--- BklynMagus <magcomm at ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> Dear List:
>
> Justin writes:
>
> > The question is: who's the "owner" and what's
> involved in "creating something by one's labor."
>
> Terrance is writing a play for the Fringe Festival
> 2005.
> His labor goes into thinking, writing, rewriting and
> working on the script. Isn't that "creating
> something
> by one's labor."
Well, yes. But there are a bunch of problems. He's not doing it alone. How much is his contribution and to what and how much does that (morally) entitle him? Suppose writing the play is a breeze for him. Has he contributed less than if it were an agony? Does it matter how much time he takes writing it? Also, even if he has a right to the product of "his" labors,it doesn't follow that he has a right to the fruit of that product, e.g., the profit, if any, from selling it in the market. And so forth. . . .
>
> On the other hand, I am writing a paper which wil be
> my first published in a peer-reviewed journal (I
> know --
> so academic and me a simple plebian).
>
> My labor will be in searching out, watching the
> films and
> also reading other articles on and interviews with
> the
> filmmaker. What is interesting to me is how do you
> deal
> with the fact that I can come to the same conclusion
> as
> someone else after we have seen the films and read
> the
> interviews? If I come to the same opinion as
> someone
> else, am I plagarizing the other person if, when I
> publish
> my opinion, it happens to be the same as hers? For
> instance, aren't there a finite number of ways to
> look at
> Hitchcock's depiction of women in his movies?
Well, I don't think that it means you're plagiarizing. It just means that you're unoriginal. Or that you're both right. Plagiarism is conscious copying. Btw, I don't think there are a finite # of ways to look at Hitchcock or any great artist.
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - now with 250MB free storage. Learn more. http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250