lnat essay review pls!!
HI ! can you all do a review for an LNAT essay for me too? the first attempt, i already hate it but I want someone else to look over it
Prompt: Should plagiarism be considered as a punishable crime in court?
All art is derived from previous art, all art inspires forthcoming art. This is a common assumption and arguably true in a lot of cases.
Plagiarism is the theft of published, written, or oral thoughts, ideas, and concepts. Most of the time it is related to academic writing journals, articles, and literary fictitious and non-fictitious works.
When it comes to theft of ideas, we talk about the theft of the brainchild of a creator who will probably feel unvalued in the society if his/her ideas aren’t protected from theft and aren’t given their due credit. The entire industry of academic and literary thoughts and ideas will cease to exist , since they gain no recognition from society. A radical consequence of this could be a depressed, stagnant society with no creativity and subdued exploration of new ideas.
Another setback could be the loss of an important source of government revenue, Royalty. It is a direct revenue that is collected on reuse of the creator of the work in context by the person wishing to reuse it. For societies thriving on creative ideas, this could be a major disaster, both financially and socially.
However to understand how Plagiarism occurs and to develop mechanisms to curb it, we must also dwell on how humans develop their thought processes. This is via cultural and societal environment, and family and friends that surround a person accordingly, cognitive processes develop and the young mind brews ideas.
When a person derives inspiration from someone’s work, it is often an unconscious/subconscious process that a person isn’t aware of. Something might thrill them, encourage them to think more or take a different perspective altogether. Even the greatest writers and artists often come up with ideas that are similar to ones written before. For example, Shakespeare’s Macbeth encouraged writers to dwell in the realms of psychological traumas of their characters and how it could impact their storylines. Similarly, a majority of ideas were introduced via certain big names but could also be discovered by smaller, less recognized writers before, And the world might not ever be able to find the root of an idea because practically, it might seem to be wasted effort.
Many legal battles have been fought, and often been won through backroom negotiations and settlements conducted by the wealthier side of the case. Moreover, the Majority of the population lacks access to legal mechanisms hence end up not being able to defend their ideas, creating plagiarism, a highly vague, unclear, and subjective concept that might benefit only the creamy layer of the society. A Lot of times the defendant is unaware of the presence of an already existing similar idea, and due to lack of resources, and also vast platforms for publishing, which makes it almost impossible to verify plagiarism-free content. Hence, Individuals often publish their work out of excitement and irrational thought.
This brings us to the ongoing trend of Fanfiction in teenagers and youth. Shouldn’t fanfiction also be considered plagiarism of ideas because it's just a continuation or fantasization by the consumer of the content. Are creators then allowed to raise their contention over it, on the grounds it harms the originality and they don’t get enough credit for their work?
And What about ghostwriting? People who don't want to give credit, top tier journalist firms and writers who publish work that isn't original. It Happens even in the fashion and creative industry. Mustn’t we also make sure that plagiarism cases are not presented as mere ghostwriting, through coercion and huge settlements, when wealthy influential people are on the other side?
Hence, there is a need for a fine line to exist between deriving inspiration and sheer robbery. Plagiarism, however, must be considered a civil offense and not a criminal offence since it largely affects individuals but doesn’t have more drastic consequences involving life and death. Classifying it as a criminal offense with heavy punishment will not only discourage people from publishing their works, it arguably could also destroy the cycle of inspiration. However, another point to be noted is that the stricter the system is, the more the chances of defiance.
690 words
// 7 mins xtra
Prompt: Should plagiarism be considered as a punishable crime in court?
All art is derived from previous art, all art inspires forthcoming art. This is a common assumption and arguably true in a lot of cases.
Plagiarism is the theft of published, written, or oral thoughts, ideas, and concepts. Most of the time it is related to academic writing journals, articles, and literary fictitious and non-fictitious works.
When it comes to theft of ideas, we talk about the theft of the brainchild of a creator who will probably feel unvalued in the society if his/her ideas aren’t protected from theft and aren’t given their due credit. The entire industry of academic and literary thoughts and ideas will cease to exist , since they gain no recognition from society. A radical consequence of this could be a depressed, stagnant society with no creativity and subdued exploration of new ideas.
