my phd-advisor stole my manuscript and published it himself

[fuzzylogician]

Might be a silly question, but what does "OP" stand for?

The quote above likely meant "other party" or "offended party." They are saying that you have not provided any assurance that you have talked this through with the prof to try and iron out differences, or told us what the outcome of such a meeting was (until just now that is).

OP just stands for "opening post" (or poster).

I don't think there is anything you could have done differently to protect yourself. This is an unusual situation, and in any normal setting what you did would have been enough. Maybe one lesson is to document these kinds of agreements and get everyone's confirmation (e.g., send a summary email following conversations about authorship, ask everyone to acknowledge receipt), and find ways to give everyone the credit they are due (e.g., have a footnote in the paper detailing what all everyone contributed). Your advisor's reasons for excluding you from the paper are absurd, as I'm sure you agree. Under no normal circumstance would such a logic lead to the exclusion of a team member from a joint project within the situation you described (your contribution being what it was, the agreement about authorship being what it was).

[TheFez]

Bones, It took some time to give us the fact that he informed you months ahead of time that he intended to publish this without you.

Without a record of his (absurd) reasons, he may offer some other (plausible) reason for this action by claiming you did not comply with your agreement.

You did not reply to my question about what you meant by "ca 50%" ownership. Contracts are usually very specific about whether it's 49%, 50% or 51% for example. And each of these changes the nature of your relationship markedly. If he has a controlling interest (> 50%)... maybe he has the right to do what he did. So what is the exact "split"? What does the contract say your obligations are? What does it say about resolving a disagreement between you two?

I am not suggesting you are wrong, or haven't been wronged. But a possible spin on this is:

1. He had a contract with you where he was the controlling partner

2. (He claims) you did not comply

3. He exercises his right to go it alone and cut you out

4. He informed you of this decision art the time

Is the professor one who is well regarded and has a good reputation otherwise? How is your rapport with others int he dept.; e.g. the department head, dean, etc.? Have other students had problems with this professor misappropriating Intellectual property?

I would not "roll over" if you are 100% certain you are in the right - but I would tread cautiously when accusing a faculty member of ethics violation.

The best route to me is to get a new adviser.

[Bones]

Thank you all. Please close this thread.

[Usmivka]

Uh, no resolution for us then?

[Bones]

Uh, sorry. Usmivka and fuzzylogician, I am following your advice. Thank you very much for encouraging me.

I think, for the time being, there is nothing more which can be added to the discussion. Time will tell what happens.

[fuzzylogician]

Good luck, I hope this works out for you.

It'd be nice to hear from you occasionally about how it's going - if only for us to learn if our advice was helpful or damaging. Too often people disappear without letting us know how their problems resolved themselves and it can be frustrating for us regulars. Either way, though, I do hope things turn for the better for you from now on.

[mirandaw]

Bones, It took some time to give us the fact that he informed you months ahead of time that he intended to publish this without you.

Without a record of his (absurd) reasons, he may offer some other (plausible) reason for this action by claiming you did not comply with your agreement.

You did not reply to my question about what you meant by "ca 50%" ownership. Contracts are usually very specific about whether it's 49%, 50% or 51% for example. And each of these changes the nature of your relationship markedly. If he has a controlling interest (> 50%)... maybe he has the right to do what he did. So what is the exact "split"? What does the contract say your obligations are? What does it say about resolving a disagreement between you two?

I am not suggesting you are wrong, or haven't been wronged. But a possible spin on this is:

1. He had a contract with you where he was the controlling partner

2. (He claims) you did not comply

3. He exercises his right to go it alone and cut you out

4. He informed you of this decision art the time

Regardless of his interest as "controlling partner," if the contract dictates co-authorship, he has no right to breach the contract without both parties revising the original stipulations, regardless of his standing as advisor. It is extremely unethical, not to mention illegal. The advisor should have known when the contract was drawn up that 50% co authorship on a published work implies that the second author (student) did the work and should not have agreed to the arrangement in the first place. Semantics aside, there should be a formal meeting with the department head and board of ethics at the very least. It SHOULD hurt this advisor's career - they should have known better. (which is not to say you shouldn't tread these waters carefully. You also have a lot to lose here.)

