You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Observations Fighting a Serial Plagiarist—True Story!
Where is the fine line between artfully providing skills in translating a page to other languages and providing source to the original text versus serial plagiarism?
How is the community going to evolve this type of standard?
I, for one, appreciate people's skill in translation, assuming that they can provide original source and that the translation is better than your black-box Google Translator.
The plagiarism I have seen just looks like Google Translate. No citation of original source.
one thing ive noticed a couple doing is double google translate back to the original. it changes enough to defeat google search.
I think one of the things youre missing is that it is not enough to merely cite a copied full text article. That is still plagiarism. Fair use allows for a cited excerpt of copyrighted material as part of a larger, original work.
Translating a full copyrighted work is absolutely plagiarism, unless such the author explicitly waives those rights.
Though i believe this law is just, thats effectively beside the point. It is the law.
Think about it. Imagine you wrote and published a book or scholarly article for which you recieved royalties. Would you be OK with someone selling that book online, with you recieving nothing except a footnote credit?
Or with someone translating it and selling it in china again with you getting nothing in return.