How do we handle self-plagiarism in submitted manuscripts?
Self-plagiarism is a controversial issue in scientific writing and presentation of research data. Unlike plagiarism, self-plagiarism is difficult to interpret as intellectual theft under the justification that one cannot steal from oneself. However, academics are concerned, as self-plagiarized papers mislead readers, do not contribute to science, and bring undeserved credit to authors. As such, it should be considered a form of scientific misconduct. In this paper, we explain different forms of self-plagiarism in scientific writing and then present good editorial policy toward questionable material. The importance of dealing with self-plagiarism is emphasized by the recently published proposal of Text Recycling Guidelines by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). (+info)
Licensing the future: report on BioMed Central's public consultation on open data in peer-reviewed journals.
Copyright compliance in health sciences libraries: a status report two years after the implementation of PL 94-553.
This paper briefly reviews developments since the implementation of the new Copyright Law (PL 94-553) and reports on a nationwide survey of academic, hospital, and special health sciences libraries. These libraries were asked to report anonymously on their current policies and the procedures used to comply with the new law. They were also asked to indicate any special concerns they have with the law or the guidelines which they have followed for compliance. The results show that with few exceptions United States health sciences libraries are complying with the specific provisions of the law and that compliance has not significantly affected library services. (+info)
Legal considerations for document delivery services.
Health sciences libraries that provide fee-based information services must consider and develop policies and procedures for complying with legal requirements. This paper reviews the provisions of copyright law that pertain to document delivery, including two court decisions concerning copyright. Also discussed are recent actions by publishers to reinforce their view of libraries' responsibilities for royalty fees for articles copied and their use of licenses to impose additional restrictions on the use of and reproduction of materials. (+info)
Intellectual property and networked health information: issues and principles.
Information networks offer enormous potential for improving the delivery of health care services, facilitating health-related decision-making, and contributing to better health. In addition, advanced information technologies offer important opportunities for new markets, targeted information products and services, greater accessibility, lower costs and prices, and more rapid and efficient distribution. Realizing the full potential of those information resources requires the resolution of significant intellectual property issues, some of which may be affected by special features of health information. For example, the government is a significant funder and originator of health-related information. In addition, much of that information is of great importance to the population and benefits not only individual users, but also employers, insurance companies, the government, and society as a whole. The government must therefore continue to provide particularly important health information to the public, and facilitate that information's accessibility and reliability, while avoiding unnecessary competition with private information providers. Congress and courts must modify or interpret current copyright law as necessary to guarantee that it does not interfere with innovation in tailored health information or exceed its constitutional boundaries and restrict access to information, as opposed to expression. Both producers and users of information must work with the government to educate the public about the availability of health information and the rights of and limitations upon users under copyright law. (+info)
Should intellectual property be disseminated by "forwarding" rejected letters without permission?
Substantive scientific letter writing is a cost-effective mode of complementing observational and experimental research. The value of such philosophically uncommitted and unsponsored well-balanced scientific activity has been relegated. Critical letter writing entails the abilities to: maintain rational scepticism; refuse to conform in order to explain data; persist in keeping common sense centre-stage; exercise logic to evaluate the biological significance of mathematical figures, including statistics, and the ability to sustain the will to share insights regarding disease mechanisms on an ostensibly lower research platform. During peer review, innovative letter writing may share the occasionally unfortunate fate of innovative research. Rejected scientific letters do not automatically lose copyright. Periodicals with high letter loads will see some valuable contributions wasted, but that is the price for maintaining autonomy in scientific publication. The scientific community is an integrated whole that must respect the rights of authors at all levels. Unauthorised forwarding of rejected letters sets the dangerous precedent of justifying unjust means. (+info)
The networked environment and the challenge of change.
The way for librarians to manage the environment of the future is to hold fast to their traditional skills and professional abilities. The challenges in the future environment include technology adoption, copyright, scholarly communication, and the role of professional medical societies. Four major areas in which librarians have skills valuable in this environment are the organization of knowledge, quality assurance of information, custodianship, and user instruction. (+info)
Electronic reserves: the changing landscape of instructional support.
During the spring 1996 academic semester, the University of Maryland Health Sciences Library implemented an electronic course-reserve system as a pilot project with the university's School of Nursing. The pilot project has been very successful because of thorough planning and the effectiveness of the system, which enables library users to retrieve assigned readings easily. This success inspired the staff to begin expanding the scope of the pilot project to include other schools and limited remote access. This paper describes the planning and implementation process, the issues that needed to be resolved, the response to the project, and future plans. Particular attention is paid to issues of copyright and cost recovery. (+info)