Timeline for Why did typesetting allegedly "make it difficult for illegal copiers"?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 20, 2020 at 9:10 | comment | added | LаngLаngС | Am just highlighting how the question comes across here. And as I tried to hint at: 'into' was perhaps much more common than wholesale, while wholesale also happened. But the main thing is that comments here indicate ppl read the Q as being about 'piracy', thus me suggesting to differentiate that. | |
| Jun 20, 2020 at 9:07 | comment | added | sempaiscuba | @LаngLаngС And, of course, that sort of thing isn't necessarily limited to hand-written manuscripts. I'm reminded of the Tom Lehrer song Lobachevsky. ;-) | |
| Jun 20, 2020 at 9:06 | comment | added | sempaiscuba | @LаngLаngС Again, why it is always worth checking the original citation. I don't think Murray is implying the plagiarism of the entire work, but rather simply the copying of large parts of one work into another ("... texts were often copied and recopied, without attribution, into other works."). Of course, it may have happened that an entire work was plagiarised by simply copying and putting another name on the cover, and with so many lost manuscripts we might never know. | |
| Jun 20, 2020 at 8:55 | comment | added | LаngLаngС | As you see in comments above, quite few would read Q as 'print piracy', not as wholesale plagiarism. A thing btw, I would also find hard to imagine in numbers. Who did plagiarise an entire work with just putting another name on the thing? (Thinking of a few letters of Paul, but can't really come up with medieval books, so… :) | |
| Jun 20, 2020 at 2:11 | history | edited | sempaiscuba | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Added page number for quoted text
|
| Jun 20, 2020 at 1:46 | history | edited | sempaiscuba | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Added summary paragraph
|
| Jun 20, 2020 at 1:33 | history | answered | sempaiscuba | CC BY-SA 4.0 |