I think the author is making a good point here, though overstating the case. Remember, plagiarism in academia isn’t just stealing an entire paper and claiming it’s yours. In my narrow sub field, probably the first three sentences of every paper’s introduction could be identical, but if I copied those from another paper that’s plagiarism. Likewise, if my paper built on a useful equation from another’s work, and I copied the explanation directly from that paper, it’s plagiarism. Yet as the author said, this does little disservice to the reader. These rules are more about properly maintaining an academic measure of merit.

But while this is a great point, we shouldn’t abandon the problem of plagiarism all together. Instead, just start with your moral system, say utilitarian or a Kantian ethic, and then put it to the test. For certain, some systems will find it intrinsically immortal regardless of the social context.