From: user3274@newsgrouper.org.invalid   
      
   georgedance04@yahoo-dot-ca.no-spam.invalid (George J. Dance) posted:   
      
   > > Michael Monkey Peabrain aka HarryLime wrote:   
   > >   
   > >> George J. Dance wrote:   
   > >>   
   > >>> HarryLime wrote:   
   > >>>   
   > >>>> Will-Dockery wrote:   
   > >>>>   
   > >>>>> George J. Dance wrote:   
   > >>>>>   
   > >>>>>> HarryLime wrote:   
   > >>>>>>   
   > >>>>>>> George J. Dance wrote:   
   > >>>>>>> PENNY'S POETRY BLOG for November 2025 is now archived for your   
   enjoyment, featuring: Folgore da San Geminiano, Jones Very, John Clare,   
   Maurice Thompson, Emily Dickinson, James B. Kenyon, Siegfried Sassoon, Alun   
   Lewis, and Edward Thomas. Read    
   them at:   
   > >>>>>>> https://gdancesbetty.blogspot.com/2025/11/   
   >   
   > >>>>>> Plagiarized Poetry Blaaargh.   
   >   
   > >>>>> Poor HarryLiar still hasn't learned what "plagiarism" means.   
   > >>>>   
   > >>>>   
   > >>>> True, "plagiarism" has a very specific meaning.   
   >   
   > >>> Actually it has several very specific meanings.  Here's one of them   
   courtesy of Dunce's "trusted source":   
   > >>>   
   > >>> "Yes, publishing someone's work on your blog without their explicit   
   consent is both   
   > >>> plagiarism (presenting it as your own) and likely copyright   
   infringement, even if you credit the author, because you're using their   
   intellectual property without permission; you need permission or a fair use   
   exception, with simple credit not being    
   enough for full republication."   
   >   
   > >> DUNCE: Funny, I asked my "trusted source" and got a slightly different   
   answer:   
   > >>   
   > >> "No, blogging Emily Dickinson's poems while properly attributing them to   
   her is not considered plagiarism. Plagiarism involves presenting someone   
   else's work as your own, either explicitly or by failing to give credit. Since   
   you're attributing the    
   poems to Dickinson, you're not claiming authorship, so it doesn't qualify as   
   plagiarism."   
   >   
   > > MMP: Sounds like your "trusted source" can't be trusted.   
   >   
   > How so? The answer it gave me looks entirely correct. Your source, OTOH,   
   looks completely unreliable: its claim that publishing Emily Dickinson is   
   plagiarism "even if you credit the author, because you're using their   
   intellectual property" can only    
   come from a source that's ignorant of both "plagiarism" and "intellectual   
   property".   
   >   
   > > Whatever.   
   >   
   > Yeah, HarryLiar fucked up again; "whatever". It does seem to be too common   
   to take much notice of, doesn't it?   
   >   
   > > If you'd rather have me call you a thief, that's fine with me.   
   >   
   > As I've told you, I have no problem with what you call me. It's only when   
   you pretend to be doing anything more than name-calling that you get my   
   attention.   
      
   Well put.   
      
   > This is a response to the post seen at:   
   > http://www.jlaforums.com/viewtopic.php?p=699367898#699367898   
      
   --   
   Poetry and songs of Will Dockery:   
   https://www.reverbnation.com/willdockery   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)