Could someone look over my first contract law assignment? (1 Viewer)

[stazi]

I'm taking commercial law this semester and right now we're dealing with contracts. I am quite confident in my ability, but would really appreciate it if a law/claw student would look over my assignment and see if my structure and referencing are correct.

Thanks in advance

EDIT: this is about formation of contracts, i.e. Offer, Acceptance, Consideration, Intention, Writing Requirement, Certainty & Completeness

EDIT 2: Would purchasing a right to film at a location in a building for a period of time constitute a lease (i.e. would the writing requirement be necessary)

 

[slively03]

Consider the following:

1. Collusion is a form of plagiarism.
2. What you are doing is unethical.
3. You are broadcasting the above on the internet.
4. You have no academic integrity.
5. Do your own howmework.

 

[stazi]

hahhaha exactly. I didn't ask anyone to do my assignment. I asked for tips as to referencing, structure, etc. Does this mean that if I refer to a referencing guide and use their advice I'm commiting plagiarism?

 

[melsc]

Consider the following:

1. Collusion is a form of plagiarism.
2. What you are doing is unethical.
3. You are broadcasting the above on the internet.
4. You have no academic integrity.
5. Do your own howmework.

Woah, he's asking for a proof read and a bit of advise, its hardly plagiarism. Students read others assignments, bounce ideas of each other and study together all the time. Also I doubt any of the people reading it are doing the same assignment. He's not asking people to do it for him so get off your high horse and don't expect anyone to help you with that attitude.

 

[wheredanton]

EDIT 2: Would purchasing a right to film at a location in a building for a period of time constitute a lease (i.e. would the writing requirement be necessary)

It's probably a licence to be on the land to film etc. A lease usually encompasses more extensive rights such as exclusive possession against the world, ie everyone including the owner. An owner is unlikely to give a film crew such extensive rights.

 

[slively03]

Okay perhaps it seemed a bit harsh. But I was just thinking about your question. The internet is not the best place for advice, okay. Just take everything with a grain of salt. Plus, the definition of collusion, is more than one person working together on a piece of work and only one person acknowledging they worked on it. Universities take this kind of stuff seriously. So, for example, if you showed your assignment to someone and they told you a bunch of stuff to change and you changed it, would that constitute a group effort?

Does your university have a discussion board? Teachers tend to answer questions on those. My understanding that a referencing guide is pretty unambiguous.

The underlying question here is, in subjects where people inherently work together in one way or another (eg. proofreading/asking others advice etc), how seriously can universities take collusion as a form of plagiarism?

 

[slively03]

Flamer. My point was that yes yes he does plaigiarise if he works in collusion with others for an assignment that is only meant to be done individually.

My point was never whether or not this was ridiculous. In an ethics course we did, we defined ethical behaviour as that which "gets you where you want to go" - ie If he asks someone for an answer rather than looking it up or doing the research himself, it doesn't benefit him or make him a better student. We could define this as being unethical.

Yes yes i know its absurd. I also think it's absurd that because you're a third year and your views are somehow worth more than mine. Just who do you think you're talking to? Actually, dont answer that one.

 

[stazi]

It's probably a licence to be on the land to film etc. A lease usually encompasses more extensive rights such as exclusive possession against the world, ie everyone including the owner. An owner is unlikely to give a film crew such extensive rights.

The owner actually did give exclusive possession rights for the basement of the building. I ended up placing it in the context of a lease, and necessitated the use of the writing requirement.

Okay perhaps it seemed a bit harsh. But I was just thinking about your question. The internet is not the best place for advice, okay. Just take everything with a grain of salt. Plus, the definition of collusion, is more than one person working together on a piece of work and only one person acknowledging they worked on it. Universities take this kind of stuff seriously. So, for example, if you showed your assignment to someone and they told you a bunch of stuff to change and you changed it, would that constitute a group effort?

Does your university have a discussion board? Teachers tend to answer questions on those. My understanding that a referencing guide is pretty unambiguous.

The underlying question here is, in subjects where people inherently work together in one way or another (eg. proofreading/asking others advice etc), how seriously can universities take collusion as a form of plagiarism?

Collusion is applied more to when students work together on writing a piece, not simply when they check each other's work, or bounce ideas off each other. If the definition of collusion was applied so strictly, then all students who attend tutorials would be subject to academic dishonesty (often tutors give the class suggestions on how to approach certain questions).

Some subjects have discussion boards, whilst others don't.

The university is very serious about plagiarism in the form of copying sources without aknowledging where those ideas come from, but not so much on collusion (to a degree). If two students are discussing what they're going to do for their assignment, then the university doesn't really do anything.

As far as I know, there is no policy on proofreading, and I don't see why there should be.

Furthermore, I had already finished a final draft of my assignment upon posting.

 

[stazi]

My point was never whether or not this was ridiculous. In an ethics course we did, we defined ethical behaviour as that which "gets you where you want to go" - ie If he asks someone for an answer rather than looking it up or doing the research himself, it doesn't benefit him or make him a better student. We could define this as being unethical.

Ok, if you want to talk about ethical behaviour as such, then I am engaging in ethical behaviour. I had done all my research and all my referencing. I was asking if my approach taken was correct. I didn't ask anyone a simple question (even the question I asked was rooted in research that I had previously done - i.e. I wouldn't be able to consider a lease as part of the writing requirement if I hadn't done the research).

