Here are some of the discussion questions you guys came up with for Jonathan Lethem’s “The Ecstasy of Influence.” Respond to one of the questions in the comments for 2.5 extra credit points toward Major Project #1. You have until 11:59pm on Saturday, March 16th to respond.
What other pieces of literature (show, song, book, etc) can you think of that “heavily borrow” from another source? Does this source cross the plagiarism line, or is it a parody?
Is the advent of technology automating retail reinventing a new medium between gift and commodities that Lethem mentions?
Since everything seems to borrow from something else, have we already crossed the point where nothing is truly original? Will we eventually run out of new music or new text?
There are often times where people come up with creative ideas but later on find out that the idea which they thought was so unique was already thought of by someone else. When Lethem speaks about everything being familiar or repeated, do you think this is because people copy ideas or because people think similarly to one another?
Lethem mentions that royalties are expected whenever there are repeated ideas or material from a previous source. Do you think that individuals are so firm on copyright issues because they care about receiving the money or because they care about showcasing their originality?
Is the use of stock photographs/free-to-use materials still considered as plagiarism?
Do you think that the introduction of the internet played a role in how the view of plagiarism has changed over time?
When should inspiration and influence be considered as forms of plagiarism? Where should we draw that line?
How does current technology impact the way that we perceive plagiarism? Is there a concrete definition, or is it changing?
Should culture be considered intellectual property, and be considered plagiarized by individuals who practice it even if it may be improved in the future? Why or why not?
If a certain practice or culture is modified in a unique way, what is the threshold that can tangibly determine when it should be deemed plagiarized? Is there a certain threshold that determines whether or not something is considered plagiarized?
As discussed in Jonathan Lethem’s article, plagiarism is hard to distinguish because it is hard to prove in some scenarios. What do you think draws the line when accusing someone of plagiarism and why?
Why do you think Lethem included this quote in his article “All mankind is of one author, and is one volume; when one man dies, one chapter is not torn out of the book, but translated into a better language; and every chapter must be so translated…?” What does this quote mean?
WAM: Writing Across Media 
Q: What other pieces of literature (show, song, book, etc) can you think of that “heavily borrow” from another source? Does this source cross the plagiarism line, or is it a parody?
A: Pharrell and Robin Thicke’s “Blurred Lines” copied heavily off of Marvin Gaye’s “Got To Give It Up”. They got hit with a $5 million lawsuit for sampling (quite heavily may I add) Marvin’s song without crediting him. That was pretty cut and dry plagiarism. On the other hand, Drake’s song “In My Feelings” samples Lauryn Hill’s “Ex Factor” but actually credits her and also didn’t borrow as heavily or as blatantly as “Blurred Lines”.
LikeLike
Q) Is the use of stock photographs/free-to-use materials still considered as plagiarism?
A) The use of stock photographs and free-to-use materials is not considered plagiarism if you do not cite them. This is because of the fair-use and royalty-free rules and regulations that are applicable, if someone claims their works to be royalty free, it falls under the fair-use clause directly – meaning these works are available to the greatest population openly and do not need to be credited back to the creator (neither does not the creator expect to make any monetary gains on the material(s)). Now, if the works are just stock and not royalty free, then the need for a citation is required from the user that is utilizing the material.
– Vishaank
LikeLike
When should inspiration and influence be considered as forms of plagiarism? Where should we draw that line?
It is hard to mark a clear threshold regarding whether or not something is considered plagiarism. If something is copied word for word, without giving credit to the original owner, it should for sure be considered plagiarism. Same goes to unique ideas that are clearly stolen, with no unique or constructive additions by the said “plagiarizer”. If someone takes someone else’s idea, and modifies it in a way that more than obviously merits significant modifications to a point where it the original piece is not obvious at first glance, it should be considered ok. The grey area here is how to tangibly describe something as obvious.
LikeLike
Q) When should inspiration and influence be considered as forms of plagiarism? Where should we draw that line?
