What I do have a problem with is the fact that, after uploading an assignment, I am required to click a checkbox that says "I agree to Turnitin's end-user license agreement." I should not have to agree to a license for a piece of software that I'm not even using; it's my professor who's using Turnitin's services. And if it's 11:55 PM and I'm trying to submit my assignment, it feels really scummy to suddenly force me to sign a legal contract that I don't even have time to read.
Then my university moved to Canvas and TurnItIn. At first there was no license agreement check box, and all the courses were force-enabled to allow TurnItIn to store student submissions forever.
I raised a lot of bell over that and the next term there was that same checkbox that I assume you also see.
It always felt very coercive. I hated checking that box. I fought tooth and nail. I had conference calls with the Academic Technologies leadership. They absolutely didn’t understand the objection. They compared it to Office 365 and didn’t understand the point that neither the university nor Microsoft was requiring that I give them a perpetual, virtually limitless license to my content in order to use the service.
I pointed to the university policies which explicitly and very clearly categorized non-compensated student output as the property of the student, who was to regain all rights. I pointed out the conflict of interest that iParadigms brings to the table.
All I ever got in response was the talking points I found on the TurnItIn marketing material. I’d have been OK if they disagreed after an actual discussion, but they weren’t interested.
In practice, this could easily fall under fair-use, though, since the paper isn't distributed for the purpose of consumption.
Authors generally have right to their works by default, even students. Those who use copyrighted works for academic purposes do get some exceptions to copyright law.... but a commercial service is not this.
Furthermore, student assignments are additionally protected by FERPA.
I'm not sure the answer, but I do think it's a great question.
https://help.turnitin.com/Privacy_and_Security/Privacy_and_S...
So your school or university are really deciding whether your paper is stored for future plagiarism checks.
U.S. copyright law provides copyright owners with the following exclusive rights:
- Reproduce the work in copies or phonorecords.
- Prepare derivative works based upon the work.
- Distribute copies or phonorecords of the work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership or by rental, lease, or lending.
- Perform the work publicly if it is a literary, musical, dramatic, or choreographic work; a pantomime; or a motion picture or other audiovisual work.
- Display the work publicly if it is a literary, musical, dramatic, or choreographic work; a pantomime; or a pictorial, graphic, or sculptural work.
-Perform the work publicly by means of a digital audio transmission if the work is a sound recording.
Copyright also provides the owner of copyright the right to authorize others to exercise these exclusive rights, subject to certain statutory limitations.
By that logic, isn't it the same for Google? They keep a copy of your content in their cache/index (you can even get the indexed page directly from their cache).
You can opt out of that, also it's published content and caching has a carved out exception. When you use this service at a school the teacher submits your paper to the service and they store it to validate against other students papers as well.
They don't only check against "published" sources.
So, sure - download to your heart's content. Which means TurnItIn has little incentive to keep works out of their database - you can't make a claim against them if they don't publicize that your work is in it.
Combined, TurnItIn is offering a service that individual copyright holders are likely uninterested in providing themselves, the use does not reduce the marketability of the copyrighted work, and there is probably not a market for this service that individual copyright holders could monetize. This is a pretty good case for fair use.
* plagiarism is not generally against the law, although it is a violation of school policies and can get you punished by your school. It's claiming someone else's work as your own. It may or may not involve a copyright violation, it can be plagiarism without involving a copyright violation -- it could be the author gave you permission, or the item isn't in copyright, or it would count as "fair use" -- it's still plagiarism if your teacher/school/honor code panel says it is.
* copyright is about the law, violating a copyright is against the law and can get you civil or criminal penalties. It involves copying work someone else legally owns without permission. It may or may not involve claiming the work as your own, for the most part whether you attribute something properly or claim it for your own is not relevant to whether it is a copyright violation. (I suppose in some edge cases it could be relevant to whether you have a "fair use" defense, but mostly it's not significant in whether something is a copyright violation).
If you provide copies of your work for free on the internet, this is why they get to keep one, just as everyone else? They are probably not allowed to distribute it, though?
A more interesting question is, if these companies do well and stay in business a long time, won't it become increasingly difficult to write an original paper that isn't flagged for plagiarism? There's only so many ways to describe the effects of the Lend-Lease Act on postwar Europe.