Re: Plagiary or politics?

[Elmer Elevator <bobmer@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Well, all this is certainly profoundly squalid and sordid. I am not demanding
that it all go away, because unhappily -- and astonishingly -- there is
plagiarism at the top levels of my trade as well. How, exactly, a novelist
who plagiarizes from another well-known novelist thinks he can get away with
it for very long is a mystery to me -- but it's happened.

Even pure mathematics has had its plagiarism scandals -- Tartaglia discovered
the method of solving cubic equations, but kept it secret (he demonstrated
his invention by solving specific challenge examples only). Cardano stole his
method, published it as his own, and took credit for it. Fortunately
historians have not had much trouble establishing Tartaglia's priority.

I think there's a lot of mental illness, perhaps a deep desire for ultimate
public exposure and humiliation, mixed in with the obvious greed and ambition
of a plagiarist. If so, if you're tempted to plagiarize, get some counseling
first. In the long run, it will do better things even for your professional
life.

Here is what writers do with an original and (what they think is) a valuable
manuscript. Before showing it to anyone, they either get it formally
copyrighted (in the USA, at the Library of Congress), or -- and this is the
method that may be of interest here -- they use the "common-law copyright."
They take a printout of the manuscript, put it in an envelope, go to a
Notary, and pay the Notary to seal it with a date. (The actual physical
sealing is often done with sealing wax, or some more modern method that can't
be unsealed without leaving obvious physical and visual traces of tampering.)
Tampering with a Notary's seal -- or a Notary affixing his seal falsely -- is
a crime.

What this proves is that John Smith was in possession (and claimed
authorship) of this intellectual material in that particular form as of 12
April 1996. Later (as has often happened or been claimed with motion picture
screenplays) during a plagiarism challenge, the sealed manuscript is unsealed
in the presence of the judge or authority. That may not settle everything
instantly, but it is powerful evidence that John Smith wrote/possessed it
well before some competitor claims he did.

So if anyone sees value in this method, I recommend he/she make hardcopy of
core code -- your most magic original algorithms -- and either copyright it
formally or use this method of common-law copyright before "letting the
program out" in any form.

I'm sure there'll be those who have mechanical/logical critiques of this
method, but such dialogue may lead to more secure ways to prevent or
safeguard against plagiarism. Unhappily, all ways to safeguard against
plagiarism are reflections of suspicion and distrust among a community like
this. So I think these two incidents really suck. They can only have a
chilling effect on the open sharing of ideas.

Bob Merkin

http://www.javanet.com/~bobmer/