Skip to main content
Log in

Academic Plagiarism at the Faculty Level: Legal Versus Ethical Issues and a Case Study

  • Published:
Journal of Academic Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Plagiarism by college and university faculty members has become a growing issue and concern in academia. This paper presents a case study of an extreme and clear case of such plagiarism. Yet an analysis of the legal and ethical contexts of such plagiarism, and the specific chronicle of this case, illustrate the complexities and difficulties in dealing with such situations. Implications for researchers, for colleges and universities, and for academic publishers and journals are offered.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Academy of Management (2013). Plagiarism policies and screening at AMJ. Accessed at www.aom.org, 16 Oct.

  • Astrachan, J., Pieper, T., & Jaskiewicz, P. (2008). Family business (p. xiii). Northampton: Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bast, C., & Samuels, L. (2008). Plagiarism and legal scholarship in the age of information sharing: the need for intellectual honesty. Catholic University Law Review, 57, 779–814.

    Google Scholar 

  • Billings, R. (2004). Plagiarism in academia and beyond: what is the role of the courts? University of San Francisco Law Review, 38, 1–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bretag, S., & Mahmud, S. (2009). Self-plagiarism or appropriate textual re-use? Journal of Academic Ethics, 7(3), 193–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burr v. Kulas (1995). 532 N.W2nd 388 North Dakota.

  • Comas-Forgas, R., & Surida-Negre, J. (2010). Academic plagiarism: explanatory factors from Students’ Perspective. Journal of Academic Ethics, 8(3), 217–232.

    Google Scholar 

  • Copyright Advisory Network (2013). Accessed at http://librarycopyright.net/forum/view/1430, 21 Oct.

  • Copyright Issues Relating to Surveys (2014). Accessed at www.fsms.org/documents/CopyrightissuesRelatingtoSurveys.doc, 27 Feb.

  • Cornell (2013). Accessed at www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/102, 21 Oct.

  • Directory of Open Access Journals (2013). Accessed at www.doaj.org, 23 Dec.

  • Dul, J., & Hak, T. (2007). Case study methodology in business research. Amsterdam: Butterwork & Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elliott, T., Marquis, L., & Neal, C. (2013). Business ethics perspectives: faculty plagiarism and fraud. Journal of Business Ethics, 112(1), 91–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elsevier (2013). Accessed at www.elsevier.com, 16 Oct.

  • Gallup v. Kenexa. (2009). U.S. District Court E.D. Pennsylvania, WestLaw 1362610.

  • Hasan, R. (2011). Copyright’s merger doctrine as a solution to conflicts between copyright law and freedom of speech. Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal. Accessed at www.cardozoaelj.com, 21 Oct.

  • Hayes, N., & Introna, L. (2005). Cultural values, plagiarism, and fairness: when plagiarism gets in the way of learning. Ethics & Behavior, 15(3), 213–231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Honig, B., & Bedi, A. (2012). The fox in the hen house: a critical examination of plagiarism among members of the Academy of Management. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 11(1), 101–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Imran, A., & Nordin, M. (2013). Predicting the underlying factors of academic dishonesty among undergraduates in public universities: a path analysis approach. Journal of Academic Ethics, 11(2), 103–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ioannides, J. (2005). Why most published research findings are false. PLoS Medicine, 2(8), e124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karabag, S., & Berggren, C. (2012). Retraction, dishonesty and plagiarism: analysis of a crucial issue for academic publishing, and the inadequate responses from leading journals in economics and management. Journal of Applied Economics and Business Research, 2(4), 172–183.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klinge v. (1995). Ithaca College, 634 N.Y.S.2d 1000.

  • Kolata, G. (2013). Scientific articles accepted (personal checks, too). The New York Times, April 7. Accessed at www.nytimes.com, 8 April.

  • Latourette, A. (2010). Plagiarism: legal and ethical implications for the university. Journal of College and University Law, 37, 9–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, B., Duchac, J., & Douglas Beets, S. (2011). An academic publisher’s response to plagiarism. Journal of Business Ethics, 102(3), 489–506.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lofstrom, E., & Kupila, P. (2013). The instructional challenges of plagiarism. Journal of Academic Ethics, on-line first articles, www.Springer.com. Accessed 11.

  • McKibban, A., & Burdsal, C. (2013). Academic dishonesty: an in-depth investigation of assessing measurable constructs and a call for consistency in scholarship. Journal of Academic Ethics, on-line first articles. Accessed 11 June 2013.

  • Mercer v. (2001) Board of Trustees for University of Northern Colorado, 17 Fed.Appx. 913.

  • Mirchin, D., & Strong, W. (2011). Copyright Law. Massachusetts Continuing Legal Education, Inc.

  • Nimmer, D. (2004). The moral imperative against academic plagiarism (without a moral right against reverse passing off). DePaul Law Review, 54, 1–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Office of the General Counsel, University of Arizona (2014). Accessed at http://ocg.arizona.edu/files, 27 Feb.

  • Parrish, D. (2006). Research misconduct and plagiarism. Journal of College and University Law, 33, 1–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Patry, W. (2007). Patry on copyright. Eagan: Thompson West.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pérez-Peña, R., & Bidgood, J. (2012). Harvard says 125 students may have cheated on a final exam. The New York Times, August 30. Accessed at www.nytimes.com, June 5, 2013.

  • Plagiarism Project (2013). Cultural issues and plagiarism. Accessed at www.plagiarismproject.pbworks.com, 18 Oct.

  • Research Councils UK (2013). Accessed at www.rcuk.ac.uk, 16 October.

  • Scholarly Open Access (2013). Accessed at www.scholarlyoa.com/individual-journals/, 14 October.

  • Sonfield, M., & Lussier, R. (2004). First-, second-, and third-generation family firms: a comparison. Family Business Review, 17(3), 189–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Springer (2013). Accessed at www.springer.com, 16 October 2013.

  • Stake, R. (2005). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stearns, L. (1992). Copy wrong: plagiarism, process, property, and the law. California Law Review, 80, 1–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • United States Court of Appeals v. (2007). Des Moines Area Community College, 495 F.3rd 906.

  • Washington State University Libraries (2013). Cultural perspectives on plagiarism. Accessed at www.wsulibs.wsu.edu/plagiarism/cultural-perspectives. 20 Oct.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Matthew C. Sonfield.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Sonfield, M.C. Academic Plagiarism at the Faculty Level: Legal Versus Ethical Issues and a Case Study. J Acad Ethics 12, 75–87 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-014-9205-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-014-9205-3

Keywords

Navigation