However, Dr. Fang has publicly defended his action and, as a matter of fact, he has repeatedly claimed that copying without reference is normal in writing popular science articles and books.

Is it really true that there are different standards in defining plagiarism? Is copying without attribution really normal in publishing popular science works?

I wish that you teach me something on this and, if possible, write a letter to Dr. Fang ("Shiming Fang" <smfang@yahoo.com> and editors@xys.org ) and copy that letter to me to clear out the confusion on this important matter.

To：Shi Liu <svl8epa@gmail.com>,smfang@yahoo.com, editors@xys.org

Date：Thu, Mar 30, 2011

Subject：RE plagiarism

30 March 2011

Dear Shi Liu,

Let me begin by saying that I am in no position to determine whether Dr. Fang plagiarized my work or not, since I cannot read Chinese. The issue of plagiarism must be left to people who can read both languages fluently.

Let me next state that the material that Dr. Fang is accused of plagiarizing was copyrighted. That is to say, it is protected against copying by United States law.

On the matter of whether it is ever permissible to copy someone's writings, United States copyright law is very explicit. One may copy only up to about 200 words, which must be placed in quotation marks and attributed to the original author. More extensive copying, whether in fragments that add up to more than 200 words or as a continuous piece, is explicitly forbidden without obtaining written permission from the author or his publisher. U. S. copyright law does not distinguish between scholarly works and popular ones: the law applies equally to both, since both are considered the fruit of intellectual work. Indeed, I consider it more difficult to write for a general audience than to write for my academic peers since it is much more difficult to communicate clearly to those with less knowledge and training.

If Dr. Fang copied any of my words without putting them in quotation marks and attributing them to me, he is guilty of plaigiarism under U. S. copyright law. If he copied extensively from my work, that is not only illegal in the U. S., but morally inexcusable. To claim as one's own the work of another individual is never morally acceptable in any society of which I am aware. Certainly in the U. S., we kick our students out of classes, and sometimes out of our universities, for such infractions and we often sue authors who engage in copyright infringement.

The legal and moral cases against stealing other people's intellectual work, whether written for academic or popular audiences, are clear. Whether Dr. Fang has done so, as I said above, must be determined by people with the appropriate dual-language qualifications.

Sincerely,

Bob Root-Bernstein