to do. You wanted to capture a feeling, and a way of expressing that feeling with words. You should have written down that feeling, not the actual words the writer used to describe it.

I think up stories that I'm sure are similar to what others have written. However, the fact that I have never read those other stories offers me some level of protection in the sense that I could not have plagiarized something that I had never read nor heard of. The line may seem fine, but it has to be for that very reason. There are very few truly original ideas. Even the ones that appear to be are generally just common memes and plot lines, mashed up enough to make them seem original, at least in their execution. Part of that is because we are all **** sapiens.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

Fishbowl Helmet said:


> Just to be contrarian in what's doubtless going to be an amazing train wreck of a thread... that's not what plagiarism is.
> 
> Plagiarism is taking another's work (as in their actual words, i.e. the execution of the underlying idea) and copying it without citing the source. Trying to pass off another's work as one's own. To barely rewrite another's work to pass it off as one's own is still plagiarism, but it's got nothing to do with the underlying idea. It's the actual words on the page that matter. I agree that the passages above are blatantly plagiaristic, but I'm just pointing out that it's not connected to the underlying idea of anything at all.
> 
> The underlying idea of the Avengers movie is that a disparate group of superheroes get together to fight a menace none of them could face on their own. That's the basic premise of damn near every ensemble action/adventure movie that's ever been made, but that's not plagiarism as it's functioning on the idea-level rather than the words-on-the-page level.


Yes. That's why the old saying goes "Plagiarism is basic to all culture."

Plagiarism is not illegal. It's not even specifically unethical in certain circumstances. I was speaking, of course, of this specific instance and didn't go into all the ins and outs --

But basically, using specific expression (with or without credit) is copyright infringement.
Using either the specific words OR the underlying idea and claiming it as your own is plagiarism.

In academia and the sciences, plagiarism cuts a wide swath. You don't take even a fraction of an idea without crediting it. It doesn't matter if it's your own words or not. Ideas are what the whole culture is about, and stealing ideas is a major no-no.

In Hollywood, there is also a similar issue. Hollywood deals in ideas and concepts and the specific expression evolves and changes. So, even though borrowing ideas is par for the course... there are very strict contract terms when it comes to how you must credit and compensate the things that inspire you. This is why no one in Hollywood will read a script without the writer first signing a release form -- because if the studio happens to be working on a similar story, and it is shown that they read the script, the author could sue, and as often happens, win. (Think about the whole Art Buchwald kerfuffle over the King of Queens.)

But this is only because there is so much money in Hollywood, and plagiarism affects everybody negatively, AND positively. They have to have rules to manage it.

In the rest of the arts, plagiarism is kinda the foundation of the field -- but there are still both ethical and legal limits.

One great example is the famous "HOPE" poster. The artist based that painting on a copyrighted photograph. On the surface, that should be totally legal. It was the equivalent of what the OP did in her example. He re-did the photo in his own "words." He painted it himself, and created a completely new and different work out of it.

Except he didn't. The essence of that photo was not the specific pixels of color (i.e. the specific words of a written work) but rather in the composition. And the artist didn't try to defend that. He claimed that the similarity in composition was a coincidence -- that he had used a different photograph as reference in creating his art -- one that had a different overall composition. When it was shown that he did use that photograph as the reference, he had no defense left and he settled.

The example used above is very similar to the HOPE poster case, in that it is on the surface a different thing, but it is clearly a beat by beat replication of what was being expressed.

So I have to take back what I said about it not being copyright infringement -- it could be considered that if it's representative of the whole work -- but it is also plagiarism, if the author presents this as original work.

Camille


----------



## Guest (Mar 27, 2015)

TO all: I asked the question because I truly wasn't certain. I didn't mean to argue that it wasn't. I still don't know where the line is. So, I won't use this paragraph in my WIP, just to be on the safe side. I appreciate your views, although a few think it isn't plagiarism. 

Shockers: one fella said never to read other novels! 
One or two (I cant recall) said you cannot borrow ideas! How crazy is that? We all know there's a limited number of plotlines. If we cannot borrow or use ideas that have been used before, how can we write?

Many said to stop doing this. But none of them are my mother. 

As a way of explanation, (God! I wouldn't think of arguing on this board. Like Captain Renault, I'm shocked to think anyone would argue here!) I rarely reform an entire paragraph. And I'd say there might be only 2 or 3 instances of sentences reformed in any of my stuff. Of course I always try to improve the phrase or sentence used, and of course work to make it better and to fit context. I see nothing wrong with this sort of thing or of using common ideas. Such sentences or phrases usually spark a better idea in my head, so what I write & revise is original to my imagination. At least consciously so. I must admit I regret the original post because the responses not only gave opinions but some bordered "off with her head!" in tone. Are writers truly knee-jerk about the P word? Is it like shouting fire in a crowded theater?

If so, my question on the topic was out of line. I apologize if anyone took offense.


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

> I see nothing wrong with this sort of thing


Seriously?



> Are writers truly knee-jerk about the P word?


Seriously x 2?

There is clearly nothing that can be said that will reach you. Good luck. You're going to need it.


----------



## Jan Hurst-Nicholson (Aug 25, 2010)

Years ago a writer said they often 'borrow' each others words or phrases, and cited 'with rat-like cunning'. I thought this was such a good phrase, but have never been able to better it, or dare use it because so many other writers apparently 'borrowed' it  .


----------



## Guest (Mar 27, 2015)

Monique said:


> Seriously?
> 
> Seriously x 2?
> 
> There is clearly nothing that can be said that will reach you. Good luck. You're going to need it.


Why so snarky?


----------



## Guest (Mar 27, 2015)

Jan Hurst-Nicholson said:


> Years ago a writer said they often 'borrow' each others words or phrases, and cited 'with rat-like cunning'. I thought this was such a good phrase, but have never been able to better it, or dare use it because so many other writers apparently 'borrowed' it .


How about "with possum-like sleaze"?


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

DanaE said:


> Why so snarky?


Because I'm a little dumbfounded by your response to all of the other responses. I feel strongly what you're doing is unethical. You've been told that repeatedly, but you don't see a problem with it or, apparently, plagiarism in general. It's a v serious thing to authors. It's troubling that surprises you.


----------



## ShayneRutherford (Mar 24, 2014)

I don't know if this will help put this into perspective for you, Dana, but how would you feel if someone did this with your work?


----------



## Jan Hurst-Nicholson (Aug 25, 2010)

DanaE said:


> How about "with possum-like sleaze"?


We don't have possums here, or in the UK, so don't think it would work as well .


----------



## Jan Hurst-Nicholson (Aug 25, 2010)

ShayneRutherford said:


> I don't know if this will help put this into perspective for you, Dana, but how would you feel if someone did this with your work?


