diversion

The word “diversion” is laced with negative interpretations, but I think you should delve into more specifics instead of stopping your thinking there.

Triggered Articles

• [/blu3mo-public/ diverting people’s knowledge](https://scrapbox.io/blu3mo-public/ diverting people’s knowledge).

• Copying someone else’s work and publishing it under your name:.

  • NG because it is an infringement of copyright.

• Cite the source clearly and cite the appropriate amount of information: (e.g., “The following is a list of the authors of this article”)

  • The copyright law explicitly says it’s OK.
    • Anything published can be cited.

• There are sometimes book authors who vaguely claim that “it is also bad manners to recapitulate the contents of a book in your own words” while citing examples of things that are clearly NG.

  • NG in terms of manner” is like saying “I can’t give you a reason why it’s not okay, but I don’t like it.”
    • If not, show me the evidence.
      • Imposing manners is bad manners.
  • Vaguely saying “it’s not a good idea” will suppress even unproblematic behavior.
    • I wish these arguments would go away, especially since it is crime against civilization to hinder the intellectual production of others.
    • This is my personal “I hate myself” statement.

• The problem that summaries made in the course of the study do not meet the citation requirements, at least not at the time they are made.

  • I know, this is an important question, and I have a solution for now, but it’s not something I’m certain of.
  • Prescription 1: Mere statements of fact are not copyrightable.
  • Prescription 2:.
    • Statements that are not mere summaries of facts, in other words, are merely the author’s interpretation.
    • When you’re trying to put this interpretation in your summary, you might want to ask yourself why you’re trying to put it in.
      • Especially when you’re disagreeing or questioning something, you can write your opinion or question and the citation requirement will be fulfilled.
  • Prescription 3: Copyright law is basically a parenthetical, so it’s not NG unless the copyright holder says it’s NG.
    • As for the partially decriminalized case, for this purpose, it doesn’t meet the requirements.
      • https://ja.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/日本の著作権法における非親告罪化
    • When I look back and think about my actions, I don’t always take a 100% OK approach.
    • If the author gets mad at me, I’ll just apologize and act like I’m sorry. - Principle of [Don’t ask permission, apologize.
  • Prescription 4: Do it in the U.S. and claim fair use.

---

• What does the term “diversion” mean?
  • I get stuck when I try to translate it into English.
  • When I looked in the dictionary, I could only find a translation of “to distribute goods illegally” or
  • I’m applying the word “diversion” to this broader concept Galapagos concept.

---

- [[Information distribution is diversion?]]
- We had another discussion on "diversion" in 2019.

---

This page is auto-translated from /nishio/横流し using DeepL. If you looks something interesting but the auto-translated English is not good enough to understand it, feel free to let me know at @nishio_en. I’m very happy to spread my thought to non-Japanese readers.