වෙබ් 2.0 සහ “සුදුස්සාට සුදුසු තැන දීම” (Plagiarism in Web 2.0)

x-pert · Sep 9, 2008

වෙබ් 2.0 සහ “සුදුස්සාට සුදුසු තැන දීම” (Plagiarism in Web 2.0)

වෙබ් 2.0 සංකල්ප වන ෆෝරම්, බ්ලොග්ස් හිදී සිදුවන (හරේශ්ගේ) ‘ප්රකාශන හරහා පොර වීම’ සමගම දක්නට ලබෙන අනෙක් කාලකන්නි ක්රියාව වන්නෙ, නිර්මාන කොල්ලයයි. මෙහිදී වරදකාර පාර්ශ්යවය ලෙස ඇඟිල්ල දික් කල යුත්තේ කාටදැයි යන්න තවමත් ගැටලුවකි.

බ්ලොග් අඩවියකදි නම් එලිපිටම වරදකරුවා වන්නේ එහි අයිතිකරුවායි.

එනමුදු, social network (ෆෝරම්) හෙවත් සමාජ සාමාජිකත්ව ජාලයකදී නිර්මාන කොල්ලය (plagiarism) ක වරද පැටවිය යුතු වන්නේ එහි අයිතිකරුටද නැතහොත් එහි සාමාජිකයින් හටද? මන්දයත්, එහිදී අන්තර්ගතය (content) පබ්ලිශ් කරන්නේ සාමාජිකයින් විසිනි. ඔව්… ඒත් අයිතිකරුවා හට එය පාලනය කිරීමේ යුතුකම සහ වගකීම සතුවෙයි.

මාගේ පෞද්ගලීක මතය වන්නේ, යම් කිසිවෙක්, යමක්, එක් ස්ථානයකින් ගෙන, තවත් ස්ථානයක පළ කරන්නේ නම්, එහි පූර්ණ ගෞරවය අදාල නිසි පුද්ගලයාට දිය යුතු බවයි. - සුදුස්සාට සුදුසු තැන දීමයි!

කෙසේ හෝ වේවා, තාක්ෂණික ලෝකය තුළ තවමත් මෙම මාතෘකාව සජීවී සංවාදයක් පමණි.

Source

rash87 · Sep 11, 2008

Well I also personally believes it too but then again I also think that who ever the publisher too must have some credit cuz if it wasn't for him then the whole thing won't have spread out. & without been spread among others, no point of writing stuff. U need to share & obviously his intention of posting it on atleast one site is also that.

Anyway to be honest I don't see a problem regarding this matter as to wether I am not aware about a problem like this is prevailing :sorry:

Asitha-K · Sep 11, 2008

මාගේ පෞද්ගලීක මතය වන්නේ, යම් කිසිවෙක්, යමක්, එක් ස්ථානයකින් ගෙන, තවත් ස්ථානයක පළ කරන්නේ නම්, එහි පූර්ණ ගෞරවය අදාල නිසි පුද්ගලයාට දිය යුතු බවයි. - සුදුස්සාට සුදුසු තැන දීමයි!

100% ඒකගයි! :yes:

meeka EK eke bahulai. :yes:

yam kisi deyakin ho yam thanakin yamak uputa gannawa nam
source eka nethinam aithi karu ge nama damiya uthui! :rolleyes:

aithi karuta nisi gaurawaya diya uthui!

Hungak aya pora wenne anunge dewal copy paste karala! :lol:

x-pert · Sep 11, 2008

rash87 said:
Well I also personally believes it too but then again I also think that who ever the publisher too must have some credit cuz if it wasn't for him then the whole thing won't have spread out. & without been spread among others, no point of writing stuff. U need to share & obviously his intention of posting it on atleast one site is also that.

Anyway to be honest I don't see a problem regarding this matter as to wether I am not aware about a problem like this is prevailing

This is a sorta situation where you can't decide whether the egg or the chicken came first.

Anyway some content creators may like the 'illegal' sharing.

But many professionals don't like it. They just like to get acknowledge for their contribution

This is a prevailing issue machang. In the future you will see it more.

(Some like to spread. But some don't )

x-pert · Sep 11, 2008

Asitha-K said:
Hungak aya pora wenne anunge dewal copy paste karala!

Thoppiya hari yana aththo daaganithwaaah :lol:

rash87 · Sep 11, 2008

x-pert said:
This is a sorta situation where you can't decide whether the egg or the chicken came first.

Anyway some content creators may like the 'illegal' sharing.

But many professionals don't like it. They just like to get acknowledge for their contribution

This is a prevailing issue machang. In the future you will see it more.

(Some like to spread. But some don't )

huh?

