Skip to main content

Authorship, Ownership and Plagiarism in the Digital Age

  • 323 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter examines the close relationship between what constitutes authorship and originality as these concepts are used as a foundation for views of plagiarism. It is important to revisit our beliefs about what makes up authorial rights because digital technologies contest the very core of what it means to have authorship rights over text. Authorship and originality also underpin the birth, and continued life, of plagiarism in policy and practice. Drawing on the nexus between legal and literary theories of authorship across four global spheres: England, Europe, the United States, and the UN, this chapter examines how plagiarism has come to be realized both in terms of authorial rights and how this has framed plagiarism as represented in university plagiarism policies. The tension between the Romantic notion of authorship (which has evolved through legal theory and the Law) and literary intertextuality, which challenges the idea of “owning words”, is evident in the debate over plagiarism being framed as academic misconduct or academic integrity. This chapter outlines that debate.

Keywords

  • Literary Work
  • Academic Integrity
  • World Intellectual Property Organization
  • Berne Convention
  • Academic Misconduct

These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Substantially all ideas are second-hand, consciously and unconsciously drawn from a million outside sources, and daily used by the garnerer with a pride and satisfaction born of the superstition that he originated them. (Mark Twain 1917, pp. 731–2)

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

References

  • Abasi, A., & Graves, B. (2008). Academic literacy and plagiarism: Conversations with international graduate students and disciplinary professors. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 7, 221–233.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Bakhtin, M. (1986). Speech genres and other late essays (trans: McGee, V.W.). Austin: University of Texas Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barthes, R. (1977). The death of the author. Glasgow: Fontana Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bloch, J. (2012). Plagiarism, intellectual property and the teaching of L2 writing. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bobis, J., Shore, S., Bennett, D., Bennett, S., Chan, P., Harrison, N., & Seddon, T. (2013). Education research in Australia: Where is it conducted? Australian Educational Researcher, 40(4), 453–471.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • De Voss, D., & Rosati, A. (2002). “It wasn’t me, was it?” Plagiarism and the web. Computers and Composition, 19(2), 191–203.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Eret, E., & Gokmenoglu, T. (2010). Plagiarism in higher education: A case study with prospective academicians. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), 3303–3307.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Feather, J. (1994). From rights in copies to copyright: The recognition of authors’ rights in English law and practice in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. Durham: Duke University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ficsor, M. (2002). The law of copyright and the internet: The 1996 WIPO treaties, their interpretation and implementation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foucault, M. (1972). The discourse on language. In M. Foucault (Ed.), Archaeology of knowledge (pp. 215–236). New York: Pantheon Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Françon, A. (1999). Protection of artists’ moral rights on the internet. In F. Pollaud-Dulian (Ed.), Perspectives on intellectual property: The internet and authors’ rights (pp. 73–86). London: University of London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frow, J. (2000). Public domain and the new world order in knowledge. Social Semiotics, 10(2), 173–185.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Galloway, K., & Jones, P. (2012). Scholarship in the discipline and higher education: The need for a fusion epistemology focused on academic identity. Higher Education Research and Development, 31(6), 931–933.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Gendreau, Y. (1999). Intention and copyright law. In F. Pollaud-Dulian (Ed.), Perspectives on intellectual property: The internet and authors’ rights (pp. 1–24). London: University of London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glendinning, I. (2014). Responses to student plagiarism across higher education institutions across Europe. International Journal for Educational Integrity, 10(1), 4–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gullifer, J., & Tyson, G. (2010). Exploring university students’ perceptions of plagiarism: A focus group study. Studies in Higher Education, 35, 463–481.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Hartle, R. T., Kimmins, L., & Huijser, H. (2009). Criminal intent or cognitive dissonance: How does self-plagiarism fit into academic integrity? In Conference proceedings, 4th Asia Pacific conference on educational integrity, Wollongong. http://ro.uow.edu.au/apcei/09/papers/5/

  • Howard, R. M. (1995). Plagiarisms, authorships and the academic death penalty. College English, 57(7), 788–806.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Howard, R. M. (1999). Standing in the shadow of giants: Plagiarists, authors, collaborators. Stamford: Ablex.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howard, R. M. (2007). Understanding “internet plagiarism”. Computers and Composition, 24, 3–15.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Howard, R. M. (2008). Plagiarizing (from) graduate Students. In R. M. Howard & A. E. Robillard (Eds.), Pluralizing plagiarism: Identities, contexts, pedagogies (pp. 92–100). Portsmouth: Boynton/Cook.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, D. (2011). Academic dishonesty: Are more students cheating? Business Communication Quarterly, 74(2), 141–150.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Lehman, C. M., & DuFrene, D. (2011). Business communication (16th ed.). Mason: South-Western/Cengage Learning.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacDonald, R., & Carroll, J. (2006). Plagiarism – A complex issue requiring a holistic institutional approach. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 31(3), 233–245.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • MacSherry, C. (2000). Who owns academic work? Battling for control of intellectual property. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mallon, T. (1989). Stolen words. San Diego: Harcourt.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marsh, B. (2007). Plagiarism: Alchemy and remedy in higher education. Albany: State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCabe, D. (2003). Promoting academic integrity – A US/Canadian perspective. Paper presented at the educational integrity: Plagiarism and other perplexities conference (21–22 Nov). In H. Marsden, M. Hicks, & A. Bundy (Eds.), Educational integrity: Plagiarism and other perplexities, conference proceedings (pp. 3–12), Adelaide.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCabe, D., Feghali, T., & Abdallah, H. (2008). Academic dishonesty in the Middle East: Individual and contextual factors. Research in Higher Education, 49(5), 451–467.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Park, C. (2003). In other (people’s) words: Plagiarism by university students – Literature and lessons. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 28(5), 471–488.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Park, C. (2004). Rebels without a clause: Towards an institutional framework for dealing with plagiarism by students. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 28(3), 291–306.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Passa, J. (1999). The protection of copyright on the internet under French law. In F. Pollaud-Dulian (Ed.), Perspectives on intellectual property: The internet and authors’ rights (pp. 23–72). London: Sweet and Maxwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pecorari, D. (2008). Academic writing and plagiarism: A linguistic analysis. London: Continuum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pecorari, D. (2013). Teaching to avoid plagiarism: How to promote good source use. Maidenhead: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phan, L. H. (2006). Plagiarism and overseas students: Stereotypes again? ELT English Language Training, 60, 76–78.

