More on the Del Castillo matter
Within a piece by Basilio H. Alo titled Did High Court commit plagiarism? , one has the text:
but it is sufficient to note that if there was any fault at all, it consisted in not revealing the authorship of the lifted phrases.
IPBiz notes that "borrowing the text" from the law reviews, but reaching a conclusion OPPOSITE to that published is problematic all by itself. If one knows about the text (even to the extent of copying from it), but ignores the analysis and conclusion of the text, one has a problematic situation.
The conclusion of the Alo piece:
As a parting word, the title of this piece asks if the Supreme Court committed plagiarism.
My answer is an affirmative NO, because the Highest Court cannot commit our legal system to an act that will amount to a virtual violation of the laws on Copyright and other Intellectual Property Laws.
And my answer will remain constant as the years go by because our Highest Court needs the support of every democracy-loving member of this society that is buffeted daily by the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune, if I may paraphrase Shakespeare in Hamlet.
As IPBiz has noted numerous times, plagiarism and copyright infringement are two different concepts. Copying the text from the law review might past muster under "fair use" concepts, but it is "copying without attribution," plagiarism plain and simple.
but it is sufficient to note that if there was any fault at all, it consisted in not revealing the authorship of the lifted phrases.
IPBiz notes that "borrowing the text" from the law reviews, but reaching a conclusion OPPOSITE to that published is problematic all by itself. If one knows about the text (even to the extent of copying from it), but ignores the analysis and conclusion of the text, one has a problematic situation.
The conclusion of the Alo piece:
As a parting word, the title of this piece asks if the Supreme Court committed plagiarism.
My answer is an affirmative NO, because the Highest Court cannot commit our legal system to an act that will amount to a virtual violation of the laws on Copyright and other Intellectual Property Laws.
And my answer will remain constant as the years go by because our Highest Court needs the support of every democracy-loving member of this society that is buffeted daily by the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune, if I may paraphrase Shakespeare in Hamlet.
As IPBiz has noted numerous times, plagiarism and copyright infringement are two different concepts. Copying the text from the law review might past muster under "fair use" concepts, but it is "copying without attribution," plagiarism plain and simple.
posted by Lawrence B. Ebert at 5:14 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home