I guess I should just reply with “B.” since you replied with A. :-) More seriously,
Both A & B will need to have real hard proof of their claims as this is a real mess in which they got themselves into. It seems as A despite not been hired by B succeeded in getting another position, which is good. B has taken advantage of his/her power position by not hiring A. He/she will find excuses why A was not a good fit blabla. From a moral perspective B sucks. Just imagine what A in B’s lab could have achieved by having someone in the project already knowing everything about the dubious protein with a four letter PDB code. Must be one of those Ego’s out there without true team leadership skills. Regarding the IP, that’s more difficult and again will require written evidence unless a patent has been filed and then that should be relatively easy and have the lawyers go after it. All of these actions require extra attention and mental resources - is it worth for A? If you just want to be right, then read on to the bottom of this email. Is the publication in C formally correct? Other than that A claims B took his/her coordinates to solve the structure. All that really counts is that the science around PDB XXXX is correct. From my own experience during my postdoc time, we had a paper under review for nine months. I know who one of the reviewers was because he copy-protected his comments in the pdf - unfortunately for him on a Mac your login user account is added per default to the pdf as creator, and that was just his plain name. The day after his paper was accepted at a different journal, ours was finally accepted as well. It is remarkable how some figures in his paper just adopt the same orientation and show the same things as ours. I never followed up on this as it was not worth my time. I will not reveal the authors names but I’m sure smart pople like you can write a little perl script to query the PDB in a meaningful manner. This was more than 2 cents I wanted to add to this discussion and hopefully A does see the value in my last paragraph. Jürgen __________________________________________ Jürgen Bosch, Ph.D. Division of Pediatric Pulmonology and Allergy/Immunology Case Western Reserve University 2109 Adelbert Rd, BRB 835 Cleveland, OH 44106 Phone: 216.368.7565 Fax: 216.368.4223 https://www.linkedin.com/in/jubosch/ CEO & Co-Founder at InterRayBio, LLC Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health Department of Biochemistry & Molecular Biology > On Aug 21, 2019, at 4:49 AM, Anastassis Perrakis <[email protected]> wrote: > > Something is unclear to me in the original question. What does “has used his > pdb for a publication” mean? Somebody used an entry already in the PDB? > Somebody used a “.pdb” coordinates file for publication (without “.mtz”)? > What was and is the relationship between A and B? > > In any case, assuming that A and B are not in talking terms (have you tried > through a mediator?), it is the director or designated ombudsperson of the > institute of A, that should review the case internally, and officially > contact the corresponding person of the institute of B. I can’t see what the > journal has to do with it, without a settlement between institutes. I also do > not consider a direct contact if A to the director of B appropriate. There > should be procedures for these cases. > > A. > > Sent from my iPhone > > On 21 Aug 2019, at 10:12, Mark J van Raaij <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > >> Dear Flemming, >> >> As I understand it (I may be wrong), the final responsible institutions are >> those where the authors work. But as you say, they sometimes don't even >> reply - or they just may be very slow because they want to be really sure >> before committing to any answer. >> >> But the journal has a responsibility also, to retract the paper if there is >> a serious suspicion the data were not obtained ethically. Of course, it may >> be difficult to prove ownership of a pdb file, if both authors claim >> ownership there is not really a way the journal can decide who is right. In >> my opinion, the journal should officially contact the institutions where the >> authors work to try and resolve this. The institutions may take the journal >> more seriously than a single researcher. >> >> A generally respected institution that may advise on authorship disputes is >> COPE, Committee on Publication Ethics: https://publicationethics.org/ >> <https://publicationethics.org/> >> May also take a while though... >> They have a database with anonymised examples of previously resolved >> disputes that may be helpful - you may find a similar situation on which >> they have "ruled". These are of course not legal rulings, but are considered >> by their members (most respectable journals) as a strong guideline. >> This case may have similarities: >> https://publicationethics.org/case/claim-stolen-data-and-demand-retractions >> <https://publicationethics.org/case/claim-stolen-data-and-demand-retractions> >> >> Best of luck, >> >> Mark >> >> Mark J van Raaij >> Dpto de Estructura de Macromoleculas >> Centro Nacional de Biotecnologia - CSIC >> calle Darwin 3 >> E-28049 Madrid, Spain >> tel. (+34) 91 585 4616 >> >> >>> On 20 Aug 2019, at 17:45, Flemming Goery <[email protected] >>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>> >>> Dear All, >>> >>> A and B belong to 2 different institutes. A claimed B has used his pdb for >>> a publication in Journal C. Journal C did not give the retraction, but >>> permit complain related to the journal publication author issue, with the >>> prerequisite journal C did not have the authority on authorship dispute. >>> Then A has e-mailed to the institute head of B with academic misconduct by >>> B as claim, the institute head of B did not give reply. >>> >>> In this situation, can A have the journal authorship dispute settled by a >>> neutral reviewer (Journal C view: you (A) need to reach out to the >>> institutions that have authority to adjudicate on such matters, as >>> investigation and adjudication on authorship claims falls outside the remit >>> of journal editors. )? Who are qualified as the neutral reviewer so that >>> the review decision can be submitted to Journal C? >>> >>> If you believe you are qualified, or you know somebody or some organization >>> qualified, please let me know and I will introduce the issue to you by >>> separate e-mail (it is best not disseminated, am I right?) >>> >>> Best regards. >>> >>> Flemming >>> >>> >>> To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link: >>> https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1 >>> <https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1> >> >> To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link: >> https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1 >> <https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1> > To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link: > https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1 > <https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1> ######################################################################## To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link: https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1
