I mentioned that I wouldn’t comment on the subject further unless Lassen offered a proper response to the plagiarism allegations and he did. In fact, he published a pseudo-defense on his blog—which ended with this lovely observation: “One man’s paraphrasing is another man’s plagiarism.”—but deleted it within 24 hours. Too bad it wasn’t faster than Google cache.

(Click image for full-sized view.)

And if you’re in the camp who believes I’ve somehow Photoshopped the screen capture, you can see Lassen’s words in all their glory by visiting Paul G. Bens, Jr’s blog where Lassen left this same defense. (I also urge you to read Mr. Bens’ cogent response.)

Basically, in a roundabout way, Lassen admits to plagiarising some of his reviews but says that it’s all right because the original authors didn’t lose income, that he did not plagiarise all of his reviews and that the GLBT/Jewish artistic/literary works needed an advocate at all costs, including integrity.

Now, a few comments:

• Plagiarism, period, is wrong.
• Lassen did violate the copyrights of various sources from which he plagiarised, including the other Amazon reviewers*, which is why Amazon nuked all his reviews**.
• There was a net loss to the author, even if it was merely recognition for his work, but also in tangible goods since Lassen received review copies, at least in part, due to his reviewing history.
• As Mr. Bens, a GLBT author, pointed out, this has absolutely nothing to do with the GLBT community and has everything to do with Lassen’s plagiary. This could actually be harming the GLBT community because those who’ve suffered a genuine slight may find it more difficult to get support for their cause.
• Finally, there is a huge difference between paraphrasing, with attribution, and copy+pasting someone else’s work, then calling it your own.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: The GLBT and Jewish artistic/literary communities need advocates who aren’t willing to sell their souls for some free swag, people who are willing to provide genuine reviews. And they must be out there, otherwise, from whom could Lassen have plagiarised?

* Some believe that once a review is published on Amazon.com, the author relinquishes the copyright. Not accurate. The author still retains his copyright, however, the author grants Amazon.com a whole lot of leverage to  use, store, and display the review however Amazon.com sees fit.

** No one that I’ve seen claims all 3,000+ reviews were plagiarised, however, it would take far too much manpower to read/compare every single one, especially since a preponderance of them displayed signs of plagiary and the problem was habitual.

[The people involved] consider themselves to be “policeman of the net. Whatever their reason for their actions may be, it appears that destroying another person makes them look good in some way. The strange thing is that several of them are not even ready to disclose their true identities and hide behind fake names and profiles. This action was begun by another reviewer, E. Jacobs (whose real name is Erin Elway) and she enlisted a group of “Amazonians” to help her reach gold. She enlisted a Jason Kirkfield, a very bitter and outspoken children’s book reviewer with a poisoned tongue, a Barbara Barclay who revealed herself when she and Elway wrote disgusting self-righteous letters to Lambda Literary about me, two characters under the names of Muzzlehatch and Truthseeker, an African American, John Green, who was enlisted to accuse me of racial slurs (I used the words ape and gorilla in a review and was accused of racism), venomous Timothy Riley, another top ten reviewer, then there are Theo and Terry, the acid tongued “avoraciousreader”, Gary Peterson, Lynn E. Lisa Mims, the recently added two days ago, Ann-Kat, J. Faulk, L. Power, tweekster and several others. You cannot imagine the way they speak. They claim that I have made death threats against them, they are planning to issue restraining orders against me, they have written to authors and publishing houses and have contacted work places claiming to be representatives of Amazon.com and released information that they had to right to know on the internet. Jason Kirkfield sees himself as a Christ figure and he is evil in speech and in deed but he has a great supporting cast.
While my profile page was posted several years ago, they chose to contact my former employers. What is so interesting is that this seems to be a 24 hour job for them. Kirkfield, for example, posted news of this blog at 1:47 AM and the author put it on the net at just 12:22 AM. They scour the net, etc. looking for news of me. I cannot imagine what a lonely life that must be.

–Comment by Amos Lassen dated December 12, 2010, 10:05AM

I attempted to leave a response there directly, but each time the comment was deleted, so I’ve decided to publish it here. It also seems someone was trying to break into my Gmail account—read into that what you will.

I’d like to address a few things specifically since Mr. Lassen saw fit to invoke my name.

