The Difference Between Copyright Infringement and Plagiarism

Posted on October 7, 2013 by Jonathan Bailey 0 Comments

Eight years ago (nearly to the day), shortly after the launch of the site, I wrote an article entitled Copyright
Infringement, Plagiarism and Fair Use. However, the age is beginning to show on the article (both literally
and figuratively) and I decided to come back to the topic with fresh eyes.
The reason is that this is a site that deals with both plagiarism and copyright issues on the Internet,
specifically, the intersection between the two. This site was founded as a resource for detecting plagiarism
of copyrighted works and stopping it, generally using copyright law.
However, to complete that mission, it is important to understand the differences and similarities between
plagiarism and copyright infringement. This is because, even though the two have a great deal of overlap,
they also have key differences that content creators need to be aware of.
So, without any further ado, heres a brief look at copyright infringement, plagiarism, their similarities and
their differences.
Defining Copyright Infringement
Copyright infringement is simply any infringement up on the rights of a copyright holder.
Copyright law gives a copyright holder (usually the creator of the work) a set of rights that they and they
alone can exploit legally (save for exceptions such as fair use). Those rights include:

The right to reproduce (copy) a work.

The right to create derivative works based upon it.

The right to distribute copies of the work to the public.

The right to publicly display or perform the work.

This means a wide variety of activities can be copyright infringing including performing a copyrighted play
without permission, writing an unauthorized sequel to a work or simply making copies of the work.
In short, copyright infringement is a very broad term, rooted in the law, that covers a wide range of unlawful
activities that violate the rights (granted by the law) to copyright holders.

Defining Plagiarism
But where copyright infringement is a construct of the law, plagiarism is a construct of ethics.
Most broadly, plagiarism is defined as the taking the original work or works of another and presenting it as
your own.
The definition of work can include a variety of things including ideas, words, images, etc. Anything that is
seen as an unethical and unattributed use of anothers original creation can be defined as plagiarism.
However, the definition of plagiarism is not always consistent. Different industries, for example, have
different standards. A lawyer, for example, is held to different standards than a poet, which is different than
a speechwriter and different from a musician.
Because of this, as with copyright infringement, many cases of plagiarism are divisive as to whether or not
a violation was committed.
The Similarities
On the surface, plagiarism and copyright both have a great deal in common. Most things that can be
plagiarized could be copyrighted. After all, most plagiarism deals with either creative or academic work and
those types of works, typically, qualify for copyright protection when they are new.
More importantly though, many plagiarisms are copyright infringements. Plagiarizing a blog post on a new
site, copying an encyclopedia article without attribution for a book report or submitting a photograph
someone else took under your name to a magazine are all examples of both plagiarism and copyright
infringement.
As such, many plagiarisms are actually addressed through the legal framework provided by copyright law.
Plagiarized content posted online is often removed with takedown notices, commercial plagiarisms, for
example in advertisements, are often dealt with through lawsuits and so forth.
However, not all plagiarisms are copyright infringements and not all copyright infringements are
plagiarisms. Though theres a lot of overlap between them, theres a lot of areas where they diverge.

The Differences
The key difference between plagiarism and copyright infringement is that not all plagiarisms are
infringements and not all infringements are plagiarisms.
For one, a person can plagiarize almost anything, including works that are not protected by copyright. If you
were to claim to have written Hamlet, for example, it would be a plagiarism but not a copyright
infringement because the play is in the public domain and is not protected by copyright.
Also, plagiarism often covers things that are not covered by copyright. Ideas, facts and general plot
elements are all things that can be plagiarized, at least in certain situations, but generally dont qualify for
copyright protection.
Its also worth noting that getting permission to use a work makes the use non-infringing thought it might
still be a plagiarism. For example, getting permission to submit a purchased essay means that the use is
not an infringement, but it is still a plagiarism as the work is not originally yours.
To make matters more confusing, most copyright infringements dont really hinge on whether or not a use
attributed. For example, if you passed out copies of a play without permission, its most likely an
infringement whether or not you tried to take credit for it. While plagiarism may have an impact on damages
awarded if a lawsuit is filed, attribution generally doesnt make an infringing action legal.
In short, its possible to infringe a work without plagiarizing it and its equally possible to plagiarize
something without committing copyright infringement.
Bottom Line
Though plagiarism and copyright infringement are often spoken of in the same breath, especially by victims
of plagiarism who are seeking justice, its important to remember that the two are not the same thing.
Another way to think of it is this. While copyright infringement has one victim, the copyright holder(s),
plagiarism has two sets of victims, the copyright holder(s) and the people who were lied to about the origin
of the work.

