Analysis of Fake Authorship from the Perspective of Communication and Hermeneutics

Hamed  Najafi

doi:10.6000/2817-2302.2023.02.01

Authors

Hamed Najafi PhD in Private Law, Tarbiat Modares University, Iran

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.6000/2817-2302.2023.02.01

Keywords:

Fake authorship, Communication, Hermeneutics, Copyright

Abstract

Literary works such as scientific works, after being created, inevitably attract people's attention and somehow, a kind of communication would be stablished between the work and the author. This communication is realized when it is efficient. Communication is effective if the authors of the work are real. Based on all hermeneutic theories, knowing the true authors, has a great impact on the formation of effective communication between the author and his audience through the interpretation and understanding of the text. When an unreal author is included in the work, the understanding of the audience is disturbed and effective communication is not formed. The main issue of this article is what effect does unreal creation have on the understanding of the audience? By using an analytical-descriptive method, we have come to the conclusion that this type of creativity disturbs the audience's understanding and ultimately makes efficient communication difficult.

References

Boell SK, Cezec-Kecmanovic D. A Hermeneutic Approach for Conducting Literature Reviews and Literature Searches. Communications of the Association for Information Systems 2014; 34(12): 257-286. https://doi.org/10.17705/1CAIS.03412

Cole M, O'Keefe R. Hermeneutic Philosophy and Data Collection: A Practical Framework. AMCIS 2002 Proceedings. Paper 233. [Online] http://aisel.aisnet.org/amcis2002/233.

Introna LD. Hermeneutics and Meaning-Making in Information Systems. In R. Galliers, & W. Curry (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Management Information Systems: Critical Perspectives and New Directions, Oxford University Press 2011; pp. 229-252. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199580583.003.0011

Shorter Oxford English Dictionary on Historical Principles, Vol. I, New York, 2002; p. 1231.

Anand Spencer, Understanding Religion: Theories and Methodology, Vision & Venture, New Delhi, 1997; p. 157.

Ginsburg JC. The Concept of Authorship in Comparative Copyright Law, 52 DePaul L. Rev 2003; 1063: 1064. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.368481

Ginsburg JC. The Concept of Authorship in Comparative Copyright Law, 52 DePaul L. Rev 2003; 1063: 1069. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.368481

Sam Ricketson. The Berne Convention 1886-1986 6.4 1987.

Zarkalam, Sattar, Literary and Artistic Property Rights, first edition, Semat Publishing House, Tehran, 2017.

Andrien v. S. Ocean County Chamber of Commerce. 927 F.2d 132 (3d Cir. 1991). See also Lindsay v. RMS Titanic. 52 U.S.P.Q.2d 1609 (S.D.N.Y. 1999).

Ede, Lisa, The Concept of Authorship: An Historical Perspective, Speeches/Meeting Papers; Reports – Research, 1985; p. 1.

Foucault M. what is an Author? Modernity and its Discontents 1969; pp. 299-314.

Carys J. Craig, Copyright, Communication and Culture: Towards a Relational Theory of Copyright Law, Edward Elgar Publishing, 2011; pp. 18-20.

Krauss RM, Fussell SR. Social Psychological Models of Interpersonal Communication, Higgins ET, Kruglanski A, (Eds.), Social Psychology: Handbook of Basic Principles. New York: Guilford Press, 1996; p. 10. Karen Tracy, Discourse Analysis in Communication, in The Handbook of Discourse Analysis, ed by: Deborah Schiffrin, Deborah Tannen , Heidi E. Hamilton, p. 725.

O’Sullivan, Tim, Hartley J, Saunders D, Fiske J. Key concepts in communication. New York: Methuen 1983; p. 131.

Pfeiffer J-B. Basic communication model, The Pfeiffer Library, Second Edition, 1998; 25: 1.

