[kyokominamino]

Welp, practically rewriting Harry Potter, or publishing Twilight-Fanfic with the serial numbers barely filed off, and I am talking characters, plot, relationships, descriptions and setup is - where I live - a totally different ball game from re-using a few expressions or descriptions barely a sentence long.

This here, I would call shoddy research and bad implementation of it. I re-read the initial post and it basically comes down to 6-7 unrelated sentences in several different books, partially re-written. All the rest is too vague and unsubstantial to even consider. I doubt it could be called plagiarism in any lawsuit. More like fair use, happenstance or something like that.

I'm not trying to "defend" Mark Dawson or anything, but this reads more like a hate campaign to me than anything else. At the very least it's hugely blown out of proportion, which makes me wonder why? I also wonder why almost everyone jumps on this bandwagon with such a display of glee. I don't get that. Especially over such a minuscule thing. Especially when I see lots of authors reusing tired old tropes and expressions.

Edited to add: By the way, I believe authors and publishers are shooting themselves in their own feet by breaking out the pitchforks in such a manner. Who would want the same situation with fiction we currently already have in music? There's nothing truly new on this planet. If authors have to be afraid every well-used expression can kill their careers and cause plagiarism accusations, we're going to end up with the same kind of muzak mush in writing that this caused in music.

I was gonna keep my mouth shut, but oh well--it was NOT a few. Look at this list. There are 20 entries on this list alone, and that's what the original OP of the Reddit thread found: And if you open the Word document that the person compiled, it has all of the theft lined up so you can CLEARLY see he took other people's passages and rephrased them, and not convincingly. It is not "shooting yourself in the foot" to call out someone doing something that is outright illegal, whether they decide to pursue it legally and monetarily or not. Even if he had only stolen "a few phrases," it doesn't change the fact that it is plagiarism. No one here is suggesting we hate him. We are suggesting that he be held accountable for unacceptable behavior. Writers naturally have homages, inspirations, and other things related to each other, but this is blatant theft and we should be calling it out because it's bad behavior, regardless of how this situation is resolved.

No need to reply. I'm just going to vacate this thread for good for my own mental health. But this needed to be said. We should not grant passes on bad behavior because someone interprets it as harmless. If you didn't write those words, then don't take credit for them and don't expect a pat on the back because you know how to use a thesaurus.

 

[Ex Aureolis]

I was gonna keep my mouth shut, but oh well--it was NOT a few. Look at this list. There are 20 entries on this list alone, and that's what the original OP of the Reddit thread found

I read that. There are a couple of straight quotes of sentences, and beyond that just similar descriptions of activities. If ten people describe how a horse is tacked up, or how a golfball is being hit with a driving iron, or how a specialty rifle is prepared for a long target shot, I'll bet you a solid couple of bucks, that at least 6 of them are extremely similar. Such things are not "diverse". There are but a very few finite ways to do them.

And if you open the Word document that the person compiled, it has all of the theft lined up so you can CLEARLY see he took other people's passages and rephrased them, and not convincingly.

I don't open doc files posted by people I don't personally know. I read his long post, though.

It is not "shooting yourself in the foot" to call out someone doing something that is outright illegal, whether they decide to pursue it legally and monetarily or not.

Plagiarism - unlike copyright theft - may be obnoxious and bad style, but it's not illegal. I don't know what genre you write, but I do know that 95% of all love scenes I read in any sub-genre of romance sound practically the same. Right down to the exact words used in them. One can even date the romance novel by what words are being used. And as up to circa 2010 most romances were published by traditional publishers, we would have heard of countless copyright cases over the years. Traditional publishers do tend to sue, they have the means alright.

And yes, of course all these authors plagiarised each other, just as a lot of them lately plagiarise videos they watch to get a notion of how what plays out. It's easy enough to discern. No need for a PhD thesis to show that. And if I wanted I could show more plagiarism of such scenes in one book, than is involved here across all of them.

Also, you didn't catch the meaning of my "shooting in the feet" argument. In music we are by now at a stage of semi-automatic copyright lawsuits, in which musicians can be sued for millions over a simple riff or 4 notes played in sequence. However, if such riffs and sequences are suddenly "off limits" to other musicians, for fear of getting sued over them, to the point of bancruptcy, no less, then consecutively less diverse and interesting music can be written or performed.

No one here is suggesting we hate him. We are suggesting that he be held accountable for unacceptable behavior.