Another setback could be the loss of an important source of government revenue, Royalty. It is a direct revenue that is collected on reuse of the creator of the work in context by the person wishing to reuse it. For societies thriving on creative ideas, this could be a major disaster, both financially and socially.
However to understand how Plagiarism occurs and to develop mechanisms to curb it, we must also dwell on how humans develop their thought processes. This is via cultural and societal environment, and family and friends that surround a person accordingly, cognitive processes develop and the young mind brews ideas.
When a person derives inspiration from someone’s work, it is often an unconscious/subconscious process that a person isn’t aware of. Something might thrill them, encourage them to think more or take a different perspective altogether. Even the greatest writers and artists often come up with ideas that are similar to ones written before. For example, Shakespeare’s Macbeth encouraged writers to dwell in the realms of psychological traumas of their characters and how it could impact their storylines. Similarly, a majority of ideas were introduced via certain big names but could also be discovered by smaller, less recognized writers before, And the world might not ever be able to find the root of an idea because practically, it might seem to be wasted effort.
Many legal battles have been fought, and often been won through backroom negotiations and settlements conducted by the wealthier side of the case. Moreover, the Majority of the population lacks access to legal mechanisms hence end up not being able to defend their ideas, creating plagiarism, a highly vague, unclear, and subjective concept that might benefit only the creamy layer of the society. A Lot of times the defendant is unaware of the presence of an already existing similar idea, and due to lack of resources, and also vast platforms for publishing, which makes it almost impossible to verify plagiarism-free content. Hence, Individuals often publish their work out of excitement and irrational thought.
This brings us to the ongoing trend of Fanfiction in teenagers and youth. Shouldn’t fanfiction also be considered plagiarism of ideas because it's just a continuation or fantasization by the consumer of the content. Are creators then allowed to raise their contention over it, on the grounds it harms the originality and they don’t get enough credit for their work?
And What about ghostwriting? People who don't want to give credit, top tier journalist firms and writers who publish work that isn't original. It Happens even in the fashion and creative industry. Mustn’t we also make sure that plagiarism cases are not presented as mere ghostwriting, through coercion and huge settlements, when wealthy influential people are on the other side?
Hence, there is a need for a fine line to exist between deriving inspiration and sheer robbery. Plagiarism, however, must be considered a civil offense and not a criminal offence since it largely affects individuals but doesn’t have more drastic consequences involving life and death. Classifying it as a criminal offense with heavy punishment will not only discourage people from publishing their works, it arguably could also destroy the cycle of inspiration. However, another point to be noted is that the stricter the system is, the more the chances of defiance.
690 words
// 7 mins xtra
The same problems come up in this essay as with most we read on TSR:
1. Over-prescriptive definitions and statements.
Again, you need to be careful not to be definite about things if you're not sure of them. For instance, your definition of plagiarism seems very definite as 'theft', but leaves no room for self-plagiarism. How can you 'steal' something which belongs to you? And what is the difference between ownership and possession there? Does that observation perhaps mean that narrowly defining plagiarism as 'theft' is beset with problems from the outset?
2. Hyperbole and/or silly ideas.
You've said if 'ideas weren't protected', This is clearly nonsense: human beings are creative beings, laws about IP or no laws about IP. Hyperbole like this significantly weakens arguments.
As the essay progresses, I think you're actually getting muddled between plagiarism and copyright. These are clearly related topics, but the question asks you to discuss plagiarism specifically, which is taking someone else's words, ideas or thoughts and presenting them as your own, or presenting your own thoughts, words or ideas as 'new' in two different works. You make some rather outlandish claims about the judicial system and various points get more and more bizarre - the last paragraph in particular was a bit
, If I'm honest with you.
