Yes, of course I have seen the comparison. And, like most, my reaction is: So what?
Well, he's taking credit as an artist for something he didn't create, instead of acknowledging the original source, and that is what bothers me. Of course, at the end of the day, it doesn't matter that much, but it reminds me of some of my students copypasting from wikipedia and saying it's their own homework, or some colleague who used to take credit for things he didn't do. It's just wrong IMO, from a common sense perspective, without introducing any legal or technical definitions.
Apparently, it is NOT wrong from a "common sense" perspective since a large majority of the people polled here (as well as the five members of the band) do NOT think it is wrong.
Eh, to be fair, there's a difference between 'I don't care' and 'I don't think it is wrong.' The former is just apathy about an issue, not necessarily support or opposition. Me, for example - I do think that if JP knowingly and directly lifted lines from a book, he should have credited that book for those lyrics. However, it's also not like he published a book on psychological disorders claiming credit for research he didn't do and failing to cite his sources - he merely took some words and put them to music. To me it's a nonissue.
Like, I don't want people stealing from me, but if someone steals four pennies they find in my couch cushions, I really won't care.
Point is, I do agree with rene that it's pretty much common sense: if you knowingly quote someone else under any context, you should credit them, or at least clarify that you weren't the original writer of the quote. So, if JP failed to credit some obscure medical text for his lyrics, then I am, in principle, against that. It just doesn't affect my opinion of the music or the lyrics or JP as a lyricist or anything else.