I wasn't suggesting that any readers here hate him. I was wondering why someone would go to such lengths as displayed here. I find that quite astonishing. Because, and that's just my personal opinion, I think what happened is extended research by Dawson and reusing that research for authentic tone. That's certainly sloppy writing and yes, he shouldn't have done that, but it nowhere comes close to the 10 to 15% rule so far. More like 0.01%.

And agreed, I'll stand corrected if more surfaces, if it can be proven that he plagiarised 10% and more of someone else's work.

Soon enough AI will render the entire argument moot anyway. If things keep evolving the way they currently do, lots of books will contain reused content. Just as already lots of stock and coverart is reused content.*

With that I also bow out of this discussion.

*Can't resist adding this:

Japan literary laureate unashamed about using ChatGPT

The winner of Japan's most prestigious literary award has acknowledged that about "five percent" of her futuristic novel was penned by ChatGPT, saying generative AI had helped unlock her potential.

 

[Brian D. Anderson]

may be obnoxious and bad style, but it's not illegal

It's not criminally illegal. No one goes to jail for plagiarism. But it is actionable. It's grounds for a lawsuit and can be cited as just cause for dismissal from employment. Morally, it's theft.
In the literary world, the product of our labors is incorporeal. A thief can't just shove it in their pocket when no one is looking. The plagiarist is stealing your ideas, skills, and talent, hoping that no one will notice. It feels like someone stole your car, painted it a different color, insisting it was theirs, all the while driving around town hoping you won't recognize your own damn car.

 

[Ex Aureolis]

It feels like someone stole your car, painted it a different color, insisting it was theirs, all the while driving around town hoping you won't recognize your own damn car.

I agree. At least as soon as a certain margin has been breached with c&p'ed text (which would be - as mentioned above - the 10-15% of a text in most Berne Convention signatory countries). Such cases have happened recently and usually consist of re-gendered (else unchanged) texts of entire novels. No discussion about that.

However, also as I stated, already a plagiarism like that of "Fifty Shades of Grey" (which is a retelling/reuse of "Twilight"), which itself then was plagiarised by a gazillion of authors, is not actionable and was largely accepted by authors, whether self-published or trad.

But someone stealing/appropriating a single sentence or maybe two of my book and using it in theirs? I'd probably be amused, feel chuffed, and might even use the deed for advertising.

 

[Becca Mills]

A point of fact here that adaptation and plagiarism are different things. If I am writing a paper about Shakespeare's Taming of the Shrew, and I use language from the play without quotation marks, I am plagiarizing. If I write the screenplay for 10 Things I Hate About You, I am adapting. In that case, the difference between the two is quite clear because the film is so different from the play and in fact critiques it. In other cases, adaptations are much closer to their source material and may cross the line into plagiarism, with so little newness being added to the work that it feels more like piggybacking or theft than adaptation. I haven't read Fifty Shades of Grey, but maybe that is the case there? Dunno. My memory is that Stephenie Meyer wasn't upset about it, and she should probably be respected as the decider on that one.

I think one of the main differences between adaptations that seem ethical and those that cross the line is the overtness of the relationship between the adaptation and its source: a work like 10 Things I Hate About You (or Clueless, or A Thousand Acres, or Ran, or My Own Private Idaho) makes no effort to disguise its relationship to its source material and in fact celebrates it because the relationship is part of the point, adaptation involving commentary on and critique of the original work. Fanfiction may not include the elements of commentary and critique, but it does have the explicitly advertised relation between adaptation and source.

But none of this has much to do with the topic of this thread because adaptation that crosses the fuzzy line into plagiarism is not the type of plagiarism that's in question here; it's the more straightforward matter of short prose passages that appear match exactly from one work to another.

 

[Viqes]

Our thresholds for "hate" must be very different. I don't hate Mark Dawson. He's not important enough for me to hate. I can't think of a single instance his name came up when I was among colleagues.
I called him a snake-oil salesman because I have seen his kind before. A seller of dreams. You too can be the next big thing in literature, and I can show you how. All the things they don't want you to know - whoever they are is never made clear - can be yours, for the low, low price of....

It's obvious you're speaking from a position of ignorance. Mark Dawson is a 7 figure author but I'd be wiling to bet that most of us here have never read a single one of his books. He's not popular in the author community because he's a great writer. He doesn't even teach writing. He teaches MARKETING.

