In response, Reeve said: "I'm not a crook" and "That depends on what your definition of 'is' is."

I'm guessing more freedom of speech.

Are you kidding, Rick? An elected official is a LIAR! He took someone else's work and put his name on it ... Again and again and again and again ...
Are you saying that's OK?

If this were any other Councilperson, Mr Lyons would think it was very newsworthy.

So let me get this straight…. Mr. Reeve’s definition of Free Speech is “ones ability to steal the words of others for personal gain.”

Disgraceful.... Step down Reeve. Please resign before you tarnish our city any further. You are an embarrassment.

I don't see anything wrong with this, these are only blog posts, not actual stories by a journalist. Plagiarism is only considered as a moral offence, not an actual crime.

"Willful trademark counterfeiting or copyright piracy on a commercial scale"(TRIPS)
Unless Councilman Reeve is actually making money off of his blog posts(which he isn't), no one is going to prosecute him for this. Copyright infringement is mainly used by corporations like Viacom or WMG to prevent piracy of their content(to no avail).

Alberto, I believe you need to look up plagiarism on the internet before you post.
Mr. Reeve can be fired, at the very least. Which he should be!

Mr. Lyons, you sometimes make insightful intelligent posts here. But your willingness to cast aside clearly immoral actions on behalf of the councilmember you support undermines all of your credibility.
Whether it's illegal, it's wrong. Do you think Mr. Reeve as a teacher would give someone who copied someone else's work a passing grade?
Of course not.
And don't argue about whether he did it for gain -- of course he did, political gain. The problem here is that he was trying to sell us voters on his ideas ... but he either hasn't developed them well enough to communicate his own philosophy, or his philosophies just fly in the wind.

I've read enough here to know that if was Councilmember Freiss or Mark Nielson caught stealing someone elses work and passing it off as their own, you would be highly offended. So please, just be honest.

Alberto, Rick -
So you guys didn't have a problem with former Mayor Joe Soto lying about having a college degree either, then? He didn't make up that story for financial gain, either.

A liar is a liar is a liar, but I guess that's OK?

First its his dog, then his plagiarism. His moral and ethical compass has gone
way south! He has no ethical or moral integrity.
Again, Rick and Alberto, you really need to educate yourselves on the meaning
of plagiarism...whether its a blog, article or book, etc.

For those who think copyright infringement in a blog is OK, how do you feel if it's in an official city document prepared by an elected official?

Read this passage from Councilman Reeve's e-Verify proposal (www.sanjuancapistrano.org/Modules/ShowDocument.aspx?documentid=24316):

The primary motivation for "San Juan Capistrano Right to Work Act" is that while California's unemployment rate remains the second-highest in the nation, among some demographic groups, joblessness is even higher. The unemployment rate among 16- to 19-year-olds in California was 34.2 percent last month, according to the state. For non-white workers, unemployment is 13.4 percent. As of July, 14.3 percent of Latinos and 20.3 percent of blacks were unemployed.

Compare Reeve's wording with this passage by Joanna Lin of California Watch (http://californiawatch.org/dailyreport/unemployment-rates-highest-among-teens-men-minorities-12197):

California's unemployment rate remains the second-highest in the nation – 12 percent in July – but among some demographic groups, joblessness is even higher. The unemployment rate among 16- to 19-year-olds in California was 34.2 percent last month, according to the state's analysis of federal data. For non-white workers, unemployment over the past year has increased, from 12.4 percent to 13.4 percent. Whereas 11.6 percent of whites were out of work in July, 14.3 percent of Hispanics and 20.3 percent of blacks were unemployed.

I think he should rename his dog" Plagerpooch" or even better" Copydog"

Thank you, Patch, for exposing this. It's outrageous, particularly for a public official. Mr. Lyons, I don't know you (or Mr. Reeve for that matter), but I'm shocked you would so vigorously defend someone who's actively stealing others' work. By your logic, you would think there's nothing wrong with students cheating either. After all, what's the damage? Where's the financial gain? Shameful. Stop defending the indefensible.

