Self plagiarism: an unsustainable and ridiculous legal concept

If I write a beautiful sentence in a poem and then use it in a novel, or if I publish an article on my blog and re-publish it on social media, it is a ridiculous idea that I could be committing the crime of “self plagiarism.”

“Self-plagiarism,” explained Robert Cruetz, “is also known as ‘reuse,’ ‘recycling fraud,’ or ‘duplicate publication,’ and consists of a person re-purposing their own written material without providing proper attribution by citing the original content.”

The legal concept of “self-plagiarism” is contrary to the order of the universe, unnatural, and therefore inherently flawed. Think of genetic code as a type of writing. A rule prohibiting “self plagiarism”” would have derailed evolution from its earliest beginnings and planet Earth would still be a hot dead rock without an atmosphere or arable soil.

All life has borrowed “writing” from the prior generation in order to both survive and to thrive in the process of adding to it, improving upon it.

Here it seems to me that the spirit of the law against plagiarism has been lost. The spirit of plagiarism laws was to protect the livelihood of the original author. The ability of the author to support their life their family. Think about that.

Self-plagiarism is ridiculous and foolish legalistic concept.

I hereby confess this is a repost, self-plagiarism, from my original writing on LinkedIn.