Comments on plagiarism -- about "a

                                         (a) 

About "a constitution and a time -- in late Qing Dynasty and the early Republic of China into the China constitutional effect" (hereinafter referred to as "a constitution and a time") plagiarism, I give the authors, Hunan University law school professor, China Social Sciences postdoctoral research personnel Mr. Nie Zilu's "on plagiarism -- to Professor Nie Zilu letter" [1] has pointed out: "the 110th to last page second paragraph of article 4-8, the countdown to the first section of line 1-5; 111st pages of the third paragraph of article 1-2 for text, the fourth paragraph of article 5-6 the first section of line, line 3-5; 112nd pages of the second paragraph of article 4-14; 113rd pages of third sections: the first section of line 8-10, line 12-14), completely copied from the" Chinese of American constitutional concept "original" (American research references "1989 the fifth period; income" USA history on ", Liaoning University press 1994 edition)." 

However, Mr Nie Zilu refuses to accept, to America new threads website published "Yang Yusheng's so-called" academic criticism "article and I reply article" (hereinafter referred to as "the answer"), a nauseating to preach the webmaster (such as "deep as your academic criticism of courage and truth and uphold justice character moved"), on the other hand request the webmaster "must adhere to justice,...... Let academia truly recognize Mr. Yang Yusheng 'academic criticism' nature." In the opinion of Mr. Nie, the author is "make such a fuss about, alarmist", "totally fabricated facts, framed and blackmail" to me, even the "reply" by Professor Yang Yusheng in October 12, 2005 letter: I said in the letter he copied this article, a serious violation of my intellectual property, "this is contrary to fact slander, defamation", "this is completely contrary to the facts of libel and slander, resulting in social evaluation of my lower", and threatening to sue me. 

In fact, "a constitution and a time" if copying this article? This fact itself is not complicated: 

First, the "American published thesis research references" and published Professor Nie for "Tribune" are the academic journals, the former is America research Chinese Academy of Social Sciences sponsored monthly, the latter is bimonthly, China University of Political Science and Law sponsored search, easy as pie. 

Second, two articles were published in the order, also be crystal clear: This article published in 1989 of May, Nie professors masterpiece published in 2005 November. 

Third, and most important, as long as the Nie professors masterpiece check post and the relevant paragraphs before the Nie published 16, whether there is similar, then gives the basic judgment. 

Next, let the facts speak. 

                                        Two. 

First, about two on the introduction and comments on the USA constitution Wei source 

This paper (fifteenth pages in third paragraph) wrote: 
    In the 50 volume "Haiguo" Volume 39 and volume 100 of the volume in 59 introduced the "country", which is what we call the USA constitution. He introduced USA presidential and parliamentary systems tract: "choose a chieftain", "bandits" outstanding and, and not by the generation of four years, a change of ancient and modern government office, and exciting box however, be not that the public on! Procedure, hearing, official selection, Juxian, from beginning, the cocoa, the no no, the good, the evil evil, three accounts from the two, she only through the same, namely in the pre meeting people, but also by the public for, be not that week on! In the "Haiguo, narrating", Wei Yuan said with emotion, American constitution "vertical game world without the disadvantages".[Click: Notes omitted] 

Professor Nie in its "a constitution and an era" in the text are as follows: 
    In the 50 volume "Haiguo" Volume 39 and volume 100 of the volume in 59 introduced the "country", which is what we call the "constitution" American. He introduced USA presidential and parliamentary systems tract: "choose a chieftain" '"bandits" outstanding and, and not by the generation of four years, a change of ancient and modern government office, and exciting box however, be not that the public on! Procedure, hearing, official selection, Juxian, from beginning, the cocoa, the no no, the good, the evil evil, three accounts from the two, she only based on the same, namely in the pre, also by the public for, be not that week on!" In the "Haiguo, narrating", Wei Yuan said, "USA constitution" "vertical game world without the disadvantages". 

Excuse me: these put it down in black and white, are as like as two peas? Suppose that in a flagrant way to copy the copy are not copied it, then, is currently professor of Hunan University Law School Mr. Nie, what exactly is it? 

Even more absurdly, Professor of the law school but speak plausibly lesson says: "you are referenced in the text of Wei Yuan's literature, as well as some commonsense knowledge, historical knowledge, and so on, you do not own intellectual property rights, not behoove them to steal it." What is called "steal"? I put Wei Yuan's Literature "steal"? Please Ph.D. of the Nanjing University winner, legal postdoctoral researchers open China Academy of Social Sciences, eyes see: the author cited the views of Wei Yuan, is as clear as noonday note from "" Haiguo ", volume thirty-eighth," the Atlantic, "the merry total narration". But can not again, Nie professors in the paragraph after the copy I did not seek truth from facts to indicate the quoted from the. 