I think I would be quite flattered


----------



## Flay Otters (Jul 29, 2014)

DanaE said:


> Shockers: one fella said never to read other novels!


Two of us said that actually.
And to be honest neither of us said you should never read again, just that too much input from other writers can color what you write too much.

TS Elliot, or Oscar Wilde, or Aaron Sorkin, or maybe it was me said:
Good writers borrow, great writers steal.

Take whatever you want and don't listen to anyone else.
The only problem is if readers notice and out you.

On the other hand, if you are cunning enough nobody will notice.

And we do have possums (technically Opossums) here, and, having run into a possum or two, I would say: with possum-like _sang-froid_ - or maybe insouciance.
And yes you may write down sang-froid and insouciance in your vocabulary book.


----------



## OW (Jul 9, 2014)

Just to add another little discussion point to the topic, or muddy the waters even further if you like. 

If we are talking about concepts and ideas too, what about tropes or works out of copyright? There are, some might argue I'm sure, whole trends, themes and subgenres similar in ideas and concepts to each other, as well as popularised works. What are the thoughts on this?

I'm not posing any sort of argument, or wishing to derail the thread. I just think it's an interesting discussion, and like to hear what people think about this is all.


----------



## Bob Stewart (Mar 19, 2014)

DanaE said:


> How about "with possum-like sleaze"?


Well, now you've stepped in it! I can turn a blind eye to a little plagiarizing, but this maligning of possums has to stop! I've known a lot of possums in my life and never have I observed one doing anything the least bit sleazy.

I knew this thread would turn ugly...


----------



## HAGrant (Jul 17, 2011)

OW said:


> Just to add another little discussion point to the topic, or muddy the waters even further if you like.
> 
> If we are talking about concepts and ideas too, what about tropes or works out of copyright? There are, some might argue I'm sure, whole trends, themes and subgenres similar in ideas and concepts to each other, as well as popularised works. What are the thoughts on this?
> 
> I'm not posing any sort of argument, or wishing to derail the thread. I just think it's an interesting discussion, and like to hear what people think about this is all.


You would be hard pressed to find a unique idea in the arts when you're looking at themes. We all influence each other. We're all influenced by everything we've ever read and been exposed to all our lives. However, the execution, the adaptation of an idea, is what's unique.

For example, superheroes aren't unique. But if I put my superhero in a black outfit with bat ears, give him a souped-up black car, and put a bat cave under his mansion, then I am plagiarizing the unique Batman adaptation of the superhero theme.


----------



## Allyson J. (Nov 26, 2014)

If someone were to read your paragraph and be reminded of the original paragraph, and then compared the two, you might be in trouble. Personally, I wouldn't want the 'plagarism police' sniffing around my work. 

If you're even QUESTIONING this, it's best to not risk it!


----------



## [email protected] (Apr 8, 2012)

You've probably changed the wording around enough that it is not legally plagiarism, but the ethics of it all are highly questionable. 

In the particular instance you quoted, you could use a bit more distance from the original. For example, starting and stopping on the exact same word in the exactly same emphasizing way is a little too close for my tastes. Using the same "going over the head" in the same spot in the paragraph is sketchy as well. It's not an identical way of describing it, which is what probably makes you legally ok (no guarantee), but it's the same concept and a very shady use of someone else's composition.

You might be better off studying what makes those passages so inspiring. What about each one grabs your attention and creates the perfect mood? Study the skill. Study why those types of words interact and what they create. You want to do more than just rework beautiful passages. You want to give yourself the ability to create your own, even better passages. That way you'll never run out, and no one can give you a hard time for your work.

This is definitely a touchy subject, as it should be. However, I'm really sad to see so many members jump to nasty right away. Making people afraid to talk and bring up a subject doesn't solve the problem. Scaring them away just robs us of the opportunity to persuade them to an alternate view.


----------



## Weirdling (Jun 25, 2011)

_Steps up on a soap box. _Confession time. When I started out writing fanfiction, I'm pretty sure I plagiarized. That was because I fell into the ignorant category. Once I learned better, I stopped it.

Ignorance is one reason for plagiarism. Another is not caring. And this is what gets me really miffed--those who know it is wrong but feel it's okay as long as they don't get caught. A wrong is right as long as no one notices? These people tend to keep at it anyway because the punishments of cheating aren't strong enough to break the rewards of cheating (speaking as someone involved with academic writing).

A third reason is trust issues. Some of it may be tied up with ignorance; some it is just fear. These students don't trust themselves. They aren't used to writing in this way or at all, and they cling to the source material as a sense of security. It's an authority; it makes their point in the paper. And in general, it does so without a lot of effort on their part. Easy, peasy, and done. But unless they can really hide the evidence, their essays don't work. A lot of these plagiarists tend to have far more outside source material than their own thoughts and words. The wording styles conflict. Organization and structure are off. The essay doesn't fit the teacher's guidelines. And so on.

For this last category of people, their plagiarism works against them. They don't learn to think for themselves. If they want to write well, they need to trust themselves, not look for the easy road. They need to learn to think and take risks and be willing to make mistakes and be willing to learn from them.

Long story short, I think plagiarists are shortchanging themselves. If you, general you, want to write well, then trust yourself and rely on your own skills, not someone else's. Do it for yourself, so that your own skills grow and make your work strong, not that you bolster your work with someone else's skills. Do the work and reap the rewards that truly last. _Steps off soap box._


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

OW said:


> Just to add another little discussion point to the topic, or muddy the waters even further if you like.
> 
> If we are talking about concepts and ideas too, what about tropes or works out of copyright? There are, some might argue I'm sure, whole trends, themes and subgenres similar in ideas and concepts to each other, as well as popularised works. What are the thoughts on this?
> 
> I'm not posing any sort of argument, or wishing to derail the thread. I just think it's an interesting discussion, and like to hear what people think about this is all.


That is fine for the legal aspect (i.e. copyright infringement), but the ethical aspect (plagiarism) is similar. The key there is, I think, that it would proper to credit the source if you were using a public domain item in a way that you wouldn't use one under copyright.

But it might very well annoy people.

I have myself often thought that some really seriously dated public domain stories could benefit with a major rewrite into a more modern story. This would be legal, and if the original were credited, it would ethical, but it would still leave a bad feeling in my mouth and that of many readers. Even if they don't love the original, people always imagine that it's like a 'remake' and somehow damages the original.

Camille


----------



## IntoTheCloset (Feb 22, 2015)

DanaE said:


> Are writers truly knee-jerk about the P word?


I don't see what's knee-jerk about calling a spade a spade, especially when the spade in question specifically asked if it was one.


----------



## George Applegate (Jan 23, 2013)

Allyson Jeleyne said:


> If someone were to read your paragraph and be reminded of the original paragraph, and then compared the two, you might be in trouble. Personally, I wouldn't want the 'plagarism police' sniffing around my work.
> 
> If you're even QUESTIONING this, it's best to not risk it!


