Plagiarizing Yourself

[Bramblethorn]

Plagiarism is a criminal term.

Is it, though?

Depending on the circumstances, a plagiarist might be violating copyright law, or perhaps committing fraud, but I'm not aware of a legal offense of "plagiarism" per se. Which law are you thinking of here?

 

[SimonDoom]

. Plagiarism is a criminal term. Using my own words is not a crime.

No, it's not. At least, not in America.

Plagiarism has nothing to do with stealing or crime. It's about the failure to attribute something to its proper source and claiming it as your own. It's a matter of ethics and honor, rather than criminal or civil liability. There is, to my knowledge, no body of law concerning plagiarism the way there is for copyright infringement, for example. Copyright infringement can result in both civil and criminal penalties. Plagiarism usually has consequences in the context of academia. It's deeply unethical for a person in academia to claim someone else's work or idea as one's own. You can flunk or get fired for doing that.

People get copyright infringement and plagiarism confused often.

Plagiarism is when you take someone else's work, writing, or idea and fail to attribute the source properly, appearing to claim it as your own. You can cure plagiarism by merely citing the proper source.

Copyright infringement has nothing to do with attribution. It's a matter of using another person's proprietary creative expression without permission. You cannot cure copyright infringement with attribution. If you fail to get permission, you're infringing, period (subject to various limits, fair use, etc.).

I can't figure out how self-plagiarism would be a problem at Literotica. If I write story A and then write story B that borrows heavily from story A and I don't give myself attribution for the borrowed content -- so what? It's my material, so failure to attribute isn't an issue. It's only an issue to the extent it annoys Laurel or readers that the story isn't completely new and I'm just recycling stuff. But there's so much repetition at Literotica alredy, I don't see the big deal.

I did an attribution for a story once. I wrote a "mailgirl" story, and because the mailgirl concept is highly distinctive and definitely not mine, yet frequently borrowed, I cited to the other authors whose stories introduced me to the idea and influenced my story. That seemed appropriate.

But I don't see why I'd have to do that for myself, if I WAS the inventor of the concept.

 

[Tio_Narratore]

Funny, yet how do you steal from yourself. What yours is yours until you either give it away, sell it, or throw it in the trash. Taking some income, that you earned and putting it somewhere else may be tax evasion but it's not embezzlement.

Embezzlement refers to corporate/company assets that are misused or taken for your own personal use.

Of course what's yours is yours until you sell it or give it away. But when you do that, you do lose the rights you surrendered.

Plagiarism, again, has nothing to do with theft; it is a question of acknowledgement, and it is, most assuredly, not a legal issue.

My statement about embezzlement was to indicate that it is possible to "steal" from yourself. If, for instance, you registered a sole proprietorship LLC, you have certain legal restrictions and requirements on what you can do with the funds it may generate. If you take them improperly, you are, since you are the sole proprietor, "stealing" from yourself.

By the way, ultimately plagiarism and theft have very little to do with what we imagine or would like them to mean.

 

[PennameWombat]

<snip>
I did an attribution for a story once. I wrote a "mailgirl" story, and because the mailgirl concept is highly distinctive and definitely not mine, yet frequently borrowed, I cited to the other authors whose stories introduced me to the idea and influenced my story. That seemed appropriate.

But I don't see why I'd have to do that for myself, if I WAS the inventor of the concept.

I attributed the idea (in my Author’s preface) behind my first Mermaid Christmas story to the person here who suggested to me the characters, skeletal plot and concept. I created the specific story, and it appears a few of us here have also worked from that person’s idea. The person didn’t want to be mentioned by name so I didn’t do that.

When I wrote my master’s thesis long ago one of my diligent efforts was around ensuring my citations were complete and correct. And, that where I’d ‘reused’ specific text I marked and cited that via footnote. When I release a story on Lit I’m not doing a master’s thesis.

IF I were to copy from someone else’s work here, I’d use my note to highlight that, after having spoken with them. But, overlap of ideas? I’ve written E&V stories set at a convention and on a college campus. I’ve zero assumption those base ideas are original with me but well, there are only 7 stories out there[1].