Yes yes i know its absurd. I also think it's absurd that because you're a third year and your views are somehow worth more than mine. Just who do you think you're talking to? Actually, dont answer that one.

Actually, his views are worth more than yours. We have completed four semesters, going on five. You haven't completed a single semester. I think that our understanding of plagiarism would be superior to yours, don't you?

 

[slively03]

Collusion is applied more to when students work together on writing a piece, not simply when they check each other's work, or bounce ideas off each other. If the definition of collusion was applied so strictly, then all students who attend tutorials would be subject to academic dishonesty (often tutors give the class suggestions on how to approach certain questions).

So if someone who proofread you assignment and told you what they thought you should change, and you changed it accordingly, does that not constitute a group effort working together?

A tutor giving guidelines on how to structure a response clearly isn't working together with you on an assignment not intended for groups.

If two students are discussing what they're going to do for their assignment, then the university doesn't really do anything.

...
Furthermore, I had already finished a final draft of my assignment upon posting.[/quote]

But even if you edited that draft after someone proofread it and suggested you make changes, and you did, that would be collusion wouldn't it?

I'm not fighting you on this one, i'm saying it can still fit the definition.

 

[wheredanton]

My views are more worthy than yours because my record and experience demonstrates I have a thorough understanding of all relevant university rules and procedures.

You, on the other hand, are an inexperienced n00b who's a little too eager to demonstrate his LOLZ ROFLLES INTELLAGENZE AND RIGHTEOUSNEZZZZZ.

Stazi doesn't need a sycophant.

The owner actually did give exclusive possession rights for the basement of the building. I ended up placing it in the context of a lease, and necessitated the use of the writing requirement.

Sounds about right.

 

[slively03]

You are very experienced at calling people names. How's that working out for you?

 

[stazi]

So if someone who proofread you assignment and told you what they thought you should change, and you changed it accordingly, does that not constitute a group effort working together?

Yes, if they told me how I should change the CONTENT and I act on this, then you enter a gray area. However, if they say 'you spelled 'laww' wrong", then it's not really plagiarism. Nor if they say "your reference approach is wrong, you should put a comma after the date".

A tutor giving guidelines on how to structure a response clearly isn't working together with you on an assignment not intended for groups.

Yes, and what if they say "for this assignment it would probably be easier to apply the pluralist theory to the latest work force reforms"? They are helping you in the way you should approach the question, beyond what is said on the assignment sheet. So, if you listen to them, your assignment can't be marked?

[But even if you edited that draft after someone proofread it and suggested you make changes, and you did, that would be collusion wouldn't it?[/quote]
It depends what advice is given, how I take the advice, and how I apply it. Think of it this way:
You have an assignment that involves adding 3+3.
you ask a friend how to add. Your friend tells you how to add (e.g. you have one apple, and one apple, this is two apples).
You apply your knowledge of how to add to answer the question of the assignment.
This, strictly speaking, is not a form of plagiarism. However, if you asked your friend what 3+3 is, and he said 6, and you wrote it down, then it is.

 

[_dhj_]

I think you're taking in too much university propaganda there. Proof-reading isn't "plagerism".

 

[slively03]

"if you asked your friend what 3+3 is, and he said 6, and you wrote it down, then it is" - Then by your own definition you are plagiarising. You were also asking "if i write 3+3=6 is this correct?" and they say yes and you write it down is is also - isn't it? - It's almost like by your own admission you said you were plagiarising, but then you'd own be plagiarising if you thought the answer you were given was right, and then wrote it down in your paper. At least that is my understanding.

 

[stazi]

"if you asked your friend what 3+3 is, and he said 6, and you wrote it down, then it is" - Then by your own definition you are plagiarising. You were also asking "if i write 3+3=6 is this correct?" and they say yes and you write it down is is also - isn't it? - It's almost like by your own admission you said you were plagiarising, but then you'd own be plagiarising if you thought the answer you were given was right, and then wrote it down in your paper. At least that is my understanding.

Then your understanding is incorrect. You need to look at things in context, as well. I was discussing a part of the requirements for contract formation, i.e. the writing requirement. Nowhere did I give the exact wording of the assignment, I simply gave a broader example which partially applies to the assignment. I also wanted to encourage debate on the issue, as it seems that the law isn't so black and white on it. My opinion was that a lease provides a person with the right to use a space for a period of time, at a certain price. Thus, such a contract must be evidenced in writing. Others could disagree whether or not my example would constitute a lease.

This isn't a 3+3 assignment where there is a certain answer.

Anyway, as dhj_ said, you're buying into all this too much. For a lot of situations there isn't a clear consensus as to whether or not it is plagiarism - e.g. what if you are on a train and two people from your class are discussing how they're answering the essay question. Do you break the window and dive out, run to a futuristic shop and erase your memory of the past hour, just in case you will use any of their ideas in your final work.

 

[slively03]

At least you admitted it.

 

[MoonlightSonata]

Would purchasing a right to film at a location in a building for a period of time constitute a lease (i.e. would the writing requirement be necessary)

The owner actually did give exclusive possession rights for the basement of the building. I ended up placing it in the context of a lease, and necessitated the use of the writing requirement.

The mere right to film at a location in a building for a period of time would constitute a license, not a lease. However, if as you say exclusive possession was granted, then it would be a lease. You should be aware, however, that not all leases need to be in writing - see s 23D(2) Conveyancing Act 1919 (NSW).

Anyhow, I take it the assignment is completed and this thread serves no further purpose. Given the bickering, I'm closing it.