This is true. A charge of plagiarism, even if never proven, is hard to live down in the internet age. Granted, you can still become the Vice President if enough time passes, but even a successful author like Yann Martel will always have a cloud over him in my memory.


----------



## Liz French (Apr 13, 2014)

Like the OP, I quite often borrow from others. If I'm struggling with something I'll use it as a place marker to keep the momentum going. More often than not when I go back and read through the whole piece, the borrowed bit jumps out at me as being not in my voice, so I'll either cut it out or change it significantly.

I don't see a problem with this, I also borrow from real life, real people and real situations. The hope is that the way I weave all the titbits together is original and the source unrecognisable, although I'm sure I've failed a few times along the way! (Sorry Mum)

I say don't worry about it. If you're honest with yourself you'll know whether it belongs to you when you read your final draft.


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

[email protected] said:


> This is definitely a touchy subject, as it should be. However, I'm really sad to see so many members jump to nasty right away. Making people afraid to talk and bring up a subject doesn't solve the problem. Scaring them away just robs us of the opportunity to persuade them to an alternate view.


I'm assuming that this is, at least partially, aimed at me. I was snarky. And I don't want to chill conversation, for that I do apologize. This is a subject that bothers me and when someone posts a question, get an answer then dismisses those answers, it also bothers me. I'm easily bothered.  I resorted, lazily, I suppose, to snark when the OP was not persuaded by multiple people and chose to say they were right, doing nothing wrong and what's the hubbub, bub? That sort of resistance triggered a more aggressive response on my part.

As an aside, I'm more uptight about all things ethical today because of the DA debacle. My teeth are already on edge.


----------



## SarahCarter (Nov 8, 2012)

My view is that it would have been OK if you'd taken inspiration along the lines of: "Oh, I like how they introduce a concept with a punchy, single-word sentence and then describe it in a very visceral way. I might try that." But what you've done goes beyond that. Not only have you used the same concept (doom), you've also copied the way it's used at the start and end of the paragraph, AND you've copied the bit about the "heavy, black taste" just with the words switched around. That crosses a line, in my opinion.


----------



## Becca Mills (Apr 27, 2012)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> Plagiarism is the appropriation of another person's thoughts or ideas and passing them off as your own. So yes, what you have done is clearly plagiarism. It is not criminally against the law. It is more considered a gross ethical breach in academic and professional circles.


Yes. Definitely plagiarism. I have given quite a few students zeroes on papers for this sort of thing.


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

SarahCarter said:


> My view is that it would have been OK if you'd taken inspiration along the lines of: "Oh, I like how they introduce a concept with a punchy, single-word sentence and then describe it in a very visceral way. I might try that." But what you've done goes beyond that. Not only have you used the same concept (doom), you've also copied the way it's used at the start and end of the paragraph, AND you've copied the bit about the "heavy, black taste" just with the words switched around. That crosses a line, in my opinion.


This would be my opinion, too--what pushes this over the line. And no, I don't think this would be OK. I don't know about legally--but I think it would be, at least embarrassing, if people found out. Hard to defend. If it would be embarrassing if people found out, that's a good test. (Which is what I'd say about DA, too, Monique, if she asked me, which she won't!)


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

LOL, I'd say the DA thing is far more than embarassing, but that's a convo for a different thread.


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

Monique said:


> LOL, I'd say the DA thing is far more than embarassing, but that's a convo for a different thread.


Well, I agree, but seems like it would've been an easy sniff test. 
I had a professor in business school who said [referring specifically to what you did in business]: "If you wouldn't want to read about it in the newspaper, don't do it." 
Change to "online," and, yep.


----------



## I&#039;m a Little Teapot (Apr 10, 2014)

Monique said:


> LOL, I'd say the DA thing is far more than embarassing, but that's a convo for a different thread.


Yes, that's quite ... eyebrow raising.


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

Rosalind James said:


> Well, I agree, but seems like it would've been an easy sniff test.
> I had a professor in business school who said [referring specifically to what you did in business]: "If you wouldn't want to read about it in the newspaper, don't do it."
> Change to "online," and, yep.


Yes, and I think that's what makes it all the more shocking. That there was no sniffing. Or if there was, the room was heavily Febreezed at the time.


----------



## ShayneRutherford (Mar 24, 2014)

Will I sound like a complete idiot if I ask what the DA debacle is?


----------



## Lydniz (May 2, 2013)

What is the DA thing?


----------



## Sam Kates (Aug 28, 2012)

ShayneRutherford said:


> Will I sound like a complete idiot if I ask what the DA debacle is?


Glad you asked cos I have no idea either.


----------



## I&#039;m a Little Teapot (Apr 10, 2014)

ShayneRutherford said:


> Will I sound like a complete idiot if I ask what the DA debacle is?


Here you go:

http://www.thepassivevoice.com/03/2015/jane-littejen-frederick/


----------



## Lydniz (May 2, 2013)

Thanks. I assumed it was to do with plagiarism.


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

Big, huge, giant deal in Romancelandia right now. Not about plagiarism, but about questionable behavior--what's ethical and isn't, where people draw the line.


----------



## Fishbowl Helmet (Jan 12, 2014)

daringnovelist said:


> Yes. That's why the old saying goes "Plagiarism is basic to all culture."
> 
> Plagiarism is not illegal. It's not even specifically unethical in certain circumstances. I was speaking, of course, of this specific instance and didn't go into all the ins and outs --
> 
> ...


With respect, I think you're confusing a few of the terms. Take a few minutes and check this site: http://www.plagiarism.org/plagiarism-101/what-is-plagiarism/

Plagiarism is illegal because it is copyright infringement. In literary terms, it is the taking of the specific expression of an idea and passing it off as your own. To quote, in part, "The *expression* of original ideas is considered intellectual property and is protected by copyright laws..." Emphasis mine.

In some cases the idea itself is something that can be plagiarized, such as an original invention, but in literary circles we deal in the specific expression of those ideas, not the ideas themselves. For me to write a vampire novel is not plagiarism of Bram Stoker, but if I were to simply copy or barely rewrite Twilight and claim it was original to me then that would be plagiarizing Stephanie Meyer. So no, it's not the vague idea that's protected here, rather the specific expression thereof.


----------



## sela (Nov 2, 2014)

SarahCarter said:


> My view is that it would have been OK if you'd taken inspiration along the lines of: "Oh, I like how they introduce a concept with a punchy, single-word sentence and then describe it in a very visceral way. I might try that." But what you've done goes beyond that. Not only have you used the same concept (doom), you've also copied the way it's used at the start and end of the paragraph, AND you've copied the bit about the "heavy, black taste" just with the words switched around. That crosses a line, in my opinion.


This.

