?

Log in

First Discussion - The Fandom Psychiatrist
September 28th, 2006
04:50 pm
[bibliophile20]

[Link]

Previous Entry Share Next Entry
First Discussion

(38 comments | Leave a comment)

Comments
 
[User Picture]
From:redcoast
Date:September 29th, 2006 12:51 am (UTC)
(Link)
Perhaps they weren't plagiarists in the traditional sense of the word: they weren't intent on passing off someone else's work as their own. Common decency (and guilt) would encourage them to admit it when pressed.

Another way of putting it would be to say that these people weren't out to fool anyone; they just didn't know it was wrong.

A person I beta-read for once cut-and-pasted a bit from the HP Lexicon into their story. When I pointed it out, they weren't offended at all; they removed it without complaint.
[User Picture]
From:bibliophile20
Date:September 29th, 2006 03:20 am (UTC)
(Link)
they weren't offended at all; they removed it without complaint.

Huh. Most of the plagiarists that I've seen thus far get highly defensive when their theft is revealed.
[User Picture]
From:redcoast
Date:September 29th, 2006 03:22 am (UTC)
(Link)
I think that indicates a difference in motive. Defensiveness implies a guilty conscience.
[User Picture]
From:bibliophile20
Date:September 29th, 2006 03:23 am (UTC)
(Link)
Indeed, it does, which implies that those do realize that what they're doing is wrong... yet they do it anyway; what does that say to you?
[User Picture]
From:mickawber
Date:September 29th, 2006 03:41 am (UTC)
(Link)
The plagiarism I've seen around the HP fandom is mostly on a far less sophisticated scale than Cassandra Clare's, which was almost brilliant in its packrat deployment of unattributed little bits and pieces of others' work.

Most often I've seen entire fics cut, pasted and posted under the name of the new 'author'--often with a different title, but not always. (It's happened with art too, which is pretty wild, since artists' styles tend to be so easily identifiable.) This strikes me as stunningly stupid, not to mention utterly amoral. The only motivation that I can imagine is Munchhausen-esque--a desire to get a lot of adulation, and a desire to take possession of a piece of fiction (or art) that you love and call it your own.

I think it may also be an outgrowth of the Kazaa/Naptser mentality: if it's out there, it's mine. If it's mine, I can do anything I want to with it. Intellectual property? What's that?

(We can talk about the ethics of IP another day--I just wanted to point out that this might be part of the mindset, especially since most of the plagiarists seem to be fairly young...)
[User Picture]
From:bibliophile20
Date:September 29th, 2006 03:58 am (UTC)
(Link)
I think we've all agreed that one of the primary reasons that people, especially younger people who make up the core of any fandom, plagiarize is because they want attention, and, as you pointed out, the whole "information is free! information belongs to us all*!" mentality certainly doesn't help.


*and Karl Marx is undoubtedly laughing in his grave
Powered by LiveJournal.com