But, using my own words and ideas? Well, I do highlight where a new story fits in my work but mainly that’s to nudge (suggest, urge) folks to read my other work. Or, I guess, to avoid it if they hate the story But have you read a Clive Cussler ‘Dirk Pitt’ novel or another? I mean one, any… one. Then you’ve read most of Cussler’s work. Didn’t stop him releasing new ones and selling millions. In fact, it seems even death isn’t slowing him down…

But yeah, although my various ‘serials’ are meant to be clearly related (like my “Geek Pride” series) I’m not doing wholesale copying and pasting of specific text. But, Asha and Tracy have their patterns. They meet in the cafeteria or pub and talk about guys and girls they have fucked or want to fuck. They occasionally fuck each other. So, you’re going to get at least most of those scenes in each story.

[1] “The Seven Basic Plots,” Christopher Booker, 2004.

 

[KimGordon67]

Okay. But. As a writer I use some passages over and over again changing the names to protect the innocent. (Psst, I don't this is just an example) And even if I did, whose going to call me out on it? Readers? Doubt it. And it's not a crime as Keith said earlier. Plagiarism is a criminal term. Using my own words is not a crime.

I'd just be repeating myself if I answered this.

 

[KimGordon67]

No, it's not. At least, not in America.

Plagiarism has nothing to do with stealing or crime. It's about the failure to attribute something to its proper source and claiming it as your own. It's a matter of ethics and honor, rather than criminal or civil liability. There is, to my knowledge, no body of law concerning plagiarism the way there is for copyright infringement, for example. Copyright infringement can result in both civil and criminal penalties. Plagiarism usually has consequences in the context of academia. It's deeply unethical for a person in academia to claim someone else's work or idea as one's own. You can flunk or get fired for doing that.

People get copyright infringement and plagiarism confused often.

Plagiarism is when you take someone else's work, writing, or idea and fail to attribute the source properly, appearing to claim it as your own. You can cure plagiarism by merely citing the proper source.

Copyright infringement has nothing to do with attribution. It's a matter of using another person's proprietary creative expression without permission. You cannot cure copyright infringement with attribution. If you fail to get permission, you're infringing, period (subject to various limits, fair use, etc.).

I can't figure out how self-plagiarism would be a problem at Literotica. If I write story A and then write story B that borrows heavily from story A and I don't give myself attribution for the borrowed content -- so what? It's my material, so failure to attribute isn't an issue. It's only an issue to the extent it annoys Laurel or readers that the story isn't completely new and I'm just recycling stuff. But there's so much repetition at Literotica alredy, I don't see the big deal.

I did an attribution for a story once. I wrote a "mailgirl" story, and because the mailgirl concept is highly distinctive and definitely not mine, yet frequently borrowed, I cited to the other authors whose stories introduced me to the idea and influenced my story. That seemed appropriate.

But I don't see why I'd have to do that for myself, if I WAS the inventor of the concept.

Thanks - this makes the point much more clearly.

 

[lovecraft68]

Seems relevant

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_RIe8c11s0E

 

[Payne_Hall]

Seems relevant

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_RIe8c11s0E

I just squealed over this, just for the reference. This is me liking this.

 

[RetroFan]

Is this the same thing as using a similar theme in different stories? With me, I often have characters who are boy-girl twins.

 

[KeithD]

Is this the same thing as using a similar theme in different stories? With me, I often have characters who are boy-girl twins.

No, this isn't the same thing. (It isn't even the "same thing" that various posters are stumbling around trying to make it here ). You can safely ignore the thread and keep keeping on with your writing.

 

[KimGordon67]

No, this isn't the same thing. (It isn't even the "same thing" that various posters are stumbling around trying to make it here ). You can safely ignore the thread and keep keeping on with your writing.

