3 ms·

Disagree, the core contention is he was copying clue themes from past puzzles (or self-plagiarising, which is a slightly different issue), not copying entire pu

by halo 11y ago

Disagree, the core contention is he was copying clue themes from past puzzles (or self-plagiarising, which is a slightly different issue), not copying entire puzzles. That's a far cry from what you describe. I don't really have a huge problem with that, even if he's selling it. Yes, it's plagiarism, yes, it's copying, yes, it's considered "intellectual property theft". No, I don't see why it should be considered such a big deal, nor do I think every crossword benefits from being created entirely from scratch at additional effort. If someone comes up with a great clue theme and someone notices a few years later and reuses it for others to enjoy, why should I get angry about plagiarism rather that feel happy that a great idea has been shared?

waqf 11y ago
If he had credited the original authors appropriately, your position would be quite tenable.
- halo 11y ago
  Why is my position, that our slavish obsession with plagiarism is counter-productive, untenable? Especially given that plagiarism inherently implies a lack of credit.
sigmar 11y ago
>Disagree, the core contention is he was copying clue themes from past puzzles That isn't the "core contention" >More broadly, 1,090 Universal puzzles and 447 USA Today puzzles were at least a 75 percent match to an earlier puzzle in the database. (Sometimes the match is with a puzzle from the same publication.) and though it may have been "self-plagiarizing" legally. Ethically, I have to wonder whether Parker was getting paid for the "original" crosswords that were submitted or if he was only using pseudonyms to falsely illustrate that the crosswords were original works.
- halo 11y ago
  That is the core contention, the mass self-plagiarization is very much secondary in the article and is a rather different issue. The actual plagiarization of the NYT puzzles is relatively minor and the sort of thing that should be considered fair game and it's irrational that we think otherwise.

by halo 11y ago

waqf 11y ago

If he had credited the original authors appropriately, your position would be quite tenable.

halo 11y ago
Why is my position, that our slavish obsession with plagiarism is counter-productive, untenable? Especially given that plagiarism inherently implies a lack of credit.

sigmar 11y ago

>Disagree, the core contention is he was copying clue themes from past puzzles That isn't the "core contention" >More broadly, 1,090 Universal puzzles and 447 USA Today puzzles were at least a 75 percent match to an earlier puzzle in the database. (Sometimes the match is with a puzzle from the same publication.) and though it may have been "self-plagiarizing" legally. Ethically, I have to wonder whether Parker was getting paid for the "original" crosswords that were submitted or if he was only using pseudonyms to falsely illustrate that the crosswords were original works.

halo 11y ago
That is the core contention, the mass self-plagiarization is very much secondary in the article and is a rather different issue. The actual plagiarization of the NYT puzzles is relatively minor and the sort of thing that should be considered fair game and it's irrational that we think otherwise.