10 ms·

Off-topic to Chinchilla, but relevant to the source site: MarkTechPost consistently borderline plagiarizes articles and shares them on their website as "paper s

Off-topic to Chinchilla, but relevant to the source site: MarkTechPost consistently borderline plagiarizes articles and shares them on their website as "paper summaries". They copy-paste from the source material and change some of the wording around as to appear original. My work, as well as other work from Berkeley AI Research, has been posted in this manner on their site. This seems highly unethical, and I'm surprised how they continue to operate.

brrrrrm 4y ago
Thanks for the heads up! In that case, I'd prefer not to share this link with peers. Do you have an alternative source with similar high-level content to share?
- lstamour 4y ago
  Tough to say. Technically https://arxiv.org/pdf/2203.15556.pdf https://arxiv.org/pdf/2203.15556.pdf has the same content, it just isn’t highlighted the same way.
  - ghgxbjfvnkj 4y ago
georgehill 4y ago
OP here - Thanks for sharing. I wasn't aware of this but despite this behavior, they are getting 600k visits. https://www.similarweb.com/website/marktechpost.com/#overview https://www.similarweb.com/website/marktechpost.com/#overvie...
boplicity 4y ago
Fill out a DMCA notice: https://abuse.cloudflare.com/ https://abuse.cloudflare.com/ Cloudflare will forward it to their host, I believe, who will then ask that they remove the infringing material, or provide a counter claim.
- kevincox 4y ago
  IANAL but I'm pretty sure you can only do that if you own the copyright that is being infringed upon.
parhamn 4y ago
I don’t know about this site, and I agree its unethical. But it does make me realize that I much prefer using language of the paper directly as opposed to having a non-expert poorly translate what your paper said. Especially given how papers put a lot of time in the accuracy and specificity of their language and word choices. Would it also annoy you if they screwed up the interpretation of what you wrote? Is the alternative less reach of your work? For hard core research the tradeoffs are tougher it seems. If it is just a matter of non-nevermind, thats strictly messed up.
- fspeech 4y ago
  It's okay to directly quote, which is what quote marks are for, with proper attribution, of course.
andreyk 4y ago
To add to this - they do this regularly, multiple times per week. While they do link to and acknowledge the source work, they do not make clear their writing is quoted or nearly quoted.
realYitzi 4y ago
We better get used to it. Because news companies will say an AI wrote it. No law allows suing an AI for plagiarism. Go prove something is not an AI.
- nudpiedo 4y ago
  No one sues the car, the dog or the children, but the owner, responsible, parent, etc.

brrrrrm 4y ago

Thanks for the heads up! In that case, I'd prefer not to share this link with peers. Do you have an alternative source with similar high-level content to share?

lstamour 4y ago
Tough to say. Technically https://arxiv.org/pdf/2203.15556.pdf https://arxiv.org/pdf/2203.15556.pdf has the same content, it just isn’t highlighted the same way.
- ghgxbjfvnkj 4y ago

georgehill 4y ago

OP here - Thanks for sharing. I wasn't aware of this but despite this behavior, they are getting 600k visits. https://www.similarweb.com/website/marktechpost.com/#overview https://www.similarweb.com/website/marktechpost.com/#overvie...

boplicity 4y ago

Fill out a DMCA notice: https://abuse.cloudflare.com/ https://abuse.cloudflare.com/ Cloudflare will forward it to their host, I believe, who will then ask that they remove the infringing material, or provide a counter claim.

kevincox 4y ago
IANAL but I'm pretty sure you can only do that if you own the copyright that is being infringed upon.

parhamn 4y ago

I don’t know about this site, and I agree its unethical. But it does make me realize that I much prefer using language of the paper directly as opposed to having a non-expert poorly translate what your paper said. Especially given how papers put a lot of time in the accuracy and specificity of their language and word choices. Would it also annoy you if they screwed up the interpretation of what you wrote? Is the alternative less reach of your work? For hard core research the tradeoffs are tougher it seems. If it is just a matter of non-nevermind, thats strictly messed up.

fspeech 4y ago
It's okay to directly quote, which is what quote marks are for, with proper attribution, of course.

andreyk 4y ago

To add to this - they do this regularly, multiple times per week. While they do link to and acknowledge the source work, they do not make clear their writing is quoted or nearly quoted.

realYitzi 4y ago

We better get used to it. Because news companies will say an AI wrote it. No law allows suing an AI for plagiarism. Go prove something is not an AI.

nudpiedo 4y ago
No one sues the car, the dog or the children, but the owner, responsible, parent, etc.