Prakoso B. Reviewing Gadamer’s Hermeneutics in Communication Studies, MediaTor, Vol 13 (2), Desember 2020; 307-318: p. 309. https://doi.org/10.29313/mediator.v13i2.5981

Friston KJ, Frith CD. Active inference, communication and hermeneutics, cortex 2015; 68: 129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2015.03.025

Mousavi SM. una introducción a la hermenéutica y sus tipos, Pik Noor, 2016; p. 52.

Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals Updated May 2022.

uaia E, Crimi' F. Honorary Authorship: Is There Any Chance to Stop It? Analysis of the Literature and a Personal Opinion. Tomography 2021; 7(4): 801-803. https://doi.org/10.3390/tomography7040067

Gaber Y, Unethical Practices in Scientific Research: Authorship, Technical Report 2011; p. 2.

Drahos P. A philosophy of intellectual property, Ashgate publishing.c. U.S.A, 2002; p. 43. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230522923

Shiffrin S. Lockean theories of intellectual property. In: Munzer S, (ed.), New Essays in the Legal and Political Theory of Property. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001; p. 156.

Rawls J. A Theory of Justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press 1971; p. 74. https://doi.org/10.4159/9780674042605

Biron L. Creative work and communicative norms, Perspectives from legal philosophy, in: The Work of Authorship, Edited by Mireille van Eechoud, Amsterdam University Press, 2014; pp. 23-4. https://doi.org/10.1515/9789048523009-002

Hughes J. The philosophy of Intellectual Property. 77 The Georgetown Law Journal 1988; 287: 330.

Hegel GWF. Philosophy of Right, Batoche Books Limited, Kitchener 2001; p. 71.

Radin MJ. Property and Personhood, 34 Stan. L. Rev 1982; 957. https://doi.org/10.2307/1228541

Biron L. Creative work and communicative Norms,in:the work of authorship,ed by: Mireille van Eechoud, Amsterdam university press, p. 28.

Kant I. Critique of Judgment (1790) (trans. W. S. Pluhar) (Indianapolis: Hackett, 1997), pp.160-161.

Drassinower A. Authorship as Public Address: On the Specificity of Copyright vis-à-vis Patent and Trade-Mark, Michigan State Law Review 2008; No. 1: p. 200.

Craig C. Copyright, Communication and Culture Towards a Relational Theory of Copyright Law, Edward Elgar Publishing, 2011; pp. 2-4. https://doi.org/10.4337/9780857933522

Waldron J. From Authors to Copiers: Individual Rights and Social Values in Intellectual Property, Chicago-Kent Law Review 1993; 68(2): 848.

See HLA. Hart, The Concept of Law 1961; 97: 181-82. https://doi.org/10.2307/3040641

Craig C. Copyright, Communication and Culture Towards a Relational Theory of Copyright Law, Edward Elgar Publishing 2011; p. 26. https://doi.org/10.4337/9780857933522

Waldron J. From Authors to Copiers: Individual Rights and Social Values in Intellectual Property, Chicago-Kent Law Review 1993; 68(2): 848.

Bently L. Copyright and the Death of the Author in Literature and Law, The Modem Law Review 57: p. 973. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2230.1994.tb01989.x

Lambropoulos and Miller (eds), Twentieth Century Literary Iheory: An Introductory Anthology (Albany: SUNY Press, 1987;p. 139.

Barthes R. Image, Music, Text, translated and edited by: Stephen Heath, Fontana Press, 1977; pp. 142-148.

Nicholas Pagan, Rethinking Literary Biography: A Postmodern Approach to Tennessee Williams, Fairleigh Dickinson Univ Press 1993; pp. 35-45.

Barthes R. Theory of the Text. (trans MacLeod) in Young (ed), Untying the Text: A Poststructuralist Reader (London: Routledge, 1981; 31: p. 39.

Sokal AD, Bricmont J. Intellectual Impostures: Postmodern Philosophers' Abuse of Science, Profile Books, 2003; pp. 1-276.

Vaezi A. Introduction a la hermenéutica, Teherán: Publicaciones del Instituto de Investigación del Pensamiento y la Cultura Islámica, 7.ª edición, 2015; pp. 475-475.