Thank you for making it very clear...This is not about what Derek does or says...This is the same talk that tried to keep him out of office...His stands against the redevelopment agency,etc..But Council members who were put in place (check out campayne contributors for some council members)by developers who gain from keeping the agency alive and well.
This same group is for attacking the Christians who have bible studies and cry out for a muslim group who has ties to radical Islam who want to take over our country with Sharia law.
Wake up and see who is really going after Derek.

As a Christian, I find Ms. Austin's comments extremely offensive. Christians are supposed to stand up to what's wrong, and plagiarism is clearly wrong. This is about Mr. Reeve doing something morally indefensible. Nothing else. By making it into some sort of quasi-political argument, you are cheapening yourselves.

It is pretty clear why all this is newsworthy...an elected official/college professor has been BLATANTLY caught RED-HANDED using other people's work for his own agenda! I would be completely angered if work I drafted, my words, were simply copied and pasted...it's not a question of legality (though it clearly is ILLEGAL) but rather a question of INTEGRITY...and it is clear Reeves has none. How hard is it really to simply include a link to the original article and show where he got he information?

Also Rick...just stop. And "a lot" is not spelled "allot."

Mrs. or Ms. Chandler.How much did you gain or profit Mr. Reeve's blog? And now you attacking him after he stop working for you as a free ride. Enjoy it while u still young make a good story for people after using them..

ladybug...it would appear more so that Reeves was the one using Ms. Chandler for a good story, using Patch's work...otherwise he would have been able to come up with original content, in his own words, rather than trying to pass other people's work off as his own.

Ms. Chandler doesn't seem to have gained anything from his blog, as there is little to gain from plagiarized work (other than the knowledge that the writer is stealing work). Reeves was the only one with anything to gain...he got to post posts, without generating any of his own original content, to forward his own political agenda/reach.

It was he who was using other people, to get his free ride, by stealing from others' works.

Sounds about right Marco!

I think you all miss the point....this is an issue of character. Plagiarizing, whether you are disabled or not is not right. You can debate the legalities from here to eternity, but the fact remains, it is a character issue. Mr. Reeves could have easily used the words and gave credit to The Oregonian or whatever.

Mr. Reeves, by virture of his position is supposed to be a leader. You can't be a leader if you have no character or no ability to know what is right and what is wrong.

It just a blog there's nothing wrong for saying anything...and i think it just for fun some blogger...don't take it seriously like some people try to put him down... Thanks for standing us Mr. Reeve your the only one here in SJC as a council has more sense... Thanks for being there for us....

Thank you Jenna.

It doesn't matter if it is a blog or not! Just because you are a "blog" doesn't mean you have zero restrictions...by that logic I could open a blog and start posting bootlegged versions of movies, screenplays, novels or any other works and since I'm a "blog" I'm not responsible for obtaining copyrights, stating sources or attributing the work to its rightful owner? I'm not gaining anything financial so that must be okay right?

Stupid.

Has Mr Reeves apologized for his indiscretion?

Professor Plagiarizer's probably been plagerizing since puberty or even perhaps pre-school or pre-pampers.

Everyone here seems to be thinking like the Winklevoss twins. Like I said before, Plagiarism is only considered to be a moral wrong, there have been no decisions in the courts that have made it illegal, unless it infringes upon copyrights or trademarks(both of which are used mainly to prevent online piracy of content to no avail). Do you know who has also been accused of plagiarism? Helen Keller, Joe Biden, and Martin Luther King Jr.

you forgot Lady Gaga and Michael Bolton

The efforts to excuse plagiarism are mind-boggling here.
I wonder what action Concordia and the other college Reeve teaches at are going to take. He certainly should not be allowed to teach, assuming that he has, indeed, violated their plagiarism policies. Penny, I hope you'll continue to follow up.

<<unless it infringes upon copyrights>>

I assure you that all work contained in a reputable news organization, such as the Oregonian and The Hill, is copyrighted. Do you not see the little c in a circle at the bottom of their pages? And ours for that matter.

