College Update – Plagiarism Aplenty, But No eMail or Wristwatches


Plagiarism is alive and well on college campuses however it is no wonder since the Internet and Social Media have changed communications. Without question Wikipedia has become a reliable source for students and at least 16 US intelligence agencies. Many question the authenticity of Wikipedia, but if the US intelligence community can rely on Wikipedia I guess the information’s reliable. But plagiarizing Internet information is part of a larger social issue that college students today believe that any information on the Internet is free game to include in their course assignments. Perhaps this is not a new phenomenon, rather professors can use Internet search tools to determine if students are plagiarizing which was not available when information only available in books when I was a college student.

Who Needs eMail or a Watch?

As Social Media morphs it’s no wonder that college students rely on cell phones for knowing the time and sending text messages in lieu of email. Remember that in 2009 there were 1.5 billion text messages sent, and with Facebook’s estimated 500 million friends the shift of communications probably indicates more postings on Facebook and that eMail will to decline from the estimated 210 billion sent each day....of course 70% are probably SPAM.  Interesting to see how Social Media evolves.

Where’s the Evidence?

Without question courthouses in the US have changed forever as a result of Social Media and the increase in text messages and eMail. However for more than 30 years my clients’ litigation has been limited to disputes about computer technology and Internet services which means that every lawsuit has had eEvidence. Recently I participated in a webcast with US Magistrate Judge Paul Grimm who wrote the well respected opinion in Lorraine v Markel (about the admissibility of eEvidence) and Judge Grimm pointed out how much more education is necessary to raise the water level for Judges and lawyers. Courthouses will never be the same, so Judges and lawyers have to understand more about Social Media communications.

The publications contained in this site do not constitute legal advice. Legal advice can only be given with knowledge of the client's specific facts. By putting these publications on our website we do not intend to create a lawyer-client relationship with the user. Materials may not reflect the most current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. This information should in no way be taken as an indication of future results.

Search Tips:

You may use the wildcard symbol (*) as a root expander.  A search for "anti*" will find not only "anti", but also "anti-trust", "antique", etc.

Entering two terms together in a search field will behave as though an "OR" is being used.  For example, entering "Antique Motorcars" as a Client Name search will find results with either word in the Client Name.


AND and OR may be used in a search.  Note: they must be capitalized, e.g., "Project AND Finance." 

The + and - sign operators may be used.  The + sign indicates that the term immediately following is required, while the - sign indicates to omit results that contain that term. E.g., "+real -estate" says results must have "real" but not "estate".

To perform an exact phrase search, surround your search phrase with quotation marks.  For example, "Project Finance".

Searches are not case sensitive.

back to top