{"title":"澳大利亚法律教育和法律实践中对剽窃定义的困惑","authors":"M. Wyburn","doi":"10.1080/14760400903354507","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"While most would admit that plagiarism, or at least its detection, has increased significantly in recent times, and this is a worldwide trend, not everyone would agree on the definition of the term, nor its application in particular circumstances. The paper discusses the problems of definition and application as revealed in recent Australian cases and controversies about plagiarism in the legal education and legal practice contexts.","PeriodicalId":107403,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Commonwealth Law and Legal Education","volume":"10 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2009-11-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"THE CONFUSION IN DEFINING PLAGIARISM IN LEGAL EDUCATION AND LEGAL PRACTICE IN AUSTRALIA\",\"authors\":\"M. Wyburn\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/14760400903354507\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"While most would admit that plagiarism, or at least its detection, has increased significantly in recent times, and this is a worldwide trend, not everyone would agree on the definition of the term, nor its application in particular circumstances. The paper discusses the problems of definition and application as revealed in recent Australian cases and controversies about plagiarism in the legal education and legal practice contexts.\",\"PeriodicalId\":107403,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Commonwealth Law and Legal Education\",\"volume\":\"10 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2009-11-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"7\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Commonwealth Law and Legal Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/14760400903354507\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Commonwealth Law and Legal Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14760400903354507","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
THE CONFUSION IN DEFINING PLAGIARISM IN LEGAL EDUCATION AND LEGAL PRACTICE IN AUSTRALIA
While most would admit that plagiarism, or at least its detection, has increased significantly in recent times, and this is a worldwide trend, not everyone would agree on the definition of the term, nor its application in particular circumstances. The paper discusses the problems of definition and application as revealed in recent Australian cases and controversies about plagiarism in the legal education and legal practice contexts.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
