Originality - AI and Plagiarism Checker

It is entirely false; it flagged my own written content as AI. I checked the content from an authentic website, and it also detected it as AI without flagging it as plagiarized.

Good

Horrendous from top to bottom. It's aggravating enough that this "product" can't tell the difference between human and AI text—and blatantly so. But what makes things infinitely worse for writers like me are all the suckers who have fallen for Originality's marketing. So many clients insist on using this garbage detector, so not only are they throwing their own money away, they're forcing writers to pay for it, too—which equals even more money thrown away. I can't convey my disdain for Originality enough. It's awful. It's a liar, and so are the scammers who created it.

Overall experience is great . The user interface is easy to navigate, and the features are helpful. Highly recommended!

Amazing product (a necessity) for any content publisher.

This is hands down the best ai & plagiarism detector tool online. I use it frequently! If you want to make sure your content is rankable or determine if someone else's is human written, you need this tool!

good

I have tried a number of plagiarism detection tools. The good ones tend to be quite expensive if you don't use them a lot, so I was attracted to the 'pay for what you use' credits model of Originality. I looked for a trial, but there isn't one. You have to sign up and purchase 1,000 credits in order to try the platform. Going by all the hugely positive comments about this product on PH, I thought I would give it a go anyway. Unfortunately, I was immediately disappointed. I pasted in a blog post which had been written for me by a copywriter I was trialling. After a bit of thinking, Originality told me my text was 100% original. I ran the same text through a plagiarism tool which I trust (but which is expensive) and it showed the same blog post was 58%(!) plagiarised, which I was able to verify - it's riddled with copied text - some text is slightly reworded, but some is directly copied-and-pasted from existing articles. So.... I don't feel this tool will meet my needs in its current state. And I have loads of credits left to use. I have not tested out the AI detection mechanism, which might still be a use for those credits, if it works.

Tried it with different texts and most times it’s close to 100% AI. Seems to label “ai generated” as default.