Did Sam Bulte Plagiarize Her Explanation For Stricter Copyright Laws?

from the now-wouldn't-that-be-ironic dept

Michael Geist continues to make good points concerning Sam Bulte, the Canadian politician who has been accused of being too close to major entertainment companies, and who appears not to listen to points of view that don't support those corporate backers of her campaign. The latest is that she has written up an opinion piece for the Toronto Star defending her position... but in doing so she actually did the reverse and proved the main point of what's being said about her. It's been clear since she said that "pro-user zealots" were trying to silence her, that she didn't even want to take the time to understand what the complaints were about. She seems to think it's just about her position on copyright, not on the fact that she's only listening to one side. As Geist points out, her "defense" only proves that she only listens to one side as almost every point is taken directly from materials, announcements, speeches and studies done by the content industry she's accused of being too close to. Over at Boing Boing, it's pointed out that this could be considered plagiarism, since she takes the points directly from content industry publications, barely paraphrases them, and yet doesn't give credit for where she got the points. It certainly does seem a bit ironic that someone who insists we need stronger copyright laws to "protect" creators would then leave herself open to being accused of violating copyright laws already in existence. You might hope that this little episode would convince Ms. Bulte that these issues aren't quite so black and white, and that the "zealots" might have at least something of value to add to the conversation -- but it seems unlikely that any such epiphany is forthcoming.