A) Inspiration and influence should be considered forms of plagiarism based on the form they take of building off from that inspiration. With music for example, a melody shouldn’t be taken from sound to sound and put in a new song. That is where we should draw the line where copying sound for sound, note to note, and word for word is considered plagiarism. I have seen music from the genre of edm and house be inspired by many songs in the same genre. However, people do sample music from many other songs and use them for their own music. However, it becomes a new melody created and does not sound the same but a new creation. In addition, did you know that rock music was inspired by other subgenres like folk, reggae, electronic music and jazz? However, when we listen to rock music we can tell that it isn’t folk or reggae because it does not sound the exact same. That is how inspiration and influence should be, where we take the inspiration of something to create something new that is its own identity.
LikeLike
Q. How does current technology impact the way that we perceive plagiarism? Is there a concrete definition, or is it changing?
A. I think current technology greatly impacts the way we perceive plagiarism. Especially my current generation, once I got to high school I was required to submit my papers through a plagiarism checker that would notify the teacher of the percentage of how similar student’s papers were to each other. This scared me into never even thinking about plagiarizing and then carried over to college. Not even just on a personal level, I think technology has impacted plagiarism everywhere. If a famous writer or screen producer were to plagiarize or even produce a very similar product as one produced in the past, they would be publicly scrutinized for it and that could ruin their career. Once something is put on the internet, it is there forever and subject to comparison.
LikeLike
Is the use of stock photographs/free-to-use materials still considered as plagiarism?
To me, the use of stock photographs/free-to-use material is not considered plagiarism, as the images are not assumed to be those of the user. Stock photos are easy to identify, and consumers of the photos do not assume the poster of the image took the actual image. The same goes for free-to-use material, as it is posted with the intention that others use it for their own work. Because of these clear assumptions, the use of this media should not be considered plagiarism.
LikeLike
There are often times where people come up with creative ideas but later on find out that the idea which they thought was so unique was already thought of by someone else. When Lethem speaks about everything being familiar or repeated, do you think this is because people copy ideas or because people think similarly to one another?
I have had this scenario happen to me before, and I spent endless hours wondering how someone came up with my exact idea (or on the flip side, how I came up with their idea). It makes a lot of sense to say that people think similarly, especially since many of us learn through similar means. Getting technical, I decided that whoever had the idea first is the original, but that was not always so clear. Eventually, I realized that it could just be influence from older works that both parties have interest in. I think Lethem argues that everyone copies one another, but that it is okay because everyone is doing it. It is extremely difficult to come up with an idea that has not been already shared in different forms. Thus, I agree that we think similarly, but I believe the same ideas are shared because someone(s) copied someone else.
LikeLike
As discussed in Jonathan Lethem’s article, plagiarism is hard to distinguish because it is hard to prove in some scenarios. What do you think draws the line when accusing someone of plagiarism and why?
I think personally being able to trace the “source of inspiration” just by looking/reading/viewing the work is probably where I would draw the line. Sometimes, inspiration is needed to help think of something better or to have a foundation to build upon. Content creators can add their own value to the source that they drew inspiration from to the extent that it no longer resembles the original. “Cross-pollination” is another way of creating content by mixing and matching ideas across multiple sources, to create something different/”new”.
Basically, a considerable amount of effort should be put into content that is borrowed for further development.
LikeLike
Q: What other pieces of literature (show, song, book, etc) can you think of that “heavily borrow” from another source? Does this source cross the plagiarism line, or is it a parody?
A: A show that I can think of that ‘heavily borrows” from another source is ‘Family Guy’. Family Guy has been known to be competing with the show ‘The Simpsons’ for years, and this is because they are both similar concepts. Both shows are animated sitcoms about families, and they display comedy through satirical concepts. Although the ideas are similar and they compete against each other, I do not think Family Guy has crossed the plagiarism line because the show did not copy the same lines or jokes.
LikeLike