- How should medical researchers respond to false copyright infringement claims?
-
Sung Pil Park, Eric Yong Joong Lee
-
Sci Ed. 2019;6(2):137-141. Published online August 19, 2019
-
DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.174
-
-
12,905
View
-
350
Download
-
1
Web of Science
-
2
Crossref
-
 Abstract
 PDF
- Serious concerns have been raised about the Morisky Medication Adherence Scales (MMAS-4 and MMAS-8) ever since researchers from Asia and other regions were claimed to have used the MMAS without a license. Donald Morisky and his team have claimed that numerous authors have infringed copyright, trademark, or other rights over the MMAS. This case study will scrutinize whether the MMAS is protected by any intellectual property rights, including copyright and trademark. In many cases, the authors have not applied the MMAS for their research, but have only introduced or described the MMAS in papers that are accessible and open to the public. The MMAS is a measure to keep track of and check the regularity and accuracy with which patients take their medications; it is not meant as a diagnosis and does not form a basis for treatment plans. If another researcher rephrases the questions in a way that achieves a certain level of originality, not infringing the original expressions of the MMAS, then Morisky and his team may not be able to claim infringement of its copyright. Even assuming that the MMAS is subject to copyright, the authors can raise a “fair use” defense. Concerted actions may be necessary for researchers to protect academic integrity and the public nature of scholarly works. The fair use of the MMAS in a scholarly article should not be barred by false copyright infringement claims.
-
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by  - Drug compliance and the Morisky Adherence Scale: An expression of concern and a warning
Alain Li‐Wan‐Po, Gregory M. Peterson
Journal of Clinical Pharmacy and Therapeutics.2021; 46(1): 1. CrossRef - Questionnaires and scores for assessing medication adherence — advantages and disadvantages of the diagnostic method in research and actual clinical practice
Yu. V. Lukina, N. P. Kutishenko, S. Yu. Martsevich, O. M. Drapkina
Cardiovascular Therapy and Prevention.2020; 19(3): 2562. CrossRef
- Arbitral action and preventive methods against predatory journal practice
-
Sung Pil Park, Eric Yong Joong Lee, Ji Hee Suh
-
Sci Ed. 2018;5(1):49-52. Published online February 19, 2018
-
DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.118
-
-
12,769
View
-
233
Download
-
1
Web of Science
-
1
Crossref
-
Abstract
PDF
- As open access model of journal publication increases, predatory journals, which deceive scholars to publish journals in fake database websites and exploit them for publishing fee, is also increasing. There are two types of predatory journals. First, journal hijacking and cybersquatting generally create fake database website by mimicking authentic database website, thereby defrauding scholars for publication fee. Second, journal phishing use scam emails to steal scholars’ personal information. If scholars suffered damage from predatory journals, scholars can take either arbitral or judicial actions. Arbitral action follows arbitrational resolution process termed Uniform Domain-Name Dispute-Resolution Policy. Scholars can join Uniform Domain-Name Dispute-Resolution Policy proceeding with legal entity that has right to authentic database website, which will result in cancellation or transfer of fake database website. In contrast, scholars can take judicial action under Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, which may help scholars to recover an actual monetary damage from predatory journals. Nonetheless, taking precaution to avoid predatory journals is the best course of action, rather than going through arduous cure procedures. Scholars may prevent predatory journals by carefully examining fake database website names or email addresses, or observing unreasonable number of published article issues in predatory journal websites.
-
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by - How to respond to and what to do for papers published in predatory journals?
Aamir Raoof Memon
Science Editing.2018; 5(2): 146. CrossRef
|
KCSE
