jump to last post 1-12 of 12 discussions (26 posts)

Plagiarized Poem...In a way...

  1. DzyMsLizzy profile image97
    DzyMsLizzyposted 4 years ago

    There is a hub on here that has William Wordsworth's poem, "I wandered lonely as a cloud...."
    published without any credit to the original author, without comment or text backup, such as a review, or commentary on why the Hubber likes the poem; it is simply published as a stand-alone piece.

    The person has just the one Hub; joined but 2 days ago, and apparently is totally clueless..

    Is this outright plagiarism, or is the era of the poet so far back that there is no possibility of copyright infringement?  I was not sure whether to flag it or not, so I just left a simple comment, saying,

    "Ah, yes, lovely poem, originally penned by William Wordsworth (1770-1850 / Cumberland / England)."

    It is not showing up, so they evidently set their comments to be moderated prior to appearing....

    1. galleryofgrace profile image81
      galleryofgraceposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      That's a little "iffy", the copyright may belong to the publisher and that may be a one of the big publishers.

      1. DzyMsLizzy profile image97
        DzyMsLizzyposted 4 years agoin reply to this

        That's what I was thinking....

  2. jsquirrel profile image61
    jsquirrelposted 4 years ago

    Hi, what I think is that because it's a famous poem it should not be plagiarism. But the author of the hub should have definitely put the authors name.   So I would not flag it, only if it keeps happening. 

    Hope this helped

    1. DzyMsLizzy profile image97
      DzyMsLizzyposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      The definition of plagiarism does not depend upon whether or not the author if famous.  None of us Hubbers are famous, but if anyone copies our work, it is plagiarism.
      The issue here, is whether any publishing house, or possible descendants, still have a copyright interest in the works of Wordsworth.

      1. Barbara Kay profile image90
        Barbara Kayposted 4 years agoin reply to this

        Work goes into the public domain that is 1920 or maybe it's 1921 or earlier. Not listing the original author is bad ethics. I don't think doing it is right. This is claiming it as your own work.

        1. DzyMsLizzy profile image97
          DzyMsLizzyposted 4 years agoin reply to this

          Right--UNLESS a descendant or publishing house has inherited or purchased the copyright, in which case, it could go on virtually 'forever.'

          1. psycheskinner profile image83
            psycheskinnerposted 4 years agoin reply to this

            You generally can't do anything about copyright.  X-amount of years pass and it expires, with a very small number of exceptions (Peter Pan etc). You can't just by your copyright back.

            The eternal rights grabs generally relate to trademarks rather than copyrights.

            Wordsworth's poetry *is* out of copyright.
            * It was published before 1923, Wordsworth died over 70 years ago, no Berne Convention perpetual copyright exception that I can see.

  3. Larry Fields profile image80
    Larry Fieldsposted 4 years ago

    Off with their head!

  4. spartucusjones profile image94
    spartucusjonesposted 4 years ago

    Because of when it is written, the hub is probably not violating copyright. But you still can't take credit for writing the poem. I would also think that you could still get in trouble for duplicate content (assuming it is published elsewhere online).

  5. chasmac profile image97
    chasmacposted 4 years ago

    I can't find that hub. Maybe it's gone. Anyway, regardless of copyright concerns, it would eventually be flagged as duplicate content.

  6. ketage profile image82
    ketageposted 4 years ago

    I feel that the author should have been credited for his work, Whether it is copyrighted or not is irrelevant. If i am not mistaken Wordsworths works are now public domain. Maybe the Hubber who posted the poem thought that public domain literature does not need to be credited. Your comment to the hubber was very diplomatic DzyMsLizzy, I doubt I would have been able to restrain myself, i would probably have just commented ( Please Credit the Original author ). Keeping in mind he might not have intentionally wanted to commit the crime of plagiarism, but rather show his appreciation for a much liked poem and not have known the proper way to credit someone, that is as polite as I could have been.

    I myself am a fan of Wordsworth, and will probably write a hub about two of my favorite poems he wrote ( We are seven and She was a phantom of delight by William Wordsworth ).
    sorry for the long winded reply, I do tend to ramble on a bit in the wee hours of the morning before my first cup of coffee.

