Rex Bell has been complimented, in a different type of way. Cooper City, Florida, Commissioner John Sims has been accused of taking other people's written material and posting it on his personal blog without permission of the authors or giving them credit for the material. Among the material "lifted" is from an Indiana Libertarian columnist, Rex Bell! Read more about this in the Miami Herald article titled "Questionable postings found on Cooper City official's blog".
Rex has a blog in the Richmond Palladium-Item and his own blog TheBellCurve.
Rex is the Wayne County Libertarian Party Chairman and is married to Susan Bell, the Hagerstown Town Court Judge elected to the position as a Libertarian. Susan is running for reelection this year unopposed, again as a Libertarian.
5 comments:
Well, now it appears that Sims is a Libertarian, and their Mayor made this lie up. The Herals reporter is on the payroll, and the facts are out. Sims linked evey article about his town on the blog to each article, but they 'forgot' very conveniently I might ad, to mention that! They are attacking him and trying to discredit him because he apparently is close to finding $18.1 million that is somehow 'missing'.
I usually don't allow anonymous comments on this blog, but the previous comment does provide a defense for Sims. Since the allegations are serious against Mr. Sims, I went ahead and posted it to give someone's view opposing the tenor of the Miami Herald article.
However, posting anonymous comments is the exception and not the rule on this blog.
thanks Mark for allowing us to comment. Yes, Commissioner Sims is a Libertarian and he wants to see this corrupt local governement investigated and shut down. The Mayor is involved in land deals with Senator Geller, and Comm. Sims has uncovered more than the inumbents can handle in corruption, that's why the Mayor and her friend at the Miami Herald attacked him, to keep the truth from being forefront. Stay tuned. Commissioner Sims will prevail!
The difference between not recognizing expression as property and plagiarism is that a plagiarist misrepresents himself to consumers, constituting a fraud.
The plagiarist does not harm the original creator of a work (since he had no right to income or value), so someone who is plagiarized has as much recourse to compensation as someone whose reputation is slandered or whose stock is brought down by FUD: none.
However, someone who consumes intellectual resources on the condition that the person selling it is the actual creator of that resourse is defrauded when that is not the case.
So, in short, not recognizing copyrights is a matter of natural rights superceding monopoly rights, while plagiarism is a matter of defrauding a consumer. Copyright 'violators' seldom misrepresent the work as their own; in fact, they would be better able to distribute by making sure the real producer is known to the consumer (i.e., no one is interested in "Man, the Economy, and State" by Anthony Bongiovanni; but the same book will sell well under its correct author).
Hello Mark,
You run a great blog! I had just a quick question regarding your comments regarding the plagiarism blog. How come we don't see what date this comments were made? I would like to participate in this blog but am unsure if this is several months old when the article broke about Commissioner Simms alleged plagiarism or if this is a recent exchange of comments?
Thank you and keep up the good work.
Jim
Post a Comment