Several services attempt to gather up “all” of the content across publishers. This post provides an overview and taxonomy.
A study of matched content in student papers submitted to Turnitin reveals where students turn for sources but is unable to distinguish instances of plagiarism from valid scholarly use.
Allowing authors access to anti-plagiarism software makes pragmatic sense when you consider the demands scientific journals place on authors for perfect English, the pressures of group authorship, and the incrementalism of most papers. Perhaps it could even do more.
The plagiarism-detection products in use in academia and scholarly publishing are also available for students and authors, who can pre-screen their papers to lower their chances of detection. In the middle, iParadigms takes money from both sides. Is this proper?
A massive study of student papers by Turnitin reveals that many are copying text from Wikipedia and other user-generated sites, but it’s not clear in distinguishing text-matches from plagiarism.