  7. Uninvited Writer profile image83
    Uninvited Writerposted 4 years ago

    Actually, Hubpages does not accept any duplicate content. I am sure that poem is published on hundreds if not thousands of websites.

  8. SAM ELDER profile image75
    SAM ELDERposted 4 years ago

    yes but in this case we cant share any quote or poem?... unless its not published? I cant even say  ...."home sweet home".... because it was published on millions websites.... hmmmm....

    1. chasmac profile image97
      chasmacposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      A short phrase like "home sweet home" isn't long enough to trigger any plagiarism detector. That's intentional, of course. It would be impossible to post anything otherwise.

    2. Uninvited Writer profile image83
      Uninvited Writerposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      I am talking about an entire poem. You can get around it by posting the poem as a graphic.

      When I first started here I had the full text of a Robert F. Kennedy speech and it got flagged as duplicate. I got around it by quoting less of the speech.

      1. wilderness profile image98
        wildernessposted 4 years agoin reply to this

        Yes, you can post copied material, even copyrighted copied material, as a graphic or even as a pdf file and will usually get around the bots and software looking for it.

        It is still theft (talking large blocks here) however.  I have found a couple of pdf files republishing my material without permission and have gotten them taken down.  No matter what the form I take a dim view of people stealing the content I worked hard to produce.

        Just my personal opinion, but I hate seeing instructions posted on how to get around the requirements; how to steal without getting caught.

        1. Uninvited Writer profile image83
          Uninvited Writerposted 4 years agoin reply to this

          Not if you are quoting a copyright free poem or text. That is what I meant.

    3. Barbara Kay profile image90
      Barbara Kayposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      We are allowed a certain percentage of content in our hubs that are quoted from elsewhere. It's somewhere in the Learning Center. It is a small percent.

  9. psycheskinner profile image83
    psycheskinnerposted 4 years ago

    While not under copyright, I am pretty sure it would be duplicate content.

  10. WriteAngled profile image85
    WriteAngledposted 4 years ago

    I have just flagged the loser for duplicate content. It would be good if lots of other people would do the same. I hope the moron's account will be deleted as well.

    I notice said imbecile replied to you in text speak, Dzy. I doubt this subhuman is capable of writing a sentence in English on its own.

    1. Simone Smith profile image92
      Simone Smithposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      Thanks for flagging it! If it is duplicate content, it needs to come down. Of course, one flag is all we need. Multiple flags of the same thing will only make it harder for us to get to other important flagged issues in a timely manner. wink

    2. DzyMsLizzy profile image97
      DzyMsLizzyposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      When I initially looked in the flagging menu, "duplicate content" did not appear in the list...only similar things, such as 'miscategorized' or  'copied content,' which specifically referred to other Hubs, not works-at-large.
      So, I was unsure how to proceed, hence, I came here.

  11. molometer profile image85
    molometerposted 4 years ago

    Good call DzyMsLizzy,
    I am sure the Wordsworth family will have something to say on this matter.
    Basic copyright law states that any published work is the property of the author and estate for 70 years after the death of the author. If however there are descendants then the copyright goes to them in perpetuity. The Wordsworth family are very much alive.
    in other words publishing this poem is totally illegal, without permission of the Wordsworth family and as to the point about using quotes. That is okay as long as you cite the author. Apart from just plain good manners you will avoid a costly court case.
    It is hard to believe these people are ignorant of the law, and they are publishing here?

  12. lovebuglena profile image86
    lovebuglenaposted 4 years ago

    I think that's plagiarism, regardless of the fact that this poem was written a long, long time ago. The hubber should have mentioned that this is the poem by William Wordsworth, or at least in some way made it known that it is not his original work. If he did no such thing I'd flag the hub.

    Maybe your coomment didn't appear because he simply didn't want to approve it. Perhaps he denied it.

    1. DzyMsLizzy profile image97
      DzyMsLizzyposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      The comment did actually appear later--so he must have it set to moderate first.  However, I was too tactful--he didn't "get" my subtle scold....instead simply thanked me, "glad I liked the poem."