Regardless of the moral quantary, the judges would not accept it, so while you could say that it's cool by your end of things, the pragmatic part would not be so easy.
Hypothetical ethics question
- Thread starter Eri
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Plagiarism is the act of passing off someone else's work as your own, regardless of whether you have their permission or not. The form I have to sign when ever I hand in uni coursework, declaring that it is my own work, is very clear about that.
So yeah, entering a contest which has the implicit or explicit assumption that it will be judging entrants on their own merits and then submitting something by someone else is unethical. You are being judged on different standards to everyone else and that is not fair. It's not kitten stomping unethical, but its still wrong.
So yeah, entering a contest which has the implicit or explicit assumption that it will be judging entrants on their own merits and then submitting something by someone else is unethical. You are being judged on different standards to everyone else and that is not fair. It's not kitten stomping unethical, but its still wrong.
It doesn't matter if the artist tells you, you can do anything you want with it.
It doesn't change the fact that you didn't create it. Participating in the contest with the piece of art would be a deception. You'd make a false claim in hope to win something.
That's lying and lying is unethical/immoral in most if not all cases.
It doesn't change the fact that you didn't create it. Participating in the contest with the piece of art would be a deception. You'd make a false claim in hope to win something.
That's lying and lying is unethical/immoral in most if not all cases.
Unethical.
There's no issue with the artist, but there's a BIG issue with other people who enter this contest and potentially are robbed of the prize by an artist who didn't even enter the contest.
Think of how the action affects EVERYONE, not just the guy you talk to.
There's no issue with the artist, but there's a BIG issue with other people who enter this contest and potentially are robbed of the prize by an artist who didn't even enter the contest.
Think of how the action affects EVERYONE, not just the guy you talk to.
I wouldn't do it personally, but that's more out of some sort of sense of pride than ethics.
I don't think anyone is cheated, really, even if you win, so I'd say it's ethical (or at least not particularly unethical). The winner is the artist who provided the commissioned work, who willingly allowed someone else to take the credit and the prize for whatever reason. The losers aren't any worse off than they would have been had the artist entered the competition in his own name, they still failed to beat him. They certainly would be better off if the artist didn't enter the competition at all, but then that's the case with any winning artists, so they can hardly complain about that.
Of course I'm sure it breaks the rules and it certainly requires deceiving people. I don't consider that unethical in and of itself personally, but many people do.
*Edit*
I don't think anyone is cheated, really, even if you win, so I'd say it's ethical (or at least not particularly unethical). The winner is the artist who provided the commissioned work, who willingly allowed someone else to take the credit and the prize for whatever reason. The losers aren't any worse off than they would have been had the artist entered the competition in his own name, they still failed to beat him. They certainly would be better off if the artist didn't enter the competition at all, but then that's the case with any winning artists, so they can hardly complain about that.
Of course I'm sure it breaks the rules and it certainly requires deceiving people. I don't consider that unethical in and of itself personally, but many people do.
*Edit*
Winning the prize legitimately also robs everyone else of it. Surely you don't consider that unethical, so why does it only become a problem when it's done in a different way?lacktheknack said:
Eri said:
It's certainly unfair to try and trick the other entrants out of a prize for actual work they've done..
all in all it's akin to paying to have something stolen for you.. why not just buy whatever it is you want in the first place.
frankly this little caper wouldn't get a pass from me even if i were a crime lord ( ok, a reaaaally small time thug.. ) purely because I may well spend out for a piece of art that doesn't win whatever the hypothetical prize is.. you're just out of pocket.
seems like a risky deal for everyone.
oh, ethics? riiiight.. no, not ethical either
It depends on what the competition actually is.
If it's a competition to present the best piece of art work regardless of how you obtained it, then ordering a piece on-line would be fine.
If, on the other hand, it was a competition to present the best piece of work you personally created, then you'd be violating the rules and so cheating.
If it's a competition to present the best piece of art work regardless of how you obtained it, then ordering a piece on-line would be fine.
If, on the other hand, it was a competition to present the best piece of work you personally created, then you'd be violating the rules and so cheating.
Its kinda funny how many people are getting serious and up and arms about this, with out realising that its just an ethical debate
Because you are deliberately fooling both judges and other competitors with work not of your own doing, for your own personal gain, then yes it is unethical. It would also make you an abominable asshole.Eri said:
Let's put it this way. If you submitted it and was honest about its origins, what would likely happen? You'd get booted out along with your work and be spat on by the other competitors. So how would get around that while still continuing this foolery? By lying (bad). And at whose expense? The other artists who likely put effort into their own pieces (very bad).
You would be manipulating an honest competition with dishonesty. It doesn't matter if the artist you commission says it's okay. I don't see how you could find this question in any way ambiguous. There is no debate. It's pretty clear cut.
Here's a better ethical question. If everyone else was submitting commissions and claiming it as their own, would it be okay for you to do it too if it's still against the rules?
The answer is still no, but at least in this scenario the moral standard is pretty low and you are just deciding whether to rise above it or lower yourself to it. In the your own scenario you are the only one partaking in the scam.
In your hypothetical scenario, you gain the artist's permission to claim his work as your own, but that only resolves part of the ethical dilemma. By entering the art as your own, you are lying to the other people involved in the competition - the judges, the other contestants, and the viewers of the art. Getting the permission of the artist resolves your moral debt to the artist, but not to the other people affected by this deception. Even if the competition does not specify the work must be your own, this falsehood would still be morally objectionable. Perhaps even more objectionable since there is no legitimate reason for lying about the true artist, other than knowing you are doing something wrong and that it violates the spirit of the competition.
Now, if instead you chose to enter the art into the competition under the true artist's name and identified yourself as his sponsor, then the moral dilemma would be fully resolved. You could arrange with the artist in advance that you would receive the prize money, if any, and the artist would receive your original payment for the commissioning of the piece along with any publicity generated by winning the competition. You would both benefit and no one would be deceived regarding the nature of the artwork.
Now, if instead you chose to enter the art into the competition under the true artist's name and identified yourself as his sponsor, then the moral dilemma would be fully resolved. You could arrange with the artist in advance that you would receive the prize money, if any, and the artist would receive your original payment for the commissioning of the piece along with any publicity generated by winning the competition. You would both benefit and no one would be deceived regarding the nature of the artwork.
It's unethical as it's technically plagiarism, but really the contest must be run by complete idiots if you're able to get past with that.
Here's a good rule when you ask whether something is ethical or not, it's not all inclusive but it could help you out: if it requires you to lie for personal gain, then it's unethical. If you enter the art into the contest, you are knowingly deceiving people into thinking you created that piece for no other reason other than you want the praise and credit for the work.
If the judges are aware it's not unethical. If you are violating the rules (since majority of them ask for your own work) it is.
Would you enter the competition with the Mosa Lisa if you owned it? If your answer is still yes it's ethical. If not then it's not ethical.
Would you enter the competition with the Mosa Lisa if you owned it? If your answer is still yes it's ethical. If not then it's not ethical.