I think that the main aim of the review paper is to give overview of all essential achievements in the field. It automatically means that authors of review should use not only own data, but present properly ideas and summaries from the other authors. It may mean that some kind of "plagiarism" is possible in review paper related with citation of original paper. But what is forbidden, is plagiarism from other review paper on the same topic!

quatations with reference could not be taken into account if you would like to check the plagiarism

I think that the main aim of the review paper is to give overview of all essential achievements in the field. It automatically means that authors of review should use not only own data, but present properly ideas and summaries from the other authors. It may mean that some kind of "plagiarism" is possible in review paper related with citation of original paper. But what is forbidden, is plagiarism from other review paper on the same topic!

I think comprehensive scholastic works such as review papers on a field of study should indeed be checked and verified for plagiarism, for the authenticity and originality of the  ideas, analysis and techniques used and comprehension, as it is not directly similar to a book where bibliographic list might be enough.  

With digital technology, plagiarism has been elevated to the ranks of serious epidemics. In academia more students are growing dependent on copy paste culture. Attached updated list of web tools to detect plagiarism

http://www.educatorstechnology.com/2013/06/top-8-plagiarism-detector-tools-for.html

I do agree with Krishnan, that copy pate business shall be considered as plagiarism. In review paper research scholar or author must understand the literature and present  his views in the form of conclusions for each referred literature. It should not be copied as it is from references. Review paper must also consider the techniques and shall be evaluated to find out the facts.

I think it is a problem for carrier but not a real problem in science. I do not care so much if in a review paper I found plagiarism. Important is that the content satisfy the need of the review: 1) give a good overview of the topic; 2) It is not mentally restricted that means not too much influenced by specific opinions (here plagiarism can be a factor); 3) is precise in furnishing good bibliography. If it does not satisfy the basic requisites, then it is easy to trash it and not cite in our paper. In addition, good review papers are supposed to have undergone to peer review process, so not only the author that make plagiarism but also referees (and editors who choose the reviewers) are responsible it it.

In my opinion plagiarism is never good for the development of research culture for growth of the society.Once it effects the development it has no value in any respect.

A review paper is an overview of the research topic ie.  historical knowledge of the scientific field, historical achievements in the subject, latest results and authors' critics with future trend on the issue. A review paper is largely documented and referenced and many times authors repeat some sentences or paragraphs from the referenced publication for the purpose of critics, their agreeing with or not, or for emphasizing the idea, results or method. This is not a plagiarism  but an academic discussion of the research topic, a plagiarism occurs when a review paper on same topic from other authors copy same content of the first review without citing it. In usual papers , plagiarism could be identified when same method, results and data are identical in 2 papers from different authors without any reference to the first one.

I agree with everyone especially the question of cut and paste as raised by Krishnan and stressed by Anup. It will make the bussines more sanitised when this practice is discouraged and the publishers invest in better and more sensitive anti-plagiarism software for detection.. Even better,  researchers need to be honest about what they credit to themselves.

what is the alternative?

it is writing the others ideas with your own words, sometimes rephrasing a paragraph might change or twist its meaning, particularly when it is done by nonnative speaker.

therefore, I prefer not to rephrase all others ideas,  quotations with a reference created for this purpose.

A review article will have to present the results of the others, however, it should use them intelligently in the article to produce added value. This value can be detecting trends and/or expecting the future in a given area. Other added value can be classification of referenced works and finding conflicts. Thanks. @AlDmour.