3. Style and quality of writing
Not great. What is all the random capitalisation about? We don't start sentences with 'And'. And god knows what this is, but it sounds disgusting:
Paragraph needs to be improved, as does clarity of thought. This rambles at times and at others is a bit head-scratching. I didn't come away with any sense of what you were trying to say, or any real sense that you'd attempted to answer the question as asked. You need to be much more focussed in approaching questions like this, and actually have a argument - which you introduce in the introduction, lay out subsequent paragraphs and reinforce by a short, snappy conclusion.
In short - a lot of work to do.
1. Over-prescriptive definitions and statements.
Again, you need to be careful not to be definite about things if you're not sure of them. For instance, your definition of plagiarism seems very definite as 'theft', but leaves no room for self-plagiarism. How can you 'steal' something which belongs to you? And what is the difference between ownership and possession there? Does that observation perhaps mean that narrowly defining plagiarism as 'theft' is beset with problems from the outset?
2. Hyperbole and/or silly ideas.
You've said if 'ideas weren't protected',
"A radical consequence of this could be a depressed, stagnant society with no creativity and subdued exploration of new ideas.".
As the essay progresses, I think you're actually getting muddled between plagiarism and copyright. These are clearly related topics, but the question asks you to discuss plagiarism specifically, which is taking someone else's words, ideas or thoughts and presenting them as your own, or presenting your own thoughts, words or ideas as 'new' in two different works. You make some rather outlandish claims about the judicial system and various points get more and more bizarre - the last paragraph in particular was a bit
, If I'm honest with you.3. Style and quality of writing
Not great. What is all the random capitalisation about? We don't start sentences with 'And'. And god knows what this is, but it sounds disgusting:
creating plagiarism, a highly vague, unclear, and subjective concept that might benefit only the creamy layer of the society.
Paragraph needs to be improved, as does clarity of thought. This rambles at times and at others is a bit head-scratching. I didn't come away with any sense of what you were trying to say, or any real sense that you'd attempted to answer the question as asked. You need to be much more focussed in approaching questions like this, and actually have a argument - which you introduce in the introduction, lay out subsequent paragraphs and reinforce by a short, snappy conclusion.
In short - a lot of work to do.
make sure you anwer the question in front of you and not the one you wish you had (they will drill this into you when you first get to law school. bet you can't wait 
).
if you look at the question again, the question is not 'what is plagiarism' or 'describe the harms of plagiarism'. the question is - Should plagiarism be considered as a punishable crime. in other words, should plagiarism be a crime? if you look at your essay tho, you spent 90 percent of it explaining what it is and why plagiarism is harmful and didn't get to the criminal part till your last paragraph. truth is, not everything harmful gets classified as a crime for public interest reasons. we resolve issues in other ways, namely getting kicked out of school and tort law.
you said in your first paragraph that plagiarism is 'theft'. well, theft is a crime in the UK (see Theft Act 1968 and 1978), so why is plagiarism not punished the same way? how is plagiarism punished currently?
you said plagiarism is 'theft of published, written, or oral thoughts, ideas, and concepts'. that's basically the definition of intellectual property crime, so how is plagiarism different from that?
i can see that you're trying to be opinionated, which is great(!). i would strongly avoid adjectives at all costs tho cuz that's just your personal opinion, and avoid statements you can't prove by example ('the stricter the system is, the more the chances of defiance' - like, why would you say that?). maybe go back to your essay and ask yourself, 'is this common knowledge or is this just my personal opinion'. your personal opinion weakens your argument if you can't prove it. if you can't prove, don't do it
).if you look at the question again, the question is not 'what is plagiarism' or 'describe the harms of plagiarism'. the question is - Should plagiarism be considered as a punishable crime. in other words, should plagiarism be a crime? if you look at your essay tho, you spent 90 percent of it explaining what it is and why plagiarism is harmful and didn't get to the criminal part till your last paragraph. truth is, not everything harmful gets classified as a crime for public interest reasons. we resolve issues in other ways, namely getting kicked out of school and tort law.
you said in your first paragraph that plagiarism is 'theft'. well, theft is a crime in the UK (see Theft Act 1968 and 1978), so why is plagiarism not punished the same way? how is plagiarism punished currently?
