Oscar: I have been accused of plagiarizing the work of Ethel Myers in my recent article. But that accusation is unwarranted. Although I admit I used passages from Myers' book without attribution, Myers gave me permission in private correspondence to do so. Millie: Myers cannot give you permission to plagiarize. Plagiarism is wrong, not only because it violates authors' rights to their own words, but also because it misleads readers: it is fundamentally a type of lie. A lie is no less a lie if another person agrees to the deception. Which one of the following principles, if established, would justify Oscar's judgment? ['An author is entitled to quote freely without attribution the work of a writer if that writer relinquishes his or her exclusive right to the material.', 'Authors are entitled to quote without attribution passages that they themselves have written and published in other books or articles.', 'The writer of an article must cite the source of all passages that were not written by that writer if those passages are more than a few sentences long.', 'Plagiarism is never justified, but writers are justified in occasionally quoting without attribution the work of other writers if the work quoted has not been published.']