Digital Plagiarism is only bad when it suits you!
After having read Barmar's article about digital plagiarism, he explained how some websites had used his content without his regard. But this then got me thinking, at the end of his article he identifies with the pure fact that...he actually does not mind if he's work is being plagiarized, as long as it draws traffic towards his article!
Money, exposure:
Its alright as long as there is exposure to my articles. This is my stance on it. I'm sure Microsoft does not care if demo versions of IE9 are floating around, as long as that demo version somehow leads to a sale on the full version or a sale of some other Microsoft product. It comes back to piracy in some way, that's how iTunes started. Don't buy the physical cd, go online like you would normally steal mp3's, and then just let the better of your morality take over, and buy the mp3 for $2!
I guess its ok if:
This leads to the actual truth about plagiarism. If it somehow brings you traffic to your blog, which inevitably means more hits which equates to more money, you won't worry or care! But, will you then pay that website, or person who plagiarized your work, and then unknowingly and most probably unintentionally lead more hits to your blog? I doubt that anyone would pay the people who promote their work! But as soon as they see their work on some other site, its called plagiarism.
Think about it...If you see your work on another website, someone quoting your work and linking it, you would immediately ask...who gave them the right...and shout plagiarism from the top of a mountain! But 5 minutes into the shout, you are told that this link actually brought with it 10 000 views through redirected traffic to your original blog...it somehow becomes o.k?
So, we can go off on a tangent and proclaim once and for all, its not plagiarism if it does benefit you, the owner, the originator of the material!
Comments
yes...thus the reason for the blog...someone stole barmar's work...he then reported it...but then made a valid point...he won't mind, and neither would I, if it was stolen and then used for promotion where he is benefitting...so, I have not misunderstood, I know what plagiarism is.
If someone takes work from/by me but states "this belongs to/comes from mr ARF, original blog link is http://whatever" then I don't have a problem with someone using what I blogged since people would actually be able to get to other stuff I wrote and it would even probably lead to a feeling of pride at being quoted as a source. Quoting someone's not a "crime", people do that with famous/important people every day but stealing is illegal. Quoting someone doesn't get you paid though, it's how you use the quote that gets payment so anyone quoting me can't expect me to pay them more than a "thank you" at best. If someone doesn't acknowledge me and I find out they will get a chance to make amends but if not, reported to whoever I can find that can delete/remove it
OS- you seem to have missed the point completely. Plagiarism is theft of the worst sort. It means taking someone else's work and claiming it as your own.
Anyone can copy a sentence or a paragraph from something that I wrote as long as they credit me with the quote. They are not entitled to copy the entire article.
Two of the sites I contacted removed my content from their sites and apologised. The third offered to keep a single paragraph with a link back to the original. Once he had done that it was no longer plagiarism. It may also bring some extra traffic and boost the Google ranking.
In one case a couple of years ago, a blogger had simply copied my articles and credited himself as the author! That is plagiarism.
LOL Barmarr you say he copied your work and said it was his? LOL...i'd have visited him and slapped him;D
He was in India.
I have written another post to explain what plagiarism is and isn't. Here it is: [url]http://www.mydigitallife.co.za/index.php?option=com_myblog&task=show&id=1056366&Itemid=206[/url]
I have to agree with everyone here. You definitely misunderstood plagiarism 
Member Login
Digital Blogs
General Blogs
I think you have misunderstood: it will only bring more hits to Barmar if it is acknowledged to be from Barmar, in which case it is not plagiarism. No-one minds if other people copy their work - as long as they acknowledge that it is copied, and who it is copied from.
Plagiarism is the copying of someone else's work and claiming it is your own. That in itself would not bring more hits.