resource 1 Title: INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: CONCEPTUAL AWARENESS OF RESEARCH STUDENTS ABOUT PLAGIARISM. Authors: Mahmood, Sheikh Tariq1 Mahmood, Azhar1 [email protected] Muhammad Nasir Khan1 Allaha Bakhsh Malik1 Source: International Journal of Academic Research. Nov2010, Vol. 2 Issue 6, p193-198. 6p. 5 Charts. Document Type: Article Subject Terms: *PROPERTY rights *INTELLECTUAL property *PLAGIARISM -- Prevention *ACADEMIC discourse *ISLAMIC universities & colleges Geographic Terms: ISLAMABAD (Pakistan) PAKISTAN Author-Supplied Keywords: avoid plagiarism awareness plagiarism Quality research research students Abstract: A number of factors are responsible for the quality of research. An essential requirement of research is that it meets the criteria of scholarly writing or academic writing. Although, in every professional field, experts consider some ideas "common knowledge," but for the researcher it is not because the researcher is getting all this from different sources of knowledge .Researchers use this knowledge for paraphrasing, summarizing and for conceptualization during this process some times intentionally and some times unintentionally not use the citation of the proper source and hence becomes a victim of plagiarism. To find out the awareness of research students about the concept of plagiarism and to suggest possible ways to avoid it, a descriptive study was conducted. The objectives of the study were to examine the researcher's knowledge about concept of plagiarism, knowledge about specific terminologies, types of plagiarism, and consequences of plagiarism and to suggest possible ways to avoid it. Study was delimited to the research students of education at PhD, M.Phil and MA level in International Islamic University, Islamabad. A sample of sixty students was selected through cluster sampling technique, five point Likert scale questionnaire was used to collect the data. Data were analyzed through descriptive statistics. Major finding were that most of the students had misconception of plagiarism, most of them were unaware about the specific terminologies and types of plagiarism. Majority of the students were unaware about the consequences of plagiarism. On the basis of findings it was concluded that they were not properly informed/taught about the concept of plagiarism during their course work and it had implications on the quality of research. The major recommendations were to add sufficient material about plagiarism in research courses and to develop a university study guide to avoid plagiarism practices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of International Journal of Academic Research is the property of International Journal of Academic Research and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the a ...

1. resource 1
Title: INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS:
CONCEPTUAL AWARENESS OF RESEARCH STUDENTS
ABOUT PLAGIARISM.
Authors: Mahmood, Sheikh Tariq1
Mahmood, Azhar1 [email protected]
Muhammad Nasir Khan1
Allaha Bakhsh Malik1
Source: International Journal of Academic Research.
Nov2010, Vol. 2 Issue 6, p193-198. 6p. 5 Charts.
Document Type: Article
Subject Terms: *PROPERTY rights
*INTELLECTUAL property
*PLAGIARISM -- Prevention
*ACADEMIC discourse
*ISLAMIC universities & colleges
Geographic Terms: ISLAMABAD (Pakistan)
PAKISTAN
Author-Supplied Keywords: avoid plagiarism
awareness
plagiarism
Quality research
research students
Abstract: A number of factors are responsible for the quality of
research. An essential requirement of research is that it meets
the criteria of scholarly writing or academic writing. Although,
in every professional field, experts consider some ideas
"common knowledge," but for the researcher it is not because
the researcher is getting all this from different sources of
knowledge .Researchers use this knowledge for paraphrasing,
summarizing and for conceptualization during this process some
times intentionally and some times unintentionally not use the
citation of the proper source and hence becomes a victim of
plagiarism. To find out the awareness of research students about

