Whether plagiarism constitutes plagiarism should be judged in terms of subjective motivation and objective results: whether it is intentional or unintentional subjectively, whether there is an element of fraud, whether objectively, whether one benefits from it, and whether it harms the original author early. When people re-examine the plagiarism-prone reference through the ages according to this standard, it becomes clear that what kind of behavior should be condemned by public opinion. In the field of literary creation, for example, Shakespeare was trapped in plagiarism as early as the 17 th century, and many sentences in his works were the same as those of his predecessors. The vast majority of people acquiesced in Shakespeare's plagiarism and even unswervingly regarded Shakespeare as a great master in the literary world, because in his time, such reference was conducive to the dissemination of knowledge and benefit to the public. however, it does not cause material harm to the original author or is negligible.
opinion?
The limitations of the times prevent plagiarism from being clearly defined