Edited May 27, 2012 by mirandaw

[Sigaba]

This thread is a good illustration of why it is important to know the difference between having good intentions and having the expertise and experience to offer useful guidance.

Is this thread about a lawyer seeking legal advice from members of this BB who are not practicing attorneys specializing in contracts and/or intellectual property and/or publishing? Is this thread about a trained attorney asking for interpretation of a contract that only he or she has read? Or is this thread about a graduate student asking for suggestions on how to manage the political and professional aspects of a dilemma?

Manuscript written and owned by: phd-advisor (ca. 50%) and me (ca. 50% of the manuscript).

Authorship according to legally binding (and enforceable) contract: phd-advisor and me.

Manuscript has been published by him under his sole authorship.

Even assuming that I have all evidence and assuming that I win all administrative and court proceedings: won't there be a massive negative effect on my career chances if I sue (and win against) my phd-advisor?

In my jurisdiction, this is also illegal.

PS: I am a lawyer, admitted to the bar.

Why are those who are not jurists offering interpretations of contract law without (I) the proper training and/or (II) full knowledge of the specifics of the situation--including a copy of the executed contract--which might include clauses that exonerate the professor from any wrong doing?

Why are some who are not yet doctoral students advising a doctoral student on how he/she should manage his/her career or her/his relationship with her/his adviser?

[TheFez]

Hi Sigaba,

I think we were offering advise because we were asked for it. If Bones, who claims to be an attorney, wanted expert legal advise they should hire a lawyer, or call Judge Judy, and not bother with us yahoos on TGC.

For my part, I was not so much offering advise, as asking questions. Like you, I can't form even an uneducated (lay) opinion without knowing the details. For instance, I find the "ca. 50%" language particularly nagging. Though I am (fortunately) not a lawyer, doesn't a good contract usually specify things like the (exact) split of ownership, mechanisms for making decisions, and resolving disputes between the parties? I did learn that owning 51% can be much different from having "about 50%" in terms of who can "legally" do what.

I also was surprised 1/2 way into the discussion when it was revealed that the adviser had an explicit conversation during which they said they didn't want to co-author the article and offered "lame" excuses. Until then, I had formed an impression that the adviser acted surreptitiously. Is it possible the adviser had some arguably legitimate reason?

I admit to being drawn to this post by it's cloak-and-dagger drama and intrigue, and also because it seemed to be a cautionary tale. Along the lines of what you history folks remind us "those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it". For me, a lot of questions remain unanswered and now, sadly, Bones has decided to bail; leaving us hanging. I hope it all works out okay.

Edited May 28, 2012 by TheFez

[Lola Wants]

Why are some who are not yet doctoral students advising a doctoral student on how he/she should manage his/her career or her/his relationship with her/his adviser?

I didn't know you had to be a doctoral student to give advice to another doctoral student. I didn't know my status as a master's student rendered my advice null and void to a doctoral student. I'm so sorry let me step back into my place.

[Bones]

Sorry for the misunderstanding. English is not my first language. Just to make it clear: I don't need legal advice--that's why I am avoiding these questions. It wouldn't make sense in this situation because I am perfectly aware about the legal situation and it is also a foreign jurisdiction governed by a foreign law. (Moreover, I would think about not giving legal advice unless you add the appropriate disclaimer which is necessary in the relevant jurisdictions in order to minimize possible claims arising from actually relying on advice which causes harm. Also third parties could read and rely on your advice. Be careful about that.)

I was asking for the political aspects Sigaba is describing.

Also, I think, I finally got very good advice. As I have already noted, I am thankful for receiving useful ideas and for the encouragement.

Unfortunately, due to the nature of this problem, it is not possible to tell immediately, how this turns out. It will take a few months (or even years).

Thank you.

Edited May 28, 2012 by Bones

[Dal PhDer]

IMO, all we can do is give advice based on personal opinion and experience (no one should think that it's anything more than this). I think there has been a lot of great advice here and the reader has clearly expressed their thanks for it...but it seems that there may be an issue with some that we were not given the full facts and that the OP may have (in the heat of the moment), accidentally swayed the tone/fact/etc to be more in favour of their position.