There's nothing wrong with admiring a writer's style and aspiring to write in a similar manner. In fact it is impossible not to be influenced by everything you have seen, read, heard and felt.

A monkey can mimic, but it takes skill and talent and intelligence to create.

Instead of copying the paragraph and substituting words, but keeping the sentence structure and word order, think about what it was about the writing that appeals to you so much. What made that passage so compelling to you? Was it the juxtaposition of short and long? The way the short sentence is expanded upon, giving a brief bright flash and then a longer slow burn of elaboration? The diction?

If you understand what it was about the writing that appealed to you, then you can take that knowledge to your own writing. To avoid plagiarism, you should start with a blank page and think of what you want to capture or convey and how, and create rather than mimic. By taking a whole passage and simply substituting words, you _are_ plagiarizing and it is one of the cardinal sins among authors.

Einstein said creativity is hiding your sources. Picasso said good artists borrow, great artists steal. They are not saying you should plagiarize. They are saying that you have to take existing ideas and words and make them your own. Nothing is original. Every word, every idea, has already been written and thought in some version. Genius is taking existing words and ideas and expressing them in such a way that the result is new.

You won't do that by copying a passage and moving words around or substituting one word for another. You may learn how to write like another person that way, but it is clumsy childish mimicry not creativity.


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

I do want to say that I admire the integrity that led you to ask the question.


----------



## Weirdling (Jun 25, 2011)

Sela said:


> This.
> 
> There's nothing wrong with admiring a writer's style and aspiring to write in a similar manner. In fact it is impossible not to be influenced by everything you have seen, read, heard and felt.
> 
> ...


+1


----------



## Guest (Mar 28, 2015)

When I was a little boy and was writing my first stories, I used to copy and retell other already written stories. I found even in high school I was still doing it, because all the great phrases and sentence structures I'd read would keep popping up in  my stories. I would alter / modify. As time went on, my concepts took more original turns, and I became gradually able to write original prose styles. I became a real writer.

So by copying, you can teach yourself how to write. Then with each story you copy a little less until you have an original voice and product. I think it's a good way to learn.

But I certainly wouldn't publish any of these types of stories because you aren't ready.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

Fishbowl Helmet said:


> With respect, I think you're confusing a few of the terms. Take a few minutes and check this site: (Link removed)


You do realize that's a sales page for legal services, right?


----------



## sela (Nov 2, 2014)

ShaneJeffery said:


> When I was a little boy and was writing my first stories, I used to copy and retell other already written stories. I found even in high school I was still doing it, because all the great phrases and sentence structures I'd read would keep popping up in my stories. I would alter / modify. As time went on, my concepts took more original turns, and I became gradually able to write original prose styles. I became a real writer.
> 
> So by copying, you can teach yourself how to write. Then with each story you copy a little less until you have an original voice and product. I think it's a good way to learn.
> 
> But I certainly wouldn't publish any of these types of stories because you aren't ready.


I agree with this completely.

I went to an art high school to study visual art. Our instructors told us we had to crawl before we could walk, and walk before we could run. We had to learn the basics and master them before we could develop our own voice and create art that would be more than mere copying. We had to learn conventions before we could break them.

So we drew a lot of boxes to learn perspective, we drew a lot of vases and cups and saucers and crocks and jars to learn about shadow and texture and composition. We learned how to capture motion and tension, weight and volume in a quick sketch of a live model. None of what we did was "art" but it was necessary to become "artists" who had all the skills necessary to enable us to develop and express our unique vision.

The same holds true for writing. You have to be able to string words into sentences, sling sentences together into paragraphs before you can use language effectively to create characters, settings, story arcs, etc. that are compelling. You have to put all the elements together into a novel, and then maybe write three or four before you might actually write something that is good.

So I see nothing wrong in practicing by mimicking work you admire. But don't publish it!


----------



## PDSinger (May 15, 2014)

If the OP has to ask the question, then the doubt has already arisen, and justifiably so.

I don't have a problem with the notebook. Clip the beautiful phrases and paragraphs, and savor them for the beauty. Roll them in your mouth like fine wine, throw them on the floor and wallow in them like dollar bills after a lottery win. Revel in them and learn from them.

And then when you go to write, let whatever distillation and permutation come from your mind to the page, and it will be yours, enriched by what you've taken in, but not so much flavored that questions of propriety arise in your mind or anyone else's.

(See what I did there? Made other posts' opinions into my own, tinted somewhat purple by the fermented grape of which I have partaken tonight.)


----------



## sela (Nov 2, 2014)

PDSinger said:


> If the OP has to ask the question, then the doubt has already arisen, and justifiably so.
> 
> I don't have a problem with the notebook. Clip the beautiful phrases and paragraphs, and savor them for the beauty. Roll them in your mouth like fine wine, throw them on the floor and wallow in them like dollar bills after a lottery win. Revel in them and learn from them.
> 
> ...


Genius!


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

PDSinger said:


> (See what I did there? Made other posts' opinions into my own, tinted somewhat purple by the fermented grape of which I have partaken tonight.)


And a beautiful job of it too!


----------



## SBJones (Jun 13, 2011)

I do know that this is a public forum and easily searchable.  Aspiring authors might wish to be careful about what they are tying their names and future reputations to.


----------



## Guest (Mar 28, 2015)

Monique said:


> Because I'm a little dumbfounded by your response to all of the other responses. I feel strongly what you're doing is unethical. You've been told that repeatedly, but you don't see a problem with it or, apparently, plagiarism in general. It's a v serious thing to authors. It's troubling that surprises you.


Perhaps you don't see that you being "dumbfounded" is an opinion no worse no better than mine. Of course P is a serious thing to authors. It is to me as well, which is why I asked the question.


----------



## Guest (Mar 28, 2015)

Rosalind James said:


> I do want to say that I admire the integrity that led you to ask the question.


Thank you. I admit to my ignorance as to where the line is, even though I changed the few lines (not a "passage") substantially. I'm somewhat envious of the certainty about this that some have displayed.


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

Well, I do think authors are very, as you say, knee-jerk about the "plagiarism thing." Because it really cuts right to the heart of what we do. Reformatting, or whatever you want to call it, phrases or sentences really is plagiarism. Because it's in creating that sentence or phrase that resonates enough that you wrote it down that we do what we do. That's what makes our work not exactly the same as any other author's. That's our creation.

Like I said, I admire the fact that you cared enough to ask the question, but I think the answer is pretty clear, and I think that's the message that's coming through here.


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

DanaE said:


> Perhaps you don't see that you being "dumbfounded" is an opinion no worse no better than mine. Of course P is a serious thing to authors. It is to me as well, which is why I asked the question. Are you snarky to anyone who disagrees with you?


