Sunday, March 04, 2007

Still plagiarizing after all these years?

The onlypunjab web site still has the article:

Edison as a Patent Troll, or Where is California Going in Stem Cell Research? - By: Annie Kaszina

In March 2006, there was renewed concern about the patent system, manifested not only in discussion of the NTP v. RIM (BlackBerry) case, which settled for $612.5 million but also on the fate of the use of injunctions in patent infringement cases, to be reviewed by the Supreme Court in eBay v. MercExchange. The Wall Street Journal wrote that U.S. patent law is “deterring research and penalizing innovation,” and that the patent system is “fast becoming a detriment to U.S. competitiveness, not to mention basic fairness.” The idea that patents are not central to innovation can also be found in the philosophy of some venture capitalists, who will directly tell you “patents are not why we are investing.”


LBE tried to write on ezine about this plagiarism of an article on ezine, but ezine declined to publish it.

On other matters of plagiarism:

In a statement destined to haunt the Boston Globe, a Globe critic wrote: "Best of all is her [Hatto's] musical imagination, which finds original things to say about the most familiar music."

Meanwhile, on 4 March 2007, the Sunday Times reported:

Ironically, Hattogate, as it’s been dubbed, began to unravel with Joyce Hatto’s death eight months ago, when she was eulogised in the obituaries as “a national treasure” and “one of the greatest pianists ever”. An American fan inadvertently became the whistle-blower while he was transferring Hatto’s rendition of Liszt’s Transcendental Studies to his iPod. He was startled to see the screen crediting the performer not as Hatto but as the Hungarian pianist Laszlo Simon, who recorded the studies in l987.


Was Joyce Hatto’s work all a brilliant hoax engineered by her scheming fraudster husband Barrington-Coupe? Did Joyce Hatto exist at all? Have the classical music critics been exposed as a bunch of prize chumps?


At first Barrington-Coupe denied any tampering or wrongdoing with his wife’s CDs. Then last weekend he wrote to Robert von Bahr, the chief executive of BIS, Laszlo Simon’s Swedish record label, admitting: “I have acted stupidly, dishonestly and unlawfully.”


Soon Barrington-Coupe began dealing with the “technical trouble” himself by editing noisy “ambience” between the movements his wife was playing. Editing is one thing; what he describes as “taking portions of ready-made recorded material” is another: most would call it theft.

By the mid 1990s Barrington-Coupe was presenting other people’s work as his wife’s as a matter of course. “It’s the old thing,” he says. “If you’ve killed someone once it’s easy to do it the second time, so in the end you kill ceaselessly. It wasn’t easy but God gave me a good ear.”


George Frideric Handel famously reworked musical material throughout his life, drawing not only on his own works but on those of lesser contemporaries. Some of his reworkings from other composers were noticed during his lifetime: allegations of plagiarism in Handel’s music have been voiced from the early 19th century onwards.

John von Rein (Rhein?) of the Chicago Tribune wrote on March 4, 2007:

The recent news of a massive fraud originating in Britain where recordings of other pianists were plagiarized and passed off to unsuspecting critics and consumers as those of an obscure British pianist named Joyce Hatto has reawakened the old debate about how honest recordings really are.

IPBiz notes that von Rein's "unsuspecting critics" text evokes the image of last year's science fraud involving the publication in the journal Science of work by Hwang Woo Suk. With Hwang's work, we had unsuspecting editors and referees who could not distinguish authentic scientific work from fake work.

Von Rein wrote:

When wrong notes, irregularities and idiosyncrasies are removed by editing, what's often lost is the sweep and spontaneity of the original performance, not to mention the warmth that allows music to touch our souls.

Modern recordings have reinforced the 20th Century reverence for textual and technical accuracy, making possible, as my colleague Stephen Wigler has pointed out, a kind of "creative lying" that could never be produced in the concert hall. Barrington-Coupe's crime was to compound the lie.

but von Rein didn't mention that critics can't tell the difference between real work and fake work.

An AP story carried in the Deseret News included the text:

[John O'Conor] said he was mystified by the praise heaped on Hatto.
"You had the media calling her the 'greatest' this and 'most prolific' that — and people in the industry kept on saying: 'Who?' She hadn't been heard of for 30 years," O'Conor said.

IPBiz has not seen what the Boston Globe says.


The distinction between plagiarism and copyright infringement


**Also, from Breitbart/UPI

A Boston Globe sports writer was suspended for two months and barred from TV appearances for allegedly plagiarizing a Tacoma, Wash., reporter's work.

"Ron Borges has been suspended for two months without pay because he plagiarized from a reporter at another news organization in a notes column published in Sunday's Sports section," said Globe Editor Martin Baron in a statement.

The story was about a potential trade of Seattle Seahawks football player Darrell Jackson


Blogger Lawrence B. Ebert said...


Former Sun classical music critic Stephen Wigler was fired in 1999 for plagiarism. The respected music journalist recently has been writing theater and music reviews for The Examiner.

2:58 AM  
Blogger Kometon said...

I am looking for email or phone number of music critic Stephen Wigler, who wrote an article about russian pianist Roza Tamarkina.
Ada Tsodikov

5:56 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home