Actually, looking at the stats, it appears to have been scraped twice. I may have to do a follow up post on this. Interesting.

On this front, we agree but I think terminology may be getting in the way.

If a student buys a paper off the Web and turns it in for an assignment, they need to be punished, regardless of whether or not they were aware it was an offense. They were clearly trying to get out of doing their work and that is a form of cheating in my book, ignorant of the law or aware.

That being said, there is a difference between a student who rips off a whole Wikipedia article and one who doesn't paraphrase enough or forgets a citation. All are incidents of plagiarism technically, but clearly the latter two are not cases of a student trying to cheat.

Students have to be able to make mistakes. That's part of learning. What they can't be allowed to do is cheat, regardless of whether they were aware of the rules or not...

That sounds like a good system, I'd have to see it in action to really say, but it would definitely be an improvement over the stealth updates Facebook, TwitPic and others do...

The problem with not planning ahead is that forces the company to make one of two choices. The first is to either make the TOS open ended, leaving them open to change the TOS at any time they want or to go back and ask for more permissions as needed.

The problem with the first is that it's a very bad deal for the user as the TOS can change at any time. The second is problematic in that it is in efficient and creates legal issues getting the user to re-agree to the terms.

While, ideally, I agree that a company should run lean and ask for permission as needed, that's not very practical unfortunately, especially with companies that have millions of users...

Are you monitoring those articles for compliance? Would be interested to see how rampant this issue is.

It seems that there's a lot of interest in this topic. Looks like I know what I'll be writing about Wednesday. So, I won't say too much here other than that I agree...

Glad to help and glad you liked the article!

I do think jealousy was part of the reason Mattel sued. I don't know which is the better seller, but I do know nothing was said until after the dolls became a hit. That being said, Mattel did have some logic for their suit, but the court just disagreed with it.

That you do. I also forgot to mention that the more niche the content is, the less likely it is to be plagiarized, though certain niches seem to be an exception to that rule. Unfortunately, tech seems to be one of those niches.

You can actually add multiple URLs to the form by clicking the "Add an additional field" link below the infringing URL. However, that's not very efficient for sending more than about a dozen URLs. If you need to do that, I suggest following the guide I laid out in this article:
http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2008/07/22/how-to-...