Let’s Talk About Plagiarism

[MrBarnett]

Well, they haven't discovered what I keep in my basement yet.

‘Keith’ tied to a chair?

[Debra A]

Yes, as a 'community' we can condemn, and (hopefully) those plagiarized would consider legal action where appropriate? What we shouldn't do is 'keep it in house', 'sort it out privately' or give it a sort of acceptance by not talking about it publicly

But isn't that the problem? That as a 'community,' not everyone agrees about the seriousness of it or how it should be dealt with? We can give an individual opinion but that's all really?

[Debra A]

Trevor’s gone to self-publishing his books now. Whether that’s as a result of what happened with his last book or not I don’t know. That may be the route Cobb has to go in the future.
If I recall correctly there were third party attacks on Mark for exposing the plagiarism in The Evil Within trying to make him out to be the bad guy and Mark just dealt with one single chapter. I discovered more instances of plagiarism in Trevor’s Sutcliffe chapter while looking at the Keith Stride stuff. Both Marriott and Stride used the same online source and so I had to first confirm with Trevor that he wasn’t Stride. Lol.

Strange world we live in.

JM

Very strange.

Yes, I remember that Mark came in for some serious criticism but he also had a lot of support.
Back in 2013 none of us could really agree what could or should be done about plagiarism and we still don't.

[Robert]

Not Cora Crippen!?!

[Debra A]

Heaven forfend!

Well, they haven't discovered what I keep in my basement yet.

[jmenges]

Yes, as a 'community' we can condemn, and (hopefully) those plagiarized would consider legal action where appropriate? What we shouldn't do is 'keep it in house', 'sort it out privately' or give it a sort of acceptance by not talking about it publicly

What makes copying from an online source like the Casebook wiki or somewhere else on the boards easier to get away with is that it’s entirely written by volunteers who might not be so inclined to have or spend the resources to pursue a claim for something they provided to the public for free. Nevertheless their time has a value and they retain ownership over what they’ve contributed.

JM

[jmenges]

Several years ago there was an entire ebook published and sold that copied all of its content off of Casebook. I can’t remember the name of it. Which brings me to ask this question. If an author cites contemporary newspaper articles in their book that they actually found in the Casebook Press Reports section...should the author cite the Casebook online source or is it OK for them to simply cite the original newspaper? Citing only the newspaper gives the impression to the reader that they did “research” when in actuality they were just using the search engine in the Press Reports.
A hypothetical question as I don’t have a specific example in mind...

JM

[Steve S]

It isn't the first time a member of the message boards writing on the Ripper crimes has been outed for plagiarism but the author in that case, whose work was proven to be lifted from other sources without attribution, is still around and writing books. Other than condemn it, what can we do?

Yes, as a 'community' we can condemn, and (hopefully) those plagiarized would consider legal action where appropriate? What we shouldn't do is 'keep it in house', 'sort it out privately' or give it a sort of acceptance by not talking about it publicly

[jmenges]

Trevor’s gone to self-publishing his books now. Whether that’s as a result of what happened with his last book or not I don’t know. That may be the route Cobb has to go in the future.
If I recall correctly there were third party attacks on Mark for exposing the plagiarism in The Evil Within trying to make him out to be the bad guy and Mark just dealt with one single chapter. I discovered more instances of plagiarism in Trevor’s Sutcliffe chapter while looking at the Keith Stride stuff. Both Marriott and Stride used the same online source and so I had to first confirm with Trevor that he wasn’t Stride. Lol.

Strange world we live in.

JM

[Debra A]

It isn't the first time a member of the message boards writing on the Ripper crimes has been outed for plagiarism but the author in that case, whose work was proven to be lifted from other sources without attribution, is still around and writing books. Other than condemn it, what can we do?

[Steve S]

I'd sooner have a disappointing book than a plagiarized one, tho (getting back to the point and away from the strange obsession with Drew...)

[Monty]

And there we have it.

[Abby Normal]

You’re interviewing him soon, aren’t you?

Perhaps you can ask him to elaborate on the history of Harrison, Barber.

Who was Harrison, who was Barber? He must know that, at least.

very disapointing book. especially from a so called acadamian. sorry. not impressed. wheres the original research?and i dont know what the definition of a ripperologist is but it aint drew grey or mei trow thats for sure. your average casebooker is more a ripperolgist IMHO.
anyone can write a " book".

the definitive work on the torsos has yet to be written. i await fishermans and or eds..

[MrBarnett]

I mentioned Drew Gray only because I was thinking of him and how he seems to envision a day when Ripper researcher’s work is respected, valued and taken seriously by those relevant disciplines outside of our field...while in reality there are those inside of our field, who’ve been around here for a long time, who don’t even respect them.
It could be that Drew’s delusional and I hope against hope. I’m beginning to think so.

JM

You’re interviewing him soon, aren’t you?

Perhaps you can ask him to elaborate on the history of Harrison, Barber.

Who was Harrison, who was Barber? He must know that, at least.

[MrBarnett]

All this goes over my head. I have more in common with the female popular historians!

Heaven forfend!

The boy stood on the burning deck,
Whence all but he had fled - the twit! (Milligan)

Fortunately the deck was outside a house called Dawes Court which, unrecorded, survived the (nothing special) fire of London. (Rubenhold)