Plagiarism is a matter for the plagiarist, their employer or their institution, and the person whose work was copied (at a stretch). It's not the responsibility of a vigilante or a mob to chase up and vilify someone who has made an entirely academic mistake, deliberately or not.

That it's proof enough for you, or me, or anyone in this thread, is irrelevant, unless you're one of the three aforementioned parties involved. What influence do you or I have on their academic conduct? That's the teacher's, tutor's, or lecturer's job.

And since I'm overlooking the fact that plagiarism in itself is a form of copyright infringement, I'll posit this: people are against SOPA because it bypasses due process and presumes guilt, as decided entirely by the self-certified victim. How is a name-and-shame post like this, where the accused has had no opportunity to defend themselves or explain, any better? Were they even made aware of this beforehand?

Does anyone even know under what circumstances this happened either? Because an undergrad copying an article means absolutely nothing compared to a PhD doing the same.

I don’t know if you intended to scare me out of my skin, but I find that phrase chilling. Men have been lynched and hanged without trial given that very same sentiment.

Accusing someone of plagiarism on the Internet and sentencing someone to death are such completely different scenarios that I have a hard time comparing the two.

edit: Upon further reflection, I do think that creating a honeypot essay for the sole purpose of shaming whoever copies it does seem rather malicious to me. However, I'm speaking more about the general case of publicly naming plagiarists than this particular witch-hunt.