Amazing that Mr. Reeve receives so many intense blog responses from the community ( 79 or so ) and yet Sgt. Tyler Holtz of Dana Point gave his life to preserve our way of life in service to his country and has 3 blogs of condolences from our community.
Spend a few minutes of your "freedom of speech" time and blog something in memory of Sgt. Holtz.

God Bless America.

Funny how the Pro-Plagiarism comments are the ones riddled with typos and grammatical errors. They must be pro-stealing other people's work because it is the only way they can post full, correct, comprehensible sentences...

I could hardly read, let alone understand, some of these comments.

What's the other side of Mr Reeses plagiarized someone's thoughts and words and used them as his own in that he did not site the source.

Amen to Concerned Parent and Whistlin'Pete. The arrogance of those defending plagiarism is astonishing.

Mr. Lyons,
First, I absolutely did not misinterpret what Ms. Austin said. I stated that I was offended, as a Christian, by her response excusing Mr. Reeve's actions. Last I checked, the 8th Commandment is "Thou Shalt Not Steal." Plagiarism is a form of theft, plain and simple.
Second, making an issue of an editor working on a story is absurd. Do you not understand what editors do? They edit the copy of news articles, and no, they're not credited with a byline.
Third, making a comparison of the lack of comments on the story of the sergeant who was killed is also ridiculous. There's no controversy to that story--just unspeakable sadness. People comment when there's controversy, or when they're outraged by something, as those of us who understand that plagiarism is wrong are in this instance. I have high moral standards for our elected officials--they should be accountable and transparent in their actions. Mr. Reeve, clearly, is not.
Finally, you speak of two sides to the story. The only "side" that appears not to be covered is Mr. Reeve making a statement about why he plagiarized. How Patch gets its revenue is completely irrelevant to the fact that he has, repeatedly, stolen intellectual property belonging to others and attempted to pass it off as his own.

I have a background in both academics and journalism. What Mr. Reeve did is wrong and he'll have to answer for it. We as a society cannot continue to accept elected officials to commit wrongdoing without consequence.

Please substitute the word "allow" for the word "accept" in the last paragraph.

Reeve had every chance to give his own side... he said nothing, because despite the efforts of some on this blog, plagairism is indefensible.

Mr. Lyons,
I'll only address the last portion of what you said because nothing you wrote in any way changes my earlier comment.
Saying that Mr. Reeve's plagiarism is a private affair is ludicrous. He was espousing political opinions (written by others) in his role as a public official. There is nothing private about that.
Patch has done nothing wrong. In fact, if they had allowed this to continue after becoming aware of the plagiarism, it would have seriously damaged their own journalistic integrity.
Please speak to the issue--do you feel it is morally correct for Mr. Reeve to plagiarize the work of others? That really is the only thing in question here.
(And I don't mean to be rude--seriously--but I can't handle seeing you write "poles" when you mean "polls" one more time. Repeated misspellings do not help your cause.)

You are aware, are you not, that the OC Register's Frank Mickadeit wrote about this issue today? And Mr. Reeve also refused to respond to his request for a comment? If you're a public official, particularly an elected one, you have a responsibility to address issues of concern. Mr. Reeve will not be able to continue to duck this indefinitely.

We have all tried to help Mr. Lyons understand the error of his position. Of course, to no avail. Mr. Lyon is in too deep in his conviction to change now. All he can do is point fingers at everyone else (me included), at the patch, anywhere.. but where it belongs, on Mr. Reeve and on himself and his flawed positions and thinking. Mr. Lyons keeps referring to the Navy Seal who went to heaven, that none of us are posting about that...gee, he forgets to mention, neither has he posted on that subject. Mr. Lyons is stuck on what is the law, he cannot see past legal issues to understand moral and ethical issues....or a more important law, God's Law! The Ten Commandments...of which includes, love thy neighbor (Muslims) and Thou Shalt not Steal. Quite frankly, if I were Mr. Lyon and Mr. Reeve, I'd be very much worried about what our Lord is thinking of them right now! We would all be better off not to post in the future, with our efforts to help Mr. Lyon see the error of his ways...it ain't gonna work! I for one give up on you Mr. Reeve and Mr. Lyon...Our Dear Lord will show you what happens when you sin and do not repent.

