After jumping to the present the cases of an alleged plagiarism of Pedro Sánchez's doctoral thesis and also of the final degree project of the former Minister of Health Carmen Montón causing the resignation of the latter, the issue of copy-paste has become Fashion. Today, the University of Barcelona has withdrawn the doctorate from a PDeCAT position for plagiarism. This, however, is not a new topic.
According to the Royal Academy of Language, plagiarism consists of substantially copying other people's works, giving them as one's own. Any literary, artistic or scientific work can be the subject of this crime, but also books, brochures, printed matter, even speeches, conferences, graphics, plans or models... the list is long. It is important to know that not every coincidence between two or more works is plagiarism: only when we talk about basic and fundamental structural coincidences, and not when they are accessory or added, that is, not transcendental.
The intellectual property of a work supposes that its author has the full disposition and an exclusive right of exploitation. The Penal Code in its articles 270 to 272 punishes behaviors that, intentionally and to obtain a benefit, violate this right, such as plagiarism. Whoever commits this crime can be sentenced to prison from 6 months to 4 years, depending on the severity. But always, to warn of the existence of the crime, an intentionality is necessary, that is, to carry out the prohibited conduct knowingly and with knowledge and will. It is also necessary that there is no authorization by the owner of the rights, and the obtaining of a benefit, whether direct or indirect.
Not only individuals can plagiarize, the Criminal Code also provides for the criminal liability of legal entities. In addition, those who commit the crime may also incur civil liability, which entails the adoption of certain measures established by the Intellectual Property Law, paying the corresponding compensation for the damages caused, including moral damages. It is precisely these lawsuits for civil liability in claim for compensation, the most examined by the courts.
Academic works
The most numerous cases of plagiarism that have come to court refer to academic works, such as doctoral theses, final degree projects and the like. A recent sentence issued by the AP of Granada (access the text here) confirmed the sentence to 6 months in prison of a doctor from the University of Granada who helped his wife present her doctoral thesis, for which they used work done by other academics in a research project. The existence of plagiarism was concluded even if some titles were altered or others were added, since the structure was identical to the copied original: order of presentation, objectives, methodology...
Justice has also pointed out that the mere collection of data, no matter how laborious and meritorious it may be, does not constitute the creation of a database, nor does it confer intellectual property rights over them. In this way, the commercial court of Murcia in a ruling issued in 2015 (access the text here) rejected the demand for compensation for plagiarism to a student who used said data for his Final Master's Project. Although the student's conduct was morally reprehensible, there was no violation of protected copyright, and therefore no compensation was possible.
In order to prove that there has been plagiarism in a work of these characteristics, it is necessary to prove, of course, that the original was made before the alleged copy. Thus, the Supreme Court (access the ruling here) concluded that there was no infringement of intellectual property rights because the alleged victim had not been able to prove that his doctoral thesis was carried out before the alleged copy.
Film and television
Television programs such as La botica de la granny and La botica de Txumari have come to justice (access the ruling handed down by the Supreme Court here) for alleged plagiarism, although in this case it was concluded that they did not exist because although there were coincidences between the two formats, numerous differences were found between both programs.
Copying a catalog of DIY products used as a commercial medium does not constitute a work of intellectual property, because it lacks originality in the selection and arrangement of its contents. The Supreme Court (access the ruling here) considered that copying the design or the form of the catalog is not an act of taking advantage of the effort of others and a violation of the right to intellectual property.
Movie scripts, of course, can be copied and pasted. The Madrid Provincial Court sentenced the authors of a film script that was plagiarized to pay compensation of more than 80,000 euros. The sentence (you can access it here) examined in detail the plot of the opposing works and verified the existence of similarities and coincidences in the development of the plot and its outcome, the main and secondary characters and their interrelationships.
Can lawyers' writings be subject to protection? a curious sentence issued by the Provincial Court of Salamanca (access the text here), examined a case in which compensation was claimed by an intern of a law firm, against one of the partners, because according to her she had used an elaborate claim by her and presented to the court as her own. The Chamber pointed out that in this case there was no plagiarism. Although the professional writings of lawyers can be considered literary works so that, if they are original, they will be able to access the protection provided by copyright. But if, as in this case, the lawyer modifies this writing to a greater or greater extent to correct it and adapt it to the needs of the process, it is in the presence of a composite work that excludes plagiarism.
What if they take away an idea?
Simple ideas, whatever their degree of originality, cannot be protected by copyright for part of the specialized doctrine. And this because they are not susceptible to appropriation as they are the heritage of humanity. To be protected, the ideas must have been captured in some way (for example, an equation). This was considered by the Mercantile Court of Madrid (you can consult the sentence here) when it examined a plagiarism claim on a work intended for students. The existence of plagiarism was rejected after a study and comparison of the texts. Nor was plagiarism found in the equations or figures used because they obey conventional criteria of a more or less universal nature.
Sign in to leave a comment.