'IP' Moral Rights Breaches are Deception Offences, Not Property Offences: Correcting a Category Error

Authors

James McKeahnie, University of WollongongFollow

RIS ID

114579

Publication Details

McKeahnie, J. (2016). 'IP' Moral Rights Breaches are Deception Offences, Not Property Offences: Correcting a Category Error. Res Publica: a journal of moral, legal and social philosophy, 22 (2), 193-207.

Abstract

In March of 2014 Nature Publishing Group, responsible for the publication of journals such as Nature and ScientificAmerican, was subject to criticism for its requirement that contributing authors waive their moral rights (a component of their copyright) in relation to their published articles. Some of the rights included under the umbrella term 'moral rights' are the right to have any copies of one's work reproduced accurately and without alteration; the right to the accurate attribution of one's work under one's own name; and the right not to have the work of others falsely attributed to oneself. The Nature Publishing case, from the criticism it sparked to the group's own response, highlights a category error that occurs when moral rights are conceived of as property rights. Rather, moral rights are natural, non-proprietary rights. In correcting this category error it becomes evident that moral rights offences are not property offences, such as theft, but fraud offences-like plagiarism and forgery. Subsequently, whereas property rights, by definition, are able to be transferred or waived, it can be shown that no justification can be made for treating moral rights as transferrable or able to be waived.