I assumed you didn't take plagiarism seriously because you said, "Are writers truly knee-jerk about the P word?" which I took to be dismissive of those who find the issue to be a serious one. Your subsequent replies also seemed dismissive of the notion that using someone else's work was wrong. I'm glad to see you don't feel that way. I found what I took to be a casual, "I don't care if I'm pilfering someone's work" attitude as insulting to authors. That's what prompted my reaction.

I'm very happy to see you say that you take plagiarism seriously. The example you cited is plagiarism and as others have noted, just not necessary, nor will it help you grow and find _your_ voice as an author. As an exercise, it can be great to work out why something moved you, but earning money from it is a different thing.


----------



## Nic (Nov 17, 2013)

Fishbowl Helmet said:


> Just to be contrarian in what's doubtless going to be an amazing train wreck of a thread... that's not what plagiarism is.
> 
> Plagiarism is taking another's work (as in their actual words, i.e. the execution of the underlying idea) and copying it without citing the source. Trying to pass off another's work as one's own. To barely rewrite another's work to pass it off as one's own is still plagiarism, but it's got nothing to do with the underlying idea. It's the actual words on the page that matter. I agree that the passages above are blatantly plagiaristic, but I'm just pointing out that it's not connected to the underlying idea of anything at all.
> 
> The underlying idea of the Avengers movie is that a disparate group of superheroes get together to fight a menace none of them could face on their own. That's the basic premise of damn near every ensemble action/adventure movie that's ever been made, but that's not plagiarism as it's functioning on the idea-level rather than the words-on-the-page level.


This. And not just this, but plagiarism is - apart from being rather icky in scientific/non-fiction circles and reason for universities withdrawing your doctorates for plagiarised content - not illegal. The current outcry within fiction writing circles stems from frequent plagiarisms among fanfiction writers and the attempt at shaming each other into silence.

Fifty Shades, undoubtedly immensely commercially successful, is a pretty straight plagiarism off Tara Sue Me's "Submission Trilogy", which is fanfiction and plagiarism off Stephenie Meyer's (original!) Twilight series. The only one actually having a leg to stand on here is Meyer, but only if she trademarked her characters.


----------



## sela (Nov 2, 2014)

Nic said:


> The current outcry within fiction writing circles stems from frequent plagiarisms among fanfiction writers and the attempt at shaming each other into silence.
> 
> Fifty Shades, undoubtedly immensely commercially successful, is a pretty straight plagiarism off Tara Sue Me's "Submission Trilogy", which is fanfiction and plagiarism off Stephenie Meyer's (original!) Twilight series. The only one actually having a leg to stand on here is Meyer, but only if she trademarked her characters.


I'm not quite sure this is the case. I think you are conflating plagiarism and copyright infringement.


----------



## Nic (Nov 17, 2013)

Sela said:


> I'm not quite sure this is the case. I think you are conflating plagiarism and copyright infringement.


Actually no, I don't. The definition of what is copying/infringing copyright (and hence illegal) is extremely tight. "The expression of an original idea" doesn't mean the idea in general. It also practically never means a paraphrased or rewritten thing. It means the exact or nearly exact use of the "expression" of that idea.

Here's the much better definition from Wikipedia (better than that lawfirm's that is):



> Plagiarism is the "wrongful appropriation" and "stealing and publication" of another author's "language, thoughts, ideas, or expressions" and the representation of them as one's own original work. The idea remains problematic with unclear definitions and unclear rules.The modern concept of plagiarism as immoral and originality as an ideal emerged in Europe only in the 18th century, particularly with the Romantic movement.
> 
> *Plagiarism is considered academic dishonesty and a breach of journalistic ethics*. It is subject to sanctions like penalties, suspension, and even expulsion. Recently, cases of 'extreme plagiarism' have been identified in academia.
> 
> *Plagiarism is not a crime per se* but in academia and industry, it is a serious ethical offense, and cases of plagiarism* can *constitute copyright infringement.


Accentuations by me. As said, plagiarism per se almost never is a crime. It can be unethical in certain circumstances, but being unethical isn't the same as committing a crime. Only when the plagiarism achieves such a major similarity to the expression of the original idea of the author who was plagiarised, that the threshold is breached which law courts demand to be breached for copyright infringement, then it becomes a crime. And only then. But, as I said already, that level is far higher than you may believe, and indeed as good as never extends to just ideas or even general rehashing of ideas. Not even rephrasing per se is criminal, as has been shown in many law cases.

There are countless, and I mean ten thousands and more cases, of pretty direct plagiarisms and appropriations of ideas, even executed very similarly to the original works, and still they are no copyright infringements. Think for instance Hunger Games and Battle Royale. You can be sure that a copyright suit would have ensued if possible. Same with Fifty Shades vs. Submission Trilogy vs. Twilight.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

Nic is absolutely right. While there are more and more cases trickling out that push the definition of "expression" in terms of copyright infringement, for the most part these are two separate things - that may or may not coincide. (Also the DMCA has confused the issue a bit more by making associated actions into crimes as well -- but I'm not sure how much has worked it's way into case law.)

Here's a quick guide:

A book pirate doesn't claim to have written the book he distributes, so he isn't committing plagiarism -- he's committing IP theft.

A college professor builds a theory on the ideas of his graduate assistants, and doesn't credit them, but he doesn't use their words or specific expression, so he's not committing IP theft -- he's a plagiarist.

A blogger takes material from other blogs and posts it on her own blog, without crediting the original authors -- she's a plagiarist AND an IP thief.

The first is illegal, the second is unethical, the third is both.

The thing that confuses the issue is that with authors, most of the cases fall into the third group -- it's both, but it's illegal because of the IP theft, not the plagiarism. (However, if you were to post a public domain work on KDP as your own, Amazon could consider it to be fraud, and a violation of contract, etc.)

There is actually a very small gray area where ideas and expression are more loosely defined (like the issue with the HOPE poster I mentioned above.) Another case is the copy-rightability of recipes and cookbooks. Recipes are not copyrightable, because we all use similar language to express the steps in the preparation of food. However, a _collection_ of recipes is copyrightable. The "exact language" test does not always apply in the area of food publishing, and a more underlying structural test does apply. However, there is a strong professional ethics issue for food writers who plagiarize other people's recipes without crediting them. (I.e. you can publish another cook's recipes, but the culture demands that you credit the other cook even if you change it.)

Camille


----------



## Guest (Mar 28, 2015)

I would say it's plagiarism if most people who read both can tell that you were ripping off something else. That may not be very helpful, but let's consider the similarities.

Both examples:
Start and end in the word Doom, used as a one word sentence.
Talk about the emotion in the second person. (It *comes *down *over your head*/*comes *up *over your head*. It wraps tentacles *around *you/it grinds *around *your face. It sinks into *your heart*/it pierces any natural optimism in *your heart*.
Reference to how it tastes, that it's black, that it's heavy.
References burning.
References stench/stink.
Both start with what it does to your head and end in what it does to your heart.

