To copy from a source is called cheating. And sometimes, when a writer (mostly content writers) copy from multiple resources, they’re applauded for their research capability. There has to be a fine line between copying and genuine research. A mindbending article about this topic will be a good read for all writers and the people who hire them.
This topic is an interesting one but a tough one to write about. You will need to treat it very meticulously by researching specific cases of 'copying' or plagiarism in the history of literature, film, theatre, art... What is the line between being inspired by and actually copying? Copying suggests the appropriation of the work. It's also very different from copying as paying a tribute. I know some people are allowed to copy some of the art works in the Louvre Museum but they have a specific title and a card, and they have to change at least one thing about the painting, whether colour or scale or small detail, to avoid plagiarism. – Rachel Elfassy Bitoun7 years ago
It is interesting to note between academic and amateur copying. While most consider academic copying to be fool-proof it is possible for a person to cite their own work previously published, thus augmenting an argument with their own information that doesn't normally get checked further down on. Theoretically a person could for decades perpetuate a lie or half-truth. All research is based on limited abilities of human beings to comprehend, such as the long-time fact of a flat Earth, etc. Looking at human research and its faults then is key for an article of this nature. – smartstooge7 years ago
This is very interesting. But It is even tougher sometimes when a writer thinks that he/she have researched something that he/she is positive that hasn't been used/written/applied before, it turns out that (not so often) it would be on internet. It's hard to do research when the internet is very broad and an idea can just as contagious as the ones on the internet. – banalma7 years ago