You're calling someone a snake oil salesman without any evidence to back it up. Mark Dawson is considered a nice guy and is one of the more helpful people in the indie author community. He runs a popular podcast and sells a course on marketing that people have found useful. If someone buys his course and doesn't find it useful they're given a no questions asked refund.

As far as the plagiarism allegation goes, there is a HUGE difference between a newbie writer being lame in their first book and taking shortcuts by copying (either intentional or otherwise) a few sentences here and there and legitimate plagiarism that is actionable.

I agree with the person earlier who said most of this sounds like a hate campaign.

 

[NikOK]

It's obvious you're speaking from a position of ignorance.

If you want to have a conversation, this is probably not the best way to start it 🤣 This forum has a ton of very smart people with lots of experience in a huge variety of subjects, and I feel like it's not really fair to say a straight up, I'm right and you're wrong.

It's great to have different opinions on the subject, and input always helps the discussion, but when you're not open to that discussion, well, that's what twitter is for 😆

 

[Redgum]

Following the allegations made on Reddit, the author seemed to disappear from social media for a month but now appears to be returning. Will he answer these allegations or is he hoping they're just going to go away?

 

[Redgum]

Judging by how the author is slowly sliding back onto social media after a five-week absence, as yet with no comment on the allegations, it could be that he's still hoping this is all going to go away. Is this a realistic strategy? Is it disrespectful to the self-publishing community, of whom many have viewed him as a leader, or even to his readers who have paid for his books, not to give a response to these very serious allegations?

 

[Redgum]

There is a new post on the wilsebbis Reddit thread "I believe bestselling author Mark Dawson is a serial plagiarist" claiming Self-Publishing Formula have announced various changes, including how Mark Dawson is going to "take a step back". Can anyone confirm if this has been published in the SPF Facebook page? I think it's members only. Interesting if confirmed to be true, as there is still no response to the allegations made in that Reddit thread.

 

[flounder88]

There is a new post on the wilsebbis Reddit thread "I believe bestselling author Mark Dawson is a serial plagiarist" claiming Self-Publishing Formula have announced various changes, including how Mark Dawson is going to "take a step back". Can anyone confirm if this has been published in the SPF Facebook page? I think it's members only. Interesting if confirmed to be true, as there is still no response to the allegations made in that Reddit thread.

The SPF post you refer to is pasted below - it appeared in their FB group yesterday. It's fooling nobody if the chatter out there is anything to go by. Dawson has made no response to the allegations and is trying to sneak away from public view opting to get out of the self-pub limelight, cutting short his career as a guru and focus on preserving his author business. Makes sense. I doubt many of his readers have heard about the plagiarism. That having been said his misdemeanours have made the mainstream press before (when he admitted underhand tactics to get on the UK Sunday Times bestseller list) and I hear that there may be more damaging revelations to come. Let's see. The folk who have invested in his courses over the years must feel pretty disappointed and cheated. It's hard to see how the SPF brand can reinvent itself without Dawson - at least he was a genuine bestselling author. The same can't be said for the guy left holding the baby (James Blatch). What an unholy mess - and wake-up call for all those other suspect gurus who inhabit the space.


Edited to remove post from SPF. You can't copy/paste material from a private group or forum to KBoards. Also edited for name-calling. - Becca

 

[Redgum]

The SPF post you refer to is pasted below - it appeared in their FB group yesterday. It's fooling nobody if the chatter out there is anything to go by. Dawson has made no response to the allegations and is trying to sneak away from public view opting to get out of the self-pub limelight, cutting short his career as a guru and focus on preserving his author business. Makes sense. I doubt many of his readers have heard about the plagiarism. That having been said his misdemeanours have made the mainstream press before (when he admitted underhand tactics to get on the UK Sunday Times bestseller list) and I hear that there may be more damaging revelations to come. Let's see. The folk who have invested in his courses over the years must feel pretty disappointed and cheated. It's hard to see how the SPF brand can reinvent itself without Dawson - at least he was a genuine bestselling author. The same can't be said for the guy left holding the baby (James Blatch). What an unholy mess - and wake-up call for all those other suspect gurus who inhabit the space.


Edited to remove post from SPF. You can't copy/paste material from a private group or forum to KBoards. Also edited for name-calling. - Becca

Thanks for posting this confirmation, flounder88. Your assessment about the author's possible strategy to withdraw from the self-publishing sphere and focus on novels seems a rational path for him to take (although it's purely speculative from our point of view). I recall the reports in The Guardian and The Independent about when the author purchased 400 copies of his own novel, retail. It is ironic that two of the sources the Reddit post alleges the author plagiarised are these two newspapers. I wonder if either of these papers is aware of this?