Prior to his statement, I made only a whopping total of three posts to the Amazon forum thread concerning the matter (here, here, and here), the third of which linked people to the blog entry where I had compiled documentation of his plagiarism.

Anyone is free to see exactly the way I speak, no imagining necessary, since that Amazon thread and my blog are freely available to the public and I’ve never contacted Lassen directly by email, phone, or post. (I’ve since made additional comments on the Amazon forum thread and at the Jesse Wave blog, but those are also public, therefore free for anyone to read.)

Quote Lassen: "They claim that I have made death threats against them,"

No, I haven’t.

Quote Lassen: "they are planning to issue restraining orders against me,"

No, I’m not. At least not unless you decide to threaten my life, livelihood, or well-being in some way.

Quote Lassen: "they have written to authors and publishing houses and have contacted work places claiming to be representatives of Amazon.com"

No, I haven’t.

Quote Lassen: "and released information that they had to right to know on the internet."

I’m not entirely sure what that means, but I’m going to assume Lassen means the release of information that people had no right to know, and in response: No, I haven’t.

All the information published on my blog is information that was freely accessible in public venues on the internet to begin with, such as Amazon.com, Google cache, and Facebook.

Unfortunately Amazon closed the "at least one comment" loophole for Lassen’s reviews. Still, there’s at least one other transgression that Amazon overlooked in their mass deletion because Lassen "hit the wrong button". To make it even more convenient, all the plagiarised sources are visible on that page. (Hint, check the product description and compare it to Lassen’s first paragraph, then read the second paragraph of Mr. Tatham’s review, written ten days before Lassen’s.)

Why he felt the need to include my name at all is beyond me. But it gets better because Lassen made another comment responding directly to me (for context, here’s my original comment):

what saddens me is that you have no idea of what you are talking about and of course I disagree–you are a late comer and your information was fed to you by these people and then you went and did your research.
And Ann-Kat, the review of "I Spit On Your Grave" came two months of constant harassment from these people and it was the way I lashed back. I do not believe that you would have taken the abuse and taunts that I took as many as 20 times on a daily basis and it was ok for Kirkfield to go to my employer as a representative of Amazon and post his findings? I wonder how you would have reacted. I doubt you would have reacted the way Lambda Literary reacted (ignoring and wondering who these people were) when Erin Elway and Barbara Barclay overstepped all bounds by writing letters and saying how much they respected the organization. Give me a break–these are cutthroat and ruthless people who wanted a crucifixion and would do whatever it took to get it. Sure I lashed out bit how much is one person to take? Mea culpa? No way. And what about the letters they wrote to universities and publishing houses? And what about the smear campaign? You weren’t there, you came in three or four days ago with your self-righteousness and as you say, you don’t know me–you only know what these people have presented you with. They gave you the leads and you followed. I would love to see how you would have reacted. They overstepped every boundary of humanity. And have you noticed, Jason Kirkfield has nothing to say nor does E. Jacobs who admitted herself that this has gone too far. Since you mean to keep it going, so do I–just not here. You have new friends now–watch how they play ball and be careful, do not cross them.

This is my final comment–the show is all yours now

–Comment by Amos Lassen dated December 14, 2010 11:45PM

Again I’ve been having problems publishing a response on that blog, so again, I publish it here.

You are right, Mr. Lassen. I did my research. It doesn’t matter what was "fed to [me]" because I won’t eat anything unless I’ve smelt it first and I truly hoped that this whole thing was just a big misunderstanding.

I read every single post in that entire thread, I read every post on the Facebook fan page, and I even used Google cache and the Internet Archive when available.

And the result of that research was that you did, in fact, lift sections of content from other copyrighted sources to pad your own reviews. It wasn’t just once or twice or a few times. (Yes, I went through and checked links and cross-referenced them with the Amazon reviews still visible using the show reviews by comments link on Amazon.)

And I’ve yet to see you refute it. You talk around the issue with no explanations. You refuse to publish the Amazon forum link on your Facebook page or provide your supporters with the means to do their own research.

I’ve seen a few ask already where the quotes you post come from, why these people are doing what they’re doing, etc., and they receive no answers except more deflection. I’ve even seen a few of those posts disappear. In fact, you only seem to feed them a one-sided view of the story and you come out looking the victim.

