I think it's plagiarism, but I'm not sure.

2007-08-03 11:36

So, the New Yorker’s article on spam may contain plagiarism. What’s weird about this is that the source (Spamhaus) has blanket permission to quote them with attribution, but that the quoted material, rather than being attributed, is very slightly modified.

I don’t get it.

That said, the article (Damn Spam) is quite nice; it just seems like it would have been more polite to simply quote directly and attribute the quote.

Peter Seebach