Whoah. I could see they were ridiculously similiar, but I didn't realize they were THAT close. Why would anyone think they could get away with that? It breaks my brain. I need duct tape.
And people want to believe they can away with the "percentage" rule because people want to break the rules and still have a flimsy excuse. It's sorta like the kid standing next to the cookie jar with a cookie and then saying, "But you didn't see me take it! You can't prove I took it! The cookies just happen to be the same KIND as in the jar!"
Not to mention that the percentage thing is a GUIDELINE for FAIR USE, and that the rest of the fair use guidelines involve things like NOT MAKING A PROFIT and FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES. Which guidelines this entry just does not meet.
If you're copying your own work, changing a few things, and then submitting it to whomever, it's not plagiarism. Adding this stipulation -- that you need to make some changes for it to not be considered plagiarism anymore -- makes sense. But this only works in the case of your own work. (at least this is now the case where I am)
I can't think of a non-educational reason for slightly altering your own work though...
(of course, this isn't the case this time. They're obviously plagiarizing)
no subject
And people want to believe they can away with the "percentage" rule because people want to break the rules and still have a flimsy excuse. It's sorta like the kid standing next to the cookie jar with a cookie and then saying, "But you didn't see me take it! You can't prove I took it! The cookies just happen to be the same KIND as in the jar!"
no subject
no subject
I can't think of a non-educational reason for slightly altering your own work though...
(of course, this isn't the case this time. They're obviously plagiarizing)