This doesn't strike me as inspiration. It's more like rewriting. And it's not your piece to rewrite. And trust me, I came in to this thread reading the title and thinking, "Oh, it can't be that bad. Using inspiration is fine. Looking for better word choices is a respectable endeavor." But what you have done here is beyond those two things. You've tried to steal another author's EMOTION. The versions are TOO similar to pass off as a unique work/thought, which is why this POSSIBLY could be more than just plagiarism but actual copyright infringement. But for a second, let's say it's neither of those things.

Does this feel right to you? If it didn't come from YOUR heart, it will not naturally fit the mood and voice and heart of YOUR story. Also, I know you feel you have made the passage better, but the original felt much more authentic. Natural, imperfect, unbeautiful. Much like the way doom is. It captured an essence, and I think that's because it came from the writer's heart. Find what's in your heart, and it will be better than your rewrite of another writer's work. You'll be creating your OWN brilliance. Wouldn't that be so much more rewarding? Wouldn't that make you so much more noteworthy?

As far as referring to babies, you know, they learn words and techniques from us, they may even repeat some of things we say, but as a mother of four, I find they are their own people with their own unique ways of expressions, their own opinions and views on things. And as I raise them, hoping for them to learn things, I do so in such a way that allows them to express themselves in their own way. The idea that because they are children they cannot have their own emotions and express those emotions in their own words is not accurate. Have you ever spoken to a child? They often use words incorrectly and say them incorrectly...even when you correct them MANY times. Most children cannot copy us as closely as you copied that author. So forgive me, but I don't agree with that as an example equivalent to what you are doing. Children are extremely creative, and the younger they are, the LESS likely they are to copy us exactly or even closely. They will try, but in their innocence and naivety, what they do is "mimic" what they PERCEIVED and within their ability to express. So the "infant author" does not write. He only reads. The toddler author has absorbed a lot through reading, and now knows how to form sentences and tell stories, but does so in his own unfettered way. The adult author, has refined HIS uniqueness. Focused on it MORE. Expresses more of who HE (or she) is, his own thoughts and opinion. If that is what we are working toward, then we should raise ourselves as authors to be our own person. Inspiration is great. Just have to understand what is.

I know this isn't what you want to hear. And you can dismiss it all you want. I don't need any excuses from you or any defense. You don't owe it to me. You have the right to think I'm wrong. I'm only sharing my opinion because you asked. What you do with my thoughts is up to you.

Good luck.


----------



## LeonardDHilleyII (May 23, 2011)

TheForeverGirlSeries said:


> I would say it's plagiarism if most people who read both can tell that you were ripping off something else. That may not be very helpful, but let's consider the similarities.
> 
> Both examples:
> Start and end in the word Doom, used as a one letter sentence.
> ...


 Well stated.

Okay, so let's say the original author of what you've posted sees that you have openly and willingly said that you are using his/her work and rewriting it into your own book. By your own admission you've handed the author documentation of your act of plagiarism. People get sued for doing this. Alex Haley was sued for $600,000 dollars over "Roots." Shia Labeouf has gotten himself into hot water with the same lame argument that it's not illegal. To prevent what you're doing from being actual plagiarism, you'd need to cite in your book where you grabbed this idea and give credit to the original author. Now, I don't know many readers that would like to read a work of fiction with a lot of in text citations. You seem to be taking plagiarism lightly, when in fact, there are severe repercussions that can occur.

https://www.legalzoom.com/articles/plagiarism-what-is-it-exactly Here are some examples of what can happen. Madonna faced problems with one of her songs.

Plagiarism is a huge problem. The dean of our college where I teach asked me nearly two years ago to do a lecture on plagiarism for each class at the beginning of each quarter. The lecture is about thirty minutes long. Texas A&M has a two page statement of what plagiarism is/isn't on their website.

This is a public forum. Proceed with caution. You never know if the author might be reading this. Best!


----------



## Nic (Nov 17, 2013)

LeonardDHilleyII said:


> The dean of our college where I teach asked me nearly two years ago to do a lecture on plagiarism for each class at the beginning of each quarter.


This is an academic setting with plagiarism rules in place for scientific work. It does not make plagiarism an illegal/criminal act, however.

Once again, there is a marked difference between plagiarism and copyright infringement. Only one of these is a crime and only one of these can lead to successful law suits.

As to Haley, he copied passages among other things. Which is copyright infringement. There's no way he could have been sentenced over reusing ideas.


----------



## LeonardDHilleyII (May 23, 2011)

No, ideas are not copyrighted. Nothing in my previous statement has anything to do with "ideas." My point is that the OP has clearly stated the passage from which key phrases have been lifted and "reworded." However, the reworded section is not that far from the original. And no, the plagiarism rules are not in place for "scientific work" but for all academia writing. You can be sued. Moving on.


----------



## E.R.Baine (Mar 17, 2013)

Hi DanaE,

Personally, maybe because I'm a minimalist, I don't see the point in including the sentence anyway. You can do something like this: "A feeling of doom crept within my heart leaving all things: sadness, joy, longing...dead." 

And that is it right there. Writing down the works of other authors is something that I would do as a child. But I'm in my thirties now and I don't find I need to. You can be inspired to define doom your own way in your writing. In literature many works by authors are used to study writing style and how different authors describe such things as love and death. You take inspiration from that and write your own.  But the original sentence was also unnecessary to begin with. Why bother? Stick to your own writing style and it would be a hit as well.


----------



## Guest (Mar 28, 2015)

After reflection on everyone's take on this, I decided to delete the paragraph entirely. Still, I stared at the page and knew it needed something. I then took the concept of psychological defeat and wrote a new bit that more directly showed the hero's feelings of defeat as he came into consciousness after being clubbed.

I'd like to thank those who replied because your collective voices on this and my initial wondering have convinced me this practice with more than a word or short phrase is a dangerous one. No one wants to be branded as a plagiarist. I do think collecting wonderful words and turns of phrase to look over when I'm not drafting is a useful practice. I can't remember where I saw this but it seems a famous writer once put an introduction that was word for word in another book, and when apologizing he called it "unconscious plagiarism."

So I googled the term and found this: Cryptomnesia occurs when a forgotten memory returns without it being recognized as such by the subject, who believes it is something new and original. It is a memory bias whereby a person may falsely recall generating a thought, an idea, a song, or a joke,[1] not deliberately engaging in plagiarism but rather experiencing a memory as if it were a new inspiration.

Oh, I don't mean I had this nesia but because I'm relatively young and impressionable, it could happen to me, I guess.


----------



## katrina46 (May 23, 2014)

There are no truly original stories. They've all been thought of and written a thousands of times, but the way you write yours should be uniquely your own. You should find your own writers voice, in my opinion.


