Subject: Re: (off-topic) self-plagiarism From: Pierre Divenyi <pdivenyi@xxxxxxxx> Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2009 19:12:28 +0200 List-Archive:<http://lists.mcgill.ca/scripts/wa.exe?LIST=AUDITORY>Mr. Nizami has obviously misunderstood my earlier posting. All journals consider any submitted paper confidential and often clearly state that the reviewer should not divulge the paper's content. Now our colleague Laszlo Toth has a valid point but he can't tell us who the author is and what the paper is about. The editor trusted him with the paper and expects him to make a recommendation as to publish it, reject it, or recommend revision. Rejection in case of multiple publication is the obvious choice but Laszlo can't do more than proposing rejection. He can also explain to the editor his reasons and could ask the editor to share his views with the editorial board and the editor in chief. -Pierre Divenyi On 7/7/09 6:25 PM, "Laszlo Toth" <tothl@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, 7 Jul 2009, Pierre Divenyi wrote: > >> I respectfully disagree with Peter. When a journal sends a paper for review, >> it is often explicitly but always implicitly implied that the paper and its >> content are confidential. > > As I said, I have found the paper in many already-published versions, > which are clearly public. So its just an additional thing that I have an > n+1th version which is confidental. I might have found the self-plagiarism > also accidentaly, just by browsing the web. I think it's not against any > law if I say: type the following sentence in google and compare the abstracts > of the > papers that come up. > > "The proposed fast time delay neural networks" > > Laszlo Toth > Hungarian Academy of Sciences * > Research Group on Artificial Intelligence * "Failure only begins > e-mail: tothl@xxxxxxxx * when you stop trying" > http://www.inf.u-szeged.hu/~tothl * >