you said plagiarism is 'theft of published, written, or oral thoughts, ideas, and concepts'. that's basically the definition of intellectual property crime, so how is plagiarism different from that?
i can see that you're trying to be opinionated, which is great(!). i would strongly avoid adjectives at all costs tho cuz that's just your personal opinion, and avoid statements you can't prove by example ('the stricter the system is, the more the chances of defiance' - like, why would you say that?). maybe go back to your essay and ask yourself, 'is this common knowledge or is this just my personal opinion'. your personal opinion weakens your argument if you can't prove it. if you can't prove, don't do it
Original post by Reality Check
The same problems come up in this essay as with most we read on TSR:
1. Over-prescriptive definitions and statements.
Again, you need to be careful not to be definite about things if you're not sure of them. For instance, your definition of plagiarism seems very definite as 'theft', but leaves no room for self-plagiarism. How can you 'steal' something which belongs to you? And what is the difference between ownership and possession there? Does that observation perhaps mean that narrowly defining plagiarism as 'theft' is beset with problems from the outset?
2. Hyperbole and/or silly ideas.
You've said if 'ideas weren't protected', This is clearly nonsense: human beings are creative beings, laws about IP or no laws about IP. Hyperbole like this significantly weakens arguments.
As the essay progresses, I think you're actually getting muddled between plagiarism and copyright. These are clearly related topics, but the question asks you to discuss plagiarism specifically, which is taking someone else's words, ideas or thoughts and presenting them as your own, or presenting your own thoughts, words or ideas as 'new' in two different works. You make some rather outlandish claims about the judicial system and various points get more and more bizarre - the last paragraph in particular was a bit, If I'm honest with you.
3. Style and quality of writing
Not great. What is all the random capitalisation about? We don't start sentences with 'And'. And god knows what this is, but it sounds disgusting:
Paragraph needs to be improved, as does clarity of thought. This rambles at times and at others is a bit head-scratching. I didn't come away with any sense of what you were trying to say, or any real sense that you'd attempted to answer the question as asked. You need to be much more focussed in approaching questions like this, and actually have a argument - which you introduce in the introduction, lay out subsequent paragraphs and reinforce by a short, snappy conclusion.
In short - a lot of work to do.
1. Over-prescriptive definitions and statements.
Again, you need to be careful not to be definite about things if you're not sure of them. For instance, your definition of plagiarism seems very definite as 'theft', but leaves no room for self-plagiarism. How can you 'steal' something which belongs to you? And what is the difference between ownership and possession there? Does that observation perhaps mean that narrowly defining plagiarism as 'theft' is beset with problems from the outset?
2. Hyperbole and/or silly ideas.
You've said if 'ideas weren't protected', This is clearly nonsense: human beings are creative beings, laws about IP or no laws about IP. Hyperbole like this significantly weakens arguments.
As the essay progresses, I think you're actually getting muddled between plagiarism and copyright. These are clearly related topics, but the question asks you to discuss plagiarism specifically, which is taking someone else's words, ideas or thoughts and presenting them as your own, or presenting your own thoughts, words or ideas as 'new' in two different works. You make some rather outlandish claims about the judicial system and various points get more and more bizarre - the last paragraph in particular was a bit
, If I'm honest with you.3. Style and quality of writing
Not great. What is all the random capitalisation about? We don't start sentences with 'And'. And god knows what this is, but it sounds disgusting:
Paragraph needs to be improved, as does clarity of thought. This rambles at times and at others is a bit head-scratching. I didn't come away with any sense of what you were trying to say, or any real sense that you'd attempted to answer the question as asked. You need to be much more focussed in approaching questions like this, and actually have a argument - which you introduce in the introduction, lay out subsequent paragraphs and reinforce by a short, snappy conclusion.
In short - a lot of work to do.
thanks for the review. will definitely put more
effort into it.
