ESSAY

Academic Plagiarism in the Context of US Institutions

The act of authors using others’ expressions in own works can be traced back to

the early days of printing and publishing. This undesirable trait is generally referred to

as plagiarism. Hammond (1997) speaks of a plagiarized version of a play originally

introduced in 1677 by name “The Rover” by another publisher in 1679.

Attributes such as copyright infringement, misappropriation, faulty citation,

cheating, literary theft, stealing, imitation, cribbing etc., are often used to imply

plagiarism (Marsh 2007). Provisions governing ‘copyright’ and ‘plagiarism’ are

contained in the US Copyright Act of 1976. According to the Act, only “fair use” of

information is permitted in publications. The principle applies equally for violation of

copyright or for plagiarism, although the former is more serious in the parlance of law.

Plagiarism is more a matter of professional ethics. In both cases; the principle of “fair

use” applies. Stearns, in his writing titled “Copy Wrong: Plagiarism, Process, Property

and the Law” (Anderson.1998) observes that “plagiarism is not a legal term, and though

an instance of plagiarism might seem quintessential act of wrongful copying, it does not

necessarily constitute a violation of copyright law.”

The practice of plagiarism in the Academic world is common if not rampant. The

plagiarizer follows the convenient shortcut to overcome his or her weakness in the

subject, presentation or maybe; the shortcut was chosen out of lethargy. Faculties in

institutions are also accused of plagiarism, may be, to a lesser extent.

The concept of plagiarism is the same whether it takes place in commercial

domain or in academics. However the penal provisions in the latter case are mostly
governed by the rules in the respective institutions to which students belong. There is a

view that plagiarism in academics is an academic offence and not a legal offence. Dr.

Ronald B. Standler, Attorney in Massachusetts and consultant (Standler.web page)

holds the view that academic plagiarism is also a legal offence, but it is the originator of

the work who can sue. Since the work is handed out by the writer for a consideration,

the question of legal action is only hypothetical.

It is worthwhile examining the provisions in the statutes on the subject of

copyright and plagiarism, for a better understanding. The US Copyright Act of 1976 and

The Copyright Term Extension Act of 1998 contain the entirety of statutes on copyright.

The second act redefines the period for which the rights will be enjoyed by the owner.

The period for right enjoyed for publications made after 1st January 1978 is 70 years

beyond the life of the author (Stim.2009). In the pre-1978 cases, the life of the rights will

vary between 95 years to 120 years depending on the date of publication.

The copyright Act prescribes three criteria for considering whether there is any

infringement (Stim.2009). It also states that “copyright does not protect ideas or facts; it

protects only the unique way in which ideas or facts are expressed.” The conditions laid

out can be briefly stated as:

1. The author must have created the work as original, without copying.

2. It should be in a form that is retrievable from the medium in which it is

retained.

3. It must have some creativity.

Students in general are not seriously concerned about copyright violations and

plagiarism. A good number of them aim at scoring higher marks by outsourcing their
work. Students find it convenient to get the services and writers and portal service

providers to make best use of the opportunities available to them.

Teachers in the institutions are the only people who will be able to contain the

evil of plagiarism among their students. If they spend enough time in understanding the

capability of each student and keep a vigil on what each one presents, it will not be

difficult to identify and counsel such candidates who can be brought on the right path.

Teachers generally exercise caution by specifying the deterrents for detected plagiarism

while giving out assignments.

Despite warnings of consequences of plagiarism, students are able to circumvent

the checks and make it appear to the reader that these are their own works. Cutting and

pasting in the present internet era can be skillfully done by students and changes made

here and there may make it appear original.

Now-a-days plagiarism detection software is used in many institutions to bring up

cases. These are effective to check plagiarism, but due to the fact that each area of

specialization requires continual updating, it is not considered one hundred percent

effective. But this induces students to take extra efforts if not avoid plagiarism.

Moreover, since students who outsource work get plagiarism free work written by

professionals, the software may not detect plagiarism, although the entire work is

plagiarized.

Sometimes it becomes difficult to charge plagiarism due to imperfection in its

definition. There is a view that there is nothing original as one always learns from what

exists. Mary Shelly in her introduction to “Frankenstein,” wrote: “Invention, it must be

humbly admitted, does not consist in creating out of void, but out of chaos.” (Buranen.
1999) And “given this interdependence of human creation efforts, the idea of plagiarism

is something of a paradox (Buranen. 1999). One starts from something, and

determining how much is copied and how much is “created,” is a difficult task.

Managements of institutions have the responsibility of discouraging plagiarism in

their institutions. This cannot be left out entirely to the faculties as there are instances

where faculties are implicated with Plagiarism. It may not be that teachers in general

resort to plagiarism. However managements should not rule it out. If teachers are

dishonest, their conscience may not discipline them to take action against students who

resort to plagiarism.

The online edition of New York Times reported a case (Chan. February 20, 2008)

titled “Professor in Noose Case Is Cited for Plagiarism” about a Columbia University

professor (name deliberately omitted) who was charged with plagiarism. Investigation

confirmed the charge and she in turn accused the University of a “Witch Hunt.”

Conclusions

Plagiarism among students is very common, as evident from ever increasing

number of portals providing writing service for students with writers queuing up for

opportunities.

Institution managements should pay more attention to monitor plagiarism in their

institutions than leaving it to the teachers as it is the management involvement that will

discipline the teachers for improving effectiveness.

Plagiarism among teachers is not as severe as it is among students. However

managements should keep constant vigil on this aspect as well.

 Plagiarism software is a deterrent to make students put more efforts in their

assignments to make it plagiarism free, but so long as the students depend on

professionals who give plagiarism free work, this objective may not be fully realized.

The teachers are the best persons to detect plagiarism. Therefore management

control should be made stricter to make teachers report cases promptly, so action could

be taken.

References

Anderson.Ed.Plagiarism, Copyright Violation and Other Thefts of Intellectual Property.

McFarland & Company. 1998.

Buranen Lise, Alice Myers Roy.Ed. Perspectives on Plagiarism and Intellectual Property
in a Post Modern World.State University of New York Press.1999

Chan Sewell. “Professor in Noose Case Is Cited for Plagiarism” June 5 2009. New York
Times. February 20, 2008, http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/02/20/victim-
of-noose-crime-is-cited-for-plagiarism/?apage=3

Hammond, Brean S. Professional Imaginative Writing in England, 1670-1740: Hackney

for Bread. Oxford U.P., 1997

Marsh, Bill. Plagiarism: Alchemy and Remedy in Higher Education. New York: S.U
Press. 2007

Standler Ronald B. “Plagiarism in Colleges in USA.” 5 May 2009. Copyright 2000

http://www.rbs2.com/plag.htm#anchor333344

Stim Richard Attorney. Patent, Copyright & Trade Mark. 10 ED. NOLO. 2009