Sure they may have badgered you for months (I’ll admit, I’ve seen some not-nice comments made about you and on some of your reviews thanks to Google cache) and you have every right to stand up for yourself, but you had opportunities to rise above it rather than stoop to their level (actually, in my opinion, far below it by some of the insults I’ve seen you throw around, and in such a public medium no less).

But, the issue was not whether these people harassed you or whether you harassed them, the issue was whether or not you plagiarised some of your reviews.

This is your online legacy, Mr. Lassen, this is the statement you’re making about yourself and your integrity. Only one question remains: Are you proud of this legacy?

I may be a late comer, but that means I’m able to gauge the situation without bias, removed from both you and your Amazon detractors. I have nothing to gain or lose from your undoing or your vindication. Consider that.

I’m not being self-righteous, just pointing out the situation as I see it. This entire mess could have been avoided had you not copied those other reviews in the first place (or even properly edited them after the fact).

By the way, I invite you and your supporters to visit my blog on the subject and point out anything you believe I got wrong in the write up. I do allow comments from both sides of this argument as long as they’re cordial, non-threatening, and the language is kept clean.

Since this whole fiasco makes me tired, and Mr. Lassen only speaks in circles, I’m done commenting unless Mr. Lassen cares to directly address the documentation I’ve published—perhaps point out anything that’s incorrect or actually refute the allegations of plagiarism.

Until then, let this be a cautionary tale to other reviewers. Learn from Lassen’s mistake: Don’t plagiarise no matter how tempted you are. It will make the original author unhappy and it will eventually make your legs tired from all the backpedaling you’ll be required to do.

Learn the right and wrong ways to use someone else’s words in your review. Right: explain why you’re including an excerpt of someone else’s review and give him credit (i.e. fair use). Wrong: copying and pasting without context or credit.

Recently, on the Amazon forums, I saw a thread titled “Plagiarism in a review?” This caught my attention because I, too, had been plagiarised by an Amazon reviewer. But before I could chip my two cents in, I was swept up on the roller coaster ride of reviewer infamy.

Back in November, reviewers discussed having been plagiarised by a certain individual, and two and two eventually added up to Amos Lassen, a well-known (former) Top 50 Amazon reviewer.

When the discussion started, it was merely a glowing ember, but now it’s a raging inferno. What was the fuel? A threatening email from Lassen in response to a request that he remove the infringing work from his review; shortly after, a Facebook fan page supporting Lassen went up with negative comments directed at those writing on the Amazon forum thread.

If you’re not inclined to read through all thirty-something pages of the thread, then I’d direct you to pages 22, 24, 26, 29, 30, and 32 where posters published side-by-side comparisons of Lassen’s reviews with their original sources. If even reading those pages seems like too much work, allow me to highlight a few transgressions.

Sources from which Lassen plagiarised includes other Amazon reviews, the product descriptions, personal websites and blogs, and even more well-known sources such as IMDb and the New York Times.

And although Amazon deleted Lassen’s reviews, which may lead some to erroneously believe the evidence has been completely purged (so no harm, to foul), some of the damning reviews are still available* since they had at least one comment.

* Edited 12/16/10: Amazon fixed that little loophole (it seems for Lassen specifically as it still works for other reviewers’ deleted reviews with one or more comments).

There is still one loophole if you wish to see the Amazon reviews yourself: In a Google search, use [site:amazon.com "amos lassen"]–remove the brackets–and click on the “Cached” link that appears. As of now there are 30,000+ pages stored.

Unfortunately, over time they will drop from Google’s cache since Amazon removed the actual links, but one can hope it doesn’t happen for a good long while. Still, I urge you to search quickly if you wish to see for yourself.

(Click images for full views.)

I’ve highlighted the original, by R. Gawlitta, in pink and the copy+pasted version, by Lassen, in yellow. You can even see where he accidentally copied the “(a” (it seems he’s not big on proofreading either). Now, unless Lassen was R. Gawlitta in a previous lifetime, then what he’s done equals plagiary.

Not enough, how about an example from the New York Times?

(Click on images for full views.)

But then, maybe Lassen was also Neil Genzlinger in that previous lifetime, in which case this wouldn’t equal plagiary either. He might have suspected as much because after being called on it, Lassen edited his review to be less obvious, but obviously not enough.

He even plagiarised a review from sources on the same page:

(Click on image for full view.)

