[longshadow]

For the record, here's my alma mater's definition of "plagiarism":

Plagiarism includes, but is not limited to, failure to indicate the source with quotation marks or footnotes where appropriate if any of the following are reproduced in the work submitted by a student:

1. A phrase, written or musical.
2. A graphic element.
3. A proof.
4. Specific language.
5. An idea derived from the work, published or unpublished, of another person.

[emphasis added]

source: http://www.cmu.edu/policies/documents/Cheating.html

The reader will note that a specific claim of "ownership" of material that is in fact attributable to another is NOT necessary for plagiarism to have taken place. The mere submission of the material in the absence of the appropriate attribution is sufficient.

[js1138]

That's a tough definition. I don't think many of us credit our non-original ideas. I don't even remember where I first read most of the stuff I know.

Am I mistaken, or has the exact post in question been made before on FR? I have a distinct visual memory of a post made a year or so ago that was several paragraphs long, mostly a quotation, but had an odd sentence or two added in.