2. the concept of plagiarism and to suggest possible ways to avoid
it, a descriptive study was conducted. The objectives of the
study were to examine the researcher's knowledge about concept
of plagiarism, knowledge about specific terminologies, types of
plagiarism, and consequences of plagiarism and to suggest
possible ways to avoid it. Study was delimited to the research
students of education at PhD, M.Phil and MA level in
International Islamic University, Islamabad. A sample of sixty
students was selected through cluster sampling technique, five
point Likert scale questionnaire was used to collect the data.
Data were analyzed through descriptive statistics. Major finding
were that most of the students had misconception of plagiarism,
most of them were unaware about the specific terminologies and
types of plagiarism. Majority of the students were unaware
about the consequences of plagiarism. On the basis of findings
it was concluded that they were not properly informed/taught
about the concept of plagiarism during their course work and it
had implications on the quality of research. The major
recommendations were to add sufficient material about
plagiarism in research courses and to develop a university study
guide to avoid plagiarism practices. [ABSTRACT FROM
AUTHOR]
Copyright of International Journal of Academic Research
is the property of International Journal of Academic Research
and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or
posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express
written permission. However, users may print, download, or
email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged.
No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users
should refer to the original published version of the material for
the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Author Affiliations: 1Department of Education, International
Islamic University Chairman, Department of Education, NUML,
Islamabad (PAKISTAN)
ISSN: 2075-4124
Accession Number: 56681642

3. Persistent link to this record (Permalink):
http://rwlib.neiu.edu:2048/login?url=http://search.ebscoho
st.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=cookie,ip,uid&db=a9
h&AN=56681642&scope=site
Cut and Paste: <a
href="http://rwlib.neiu.edu:2048/login?url=http://search.ebscoh
ost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=cookie,ip,uid&db=a
9h&AN=56681642&scope=site">INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
RIGHTS: CONCEPTUAL AWARENESS OF RESEARCH
STUDENTS ABOUT PLAGIARISM.</a>
Database: Academic Search Complete
resource 2
Title: Protecting student intellectual property in plagiarism
detection process.
Authors: Butakov, Sergey1 [email protected]
Barber, Craig
Source: British Journal of Educational Technology. Jul2012,
Vol. 43 Issue 4, pE101-E103. 3p.
Document Type: Article
Subject Terms: *PLAGIARISM -- Prevention
*PLAGIARISM -- Universities & colleges
*INTELLECTUAL property
*UNIVERSITIES & colleges
*COLLEGE students -- Conduct of life
*COLLEGE students -- Legal status, laws, etc.
*CONTRACTING out
Abstract: The article discusses the problem of plagiarism in
higher education and the use of plagiarism detection services
(PDS) by universities, with particular focus given to the
potential of PDS to violate students' intellectual property rights.
Typical PDS structures are described, and advice for creating

4. one which avoids legal issues related to intellectual property by
using small samples of student work. The problems created by
the fact that most universities outsource PDS due to resource
constraints are also touched on.
Author Affiliations: 1SolBridge International School
ofBusiness, 151-13 Samsung 1-Dong, Dong-gu, Daejeon 300-
814, South Korea
Full Text Word Count: 1475
ISSN: 0007-1013
DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8535.2012.01290.x
Accession Number: 77387221
Persistent link to this record (Permalink):
http://rwlib.neiu.edu:2048/login?url=http://search.ebscoho
st.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=cookie,ip,uid&db=a9
h&AN=77387221&scope=site
Cut and Paste: <a
href="http://rwlib.neiu.edu:2048/login?url=http://search.ebscoh
ost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=cookie,ip,uid&db=a
9h&AN=77387221&scope=site">Protecting student intellectual
property in plagiarism detection process.</a>
Database: Academic Search Complete
Colloquium
Introduction
The rapid development of the Internet along with increasing
computer literacy has made it easy and tempting for digital
natives to copy-paste someone's work. Plagiarism is now a
burning issue in education, industry and even in the research
community. In this study, we concentrate on plagiarism
detection with particular focus on the technical and legal sides
of it. Usually, schools outsource plagiarism detection as it is a
very resource-demanding procedure. Outsourcing of plagiarism
detection may lead to intellectual property (IP) protection

