Non-plagiarism = thought-crime

How stultifying our speeches would sound if tyrannized by the half-cracked idea of " intellectual property ". Every phrase and sentence - indeed every THOUGHT - has its lawful owner.

After reading John Schulz pathetic self-condemnation yes, even UNINTENTIONAL plagiarism must be punished - I'm inclined to conclude that " property is theft " even when it consists of a clutter of words .

Schulz reminds me of a pathetic character named Parsons in George Orwell's " 1984 ". Fanatically devoted to " Big Brother " he nevertheless said something disloyal " in my sleep " - and his little daughter reported this to the authorities. " Thoughtcrime is a dreadful thing ,old man ", he warns Winston Smith.

" You don't think the Party would arrest an innocent man, do you ? "

Stealing intellectual property with the purpose of " selling " it yourself is clearly unethical. When challenged or questioned, a writer should reveal his sources.

Most of the " opinions " for sale nowadays are hardly worth a nickel ! One gets cheap and good opinions in bar rooms and on the Internet - the equivalent of an intellectual flea-market.

But most academic writers are still anal-retentives .My own opinions on things are absolutely FREE. I represent the FUTURE of " intellectual property " !