The other important way to look at is that plagiarism is an ethical construct and copyright infringement is a
legal one. Though they have a lot of overlap, they are not the same and can never really be the same.
So while plagiarism may come up in copyright discussions and vice versa, its important to know that the
two are different in some very important ways.

IS THERE A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A CORPORATE NAME AND A

TRADE NAME?
Yes. A corporate name is used by an entity that is formed as a corporation. Profit corporation names are
required to contain one of the following endings: Corporation, Incorporated, Limited or an abbreviation
of one of those words. The name cannot be substantially identical to a name already registered with the
Department.
A trade name is a name under which a person transacts business, other than ones legal name (personal
name) or a registered corporate name, general or limited partnership name, limited liability company
name or limited liability partnership name. A trade name is also known as a fictitious name or a DBA
(doing business as). A registered business entity can file for Registration of Trade Name (Form T-1) as
long as the name is different from its registered name.

Legal Name vs. Trade Name vs. Trademark

Many people are often confused as to the differences between legal names, trade names and trademarks. Moreover,
many business owners assume that once they have chosen a business name and registered the business with the
state, that they have unlimited rights to the name in conjunction with their business. The following questions and
answers will hopefully explain the different meanings of these terms and the proper usage of each.
A. What is a Legal Name?
The legal name of a business is the name of the person or entity that owns a business. If the business is a
partnership, the legal name is the name given in the partnership agreement or the last names of the partners. For
limited liability companies (LLCs) and corporations, the business' legal name is the one that was registered with the
state government. These names will often have a legal ending such as LLC, Inc. or LLP.
B. When Should a Legal Name be Used?
A legal name should be used when communicating with the government or other businesses. For example, the
business legal name should be used when filing tax returns, buying property, or writing checks.
C. What is a Trade Name?

A trade name is generally considered the name a business uses for advertising and sales purposes that is different
from the legal name in its articles of incorporation or other organizing documents. A trade name can also be referred
to as a Fictitious Name or a Doing Business As (DBA). Examples of trade names are the use of the name "Kodak"
by the company whose legal name is Eastman Kodak Company or McDonalds by the company whose legal name
is McDonald's Corporation. A trade name may not include Inc., LLC, Corp. or similar legal endings. Although a trade
name may sometimes also be a trademark, a trade name is not, in itself, a form of intellectual property.
D. When Can a Trade Name Be Used?
A company may use a trade name for advertising and trade purposes. It is often the name the general public sees on
signs, the internet, and advertisements.
E. What is a Trademark?
A trademark is any word, phrase, design, or symbol that a business uses to distinguish its goods and services from
someone else's and to indicate the source of the goods. In short, a trademark is a brand name. A trademark can be
any combination of the above and can even be a slogan, such as Coke's "It's the Real Thing." The Nike "swoosh" is a
trademark, as is the Gap logo and thousands of other familiar symbols and logos. Trademarks that have been
registered with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office should have the registered trademark symbol after the mark
on the product, its packaging, or when used in association with the service.
F. Can a Trade Name Be Used as a Trademark?
When a business is using its trade name to identify its products or services, then the name is functioning as a
trademark, and trademark law must be considered. A company has a legal right to use a name as a trademark only to
the extent that it does not infringe upon existing trademarks. It is not necessary to register a trademark; however,
federal registration has several advantages, including notice to the public of the registrant's claim of ownership of the
mark, a legal presumption of ownership nationwide, and the exclusive right to use the mark on, or in connection with,
the goods or services set forth in the registration. The trade name Kodak is a federally registered trademark of the
Eastman Kodak Company and the trade name McDonalds is a federally registered trademark of the McDonald's
Corporation.
G. When Does a Trade Name Infringe Upon a Trademark?
If a trade name is similar enough to anothers trademark that it creates a likelihood of confusion in the mind of a
purchaser, it may be infringing the trademark, which can prove to be a very costly mistake.
Conclusion
Understanding the terms legal name, trade name and trademark can be confusing, however, each of these terms
does have a different meaning. While there are gray areas, it is easiest to view legal names and trade names as
relating to businesses or entities and trademarks as relating to the products or services of the businesses or entities.