Do You Think Rewriting Content Is Plagiarism?

As mentioned, it makes no difference what the content is, plagiarism is plagiarism - PERIOD!

That said, someone who is trying to describe how to set up a squeeze page,
or how color affects a visitor's impression of a web site, will only be able to
state the facts as they find them. The facts will be the same from one person's
content to another. I usually try to look up research articles on subjects (if possible)
before writing about anything. However, I must confess that I do sometimes read other
people's work to gather ideas for my writing.

 

It's almost is the definition of plagiarism.

However, we can all go philosophical here and start talking about rewritten content as an acceptable form of plagiarism.

For example, millions of academic papers contain plagiarism and claims that they make are usually a rewritten form of prominent academic studies.

Papers on Shakespeare are most definitely rewritten content. You can't have an original thought about Romeo all of the 600 million times he has been written about in high school and college papers.

But in general, yes - it is plagiarism. Just like in this case

 

There actually is a definition of plagiarism that explains things a lot and leaves much space for thought.

It was given by Alexandre Dumas, famous French writer, novelist and essayist, author of more than a hundred books.

"Let's assume you see a young and pretty girl on the street. She is poorly dressed, yet beautiful. She is accompanied by a group of miserable people, who will most likely ruin her body and soul, so that she will end up as a prostitute or beggar soon enough, Wouldn't it be your responsibility as a man of honor to save her from such fate? You can - and you SHOULD - take her away from the street, spend some time educating and decorating her, before introducing her to your friends in secular society. This way she may meet her true love and live a happy life, full of fame, honor and respect."

He was often accused of plagiarism - yet all attempts to state that poorly-written trash of other authors was better than his brilliant masterpieces stood no chance. He took poorly-expressed ideas and reformed them into beautiful stories millions of people adore till this day.

What I mean to say - feel free to use other people's work if you need to. BUT you should not only re-write it, you should IMPROVE it, make it MUCH better. Then - it is a true rewrite.

Poorly written pieces of trash with direct copy&paste - is a plagiarism and give you no credit.

 

Not sure what you're trying to say there but do you mean using others' ideas is justified this way? Even if a poorly written piece of content is remade, improved, revamped and presented in a new and engaging format that greatly appeals to readers, it is STILL a case of plagiarism in my view as the basic idea is copied/stolen/taken from some other source.
Maybe I haven't got your point correctly or rather have not got it at all. On second thought, I don't think so.

 

I do not justify plagiarism in any way, even the Dumas' one. However, this thing exists independently of your and my opinion.
What I was trying to say is that:
1) Content writing is a highly competitive niche
2) Whatever topic you should write on- there will be a plenty of articles on that topic, mostly poorly written
3) in 95% cases you WILL HAVE TO USE that material - just because of the lack of time or inaccessibility to any other material (not all topics are described in wikipedia in details, and in some niches there simply are standard things everybody writes - thus said, no matter how hard you try - your text will inevitably be a plagiarism to a certain degree)
4) IF YOU DO HAVE TO REWRITE ANY TEXT - AT LEAST DO IT WELL. I am sure that you, Content Maestro, are capable of producing a stylish, witty, entertaining and contributing content. On the other hand, there are a LOT of writers, which produce poor-quality crap with little to no grammar.

However, plagiarism is bad from any point of view.

 

OK, I think I got your point now. You are actually right. Producing a COMPLETELY original piece of content is very rare and difficult as almost all information about a subject is already recorded somewhere. You can just present it with a different touch. That makes me agree with your statement - "no matter how hard you try - your text will inevitably be a plagiarism to a certain degree". The only exceptions to this I know are news agencies and journalists/reporters and that too because they're authorized to sell the same content (I suppose it's called 'syndicated') to multiple media outlets.

 

When writing Articles, you research first. When you rewrite an article completely, you are essentially researching, and not blatantly copying someone's intellectual rights. Although..you are stealing his/her's unique viewpoints and ideas, which MAY constitute plagiarism. A bit confused..

 

You need to give enough of a darn to research, research, and research. Then write your own article. Write the way you speak. If you do that, you'll be golden.

 

You're confused because you are contradicting your own statement. On the one hand you say rewriting with researching is not copying; on the other, you define the same thing as stealing someone's views and ideas!!?? How ironic!

There are two cases in which a work is NOT considered plagiarist:

1. when you quote someone's words (- you have to obtain the necessary permissions for it from the author) and properly credit that person or source and
2. when you have the appropriate license to reuse that content. Journalists and reporters have the license and hence, even if they sell their content to multiple broadcasting outlets and publications, which is called “syndicated” content, they are NOT charged with plagiarism.

Even if you state someone's views and ideas in a completely different manner, it IS plagiarism because you're not the person who originally created them, of course unless you fulfill the aforesaid conditions.

 

Rewriting without proper attribution, and content spinning is still plagiarism. However, in some countries, fair use is still applicable.

Have you heard of the popular saying, "If it's stolen form one source, it's plagiarism; and if it's copied from multiple sources, it's research"? What are your thoughts?

 

Rewriting articles is plagiarism. Usually. Sometimes it's even considered copyright violation. Sometimes it's plagiarism even when you're rewriting your own work. Yet this is not common knowledge amongst web content writers.

 

Yes, all not unique content is plagiarism.

 

Yes it's plagiarism , what gives the real uniqueness to content is the creative ideas unlike what I call the "physical plagiarism" which is seen by the search engines !

 

I'd like to write a book about a boy named Barry Cotter. He seems just like an ordinary boy, but he is actually a boy wizard destined to battle a great evil called Boldemort. He goes to school in a magical place called Mogwarts, and aided by his friends Don Measley and Fermione Branger, he battles forces of evil under the guidance of the principal, Bumbledore, and the friendly half-giant groundskeeper Bagrid.

Do you think J.K. Rowland will sue me to kingdom come? After all, I used different character names, different locations and different words. I might even rearrange the story and introduce Dirius Flack in the beginning of the story. Maybe I'll even keep Bumbledore alive till the end. Perhaps, instead of speaking in snake language, I can get Barry Cotter to speak in monitor lizard language. It all sounds original. J.K. Rowling has no leg to stand it. I'm sure any judge will agree, right?

 

I think rewriting is not a plagiarism because you create a new unoque content. Of course you use ideas of someone else. But if the analisys will show less than 70% of match with the originial it's good.

 

I think YES. Because the changning you have done in others content, that is not fair. Its means that you steal the ideas the thoughts of someone and just after few changes, tagged with your name ... its really not fairm its shameful act i think.

 

Paraphrasing isn't stealing... No one has ownership over ideas...
However, taking sales images/graphics is wrong

 

Rather than rewriting content, I would say that using already written content to create new and unique content is a better approach in any instance.

Sometimes previously written content can be source of inspiration to achieve this, or at least has happened to me that once I'm start to rewrite old content, I may end up bring up new ideas, or finding a new perception of the same topic that I couldn't see back then.

 

If you are reading a single article on another site and then rewrite it changing some words here and there, the answer is yes. (basically you are stealing an idea and presenting it as your own = plagiarism).
On the other hand, if you document yourself from more than one source and then you draw your own conclusion which you will present in your own words, the answer is no.

Think of an article as of a school essay. I don`t think it`s that hard to document yourself and write your own opinions. (we are living in the era of information, aren`t we?)

 

To Everyone:

Here's what I'm doing... I'm taking facts from various on-line news sources (CNN, CBS News, OAN, FOX, local affiliates, etc.) and rewriting those combined articles with a new take on the information (usually a more humorous, shocked, or sarcastic approach) AND I'm citing the original sources in the text. Is that plagiarism?