Original post by Joleee
make sure you anwer the question in front of you and not the one you wish you had (they will drill this into you when you first get to law school. bet you can't wait ).
if you look at the question again, the question is not 'what is plagiarism' or 'describe the harms of plagiarism'. the question is - Should plagiarism be considered as a punishable crime. in other words, should plagiarism be a crime? if you look at your essay tho, you spent 90 percent of it explaining what it is and why plagiarism is harmful and didn't get to the criminal part till your last paragraph. truth is, not everything harmful gets classified as a crime for public interest reasons. we resolve issues in other ways, namely getting kicked out of school and tort law.
you said in your first paragraph that plagiarism is 'theft'. well, theft is a crime in the UK (see Theft Act 1968 and 1978), so why is plagiarism not punished the same way? how is plagiarism punished currently?
you said plagiarism is 'theft of published, written, or oral thoughts, ideas, and concepts'. that's basically the definition of intellectual property crime, so how is plagiarism different from that?
i can see that you're trying to be opinionated, which is great(!). i would strongly avoid adjectives at all costs tho cuz that's just your personal opinion, and avoid statements you can't prove by example ('the stricter the system is, the more the chances of defiance' - like, why would you say that?). maybe go back to your essay and ask yourself, 'is this common knowledge or is this just my personal opinion'. your personal opinion weakens your argument if you can't prove it. if you can't prove, don't do it
).if you look at the question again, the question is not 'what is plagiarism' or 'describe the harms of plagiarism'. the question is - Should plagiarism be considered as a punishable crime. in other words, should plagiarism be a crime? if you look at your essay tho, you spent 90 percent of it explaining what it is and why plagiarism is harmful and didn't get to the criminal part till your last paragraph. truth is, not everything harmful gets classified as a crime for public interest reasons. we resolve issues in other ways, namely getting kicked out of school and tort law.
you said in your first paragraph that plagiarism is 'theft'. well, theft is a crime in the UK (see Theft Act 1968 and 1978), so why is plagiarism not punished the same way? how is plagiarism punished currently?
you said plagiarism is 'theft of published, written, or oral thoughts, ideas, and concepts'. that's basically the definition of intellectual property crime, so how is plagiarism different from that?
i can see that you're trying to be opinionated, which is great(!). i would strongly avoid adjectives at all costs tho cuz that's just your personal opinion, and avoid statements you can't prove by example ('the stricter the system is, the more the chances of defiance' - like, why would you say that?). maybe go back to your essay and ask yourself, 'is this common knowledge or is this just my personal opinion'. your personal opinion weakens your argument if you can't prove it. if you can't prove, don't do it
hey thanks so much for the review! i absolutely get what you're trying to say, I'll definitely look into it !
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Glasgow LNAT Score 2024
- arbitio vs law mind (lnat+ps)
- Lnat essay
- do i have a chance at law at bristol
- LNAT reassurance
- LNAT help (pls)
- Anyone already gave LNAT for 2024 entry?
- UCL Law 2024
- Is there point in doing the LNAT test when chances of receiving a conditional are low
- LNAT vs Arbitio help
- UCAS Law application
- Law offers - 2024 entry
- How best to prepare for the LNAT?
- how do bristol and durham look at LNAT?
- LNAT Results 2023 Thread
- Are LNAT universities better? Should I do the LNAT?
- Durham Law 2024
- Lnat booking help
- Hi guys, sitting my LNAT
- UCL LNAT score 2024
Latest
Last reply 5 minutes ago
Official Veterinary Medicine Applicants thread 2024 entryLast reply 14 minutes ago
BAE systems degree apprenticeships September 2024Last reply 36 minutes ago
What is the difference between ejusdem generis and noscitur a sociis?Last reply 36 minutes ago
Official London School of Economics and Political Science 2024 Applicant ThreadLast reply 38 minutes ago
Risus eget quam volutpat nisl in. Posuere mauris quam quis interdum vestibulum. Sed pLast reply 42 minutes ago
Durham vs Exeter Finance/AccountingLast reply 46 minutes ago
British Airways Apprenticeships 2024Last reply 47 minutes ago
LSE politics and Economics 2023/2024
