Loading...
Larger font
Smaller font
Copy
Print
Contents
Understanding Ellen White - Contents
  • Results
  • Related
  • Featured
No results found for: "".
  • Weighted Relevancy
  • Content Sequence
  • Relevancy
  • Earliest First
  • Latest First
    Larger font
    Smaller font
    Copy
    Print
    Contents

    The definitional and legal issues

    Definitions of “plagiarism” vary. From the time of Canright, differing definitions of plagiarism and standards of literary ethics have been cited by both sides of the debate to provide support for their respective positions. One side defines plagiarism simply as “literary theft,” and a plagiarist as “one who purloins another’s writings and offers them to the public as his own.” The other side maintains that there is a distinction between “plagiarism” and “literary borrowing.” The mere use of another’s language does not constitute plagiarism. Plagiarism, they argue, is the deliberate passing off of another’s material as one’s own, with the implied intention of appearing to be the original author; in contrast, literary borrowing is using the ideas or words of another in one’s own composition to serve new and often improved literary purposes. 31See, e.g., Jerry Moon, “Who Owns the Truth? Another Look at the Plagiarism Debate,” Ellen White and Current Issues” Symposium 1 (2005): 46-71. Moon writes, “Proper literary borrowing is like using apples grown by someone else to make pies that are my own” (47). It is linked to the legal doctrine of “fair use,” and involves entirely different motives than that of the plagiarist. 32For recent discussions within Seventh-day Adventism, see articles by J. Stirling, J. Walters, and T. Joe Willey in Adventist Today (May/June 2007) and the three-part series by K. Morgan and D. Conklin in Ministry (August, October, December 2007). UEGW 152.2

    The literary standards of today are more stringent than those of Ellen White’s time. This is recognized by both critics and supporters. Not only are standards of attribution more demanding today, but they also vary from one genre of writing to another. Jerry Moon has illustrated how forms of acknowledgment vary regarding sermons, news accounts, popular writing, and academic works. 33Moon, “Who Owns the Truth?” 49. Critics have argued that, as a prophet, Ellen White should have risen above the common literary practices of her day. Supporters have countered that, if such were the case, we should similarly expect to find the Bible writers rising to today’s standards and acknowledging their unnamed sources.UEGW 152.3

    Judged by contemporary legal standards, Ellen White was not a plagiarist. When one factors into the discussion both intent and legal precedent from court cases of Ellen White’s day, the case appears to be clearly in Ellen White’s favor. This was the conclusion following a professional review of Ellen White’s alleged plagiarisms by patent and trademark law attorney, Vincent L. Ramik. He researched more than one thousand cases in American literary law from 1790 to 1915 and noted several factors that critics of Ellen White’s writings have failed to take into account when accusing her of literary theft or deceit: (1) Her selections “stayed well within the legal boundaries of ‘fair use.’” (2) “Ellen White used the writings of others; but in the way she used them, she made them uniquely her own” (3) Ellen White urged her readers to get copies of some of the very books she made use of—demonstrating that she did not conceal her use of literary sources, and had no intention to defraud or commercially displace any other author. 34“Memorandum of Law; Literary Property Rights, 1790-1915,” August 14, 1981; reprinted at http://www.whiteestate.org/issues/ramik.html. UEGW 152.4

    No lawsuit, or threat of a lawsuit, in connection with Ellen White’s Sketches From the Life of Paul was instituted. Conybeare and Howson’s work and many other works used by Ellen White were not copyrighted.UEGW 153.1

    Larger font
    Smaller font
    Copy
    Print
    Contents