    Google Scholar 

  • Power, G. L. (2009). University students’ perceptions of plagiarism. The Journal of Higher Education, 80(6), 643–662.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Prowle, M. (2013). University funding: Give the REF the red card. Retrieved Nov 2014 from http://opinion.publicfinance.co.uk/2013/02/university-funding-give-the-ref-the-red-card

  • Rose, M. (1993). Authors and owners: The invention of copyright. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmelkin, L. P., Pedhazur, L., Gilbert, K., Spencer, K. J., Pincus, H. S., & Silva, R. (2008). A multidimensional scaling of college students’ perceptions of academic dishonesty. The Journal of Higher Education, 79(5), 587–607.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Selwyn, N. (2008). ‘Not necessarily a bad thing…’: A study of online plagiarism among undergraduate students. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 33(5), 465–479.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Skaar, H., & Hammer, H. (2013). Why students plagiarise from the internet: The views and practices in three Norwegian upper secondary classrooms. International Journal of Educational Integrity, 9(2), 15–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sutherland-Smith, W. (2005a). The tangled web: Plagiarism, the internet and students’ academic writing. Journal of Asia-Pacific Communication. Special Issue, 15(1), 15–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sutherland-Smith, W. (2005b). Pandora’s box: Academic perceptions of student plagiarism in writing. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 4(1), 83–95.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Sutherland-Smith, W. (2008). Plagiarism, the internet and student learning: Improving academic integrity. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sutherland-Smith, W. (2010). Retribution, deterrence and reform: The dilemmas of plagiarism management in universities. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 32(1), 1–12.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Sutherland-Smith, W. (2013). Crossing the line: Collusion or collaboration in university group-work. Australian Universities Review, 55(1), 51–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sutherland-Smith, W. (2014). Legality, quality assurance and learning: Competing discourses of plagiarism management in higher education. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 36(1), 29–42.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, J. (2001). The impact of performance indicators on the work of university academics: Evidence from Australian universities. Higher Education Quarterly, 55, 42–61.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Twain, M. (1917). Letter to Helen Keller. In S. Clemens (Ed.), Mark Twain’s letters, Vol. 2 of 2 (pp. 731–732). New York: Harper & Bros.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walker, J. (2010). Measuring plagiarism: Researching what students do, not what they say they do. Studies in Higher Education, 35(1), 41–59.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • WIPO. (2002a). Berne convention treatises. Retrieved 27 Nov 2014 from http://www.wipo.org

  • WIPO. (2002b). WIPO copyright treaty. Retrieved 27 Nov 2014 from http://www.wipo.int/docs/wo/wo033en

  • WIPO. (2002c). Berne convention treatises and the TRIPS agreement. Retrieved 27 Nov 2014 from http://www.wipo.int/docs/treatises/TRIPS

  • WIPO. (2003). Berne convention for the protection of literary and artistic works. Retrieved 27 Nov 2014 from http://www.wipo.int/treaties/ip/berne.index.html

  • Woodmansee, M. (1994). On the author effect: Recovering collectivity. In M. Woodmansee & P. Jaszi (Eds.), The construction of authorship: Textual appropriation in law and literature (pp. 19–37). Durham: Duke University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yeo, S. (2007). First year science and engineering students’ understanding of plagiarism. Higher Education Research and Development, 26(2), 199–216.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Wendy Sutherland-Smith .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer Science+Business Media Singapore

About this entry

Cite this entry

Sutherland-Smith, W. (2015). Authorship, Ownership and Plagiarism in the Digital Age. In: Bretag, T. (eds) Handbook of Academic Integrity. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-079-7_14-2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-079-7_14-2

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-287-079-7

  • eBook Packages: Springer Reference EducationReference Module Humanities and Social Sciences

Chapter History

  1. Latest

    Authorship, Ownership and Plagiarism in the Digital Age
    Published:
    29 October 2015

    DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-079-7_14-2

  2. Original

    Authorship, Ownership and Plagiarism in the Digital Age
    Published:
    29 June 2015

    DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-079-7_14-1