Heat of Battle

Catch up to the issue with this post...

Not only is it 35 freakin degrees outside, but e-mails from Mr Steffler have been heating up as well. Just got this doozy...guess who else joined in on the party! None other than Mme MacGregor herself! I feel so enlightened now!

Mr. M,

Thank you once again for your message. It is clear that you have put a lot of thought into this matter.

Having reviewed this matter, I believe that you have misread my original post and/or formed links to other concepts that were not being addressed in this message. Note that UW Policy #71 is not directly linked to the Copyright Act or Criminal Code. The arguments presented in my original post referred solely to Policy #71 and not the other documents that were discussed in your message. As such, I will make no comment on the other information you have provided, nor the links provided to these other documents. This is not due to a lack of appreciation of the efforts that you have went to, but rather, due to the lack of time I have to devote to these other issues in light of my other duties.

Once again, I reiterate that UW does consider Theft to be a charge under UW Policy #71- a charge independent of what may be contained in the other documents you list. It appears that you have an understanding of plagiarism and cheating under the policy. However, there is a difference between a case in which an individual who plagiarizes or cheats does so using an assignment that was freely provided to them versus someone who cheats and plagiarizes using an assignment that was secured through dishonest means. In the latter case, this is not simply a case of plagiarism and cheating- there is another element of dishonesty- theft. In this case, the policy refers to theft through its actual English definition, quite simply “the action or crime of stealing” or “taking (something) without permission or legal right and without intending to return it, giving or taking surreptitiously or without permission” (www.askoxford.com). At no time in my post do I attempt to make reference to theft as defined in “legal” , “criminal” or “copyright” terms. While I appreciate the spirit of your message, I truly think you have overcomplicated the issue and once again do not feel a clarification is required.

I do note that many of your arguments appear to be related to concepts covered in the PDENG 35 course. As Dr. MacGregor is taking lead in this course, I am copying her on this response. She may have additional insights to add based upon PDENG 35 issues.

Regards,

Jeremy Steffler

Man this guy dodges the issue better than George Bush dodged military service! Basically, he's saying that I'm confusing up the issue with too much evidence. Great, now proof of why you're lying and making up shit is 'overcomplicating the issue'.

But the good news is, his argument still doesn't make any sense and is easy to disprove. I haven't responded yet, because I'm waiting for some evidence from the Office of the Secretariat, but rest assured, this gross lack of logic will not go unexposed!

PDEng and Policy #71 -or- Plagiagrism = Theft!!1

So about a month ago, Jeremy Steffler - P. Eng, Assistant Director of the entire PDEng program, posted a 'clarification' to the PDEng Programmes interpretation of UW Policy #71 - Academic Discipline. In this post, Important Announcement Regarding Common Misunderstanding Regarding UW Policy #71, he spouts off an awful lot of uninformed, unproven catch-phrases about how PDEng obeys a completely different set of rules than the rest of the Faculty/University. Here are the most memorable moments:

Individuals have made it clear that their assignment was to be used for reference only... In this way, it was felt that the individual who was making a copy of their assignment submission available was not violating UW Policy #71...This interpretation of UW Policy #71 is not correct.

In the fourth paragraph, he starts using the word theft:

This does not mean that the warnings do not serve a purpose- should an individual copy an assignment provided by another student after being warned not to, the individual copying the assignment is guilty of both theft and cheating under UW Policy #71. Such an offense generally carries greater consequences that being charged with cheating alone.

Great. Where exactly in Policy# 71 is there any mention of theft? For that matter, since when is plagiarism referred to as theft? I believe the correct term is copyright infringement.

So naturally, I decide to let Mr Steffler how I feel about this issue.

Dear Mr Steffler,

If I may be blunt, I would like to point out a slight typographical error in your June 22, 2006 post on the PDEng 35 Announcement board regarding the PDEng Programmes particular understanding of Policy 71.

In the fourth paragraph, you use the word theft in this sentence:

This does not mean that the warnings do not serve a purpose- should an individual copy an assignment provided by another student after being warned not to, the individual copying the assignment is guilty of both theft and cheating under UW Policy #71.

Upon review of the UW Policy 71, there is absolutely no reference whatsoever to theft, stealing, stolen, thievery or any variation on the word theft in relation to academic offences. From what I understand of that particular paragraph, I believe the word you are looking for is in fact plagiarism: The act of presenting the ideas, words or other intellectual property of another as one's own (Policy 71).

If you could possibly send a follow up clarification to all of those who received this announcement, it would be much appreciated.

Yours,

Eric M
PDEng 35 student

I send this on a Sunday evening, after finishing the best PDEng assignment of my life, so naturally I don't expect a response til Monday, at the very earliest. 1 hour later:

Mr. M,

Thank you very much for your message. I have reviewed your concerns and the
original message and assure you that the information presented in my post is,
to the best of my knowledge, correct and no follow-up clarification post is
required.

