• plagiarism,
• intellectual property,
• copyright,
• scientific work,

Alin Speriusi-Vlad*

Abstract

It is dangerous to narrowly define plagiarism through the prism of special legislation regarding the good conduct in scientific research, technological development and innovation (Law 206/2004) and to disregard the law (general) of copyright (Law 8/1996), because at least, it might conclude (incorrectly) that we do not have plagiarism prior to the entry into force of Law 206/2004. In reality plagiarism represent the infringement of a moral (and imprescriptible) right to authorship of the scientific work protected by Law 8/1996 (art. 10 letter b), which is why this scientific crime defined in special legislation should be reported to the general legislation on copyright. The ban to takeover ideas from scientific work regulated under Law 206/2004 does not conflict with the exlcusion of ideas from copyright protection, according to art. 9 letter a) of Law 8/1996, as long as the special law (art. 4 para. (1) letter d) of Law 206/2004) protects ideas as components of a scientific work, which (along with expressions, demonstrations data, hypotheses, theories, results or methods used) differentiates each scientific works.

* Lect. univ. dr. Facultatea de Drept din cadrul Universităţii de Vest din Timişoara, avocat Baroul Timiş, This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..

• Silviu G. Totelecan,

Silviu G. Totelecan**

Abstract

This interdisciplinary paper, a fine combination of juridical studies, arts and socio-anthropology, investigates the digital turn and its effects upon authors and their work, with a special gaze on the nowadays arts world. It starts with a brief historical review of the copyright regulations in Romania, and then introduces issues such transnationalism vision and glocal blending, as inseparable vectors of worldview making in our contemporary times, influencing and leading the future-to-be national strategies for the digital realm. One of the key-concepts launched here is that of telematics machine, seen both as the meta-instrument of art transfiguration into digital image, as much as its backward reconfi­guration. After exposing a few cases that provide glimpses for a better understanding of real virtuality, the end of the article brings to the fore possible ways – outlined after the Creative Commons copyright licenses and the copyleft licensing – of dealing with the intellectual properties in their transition from private commodities to public goods.

Key words: digital era, telematics machine, real virtuality, auctorial, work of art, culture of speed.

• Sonia Florea,

Sonia Florea**

Abstract

The study argues that the current regulation of plagiarism and self‑plagiarism, as defined by the provisions of Law no. 206/2004 regarding the conduct in scientific research, technological development and innovation and sanctioned according to the procedures stipulated in Law no. 1/2011 on the National Education, the Law no. 319/2003 regarding the Status of Research and Development Personnel and the Government Decision no. 681/2011 approving the Code of Doctoral Studies, as amended by Government Decision no. 134/2016, is able to effectively prevent and punish breaches of the rules of good conduct in research and development and to ensure that the academic standards practiced by Romanian universities comply with rules of good conduct of academic work already adopted and applied by European universities, provided that, under the principle of university autonomy exercised ''only under public accountability'', Romanian universities and research institution find pragmatic solutions in order for academics, students and researchers to know what plagiarism and self‑plagiarism consist of, how to avoid them, what are the rules of academic writing, what are the rules for for taking, from works of other authors (protected or not by copyright), texts, expressions or ideas, any data or any kind of information, what are the sanctions for committing plagiarism and self‑plagiarism. It is essential that the sanctions provided by the law are effectively applied in reality. Only by such kind of effective and pragmantic measures, including the effective use of computer programes for the detection of plagiarism and self‑plagiarism, may be avoided the risk of undermining the academic standards adopted and practiced by Romanian universities and of discrediting the diplomas issued by Romanian universities.

Key words: plagiarism, author’s rights, infringement of intellectual property rights, originality.

• Alin Speriusi-Vlad,

Alin Speriusi-Vlad*

Abstract

It is dangerous to narrowly define plagiarism through the prism of special legislation regarding the good conduct in scientific research, technological development and innovation (Law 206/2004) and to disregard the law (general) of copyright (Law 8/1996), because at least, it might conclude (incorrectly) that we do not have plagiarism prior to the entry into force of Law 206/2004. In reality plagiarism represent the infringement of a moral (and imprescriptible) right to authorship of the scientific work protected by Law 8/1996 (art. 10 letter b), which is why this scientific crime defined in special legislation should be reported to the general legislation on copyright. The ban to takeover ideas from scientific work regulated under Law 206/2004 does not conflict with the exlcusion of ideas from copyright protection, according to art. 9 letter a) of Law 8/1996, as long as the special law (art. 4 para. (1) letter d) of Law 206/2004) protects ideas as components of a scientific work, which (along with expressions, demonstrations data, hypotheses, theories, results or methods used) differentiates each scientific works.

Key words: intellectual property, copyright, scientific work, plagiarism, ideas protection.