From using a famous line or quotation as a caption in social media to writing one’s own thesis, almost everyone is susceptible to committing plagiarism, especially in this digital era. But what exactly is plagiarism?
Black’s Law Dictionary defines plagiarism as “[t]he deliberate and knowing presentation of another person’s original ideas or creative expressions as one’s own.” According to Merriam-Webster’s dictionary, to plagiarize is “to steal and pass off (the ideas or words of another) as one’s own.”
In the Philippines, plagiarism is a commonly used concept in the academe and is considered a breach of academic integrity. The original scholarship is highly valued in the academe since the writing is intended to earn the student an academic degree, honor, or distinction. In one case (A.M. No. 10-7-17-SC, 8 February 2011), the Supreme Court defined plagiarism as the theft of another person’s language, thoughts, or ideas. According to the Court, the passing off of the work of another as one’s own is an indispensable element of plagiarism.
While plagiarism is a popular term, it has no legal definition under Philippine laws. This does not mean, however, that it has no legal repercussions. In Advisory Opinion No. 02, Series of 2012, the Department of Justice explained that plagiarism, when committed under certain circumstances, can amount to a criminal offense. It becomes actionable as a crime when committed with deliberate intent and amounts to (1) copyright infringement under the Intellectual Property Code; (2) online piracy under Republic Act 8792 otherwise known as the E-Commerce Act; or (3) violation of RA 10175 otherwise known as the Cybercrime Prevention Act.
There is copyright infringement when a person encroaches on the rights of the copyright owner without the latter’s consent. These rights include, among others, the right to carry out, prevent, or authorize the reproduction, transformation, public distribution, rental, public display, public performance or other public communication of the work. To constitute infringement, it is not necessary that the whole or even a large portion of the work shall have been copied. It suffices that the value of the original work is sensibly diminished, or the work of the original author is substantially and to an injurious extent appropriated by another.
The Supreme Court further clarified that copying alone is not what is prohibited in cases of infringement. To constitute infringement, it is necessary that the copying produces an “injurious effect”. The injury may consist in the prejudice suffered by an author on his research work and compilation as a result of another person’s act of misrepresenting the work as his own. Since one’s work is the product of his long and assiduous research, the other person’s act of representing it as her own is injury enough. (G.R. 131522, 19 July 1999). In such a case, plagiarism amounts to copyright infringement and the person responsible may be held criminally liable under the IPC.
If plagiarism and/or copyright infringement is committed using the internet or other telecommunication networks, the person may likewise be held criminally liable for online piracy which is punishable under the E-Commerce Act. On the other hand, if the same act is committed by, through and with the use of information and communications technologies, then the person responsible may also be held liable under the Cybercrime Prevention Act.
Considering the consequences of plagiarism, which include criminal sanctions, plagiarism is strongly discouraged in all its forms and regardless of sanctions. The best protection would be avoiding plagiarism by cultivating the habit of attribution. Thus, in case of doubt, it is strongly recommended to take a precautionary stance and cite. After all, an unnecessary or superfluous citation is always better than no citation at all. (Advisory Opinion No. 02, Series of 2012)
Happy new year my dear readers.
The Daily Tribune
