To me Martha is guilty maybe not of plagiarism, but of copyright infringement. I believe she is guilty of copyright infringement because even though she cited her work she still did not receive permission from the original person. The reasons I chose the answer I chose is because after looking at the definitions you can make a guess. Plagiarism is the act of taking someone else's work or ideas and passing them off as one's own. But because she didn’t copy the words or even take some and rephrase them into her own I would not consider it plagiarism.
Next I will tell you what copyright infringement is. Copyright infringement is the use of works protected by copyright law without permission. So if you copy someone stuff without their permission to me you are guilty of copyright infringement. Now other people have their own opinions but when it all boils down to it the one that makes the final decision is the government or school authorities. With all that said since I believe she is guilty on copyright infringement I’m going to go a little more in depth on this subject. “Before you can know what copyright infringement is, you must first know what rights you hold as a copyright holder. Each of these rights can be sold or assigned separately. Copyright infringement occurs when one of those rights are used without the express consent of the copyright owner. Now you must know your rights as a copyright owner.” Copyright Infringement. 2014).
1)
…show more content…
This is to reproduce, copy, or duplicate the work in any fixed form.” (Copyright Infringement. 2014).
2) “The Right to Derivative Works. This is the right to modify the work to create a new work.” Copyright Infringement. (2014, December