----------



## Moist_Tissue (Dec 6, 2013)

Does the DA situation have its own thread on this forum? Sometimes thread titles can be misleading....


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

Moist_Tissue said:


> Does the DA situation have its own thread on this forum? Sometimes thread titles can be misleading....


Not that I'm aware of.


----------



## Chinmoy Mukherjee (Apr 26, 2014)

Better use some tool like document compare, etc. Ideally there should not be more than 5% match with any existing book, etc.


----------



## Guest (Mar 29, 2015)

1) THIS is Spot in:

My opinion, since you asked, stop reading other people's stuff.
They will only ever be average compared to the great writers (that's a simple statistical fact), so why do you want to copy an average writer?

2) Readers are reading your books FOR YOUR VOICE. That isn't going to happen by searching OUTSIDE. You have to search INSIDE YOURSELF.

Find a time in your life when you felt despair and right that (write that). OR watch some other creative art like movies or paintings and try to capture what that makes you feel IN YOUR OWN WORDS.

3) People read to be able to experience a world painted by someone else, a world they interpret based on their experiences, and capture using their words. Then they take those words, and build a recreation of that world themselves.

So what they are primarily interested in, are

Your Unique View of the World
Your interpretation of your Experiences
The Story YOU are writing
The Words you use
The picture you paint

At times it might seem that picking parts of other people's views is a good idea. However, you want to be the equivalent of a method actor i.e.

A method actor becomes the person instead of copying the actions that the person would take.

So they don't say - a beggar slouches and dresses poorly and let's take pieces of their actions and personality and copy that.

They get into the mindset of becoming a beggar.

Here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Method_acting

So feel your story and use your own view of the world and your own words to write it. That (your uniqueness) is what people want to read.


----------



## Shei Darksbane (Jan 31, 2015)

Perhaps a more pertinent response:

What you did sounds awkward compared to the original, so I don't think you're really gaining anything by doing this.

You're just drowning your own voice in an awkward attempt to sound like someone else.

I think you're doing yourself a disservice.


----------



## Mandy (Dec 27, 2009)

Perhaps the biggest threat is the risk of losing your readers. The two passages are near-identical, and the last thing you'd want is to have a reader spot this and call you out on it in a review. I remember not so long ago when an "author" was caught plagiarizing a KB member on a much larger scale and was crucified (rightfully so, IMO). Amazon even stepped in and removed the plagiarized content. Plagiarism is not a label I'd want to have as an author.


----------



## Annabel Chant (Feb 24, 2015)

This is exactly what I was going to say. If that passage stood out strongly enough in your mind for you to want to rehash it, it's probably a passage that many readers would remember and, if they saw almost the same in your book, they'd probably be scornful and stop reading. I get the feeling that readers that are scornful, rather than just disliking a story, would be far more likely to write a scathing review. A few of those, saying similar things, would likely sink your book. Is it worth it for one small passage?

ETA - I didn't mean, by that, that it would be worth it for a larger one


----------



## jb1111 (Apr 6, 2018)

I didn't read all the thread, sorry... But I read the first post.

I wouldn't call it a dictionary definition of plagiarism, but it's close enough.

Why not give it a week or two, write on your story, and come up with your own unique way of saying something?

I've heard of authors keeping journals. They see something at the local coffeehouse and write things down, bright little dots of inspiration... But it sounds like you are copying another author's thoughts, to where you are borrowing words and just rearranging them. Whether it is or isn't plagiarism is sort of beside the point. It's not exactly original, and if you are an author, certainly you can come up with your own paragraph that gives the same feel but doesn't re-write someone else's work into your own.

You probably have your own unique way of expressing what you want to express. Give it a chance to breathe.

Good luck in your endeavors.


----------



## Crime fighters (Nov 27, 2013)

This thread is three years old.


----------



## 102069 (May 15, 2018)

daringnovelist said:


> I have myself often thought that some really seriously dated public domain stories could benefit with a major rewrite into a more modern story. This would be legal, and if the original were credited, it would ethical, but it would still leave a bad feeling in my mouth and that of many readers. Even if they don't love the original, people always imagine that it's like a 'remake' and somehow damages the original.


You mean like _Clueless_ or _10 Things I Hate About You_ or _Pride and Prejudice and Zombies_? I saw one the other day that's basically _Wuthering Heights_... but IN SPACE!


----------



## Becca Mills (Apr 27, 2012)

frankie saxx said:


> You mean like _Clueless_ or _10 Things I Hate About You_ or _Pride and Prejudice and Zombies_? I saw one the other day that's basically _Wuthering Heights_... but IN SPACE!


Or _The Lion King_? Adaptation is cool. 

Maybe some of those zombie-slaying Bennet daughters will come for this thread ...


----------



## 102069 (May 15, 2018)

K.B. said:


> This thread is three years old.


So it is. Guessing that bump was a spambot selling plagiarism solutions?


----------



## 102069 (May 15, 2018)

Mark Gardner said:


> Hey, look, it's Frankie! I've plagiarized her before.


No accounting for taste...


----------



## C. Gold (Jun 12, 2017)

Shei Darksbane said:


> Perhaps a more pertinent response:
> 
> What you did sounds awkward compared to the original, so I don't think you're really gaining anything by doing this.
> 
> ...


I want to emphasize this. I have a favorite Christmas movie I like to watch and found a book that copied it pretty much scene for scene. The author changed a few minor things for whatever reason without thinking about why those things were in the original. What resulted was worse than if the author had come up with her own story or simply kept the story verbatim with the script. Things that were clever in the movie were left dangling because she altered what she felt were minor things but were actually key plot elements that tied the whole thing together and made it the heartwarming Christmas story it was (even if a bit cheesy).

When you copy and swap a few words out, you run the risk of turning that clever something into utter garbage because you are too busy tweaking to understand what it is about that passage (or movie) that was compelling enough to want to copy it in the first place. It's far better to come at it from your own head space, that way things maintain internal consistency and make sense.


----------



## Crime fighters (Nov 27, 2013)

But... Did anybody sign up for the plagiarism service that prompted the revival of this thread?


----------



## C. Gold (Jun 12, 2017)

Becca Mills said:


> Or _The Lion King_? Adaptation is cool.
> 
> Maybe some of those zombie-slaying Bennet daughters will come for this thread ...


Pride & Prejudice & Zombies has to be the most clever retelling I've ever seen/read. Every aspect of it kept an Austen vibe, even the zombie slaying bits. I was impressed. I think the marriage proposal rejection scene in this movie was awesome and went to the top of my favorites of all the P&P movies/series I've watched. (Oh, I might have outted myself as an Austen fan )



K.B. said:


> But... Did anybody sign up for the plagiarism service that prompted the revival of this thread?


FLIPPING Zombie threads. I blame all you all that posted before me for this one!