If you review UW Policy #71
(http://secretariat.uwaterloo.ca/Policies/policy71.htm), you will note that,
under Part II of the policy, it specifically states that "Academic offences
shall include, but shall not be limited to, the following:" after which it
describes some of the more common offenses under the policy. If you re-read my
original posting, you will note that this part of the policy was highlighted.
Theft of intellectual property for the purposes of cheating or plagiarism,
while not specifically highlighted in the Policy, is one of those offenses that
fall under UW Policy #71 despite the fact that it is not specifically detailed
in the policy. I am currently investigation a number of cases of theft of
intellectual property and, regrettably, can assure you that this is indeed a
violation of UW Policy #71. The charge of theft would be in addition to charges
of plagiarism or cheating, depending on how the stolen property was ultimately
used.

I would highly recommend reviewing UW Policy #71 again and paying close
attention to the wording of the policy, as well as reflecting upon the main
purpose of the document. There have been a number of individuals who have
erroneously taken actions, that while clearly not in keeping with the
principles of honesty, integrity and fairness, they believed did not violate UW
Policy #71 as they were not specifically listed by name or description in the
policy. These individuals unfortunately did not read the policy in its entirety
(i.e., they did not read the "but shall not be limited to" clause) and are now
subject to formal investigations or chrages under this policy.

I trust that this message addresses your concerns.

Regards,

Jeremy Steffler

WHAT! Copyright infringement != theft! Unless...anyways, I'll let my response speak for itself:

Mr Steffler,

Thanks very much for the speedy reply. I wasn't suspecting you to be in the office on a Sunday night, so it was much appreciated.

Having said that, let's start at the beginning:

Ah, you mention the old "but shall not be limited to..." clause...actually, let's leave that for later. I'll get right to the "stealing" factor.

Theft of intellectual property for the purposes of cheating or plagiarism,
while not specifically highlighted in the Policy, is one of those offenses that
fall under UW Policy #71 despite the fact that it is not specifically detailed
in the policy.

From this last statement, I can draw this conclusion: you are referring to someone physically breaking into my house, and stealing my handwritten manuscript of my PDEng assignment? Okay, fine, yes. That is stealing. And when they reuse my stolen manuscript to hand in as their assignment? Yes, I wholeheartedly agree, that is definitely plagiarism, or "copyright infringement" as defined by the Canadian Intellectual Property Office < http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/sc_mrksv/cipo/cp/faq_cp-e.html#17>.

What is copyright infringement?

Unlawful use of copyright material. Plagiarism — passing off someone else's work as your own — is a form of infringement.

So far I'm in complete agreement with you.

The main problem I have is the fact that in your initial 'posting', you state that:

You should not provide them with a copy of your actual assignment submission, whether in whole or in part (e.g., cutting and pasting portions of your assignment in your online chat program of choice or in an e-mail).

So, if I understand you correctly, if my friend Billy Joe were to e-mail me a copy of his assignment, and I were to purposefully submit his work as my own, I would be guilty of Cheating (for copying another student's work), Plagiarism (for the act of presenting the ideas, words, or intellectual property of another as my own) AND Stealing? Sorry, THEFT!

The charge of theft would be in addition to charges
of plagiarism or cheating, depending on how the stolen property was ultimately
used.

You make it sound like it's a criminal offense! Is it?

Actually, comparing the civil infraction of copyright infringement (plagiarism) to the criminal offense of theft is one of the most common misconception about Intellectual Property, so you are not alone.

Even the Office of the Secretariat at the University of Waterloo concurs with the fact that the above situation would be plagiarism, and in no way theft. < http://www.adm.uwaterloo.ca/infosec/students/studentmisconduct.htm>

You are postulating that COPYING someone's intellectual property is a criminal offence? I think you are entering a battleground that is not meant for a singular course within a university within a country that specifically indicates that copyright infringement is not act of theft. So unless PDEng has finally seceded from Canada, then I think you, sir, are incorrect.

I would highly recommend reviewing The Canadian Copyright Act, <http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/C-42/text.html > (again?) and paying close attention to the fact that the word theft does not appear in the entire document, as well as reflecting on the main purpose of the document. There have been a number of individuals (and corporations...think the RIAA, CRIAA, MPAA...) who have erroneously held the same beliefs as you, that copying someone's intellectual property is akin to physically removing property from someone's possession. These organizations all believe that electronically copying an document is in violation of the Criminal Code of Canada (theft). I take it PDEng would agree with them. These corporations, unfortunately, did not read the law in its entirety.

Great, now all we've got left is the "but shall not be limited to" clause. After all that's just been said, do you still believe that the UW Policy #71 has the ability to formally reverse the ruling of the Canadian government? No, sorry, I don't think so.

Now, I will go back to my original request. After finishing up your review of the current Canadian legal opinions on the entire copyright debate in Canada, could you please send a message to all those who received your initial posting explaining that there is no correlation between theft and plagiarism.

Eric M

Anyways, he hasn't responded yet. I'll update when it comes.

I hate PDEng. And mis-representations of Policy 71. Policy 73 FTW!

Lol, PDEng.

Just to clarify a small point, I never actually would use the acronym-thing LOL in a real situation, online or not, I solely use it for the purposes of mocking thinks. Keep that in mind. Onto the subject at hand: I am currently in the middle of a heated e-mail debate with Jeremy Steffler regarding how PDEng has now made plagiarism a criminal offense, stay tuned for details!