The first source from which Lassen plagiarised was Amazon’s product description (highlighted in pink), but that wasn’t enough. He also plagiarised the reviewer preceding him, Michael E. Tatham (highlighted in green). Lassen’s transgressions are highlighted in yellow and purple respectively.

By the way, you are welcome to compare and contrast for yourselves as the review is still up because Lassen “hit the wrong button”, which published it as a child’s review, and it was overlooked in the mass deletion. I don’t know how long Amazon will allow it to stay, though, now that it’s been brought to light.

And a couple other original reviewers weren’t thrilled when alerted:

(Click image for full view.)

A few are crying foul on Amazon because they’ve booted such a wonderful pillar of the GLBT and Judaic artistic communities (mostly the authors who’ve had a book reviewed by Lassen) and that makes me sad. Sad because those people are directing their anger toward the wrong entity (Amazon wouldn’t delete over 3,000 reviews and revoke the reviewing privilege of one of it’s Top 50 reviewers without some damning evidence) and sad because Lassen should have set a much better example.

Lassen should have just said mea culpa and righted his wrongs—it would have been better all around—instead, he became nasty.

In response to being revealed as a plagiariser, Lassen wrote a review entitled “I Spit On Your Grave” directed at those who exposed him—a review which included these choice words: “The only good thing about this is wishing that all of them would die as soon as possible and the rest of the world could give a collective spit on each and all of their graves. I am sure God is crying over the way these creations turned out and we are crying for having had to deal with them.”

(Click the image for the full size view)

Called one accuser an evil, disgusting reprehensible piece of sh*t:

(Click the image for full size view.)

And mocked another accuser’s product choices:

(Click the above images for full views.)

To which I say: at least Jason Kirkfield reviews those “bunnies, turtles, and truckers(sic)” with integrity using only his own words and proper attribution when necessary.

To further his cause, some of Lassen’s supporters have insinuated that those who’ve exposed him as a plagiarist are homophobic anti-Semites.

Having read through all 33 pages of the forum thread (I simply could not tear my eyes away), I noted not one person expressing any dislike or hatred for Lassen’s sexual preference or religious leaning. The only thing I got was that they went after him because he stole other peoples’ words and claimed them as his own—it’s an unfortunate coincidence that most of his reviews were for homosexual and Jewish art.

I have to wonder if Lassen studied politics because he is quite adept at deflection. On the Facebook support page, rather than post entire quotes from the Amazon thread in their context or provide a full link to the Amazon thread, he only publishes the most inflaming parts. And even those who ask where and why these people would do this are given a deflection, but not an answer.

One follower even challenges Lassen’s accusers to publish the proof directly on the Facebook page:

Unfortunately, anyone who seeks to provide the supporters with links to outside sources which may incriminate Lassen have their posts immediately deleted. (It’s probably a safe bet that a link to my little ol’ blog won’t make it there either.)

(Click images for full size views.)

Throughout this entire Lassen-is-above-reproach tirade, it’s not been suggested by Lassen’s followers that someone else should simply start writing proper, honest Amazon reviews for homosexual and Jewish art to replace what’s been removed. However, it’s been suggested by those who’ve exposed Lassen’s farce and therefore, by default, is an unacceptable suggestion.

As a customer, this is maddening. I rely on Amazon’s review system to help me make informed buying decisions and I expect the reviews I’m reading to be those of the independent reviewer. If I wanted the New York Times opinion of a book or an IMDb user’s opinion of a movie, I’d visit those respective sites. When the reviewers aren’t honest on Amazon, trust in the system is lost. And when consumers lose trust in the system, it’s a bad thing all around from Amazon to the publishers to the authors themselves.

As a reviewer, this is maddening. I write to help others make informed decisions and I work hard to craft my opinions in a way that others will, I hope, understand. When someone takes those words to pass off as his own, it’s like he’s stealing a bit of who I am. Others may feel differently about their work, and that’s all right, but they should put up their reviews with an appended stamp saying free for the taking. Until then, people should keep their grubby mitts off of someone else’s work. It’s simply ethical, not to mention common courtesy.

All of those who rely on Lassen for reviews should seek out those from whom Lassen stole words and see what those people recommend because they are the true reviewers, the true (untarnished) pillars of the community.

Update: Amos Lassen Admits Plagiarism, Calls It Paraphrasing