OK, Rick Lyons. Here's the truth: Derek Reeve is a puppet controlled by Patch. In an effort to get more hits on our website, we hypnotized him to name his dog Muhammad and announce it at a City Council meeting. We also made him write a blog, hypnotizing him to lift multiple passages from other writers. And it worked! San Juan Capistrano Patch now has more traffic than the New York Times and Drudge Report combined. And revenue has soared, with national advertisers clamoring to buy slots on our next Reeve expose (hint: The councilman will have an affair with Lindsay Lohan -- think of the hits THAT will get!). Meanwhile, Ms. Chandler will use her well-deserved company bonus to take a four-week vacation to the Spain.

As an active commentator on this issue and clearly a contributor to the increase in revenue, I demand my share of the increased profits. (I'll gladly split mine with Mr. Lyons!) Or perhaps we can tag along with Jenna to Spain.

Do any of you know who Mr. Lyons is...? Have you met him?

Good question, Carole. Something has been bothering me about Rick Lyons since this post first went up. Who would be motivated enough to spend as much time and energy as Rick Lyons has to defend Derek Reeve? And there are certain inconsistancies in his posts. On Monday he questioned what the extent of Councilman's Reeves disabilities were since it was unclear from the photograph, and then later talks as if he had been to a city council meeting, which would mean he had seen Derek Reeve in person. Something doesn't add up here. I have had this feeling that Rick Lyons and Derek Reeve are one and the same.

I think the last name tells you all you need to know.

Mr Lyons could solve this mystery if he would just show up at Council on Tuesday and address his vast following.

Mr Lyons, please come to Council on Tuesday and explain to us, the "Good" side of plagerism.

Good idea, Steve. I'd like to hear the virtues of plagiarism explained in person, too.

Mr. Lyons, as you know, I have cancer and can not always do what I'd like. I'm usually in bed early because I am tired. Of course, you already knew this but want
to keep taunting me about not being at the meetings.
However, you do not have an excuse. Show up at the meeting as suggested above and defend plagiarism in person. Wish I could be there!

Very sad for Mr. Reeves. He knows better, and silence on his part to respond to the allegations leads me to believe he knows the severity of his serious theft of intellectual property. I believe he is a good man; but he is easily manipulated by a few who push him to "buck the system." Our city knows these few conspiracy and devisive mongers. Yes Mr. Lyons, from what I read, you appear to be ignorant of facts and the gravity of Mr. Reeves actions, and fail to present logical foder for excuses. My advise to Reeves is to follow the examples of tenured council members, who understand the city and its people, and place them first. Those non-common sense folks will lead you down a path for thier own gain and leave you stranded when done. Understand they have minimal support (as seen in numerous elections) and thier barks lack bites. Mr. Reeves, be humble and a servant for us. Be tolerant. Make positive, non-devisive changes.

While we wait for Mr. Lyons to answer my questions about what specific info from "the other side" was left out of this article, let me mention some other non-blog writings by Councilman Reeve.

In the July 19 City Council agenda packet, Reeve's staff report in favor of revising San Juan's gun law lifted multiple paragraphs, verbatim and without attribution, from the National Rifle Association and an Examiner.com article by Charles Nichols.

He also presented language from a 2005 legal brief (http://www.gunowners.com/amicus7.pdf) and appeals court ruling on the city of San Francisco's Prop. H as his own legal arguments. Court documents generally are fair game to quote, but the sources should have been identified.

This is the link to obtain USC Dissertation; http://www.usc.edu/libraries/about/idd/dissertations/

No Rick Lyons sightings at Council tonight.

Well Mr. Lyons...we missed you for a few days....glad your back....'trying' to get
the last word in on everyone! You certainly are entertaining! You cheer up my day
by making me laugh alot!!! THANKS!!!!