On the subject of the novels, the last time I checked, the author's novella "Tarantula", which I believe was the subject of many of these allegations, had been removed from Amazon. Whether it was removed by Amazon or the author is of course not public information, but I believe some of the other titles mentioned in the same Reddit post are still for sale on Amazon, and also published by Welbeck in paperback. One wonders what Welbeck's reaction is to these serious allegations.

 

[Crystal_]

It's possible Mark is stepping back because of this, but it's also highly likely he was planning on stepping back either way. I expect this is more about Facebook ads losing effectiveness (that was his focus) than anything else.

Mark has been been less and less of a presence in SPF courses for years.

 

[Redgum]

I see Hidden Gems are doing a podcast called "Inspiration vs Plagiarism: Exploring the Fine Line between Inspiration and Plagiarism". I thought this was interesting timing.

 

[powerofwords]

EDIT: Since it seems some of his early books were co-authored, could it be that other person did that? And Dawson would have little chance to find it if he didn't read those books...

If a book is co-authored, every author would also read the book and comment if they found it not quite right. Some of the language used is nothing you'd ever find today (even in historical works). An article spinner would have added different nouns here and there perhaps, that's how spinners work.

 

[Redgum]

If a book is co-authored, every author would also read the book and comment if they found it not quite right. Some of the language used is nothing you'd ever find today (even in historical works). An article spinner would have added different nouns here and there perhaps, that's how spinners work.

I'm not sure which of his books are supposed to be co-authored. Certainly none of the ones mentioned in the original Reddit plagiarism allegation thread, although I'm happy to be corrected.

 

[flounder88]

Thanks for posting this confirmation, flounder88. Your assessment about the author's possible strategy to withdraw from the self-publishing sphere and focus on novels seems a rational path for him to take (although it's purely speculative from our point of view). I recall the reports in The Guardian and The Independent about when the author purchased 400 copies of his own novel, retail. It is ironic that two of the sources the Reddit post alleges the author plagiarised are these two newspapers. I wonder if either of these papers is aware of this?

On the subject of the novels, the last time I checked, the author's novella "Tarantula", which I believe was the subject of many of these allegations, had been removed from Amazon. Whether it was removed by Amazon or the author is of course not public information, but I believe some of the other titles mentioned in the same Reddit post are still for sale on Amazon, and also published by Welbeck in paperback. One wonders what Welbeck's reaction is to these serious allegations.

I think the author of the original plagiarism post on Reddit reached out to a whole bunch of press including The Guardian. It remains to be seen what will come of that; maybe there will be some mainstream press on this in the future (I think there would be a lot of research and crosschecking to do on the topic before going live with any such article). As for the missing books, I don't doubt there will be some rapid-fire re-editing of editions in the background to remove any further examples of his plagiarism. This would explain their absence. By the way, Welbeck is no more having been bought by Hachette in 2022. Dawson's books now appear under their Headline division. He doesn't have many books on there. I'll be amazed if they renew his deal when this one ends.

 

[flounder88]

I see Hidden Gems are doing a podcast called "Inspiration vs Plagiarism: Exploring the Fine Line between Inspiration and Plagiarism". I thought this was interesting timing.

Very interesting. I see there's a link to the Medium article on Dawson's plagiarism in there but the author's careful not to address the story directly - probably on the advice of HG's lawyer!

 

[empty page]

I just discovered the Self Publishing Show podcast and feel that it's helpful for newbies to publishing, which I am. And then I came across the Dawson plagiarism allegations, which was disappointing and confusing. Confusing because, when going deeper, I haven't found anything other than a Reddit thread. Is there an actual law suit or anything official?

 

[flounder88]

I just discovered the Self Publishing Show podcast and feel that it's helpful for newbies to publishing, which I am. And then I came across the Dawson plagiarism allegations, which was disappointing and confusing. Confusing because, when going deeper, I haven't found anything other than a Reddit thread. Is there an actual law suit or anything official?

The evidence in the Reddit post is pretty damning but you'll now find many references to that post in the self-pub world. Dawson has yet to make any public comment (as has his company Self Publishing Formula - or whatever it's now called) but who knows what's going on behind the scenes. There could be legal moves from Dawson against the author of the post but don't discount legal moves against Dawson from those authors whose works he allegedly plundered.