A write-up had been submitted by matching writer (CA) on 19 December 2011. After a few revisions this article had been accepted for book on 23 March 2012. The content ended up being posted online 8 May 2012.
• Co-author A claims that this paper ended up being submitted to journal A by CA during her lack (maternity leave).
At the full time of distribution, CA had been a PhD pupil at an investigation centre (X).
On 21 November 2012, co-author />• Co-author A claims that she while the other 7 co-authors (writers B, C, D, E, F, G and H) are not informed in regards to the book in log A by CA.
• Co-author A claims that 90% associated with information presented in this paper had been acquired during work done when you look at the laboratories at research centre X, would be the home of X, and that can simply be posted by the X employee and cannot be distributed or posted without X’s permission. Relating to co-author A, CA knows of this as he finalized a agreement with centre X.
• Co-author A mentions that she recently presented an updated form of the exact same paper to a different log. A is the corresponding author for this submission, co-author. All writers (including CA!) consented to this book. (NB: Journal B is a log with an increased effect element than journal A.)
On 3 December 2012, the editor-in-chief of log A informed co-authors A and CA and all sorts of of the other co-authors (B, C, D, E, F, G and H) of this possibility for posting an erratum.
On 6 December 2012, the Legal and Contracts Officer (LCO) of research centre X responded towards the editor-in-chief that CA violated obligations that are contractual X by publishing the content and moving the copyright to your copyright owner of this journal. Continue reading Paper presented for book without knowledge or consent of co-authors