I think we all know we don't come on here for anything but peer opinion and support. I think we also all know that sometimes when an OP posts they are in the moment and may be upset and misconstrue the situation/facts/etc- intentionally or unintentionally.

I think the important thing is that we all want to give helpful guidance/advice and have it reflect the reality of the situation.

I think this is a very important topic, that a lot of students experience. I hope Bones keeps us in the loop and lets us know the course of action they took and what happens...students could learn a lot from the situation.

[TheFez]

Well, and as an actual PhD candidate it seems like your opinion actually counts Dal !

Reflecting on Sigaba's point about who's opinion should matter most, perhaps some sort of weighting scale like the one below would help:

The Fez and Members of The Fez Friends Inner Circle ................................... 110%

PhD Candidates in hard stuff like Math, Econ and Physics............................... 100%

PhD Candidates in fuzzy stuff ........................................................................... 95%

History ABDs ..................................................................................................... 90%

PhD Candidates with over 750 posts................................................................. 89%

Masters Candidates (except Math, Econ, etc.) ................................................. 80%

Phoenix Students ............................................................................................. 50%

Practicing Attorneys Specializing in Contracts, etc............................................ 30%

People with Good Intentions Only ..................................................................... 0%

[Dal PhDer]

Well, and as an actual PhD candidate it seems like your opinion actually counts Dal !

Reflecting on Sigaba's point about who's opinion should matter most, perhaps some sort of weighting scale like the one below would help:

The Fez and Members of The Fez Friends Inner Circle ................................... 110%

PhD Candidates in hard stuff like Math, Econ and Physics............................... 100%

PhD Candidates in fuzzy stuff ........................................................................... 95%

History ABDs ..................................................................................................... 90%

PhD Candidates with over 750 posts................................................................. 89%

Masters Candidates (except Math, Econ, etc.) ................................................. 80%

Phoenix Students ............................................................................................. 50%

Practicing Attorneys Specializing in Contracts, etc............................................ 30%

People with Good Intentions Only ..................................................................... 0%

I admit- I chuckled at this!

My 'fuzzy' PhD is more credible here than in my lab...they tell me I have a 'scientology' degree....! :)

[Lola Wants]

Well, and as an actual PhD candidate it seems like your opinion actually counts Dal !

Reflecting on Sigaba's point about who's opinion should matter most, perhaps some sort of weighting scale like the one below would help:

The Fez and Members of The Fez Friends Inner Circle ................................... 110%

PhD Candidates in hard stuff like Math, Econ and Physics............................... 100%

PhD Candidates in fuzzy stuff ........................................................................... 95%

History ABDs ..................................................................................................... 90%

PhD Candidates with over 750 posts................................................................. 89%

Masters Candidates (except Math, Econ, etc.) ................................................. 80%

Phoenix Students ............................................................................................. 50%

Practicing Attorneys Specializing in Contracts, etc............................................ 30%

People with Good Intentions Only ..................................................................... 0%

I hope you're being facetious about this arbitrary scale.

[mirandaw]

I hope you're being facetious about this arbitrary scale.

Well considering TheFez isn't explicit whether or not they hold a PhD, I'm not sure their thoughts matter!

[TheFez]

Ah, Miranda, you see that The scale clearly shows the Fez (and his inner circle) count 110% !

[Beater123]

Why not communicate with him frankly?

[lewin]

Bones- was research done with grant money from adviser? If s legally he has the right to any and all data collected and the right to publish anything.

Old comment, but just wanted to address this. In my field this is definitely not true. APA guidelines specifically state that providing funding--in itself--does not qualify one for authorship, and being paid to work does not mean waiving authorship. Professors have the right to publish but not to omit individuals who contributed to the work.

And if this were me I would have frank discussions with my advisor, a trusted professor, the department chair, and the dean. In that order. I would limit myself to internal professional action, nothing using the legal system.

[Sigaba]

Ah, Miranda, you see that The scale clearly shows the Fez (and his inner circle) count 110% !

Yeah, but unless your inner circle is very small, you might be placing yourself towards the other end of the scale.

So, try this revision. It is based upon the way many Americans (on the left and the right) talk about the issues of the day.

Fez and everyone who agrees with the Fez.....100%

Everyone else...................................................0%

HTH.