Honestly, why can't you just accept that if plagiarism has a specific meaning in the 'legal' context with which you're apparently familiar, that it has different meanings in other contexts? Especially when there's a bazillion references online to 'self-plagiarism', and when people who clearly actually know what they're talking about say that self-plagiarism is a thing in some contexts. Not here - as everyone has said, it really doesn't matter in the context of Lit, but quite clearly it DOES matter in some contexts. Why is it so difficult for you just say 'Huh - fancy that - there's something I didn't know' and move on?

 

[KeithD]

Hmm, I don't know. Why don't you (and others) recognize that it means nothing in the context of writing erotica for Literotica and maybe you should stop confusing folks here with half-baked "knowledge"?

 

[KimGordon67]

Hmm, I don't know. Why don't you (and others) recognize that it means nothing in the context of writing erotica for Literotica and maybe you should stop confusing folks here with half-baked "knowledge"?

I don't think anyone is disagreeing with this. My original response to your original comment was simply that self-plagiarism is a thing.

 

[KeithD]

I don't think anyone is disagreeing with this. My original response to your original comment was simply that self-plagiarism is a thing.

There have been two examples of confused writers about what was being posted to this thread already, so you can drop the "no one disagreeing" with the thrust of this thread assertion. "Self-plagiarism" is not a "thing" that includes any concern for anyone in what we do here (or just about anywhere).

 

[KimGordon67]

There have been two examples of confused writers about what was being posted to this thread already, so you can drop the "no one disagreeing" with the thrust of this thread assertion. "Self-plagiarism" is not a "thing" that includes any concern for anyone in what we do here (or just about anywhere).

I said 'I don't THINK anyone is disagreeing', so you can drop the ridiculous attitude.

Your original comment was "No, by definition, you can't plagiarize yourself. Plagiarism is stealing passages from someone else." This was a general statement, not specific to Lit.
I simply pointed out that this wasn't entirely correct - in many contexts, self-plagiarism is an issues. Numerous other people have supported this, mostly with reference to academic contexts, which I can only assume you're not that familiar with.
At that point you could have said 'Oh yeah - I guess I wasn't aware of that', but instead you had to suggest that the source I provided was BS (even though there's a bazillion other references online to the same thing - in fact, in the Wiki entry on plagiarism, self-plagiarism is second in the list of 'types of plagiarism').

What is the problem with just admitting that someone might know something that you don't? How on earth do you ever learn to do anything new with that attitude?

Don't bother responding - these are rhetorical questions. I truly can't be arsed with your self-importance to be bothered engaging any more.

 

[KeithD]

I don't know, Kim, what's the problem with you just admitting that you (and others) dumped a lot of confusing and irrelevant "stuff" on this thread and caused at least one poster to say they'd be running down a blind path in their writing from now on?

Why are you having trouble admitting that you (and others) screwed up the relevance of any of this to writing erotica for Literotica?

Better yet, why don't you just stop trying to dig yourself out of the hole you dug?

 

[Wifetheif]

A citation for this? "Is likely" should produce several examples.

What about someone like Edgar Rice Burroughs who used the same scenes and tropes across dozens of different novels in various genres? You don't have to tell Tarzan's origin story every time but you do have to reference it. Some of the Tarzan and John Carter books are direct sequels to each other. Others take place in the same universe. It's not plagiarism it's world-building! Writers who followed in ERB's footsteps were said to write "Burroughsian fiction" they weren't plagiarists but their work would not have existed without the originals. It also wasn't fan-fiction because the Burroughs imitators changed things up enough to not get sued into oblivion.

 

[KeithD]

What about someone like Edgar Rice Burroughs who used the same scenes and tropes across dozens of different novels in various genres? You don't have to tell Tarzan's origin story every time but you do have to reference it. Some of the Tarzan and John Carter books are direct sequels to each other. Others take place in the same universe. It's not plagiarism it's world-building! Writers who followed in ERB's footsteps were said to write "Burroughsian fiction" they weren't plagiarists but their work would not have existed without the originals. It also wasn't fan-fiction because the Burroughs imitators changed things up enough to not get sued into oblivion.