----------



## Crime fighters (Nov 27, 2013)

I will not take the blame for this. My only previous contemplation was to announce that we had a zombie on our hands.


----------



## C. Gold (Jun 12, 2017)

K.B. said:


> I will not take the blame for this. My only previous contemplation was to announce that we had a zombie on our hands.


I thought we were supposed to kill the messengers? Or maybe eat their brains or something.


----------



## unkownwriter (Jun 22, 2011)

Well, zombie thread. Zombies crave braiiiiins! Ergo, let's eat their brains.

Also, don't plagiarise, people. Just don't.


----------



## Becca Mills (Apr 27, 2012)

I feel like there's a clever analogy lurking here -- something about a plagiarized text being a zombified version of the original.

Okay, maybe not so much on the "clever."


----------



## CatParker (Sep 17, 2015)

This thread is so awesome that it could have been started and maintained by a Russian troll farm trying to sow division and get people to waste their time in order to destroy Western productivity. 

Truly fabulous!!!


----------



## David VanDyke (Jan 3, 2014)

DanaE said:


> And I disagree about "out and out plagiarism" -- to me that would be using the para word for word or changing a couple of words only. Toddlers learn by aping others. Where do you think all the books you've ever read reside in your memory? Subconscious? Here I was influenced by the way the writer added the concept of doom to the tale. It fit the context of my WIP. How would you rephrase or reword the paragraph so as not to be plagiarism by your standard? Would you not use it at all? I'm curious where the line is.


You simply rewrote someone else's paragraph. You even ended with the same one-word sentence.

Here's a simple test. If you turned that in to a creative writing teacher who was familiar with the original work, would s/he pass you or fail you? I'd fail you, because that wasn't inspiration. That was deliberate reworking, line by line.

It's also very telling that you're not asking the question neutrally--you're arguing with those who give you an answer you don't want to hear. That's a dead giveaway that you already know it's wrong.


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

n.b.

This thread is over 3 years old and the post/account which resurrected it has been deleted as suspected spam.


----------



## jb1111 (Apr 6, 2018)

Ann in Arlington said:


> n.b.
> 
> This thread is over 3 years old and the post/account which resurrected it has been deleted as suspected spam.


Thank you for explaining it... I didn't intend to respond to a post made in 2015.

I'll have to be more careful in the future I guess. My bad.


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

jb1111 said:


> Thank you for explaining it... I didn't intend to respond to a post made in 2015.
> 
> I'll have to be more careful in the future I guess. My bad.


Well, discussion of plagiarism is fine, of course. But there's not a lot of value in responding to the OP because s/he is long gone.

FWIW, I generally use the 'new' tag vs clicking the thread title. That takes me to the most recent post. If it IS the first post, it's obvious. If it's not, but the thread seems both new and long, I can scroll back a bit and see whether it's a zombie, or something I missed earlier.


----------



## jdcore (Jul 2, 2013)

Flay Otters said:


> The riff that opens 'Money for Nothing and Chicks for Free' is almost a note for note knockoff of 'Jumpin' Jack Flash.'


After I read this I went back and listened to both for comparison, and my world is now shook.


----------



## David VanDyke (Jan 3, 2014)

jdcore said:


> After I read this I went back and listened to both for comparison, and my world is now shook.


"Money for Nothing" was also a deliberate parody. It even had Sting on backup vocals singing "I want my MTV" in a knockoff riff from The Police's "Don't Stand So Close to Me".

Parodies are immune to plagiarism issues, otherwise SNL would be sued 10x a week.


----------



## Flay Otters (Jul 29, 2014)

Yeah and Jean Genie was a knockoff of Bo Diddley's I'm a Man as performed by the Yardbirds... or was that Blockbuster by the Sweet?
And the Beach Boys knocked off Chuck Berry's Sweet Little Sixteen for Surfin' USA (although they had a little issue with that one). 
And Chuck Berry (and Goree Carter) borrowed his famous intro from Louis Jordan (check out his Just Like a Woman from 1946), and they all borrowed it from the classic boogie-woogie intros of Albert Ammons & Pete Johnson (early-mid 40s).
And don't even start to look at Jimmy Page and his massive thievery.

It's everywhere man. People be stealing stuff right and left. Let's call it... inspiration.
As pretty much everyone EXCEPT Picasso said, or didn't (spoiler: it was TS Eliot) "Immature poets imitate; mature poets steal." And even Eliot stole most of that aphorism.

The key to this (as in much of life) is to _improve_ on the source material.


----------



## Jan Hurst-Nicholson (Aug 25, 2010)

Flay Otters said:


> It's everywhere man. People be stealing stuff right and left. Let's call it... inspiration.
> As pretty much everyone EXCEPT Picasso said, or didn't (spoiler: it was TS Eliot) "Immature poets imitate; mature poets steal." And even Eliot stole most of that aphorism.
> 
> The key to this (as in much of life) is to _improve_ on the source material.


As they say - to take from one person is plagiarism, to take from several is research.


----------



## Flay Otters (Jul 29, 2014)

Jan Hurst-Nicholson said:


> As they say - to take from one person is plagiarism, to take from several is research.


Now you're talking my language


----------



## DCRWrites (Jan 20, 2014)

I grab ideas from all over the place when I'm writing my pulp adventures: then I throw them all in my head blender, add a few of my own, and write what comes out. It's up to my readers to decide whether I improved on my inspirations, but at the very least I put my own spin on the ideas.


----------



## AsianInspiration (Oct 12, 2016)

I understand this is a zombie thread from years ago, but I just wanted to say I find it extremely interesting how different cultures think differently.

In Chinese, writers/people ALWAYS quote or reference other works, especially famous old works like poems, the 4 great chinese classics, philosophers like Confucius, etc. 

Doing so makes you seem well read, highly educated and intelligent. Furthermore, it shows that you respect those old greats, and aren't conceited/arrogant enough to think you can come up with a better, more succinct way of expressing those ideas, and it shows that you aren't passing those ideas off as your own.


----------



## DCRWrites (Jan 20, 2014)

AsianInspiration said:


> I understand this is a zombie thread from years ago, but I just wanted to say I find it extremely interesting how different cultures think differently.
> 
> In Chinese, writers/people ALWAYS quote or reference other works, especially famous old works like poems, the 4 great chinese classics, philosophers like Confucius, etc.
> 
> Doing so makes you seem well read, highly educated and intelligent. Furthermore, it shows that you respect those old greats, and aren't conceited/arrogant enough to think you can come up with a better, more succinct way of expressing those ideas, and it shows that you aren't passing those ideas off as your own.


It's not that different here; the issue only occurs when someone is trying to pass those ideas off as their own.


----------



## Flay Otters (Jul 29, 2014)

DCRWrites said:


> It's not that different here; the issue only occurs when someone is trying to pass those ideas off as their own.


...without improving on them.


----------

