ANON: Re: Plagiarism

[Anonymous <anonfwd -at- RAYCOMM -dot- COM>]

Message forwarded on request. Please
reply on list.

****************************


I agree that the sentence should be rewritten, as using it constitutes
intentional plagiarism.  We can run into plenty of issues trying to make an
honest effort at original work. Why tempt fate?

As an example, a website was removed as a result of a threatened copyright
infringement suit by another company. The company feels very wrongly accused.

The site is on a well-known subject. Terminology and processes in the field have
been standard for a long time. A limited number of other web sites address the
same subject this site addresses.

The suing company claims that their approach and the links they selected are
copyrighted.  In my opinion, the first claim amounts to copyrighting an idea
that has been in the field for fifty years and is recorded in numerous
textbooks--without copyright problems. The second part, the links, is a little
trickier, I don't know to what extent the sued company's site used the same
order, descriptions or groupings. I do know that any link list on this topic
created by two different people would have extensive overlap. The sued company
didn't want a legal battle and so chose to redo their site.

As a techwriter walking into a litigious situation how would you approach the
rewrite? A draft structure--intentionally created without reference to existing
sites--was disturbingly close to the suing company's organization. Several
headings matched. They're natural to the topic. So, the new site artificially
changes the headings and restructures the material in a way that is slightly
different (not so different that it is inaccurate to the established practices).
Different areas receive emphasis, where possible.

I still see risks, because some things don't change just because someone else is
doing the writing.  A post-review still indicates many phrases in common with
the suing site. To further change it, would require changing commonly accepted
principles and terminology.

I think this is an issue that will occur more and more frequently with web
sites. They often present information at a higher level than text books.  The
higher level is often fairly strongly articulated in some fields. Haven't you
ever visited several sites in row with essentially the same information?
Obviously, companies want their site to have some discriminators, but overlap is
bound to occur. Furthermore, style manuals and books on online documentation
encourage us to use standard topic styles that I believe are carrying over to
web sites (Use of gerund or infinitive headings, for example.) Online help
training, minimalist documentation and high-level discussion of topics
encourages unintentional plagiarism.

How do we avoid this?  I know a few things the new site tried to do, but I'd
like to hear others ideas.


 From ??? -at- ??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000=