AI plagiarism tools under fire for manipulating originality scores

Platforms like Justdone.ai and Quetext.com are being accused of misleading users by inflating plagiarism rates before subscription, then lowering them significantly after payment.

Concerns raised over inconsistent plagiarism detection results

A growing number of users are questioning the credibility of AI-powered plagiarism detection tools such as Justdone.ai and Quetext, claiming the platforms deliberately display inflated similarity scores during free trials. Once users upgrade to paid versions, the same content reportedly receives significantly lower plagiarism ratings. This discrepancy has sparked debate across online forums and raises concerns about whether these services are genuinely reliable or are instead using pressure tactics to push subscriptions.

In a test conducted by n24.com.tr, a sample article was analyzed using Justdone.ai both before and after purchasing a subscription. During the free trial, the system flagged the content with a 95% plagiarism rate, while the same text showed only 13% similarity after activating the paid membership. The stark contrast has added fuel to allegations that these platforms are manipulating scores to drive users toward purchasing their premium services, especially the ones offering "AI rewriting" or "make your content original" features.

Reddit users share similar complaints

On platforms like Reddit, Quora, and ProductHunt, users have voiced similar experiences. Discussions under threads titled “Is Justdone.ai reliable?” or “Does Justdone.ai give accurate plagiarism scores?” have revealed that many users noticed unusually high similarity percentages during free trials. Some reported that upon subscribing, the same documents were suddenly rated as mostly original. This pattern, recurring across different platforms, suggests a strategy aimed at encouraging users to opt for paid versions under the impression that their content is not original.

Several users labeled this as a form of deceptive marketing. One comment stated, “Before payment, I was told my article was 91% plagiarized. After subscribing, it magically dropped to 14%. That’s not how real plagiarism detection should work.” Others accused these platforms of using “AI-based scare tactics” to push their rewriting tools and subscription plans.

Users urged to rely on trusted academic tools

Experts recommend avoiding lesser-known platforms that are not transparent about their scanning methods or databases. For accurate and consistent plagiarism checking, users are encouraged to use tools backed by academic institutions or established research communities. These services are more likely to offer credible analysis and do not base their business models on generating fear or confusion.

Calls for transparency in AI-driven originality software

As AI becomes more embedded in content creation and review processes, transparency in how plagiarism scores are calculated is essential. Platforms like Justdone.ai and Quetext must clarify whether the differences in detection results are due to advanced scanning options available only to paid users or deliberate algorithmic manipulation.

The growing concerns surrounding these tools reflect a broader skepticism about AI plagiarism checkers, particularly those that bundle detection with “AI rewriting” services. Without regulation and greater scrutiny, users risk being misled, both financially and in terms of content integrity.

Frequently Asked Questions

• Justdone.ai reliable?

• Does Justdone.ai give accurate plagiarism results?

• AI plagiarism checkers misleading

• Quetext vs Justdone.ai

• Originality score manipulation

• AI content rewriting tools scam

• Plagiarism checker paid version difference