When it comes to annotate and quote, Nie professors seemed unconvinced, even feel good to express: "in this paper, I adhere to the academic norms, in strict accordance with the Ministry of education in 2004" issued by the higher school of philosophy and Social Sciences, academic norms (Trial) ", for the citation notes. The "academic standard (Trial)" seventh stipulates: 'citation should be based on the original documents and first-hand information as the principle'. Therefore, all marked my original literature on reference and first hand information in the text is the original source. But behold my this specification move, you have been accused of being copied your thesis, a serious violation of your intellectual property. I really don't know you is what heart? You have what legal basis?" In fact, answer Professor Nie these pediatric problem, just lift a finger. 

In order to regulate the widespread resort to deceit present academic quotation and annotation (pseudo note) phenomenon, discussed by Ministry of education and Social Science Committee in 2004 June "higher education philosophy and social science academic research norms (Trial)" I specialize in specified in section third of the "academic citation norms", all its contents are divided into two sections: "(seven) citation should be based on the original documents and first hand information principle. Any reference to the views of others, program, data, data, or have you ever published, whether paper or electronic version, shall be detailed annotation. All other documents, shall according to the facts. (eight) academic works should be rational use of citation. On the academic achievements have introduction, comment, references and comments, should seek objective, fair, accurate. False note, forgery, tampering with the literature and data, are academic misconduct." 

According to the "academic citation norms", then, "a reference to the views of others, program, data, data, or have you ever published, whether paper or electronic version, shall be detailed annotation. All other documents, shall according to the facts." As mentioned above, Nie professors in "a constitution and an era" is clearly the view and the reference data, but did not comment, but not "detailed annotation". Moreover, according to the "academic citation norms", "where the quoted documents, shall truthfully", then, excuse me Professor Nie "tell"? 

The "academic citation norms" content, is the unity with inherent logic connection, but Professor Nie interpret out of context to quote "citation should be based on the original documents and first-hand information to the principle of" sophistry "after in the original documents on the referenced and first hand information of all marking is the original source", but he just neglected and ignored "any reference to the views of others, program, data, data etc.,...... Shall be detailed annotation. All other documents, shall truthfully "requirements. In this case, the articles of others steal, "but also boast my this specification move, you have been accused of being copied your thesis, a serious violation of your intellectual property. I really don't know you is what heart? You have what legal basis?" This is not have no shame, what is it? This is not the one, then what is it? 

In accordance with the "Higher School of philosophy and Social Sciences, academic norms (Trial)" the provisions of: "false note, forgery, tampering with the literature and data, are academic misconduct". The "constitution and a time" to steal the and do not indicate the style, it is false note genuine, belongs to the typical academic misconduct. 

Second, about two of the Liang Tingzhan USA constitutional review 

This paper (fifteenth pages in fourth paragraph) wrote: 
    Contemporary with Wei Yuan Liang Tingzhan in 1844 in Guangdong Province of China published "he said", this is the first Chinese written specially introduced America works. In the book 2 thirteenth - page 15, Liang Tingzhan detailed American "new 'rules' ten seven", "nothing will be set on the size of urgency, leap, discussion will be' cases". The other relates to the constitution to encourage trade, encourage invention items. He said: "no command, first law; law, the people also, over the limit and easy...... The end has to reform. Neither according to not return, but not to give self generation. The lifting its back, a male people". Among other things, is "a opened not the bureau".[Click: Notes omitted] 
       
The relevant content to see Professor Nie "a constitution and an era": 
    Liang Tingzhan in 1844 in Guangdong Province of China published "he said", "United States" is a coastal state said "four", this is the first Chinese written specially introduced American works. Liang Tingzhan American democracy is right, in the book, Liang Tingzhan described in detail America "new 'rules' ten seven", "nothing will be set on the size of urgency, leap, discussion will be' cases". The other relates to the constitution to encourage trade, encourage invention items. He said: "no command, first law; law, the people also, over the limit and easy...... The end has to reform. Neither according to not return, but not to give self generation. The lifting its back, a male people". Among other things, is "a opened not the bureau". 

Excuse me, in the two paragraph, except for the omission of the "contemporary with Wei Yuan" these 7 words, "states four" increase is said "a" these 8 words and a book name, isn't it exactly the same? But Professor Nie was asked: "you and I were cited Liang Tingzhan's text, certainly must mark the original source. With what say I copy your article, constitutes a serious violation of your intellectual property? You don't have to say "Liang Tingzhan" state four intellectual property?" I puzzle is: this question actually comes from a famous university law school professor's mouth, what is the Coca Cola or poor? 

