Pat Gunning wrote:
>Also, if B is free, under the law, to copy A's 
>invention, it harms SOCIETY because the prospect 
>of having an invention copied reduces the 
>incentive to invent. But what would happen if 
>economists were free, under the law, to copy 
>each other's words without citations? Would 
>anyone be harmed besides the members of the 
>economics profession? And would the harm to 
>original writers be greater than the gain to the copiers?



Because we get carried away about copyright, or 
intellectual property, which certainly is a very 
interesting issue, it would be important to 
recall that copyright and plagiarism are legally different.

Violation of US copyright is a federal crime: 
(U.S. Copyright Act 17 U.S.C. §§ 101 - 810).

Plagiarism may or may not be a violation of 
copyright. It depends on fair use, the sense of 
which varies culturally, even in professional 
cultures. If you don't want to claim violation of 
copyright, but still feel abused and want legal 
action, you use civil law, file a suit.

It is a nasty business, confused enough as it is, 
without us confusing it further.

John Womack