| |
|
The Nonlinear Optics Web Site
A Case Study in Plagiarism: The chronology of what happened III.
Email to Dr. Dean from Dr. Cheater on march 6, 2003.
Dear Sir,
With reference to above, the matter has been sorted out with Dr. Mark
G. Kuzyk. However, if you still need any clarification, I can meet you
and explain further.
Thanks with regards,
Dr. Cheater
Email from Dr. Dean to me on March 16, 2003.
Dear Mark,
I received this email from Dr. Cheater.
What happened with his effort to "sort it out"?
Is it to your satisfaction?
Anyway, even if you accept his apologies, it will have consequences here. I do not know the policy because I never heard of this kind of thing before, but I would treat it similar to using pirated software; theft of intellectual property.
Best regards
Dr. Dean
My Response to Dr. Dean (with copies to Dr. Editor and my coauthor) on March 17, 2003.
Dear Dr. Dean,
I thank you for taking this issue so seriously. As far as the “sorting out,” Dr. Cheater sent me an email that his collaborator was at fault and that he was sorry that this happened. I believe that I copied you with my response to him, and I believe that is the last email between us. He apparently withdrew another paper that was submitted to the same journal, so this was not an isolated incident. I agree with you that an apology should not be the end of the story.
I can give you some of my own thoughts on this subject, and I apologize if I am being too presumptuous in doing so. I believe that academic honesty and integrity should be one of the most important principles of any institution. If we expect our students not to cheat, we ourselves as faculty need to be extra vigilant. Based on my comparison of Dr. Cheater’s paper with my APL paper, I do not believe that it was just a lack of referring to our work. Rather, I believe that he basically re-published the SAME WORK with some minor changes as camouflage. As such, as far as academic integrity is concerned, I think that this transgression is extreme. The net effect is that this incident reflects badly on the co-authors of this paper as well as your institution. The steps you take as well as your actions will set a precedent for future cases; and will hopefully act as a deterrent to others.
At our university, we have an ethics committee that hears cases and decides on actions (though we have not had such a case – to my knowledge, in the 13 years I have been here). The more people that are involved, the more even-handed will be the result. Before any decision is made on this case, I think that several steps need to be taken:
1. The fact that the paper has been plagiarized needs to be established by an independent party (excluding myself since I am clearly a biased party). I can suggest some excellent and ethical researchers that would act as “reviewers.” They could in effect assess the level of plagiarism.
2. Other papers by Dr. Cheater should be investigated. Since we already know about two alleged ones, there may be more.
3. The person responsible for the plagiarism needs to be identified. Given that Dr. Cheater is the first author as well as the corresponding author, if he claims that he is not responsible, the burden of proof is on him to show that he is not. (If he is a common author on several plagiarized papers, that would make a good case against him.)
4. Once the guilty parties are identified, an internal committee at your institution would have the final word on what disciplinary action you would want to take (if any). If any of his plagiarized papers are in print, they should be officially retracted.
I agree that this case is similar to the cases that you bring up, such as copyright infringement (though in this case, it was attempted copyright infringement). I would like to stress that in my opinion, the more important issue is the ethical one rather than the legal one. I tried to look on the internet for similar cases at other universities, and found that most of them deal with student plagiarism. Penalties range from getting a zero on the paper in question, to failing the course, to being expelled – based on the severity.
I again apologize if I am overstepping my boundary. As a past journal editor and active researcher, I find this to be an important issue, and that is my motivation for originally bringing this issue to you. I look forward to hearing about your progress on this issue; and, I would be glad to help you.
Regards,
Mark G. Kuzyk
Response from Dr. Dean on March 18, 2003.
Dear Mark and Carl,
Be assured that not only me, but also the upper administration is looking into this; and, there will be actions taken soon.
Best regards,
Dr. Dean
My Response to Dr. Dean on March 23, 2003.
Dear Dr. Dean,
Thanks you for the update. I have no doubt that the situation is in good hands.
Regards,
Mark G. Kuzyk
Email from Dr. Dean to me on April 9, 2003.
Dear Mark,
An update of the current situation. At the moment the issue is being investigated by the administration. A committee for such things is in place.
…If the committee asks me, I will recommend termination.
Best regards
Dr. Dean
Email from Dr. Dean to my coauthor and me on September 26, 2003.
Dear Professors,
…Now after going through the appropriate channels of the University,
our disciplinary board has made a decision and the contract of Dr.
Cheater as main author of the copied paper has been terminated with one
month notice…
Thank you and best regards,
Dr. Dean
My response.
Dear Dr. Dean,
It is good to see that your university took strong measures in this case. Thanks again for dealing with this issue with such vigilance.
Regards,
Mark G. Kuzyk