5. charges from the students (Bennett, 2009). This colloquium
paper proposes an improved way to build a Plagiarism Detection
Service (PDS) allowing the school use applicable IP policy and
yet allow the PDS to maintain an acceptable search quality. The
proposed framework is based on the idea that only a limited
amount of information from the student submission is required
to locate potentially similar documents on the Web.
Typical architecture for plagiarism detection service
Plagiarism detection is applicable to many areas including but
not limited to education, publishing and research proposal
evaluations. Some of these areas may be sensitive to IP
protection. Most likely, in education, not all studentworks are
subject to IP protection, but senior-level papers as well as
master's and PhD theses fall in to this category.
The Internet plagiarism search assumes that the paper in
question has to be compared against all possible sources on the
open Web. The typical process is composed of four major steps:
University receives a digital submission from the student and
transfers it to external PDS along with some other related
information such as course name, code, institution, etc.
PDS performs a check-up over its own database of papers
submitted to the service earlier and to the index of web
documents.
PDS prepares a plagiarism check-up report, which includes
links to detected sources and highlights paragraphs that had
been possibly plagiarised. It may also notify the school that the
report is complete.
University retrieves a report from PDS on professor's or
student's request.
Such an approach is used by major players on PDS market--
iParadigms LLC--in its well-known Turnitin service
(http://www.turnitin.com) and BlackBoard's SafeAssign
(http://www.safeassign.com). There are two important points

6. that should be highlighted here: the complete student
submission is transmitted to the PDS and the PDS retains a copy
of the document to use it for the comparison with other
submissions in the future. Many universities are aware of IP
protection concerns. For example, University of Maryland
University College suggests faculty members to consider the
following factors while choosing PDS (Virtual Academic
Integrity Laboratory, 2011):
"Will the [plagiarism detection] service archive all student
submissions for further detection?"
"Will all submissions be immediately destroyed after a report is
generated?"
The next section analyses a few cases on IP protection and
provides insights on how the information flow could be
improved to avoid collisions with IP protection mechanisms.
Legal issues related to plagiarism detection
There has been considerable controversy about the PDS by
iParadigms LLC called Turnitin. Turnitin requires the teacher or
student to submit the student paper to themwhole.Turnitin then
creates a "digital fingerprint" of the paper and archives the
paper. This had generated considerable outrage on the part of
students and, interestingly, in certain parts of the academic
world (Horovitz, 2008). The complaints have gone as far as
legal action including law suits against iParadigms LLC
(Bennett, 2009; Sharon, 2009). In legal cases against the
Turnitin service, iParadigms LLC was using fair use doctrine to
protect its way of doing business. In determining whether the
use made of a work in any particular case is of fair use, the
factors to be considered shall include:
"The purpose and character of the use, including whether such
use is of a commercial nature or is for non-profit educational
purposes;
The nature of the copyrighted work;

7. The amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to
the copyrighted work as a whole; and
The effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of
the copyrighted work" (The Copyright Act § 107, 17 USC §
107, 1976).
Based on the brief analysis of the four US Turnitin cases (A.V.
ex rel. Vanderhye v. iParadigms, 2009; A.V. v. iParadigms,
LLC, 2008; Christen v. Iparadigms, LLC, 2010; Mawle v. Texas
A & M University Kingsville, 2010),we can see that a PDS will
be less subject to legal actions if it is based on the following
principles: do not transfer the student work to third-party
computers in a form that can be considered a copy of thework
and do not store the copy of the paper on the third-party
computers for later use. The next section outlines the details of
the proposed architecture based on these principles and can
serve as a blueprint for PDS development.
Proposed architecture
The proposed architecture proposes to divide PDS into two
parts: an internal part running on university infrastructure and
an external part running on a third party system. Most of the
data processing is happening on university infrastructure. The
only outsourced part performed on third-party infrastructure is
pre-selection of probable sources of plagiarised paper from
theWeb. The second step in the typical process outlined earlier
has to be split into two:
Pre-select possible sources from the Internet. This step is
performed by the third party.
Detailed comparison is done on the university infrastructure.
The major difference between typical approach presented and
the proposed one is the amount and form of the information that
is being transferred to the third party infrastructure. The
proposed architecture sends out the essential queries instead of
sending complete submission. These essential queries should be
prepared in theway thatwould allowfinding candidate sources on

