Whether my master's degree thesis was plagiarized by others is protected by law has been reported in this newspaper (for details, please refer to the article "Legal Protection of Postgraduate Degree Thesis" in July 2007 10). After two and a half years of trial, the two courts made completely different judgments. Recently, Beijing No.1 Intermediate People's Court concluded that the dissertation was protected by copyright.
In March, 2006, the graduate student list of Peking University Archaeological Institute found that the book "Archaeological Excavation of the Former Xiongnu and Xiongnu's History and Culture" written by Associate Professor Ma from the School of History of Renmin University (hereinafter referred to as "Former Xiongnu") seriously copied more than 20,000 words of the original master's thesis "Tomb of Xiongnu", and only mentioned his thesis in a note in the book and references after the text. In May 2006, Shan sued the Haidian District People's Court in Beijing, demanding that the court find that Ma infringed the copyright of his dissertation.
One of the focuses:
Is the dissertation protected by copyright?
On May 18, 2007, the Haidian District Court ruled that the two works involved in the case were both academic works on the study of Xiongnu culture, with some overlapping contents. Creative materials should mainly come from archaeological excavations, which determines that scientific, rigorous and concise interpretation methods should be adopted in creation. This description of facts will not be very different because of different authors in the same subject matter, and the similarity produced by the same fact should be an inevitable similarity. Therefore, all the works involved that meet the above conditions do not enjoy monopoly rights, and the relevant descriptions are not protected by copyright law.
Haidian District Court held that the viewpoint in the single paper "Hun Tomb" was its first creation and was regarded as an academic issue. But at the same time, he stressed that even if he first put forward the relevant views, it is not the object of copyright law protection, because the protection of copyright law is not as good as the protection of thought.
The judgment of Haidian District Court is based on an idea: "The law does not allow anyone to enjoy monopoly on objectively existing events and known facts. Any practice that hinders cultural communication and exchange is contrary to the original legislative intention of the copyright law. "
The final judgment of Beijing No.1 Intermediate People's Court held that the tomb of Xiongnu Mountain, as a scientific activity of archaeological research, must be based on respect for objective history, although some historical materials at home and abroad were referenced. Therefore, in academic research, especially in the field of Xiongnu archaeology with very limited materials, it is inevitable to learn from known historical materials. Although Shan also borrowed, referenced and quoted some historical materials, more content was his further exploration and research based on historical materials and his own professional knowledge, and he put forward the author's unique academic views and fully demonstrated them. Therefore, it is considered that the article Hun Tomb is an independent creation with originality and belongs to a work protected by copyright.
The second focus:
Does the behavior of the original Xiongnu author constitute plagiarism?
On the issue of plagiarism, the Haidian District Court found that although it can be concluded that Ma borrowed the contents of Shan's works in the process of creation, it is not enough to identify his plagiarism. As a rigorous author, Ma should ask Shan for relevant information. Even if it is determined that the relevant content does not belong to the object of copyright protection, the usage should be explained to Shanying and reflected in his works.
Considering the corresponding labor and cost, Haidian District Court objectively saved some time and energy for Ma in the process of completing The Original Xiongnu. Proceeding from the principle of fairness, the court of first instance ruled that Ma paid a single economic compensation of 1 10,000 yuan. Dismissed other claims of Shanying.
The Beijing No.1 Intermediate People's Court held that in this case, Shan's Tomb of Xiongnu was completed in May of 200 1 year, and the work was not published. Ma's book The Former Xiongnu was published in March 2005. Although Ma quoted the article Hun Tomb written by Shan in the reference part of the book, the book used 20,000 words of the article Hun Tomb and some drawings, which exceeded the limit of Ma's personal study and research. Without Shan's permission, Ma used the contents of The Tomb of Xiongnu in The Original Xiongnu, which infringed Shan's right to publish and get remuneration according to law, and should bear legal responsibilities such as stopping the infringement, apologizing, compensating economic losses and paying reasonable expenses for this case.
The final judgment of Beijing No.1 Intermediate People's Court revoked the first-instance judgment of Haidian District Court; Inner Mongolia University Press and Inner Mongolia Xinhua Bookstore Group immediately stopped publishing the book The Former Xiongnu; Ma Xiangshan apologized in writing (the content must be examined by our hospital) and compensated Shan for economic losses and reasonable litigation costs of 5,000 yuan; The acceptance fee for the first and second instance cases is 5000 yuan, which shall be borne by the horse.