Plagiarism:

[billy]

Yes. And if you were exposed for stealing my poetry, I'd get attention in the scandal. And if you get away with it, good for you. Other than money or moral issues, it would be a ego boost too for the poet that's been robbed.

---

And I think that if the quotation is blatant, it should be obvious that it's being used because it wants the specific mood it creates to be cast over that part of the poem. Risky sometimes, but I don't have a problem with it.

i see what you're saying but not everyone is an encyclopaedia of poetry.
not every one knows all Shakespeare's lines or works. how do we define the truth of whether it's being used and claimed as ones own or if indeed it's more of a homage. surely the main function of accrediting the owner is to let those who would have no idea, that the work is not one's own. so sorry but blatant quotes are seldom seen as such.

And if you get away with it, good for you. Other than money or moral issues,

the above phrase seems to be at odds because it more or less covers everything, after all, isn't stealing morally wrong?
wouldn't it be morally wrong to take the risk knowing many would think the words one's own.

i do admit to doing a homage poem or two without crediting the poet but all the words were my own. that said i suppose in hind site i should have mentioned it on the william carlos williams poem, but it is an accepted form.
the other one one was a homage poem for sexton that was obvious because i used her real name as the title. but still, i think i could and should have said more.

all the above aside, how would you feel should someone steal a poem get it published, then argue it's yours (for the fame/ego factor) only to have all the critics ask; why the fuck did they steal that poem, it's utter shite?

[rowens]

If there's money or fame or recognition you think can be made from it, and that's the reason you did it, then you have a moral issue. If you can't write your own poem, that's sad for you. What other reasons would you have for it? That depends on your method. The other poet might not approve, or might not care. I don't particularly think if the thing falls apart once someone discovers what youve copied then it's worth it. But there could be other reasons.

---

The immorality may be the point. If you stretch the subject out, whether to create a sinister mood i for yourself, or unethical stance, or to simply borrow something from somewhere else, some odd idea might strike you that inspires another direction. Another train of thought to utilize somewhere else.

[billy]

which is pretty much my point, you said unless there's a moral issue involved.
i was pointing out that there would always be a moral issue involved should someone else claim your work as their own.

on the point of using an idea, or getting an inspiration from another poem, i see nothing wrong with that. isn't that one of the things poetry is all about our experiences and imaginings? how else would we get a lot of those things were it not for inspiration. poetic form isn't that mainly an inspirational concept; to write a sonnet in the style of Spencer or Shakespeare etc, and we do. but the words are our own, we can't make a poem up of 14 different Shakespearian lines of sonnets and claim it as our own. that's plagiarism and silly to boot. the same as copying verbatim whole phrases or simply rewriting someone elses poem but leaving most of the original words in.

i'm all for someone copying my poetry and sticking it on their own site, as long as they say. billy marsland wrote this poem, or A poem by w. marsland. it wouldn't really bother me if they tried to pass it off as their own apart from the fact it wouldn't be fair.

back to the moral issue of making cash out of it, that part i can understand...greed is big temptation i don't agree with it but it's something i can understand. i could never understand why people steal the works of others just so they can say "i wrote it, I'm rather good aren't I?"

[rowens]

I don't think anyone should use someone else's words for the sake of passing them off as their own. And I consider a poem where someone uses someone else's words to be a minor expression, at least if that's what gives the whole poem its life. I think if the lines are used, not only in another context, but out of the original context, or the poem is trying to express a theme of confused identity, or kind a of criticism, or a theme of weakness, or some theme of merging, or a question of persona, and individual authenticity itself, a feel of plagiarism is what is wanted. Acknowledging the other poet in a footnote would lessen that. So if it's not a blatant enough thing, there should be some hints that these words are someone else's, I don't think they should blend in easily with the rest of the poem. As for the immorality of plagiarism, that would factor in, within the new context, the effect would depend on the reader making that connection. If that connection's not made, or not made enough, then the context fails. Or at least part of it fails.

[Todd]

Funny case of plagiarism (sort of):

I'm on another site, and a guy posts: can you help me interpret my poem? What do you think it means?

I read it. It's portions of a William Blake poem. I think what he was actually doing was trying to trick people into doing his homework. So yeah it's plagiarism but it's sort of funny.