8. theWeb, but on the other hand, these queries should not be
sufficient to recover the original document submitted by a
student. The assumption that exhaustive search is not required
to detect plagiarism is based on the results of two reports:
Culwin and Child have indicated the exact phrase search
technique with use of public search engine can be effective to
locate the source (Culwin & Child, 2010).The authors of the
second report also indicated that if a significant part of the
paper was plagiarised from the Internet, there is no need to send
all possible queries to the search engine: even as lowas 10% of
these queries can help to locate the source (Butakov &
Shcherbinin, 2009).
Questions to be answered
To evaluate the practical value of the proposed approach, two
major questions has to be answered with a pilot project:
How to select indicative queries from the submission to pre-
select potential sources from the Web? Howmuch of the
document these queries should cover to make a reliable decision
on the question whether the submission was plagiarised from
the Web?
How scalable are these approaches in terms of additional
workload to the university infrastructure? Will it significantly
raise the cost of infrastructure on the university side?
Authors would like to encourage the readers to provide some
additional concerns and questions that should be addressed
during the pilot part of the project.
References
A.V. ex rel. Vanderhye v. iParadigms, LLC, 562 F.3d 630, 2009
Copr.L.Dec. P 29,743, 90 U.S.P.Q.2d 1513 (4th Cir. 2009).
A.V. v. iParadigms, LLC, 544 F.Supp.2d 473, 232 Ed. Law Rep.
176 (4th Cir. 2008).

9. Bennett, M. G. (2009). A nexus of law & technology: analysis
and postsecondary implications of A.V. et al. v. iParadigms.
LLC Journal of Student Conduct Administration, 2, 1, 40-45.
Butakov, S. & Shcherbinin, V. (2009). On the number of search
queries required for internet plagiarism detection. In
Proceedings of the 2009 Ninth IEEE international Conference
on Advanced Learning Technologies (July 15-17, 2009),
ICALT, IEEE Computer Society, (pp. 482-483).
Christen v. Iparadigms, LLC, August 4, 2010, 2010 WL
3063137, Copr.L.Dec. P 29,960 (E.D.Va. 2010).
Culwin, F. & Child, M. (2010). Optimizing and automating the
choice of search strings when investigating possible plagiarism.
In Proceedings of 4th International Plagiarism Conference,
Newcastle, June 2010. Retrieved November 20, 2010, from
http://www.plagiarismadvice.org/
Horovitz, S. (2008). Two wrongs don't negate a copyright.
Florida Law Review, 60, 229-275.
Mawle v. Texas A & M University Kingsville, 2010 WL
1782214 (S.D.Tex. 2010).
Sharon, S. (2009). Do students turn over their rights when they
turn in their papers? A Case Study of Turnitin.com (June 1,
2009). Available at SSRN. Retrieved December 1, 2011, from
http://ssrn.com/ abstract=1396725
The Copyright Act § 107, 17 USC § 107 (1976).
VAIL (Virtual Academic Integrity Laboratory) (2011).
Detection tools and methods. Student copyright and detection
services. Retrieved December 1, 2011, from
http://www.umuc.edu/cip/vail/faculty/

10. detection&lowbar;tools/services.html
~~~~~~~~
By Sergey Butakov and Craig Barber
Address for correspondence: Dr Sergey Butakov, SolBridge
International School of Business, 151-13 Samsung 1-Dong,
Dong-gu, Daejeon 300-814, South Korea. Email:
[email protected]
Scanned by CamScanner
Scanned by CamScanner
Scanned by CamScanner
Scanned by CamScanner
Scanned by CamScanner
Scanned by CamScanner