Now u made me even more confusing? :rolleyes:

Nywaz, u r saying tht actually ppl post thm w/ the intention of acknowledgment but w/ loathsome of been it spread? :eek:

Man or man, I am confused to hell? :confused:

zed · Sep 11, 2008

but sometimes, there is no author,, its published under the name of the site, in case of that we cant post the source coz it against the forum rules

but in case asitha-k is correct, there r meny ppl out there that try to shine all over by coppyinbg othors work

zed · Sep 11, 2008

hear is an example

cheq this

http://www.google.lk/search?q=Types...s=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

see, how meny ppl have posted the same joke without acknowlejing the author (sorry R, u have done the same mistake too)

mldarshana · Sep 12, 2008

This is what you call professional !!! Thanks .....

x-pert · Sep 12, 2008

rash87 said:
huh? Now u made me even more confusing?

Nywaz, u r saying tht actually ppl post thm w/ the intention of acknowledgment but w/ loathsome of been it spread? Man or man, I am confused to hell?

oops sorry about the confusion

As an example... let's say rapa posted an article in EK, taken from Sudharaka's blog. Or Neroshan posted a poem in EK which he got from another site. And they both do it without telling/ informing the original author or without mentioning their names.

So that's wrong machang.

Atleast the secondary poster (Rapa or Neroshan in this example) should mention the original author - that's what I called acknowledging..

Or else they should take written permission from the authors to publish their articles in EK.

x-pert · Sep 12, 2008

mldarshana said:
This is what you call professional !!! Thanks .....

Yes machang. That's it

People have forgotten that bit nowadays...

rash87 · Sep 12, 2008

x-pert said:
oops sorry about the confusion

As an example... let's say rapa posted an article in EK, taken from Sudharaka's blog. Or Neroshan posted a poem in EK which he got from another site. And they both do it without telling/ informing the original author or without mentioning their names.

So that's wrong machang.

Atleast the secondary poster (Rapa or Neroshan in this example) should mention the original author - that's what I called acknowledging.. Or else they should take written permission from the authors to publish their articles in EK.

Oh, well acknowledging should be done, but what if it is annonymos :eek:

x-pert · Sep 12, 2008

rash87 said:
Oh, well acknowledging should be done, but what if it is annonymos

Nice one

Asitha-K · Sep 12, 2008

rash87 said:
Oh, well acknowledging should be done, but what if it is annonymos

if it's antonymous i think they should post the source!
or tell this is not mine!

zed · Sep 12, 2008

hear is the rules

u can use a hard copy of a book older than 80 yrs without acknowledging author
u can use a jurnal article older than 30 yrs without acknowledging author

x-pert · Sep 12, 2008

zed said:
hear is the rules

u can use a hard copy of a book older than 80 yrs without acknowledging author
u can use a jurnal article older than 30 yrs without acknowledging author

Who says that?

You have to cite the author when writing an academic paper irrespective of the year.

(Personally I've written papers in 2007 and in 2008 with resources {journal articles} dating back to 1960s'... Still I had to acknowledge them)

Maybe the rules differ between educational institutions. But as a general practice, it is always better to acknowledge the author.

Best example is in your post bro :rofl:

How can I believe what you're saying? any reference?

x-pert · Sep 12, 2008

rash87 said:
Oh, well acknowledging should be done, but what if it is annonymos

Sorry.. I thought you were just kidding... :lol:

Well.. If you don't know me, then can you call me by my name? No dramas. Same thing applies.... - If the article is anonymous, then don't mention any name, but simply mention that it was written by someone else

(In Academic writing you can't use anonymously written documents.)

nuwa1 · Sep 12, 2008

x-pert said:
Sorry.. I thought you were just kidding...

Well.. If you don't know me, then can you call me by my name? No dramas. Same thing applies.... - If the article is anonymous, then don't mention any name, but simply mention that it was written by someone else

(In Academic writing you can't use anonymously written documents.)

wow this is becoming a great thread.. learned lot. thanks bro .....

zed · Sep 12, 2008

x-pert said:
Who says that?

You have to cite the author when writing an academic paper irrespective of the year.

(Personally I've written papers in 2007 and in 2008 with resources {journal articles} dating back to 1960s'... Still I had to acknowledge them)

Maybe the rules differ between educational institutions. But as a general practice, it is always better to acknowledge the author.

Best example is in your post bro How can I believe what you're saying? any reference?

Oops (lets say those rulese are older than 80 yrs)

bro, it was mentioned by our lecherer, im still searching for a written proof for that

hear the correct rules

Moral rights:

apply to the creators of copyright works
are separate from the entitlement of a copyright owner to payment
generally last for 70 years after the author's death.

(dont know why it says generally)

sorce

x-pert · Sep 12, 2008

nuwa1 said:
wow this is becoming a great thread.. learned lot. thanks bro .....

Pleasure bro

Siraawata.. I felt really bad about SLIIT one time coz of this. Because we were never ever taught to acknowledge properly isn' it? Maybe they are doing it now. But when I was there, plagiarism was not a huge issue.

So after coming to Aus, had to change the styles a lot...

වෙබ් 2.0 සහ “සුදුස්සාට සුදුසු තැන දීම” (Plagiarism in Web 2.0)

Member

Member

Active member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Well-known member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Active member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Similar threads