Well, yes. I was asking for a citation on claiming something contrary to this. Your question is for someone other than me. Except for the "but you do have to reference it." No, you don't have to reference Burroughs every time you use the Tarzan story. Who does that? What makes them (or you) think "you have to reference it"? Who says? Actually I don't really follow what you're posting at all, but I don't think it relates to anything I've posted.

 

[TxRad]

I tried to sue myself for Plagiarizing myself but my lawyer said I couldn't do that.

It seems, under the law, I is I and Me is Me so we can't be on different sides.

Anyway, I'd have to prove I didn't write the second part or is that the first part second.

Way too complicated for me or us or whatever.

 

[SimonDoom]

What about someone like Edgar Rice Burroughs who used the same scenes and tropes across dozens of different novels in various genres? You don't have to tell Tarzan's origin story every time but you do have to reference it. Some of the Tarzan and John Carter books are direct sequels to each other. Others take place in the same universe. It's not plagiarism it's world-building! Writers who followed in ERB's footsteps were said to write "Burroughsian fiction" they weren't plagiarists but their work would not have existed without the originals. It also wasn't fan-fiction because the Burroughs imitators changed things up enough to not get sued into oblivion.

The relevant body of law in this case is copyright, not plagiarism. The ERB estate owns the copyright in his works, and it's still alive to my knowledge.

ERB was under no legal or ethical obligation, in the event of writing a new Tarzan book, to refer to his previous novels, or cite himself. It's common in a case like that for a list of previous Tarzan books to appear somewhere inside the book. But it's not obligatory, UNLESS his contract with his publisher put an obligation to him to do so, or forbade him from recycling specific content in old novels in his new novels. In that case, it's not a matter of plagiarism OR copyright -- the relevant question is what the terms of the publishing contract are.

Copyright prevents other authors from infringing the copyright, which means they cannot duplicate or use without permission the unique creative expression of the Tarzan books. They ARE free, however, to use the ideas in the book, because ideas are not protected by copyright. The line between an unprotected idea and the protected expression of an idea in a work of fiction is not always clear, but that's the all-important line in copyright infringement.

 

[jaF0]

Is this anything like arguing with yourself?


Or beating yourself over the head with a skillet?

 

[SimonDoom]

Is this anything like arguing with yourself?


Or beating yourself over the head with a skillet?

That, I think, takes us out of the realm of intellectual property law and into the realm of psychiatric disorder.

 

[jaF0]

More like a properly disordered intellectual psyche.

AKA .. Litser.

 

[lovecraft68]

Is this anything like arguing with yourself?


Or beating yourself over the head with a skillet?

I think this whole clusterfuck started because someone took the OP's initial post literally, which is not what I got out of it. They were talking about ways to avoid something close to what you may have previously written.

They weren't looking for legal definitions or debates or trying to get lits resident expert on everything to make the thread about them, but that happens on most threads here.

Amazing how some people who write fiction can't understand the difference between figurative and literal.

 

[lovecraft68]

I said 'I don't THINK anyone is disagreeing', so you can drop the ridiculous attitude.

Your original comment was "No, by definition, you can't plagiarize yourself. Plagiarism is stealing passages from someone else." This was a general statement, not specific to Lit.
I simply pointed out that this wasn't entirely correct - in many contexts, self-plagiarism is an issues. Numerous other people have supported this, mostly with reference to academic contexts, which I can only assume you're not that familiar with.
At that point you could have said 'Oh yeah - I guess I wasn't aware of that', but instead you had to suggest that the source I provided was BS (even though there's a bazillion other references online to the same thing - in fact, in the Wiki entry on plagiarism, self-plagiarism is second in the list of 'types of plagiarism').

What is the problem with just admitting that someone might know something that you don't? How on earth do you ever learn to do anything new with that attitude?

Don't bother responding - these are rhetorical questions. I truly can't be arsed with your self-importance to be bothered engaging any more.

In the future don't waste any time or thought in his direction. If you said you were an expert in eating shit, he'd tell you he'd eaten more shit than you or anyone else ever had.

CLD is a real thing and seems to be incurable. My ex suffered from it, so I know there is no point in trying to make a point that contradicts the latest story concocted to give them self edification.