Nie professors do not admit plagiarism, the reason is he like me, were cited Liang Tingzhan, Wei Yuan's text, but why you Nie professors referenced content and I quote actually exactly the same? If the text quotes the same can understand, then, why the connectives between different citations are the same? The author in writing, have some habits of words, such as "these", "all", "Liang", "the other", just for the simple or easy, why Professor Nie also follow in sb.'s footsteps, and I have run in the same groove of the word usage habit? As for the "Liang said with emotion" usage, strictly speaking, is not appropriate, "Liang said only" or "Liang said," that you can. So, why do far Hunan University Professor Mr. Nie also parrot to a "Liang said with emotion"? 

Third, about two of Liang Qichao's American Constitution View Comments 

This paper (Sixteenth pages in second paragraph) wrote: 
    Active in the late nineteenth Century early twentieth Century improved China politics faction, on USA constitution is what attitude? Here take the relevant discussion of Liang Qichao one of its leaders to make the introduction. Liang Qichao once called "the motherland is American world republic". In "travel notes of the new continent" (1904), he told the Convention of 1787, the author of the constitution, and the "open the constitutional convention in Philadelphia" as states third "united", "from this previous, and USA before that one of the country". In 1905 five, zaize ministers abroad investigating constitutionalism. Autumn and winter of the same year, Liang Qichao wrote "constitutionalism" generation five Secretary investigation report, proposed the setting up of the house of Lords, he said, "take America system, its representatives in the house of Commons number, which the house of representative provinces...... No, the size, number, and each province to two members for the amount of total. Fu Gou representative provinces, but not the number of Representatives, the right big province will pressure is small, and the potential is not all; if I have the number of Representatives and no representative provinces, is a small province of rights for the province the pressure, but also does not have the potential. So America to each house represents one, honest consider mediation of refinement, to good to beauty, meaning. Although the government and Chinese America Shu, vast and American, with great power and constitutional politics, desire more national hope, give up this late". On the judicial power to independent is appropriate, Liang also to USA first amendment according to section third. And local autonomy, he also advocated except Japan, "potential can not adopt America". This shows that not only the revolutionaries, Sun Zhongshan, the reformist Liang Qichao also deeply felt American constitution very noteworthy advantages. [Click: Notes omitted] 

Look at the Professor Nie "a constitution and an era" statement: 
    Not only the bourgeois revolution faction, Party Constitution "and" improved USA favourably of. In the case of Liang Qichao more convincing. Liang Qichao once called "the motherland is American world republic"....... In "travel notes of the new continent" (1904), he told the Convention of 1787, the author of the constitution, and the "open the constitutional convention in Philadelphia" as states third "united", "from this previous, and USA before that one of the country". In 1905 five, zaize ministers abroad investigating constitutionalism. Autumn and winter of the same year, Liang Qichao wrote "constitutionalism" generation five Secretary investigation report, proposed the setting up of the house of Lords, he said, "take America system, its representatives in the house of Commons number, which the house of representative provinces...... No, the size, number, and each province to two members for the amount of total. Fu Gou representative provinces, but not the number of Representatives, the right big province will pressure is small, and the potential is not all; if I have the number of Representatives and no representative provinces, is a small province of rights for the province the pressure, but also does not have the potential. So America to each house represents one, honest consider mediation of refinement, to good to beauty, meaning. Although the government and Chinese America Shu, vast and American, with great power and constitutional politics, desire more national hope, give up this late". On the judicial power to independent is appropriate, Liang also to "constitution" USA first section third for it. And local autonomy, he said: "today, there will be one or two provinces and autonomous China hinterland, then there is a way out". He advocated except Japan, "potential can not adopt American". This shows that, Liang Qichao has been deeply aware of USA "constitution" is worthy of reference and transplantation. 

In contrast to the above two paragraphs, any respect facts are found: the latter is almost entirely from the cloning. In addition to text layout is almost identical, even punctuation (including the ellipsis of citations in use), are as like as two peas. However, the lovely law school professor Mr. Nie can confuse right and wrong said: "comparison of the two section, I copied your ideas and creative achievements? Liang Qichao understanding and evaluation of the America constitution how becomes your original and intellectual property? Don't you first quoted literature, will automatically get the literature of intellectual property rights? Other people will not be able to refer to the literature, or is it your article? How, how can the world is such a reason?" 

Mr Liang Qichao's understanding and evaluation on American constitution, of course he thought achievements, but when this is the first time that Mr. Liang's wonderful comments concise and comprehensive summed up and statute, which itself contains the author's intellectual labor. "Travel notes of the new continent" and "generation five minister investigating constitutionalism report" is certainly out he wrote the works of Mr. Liang, but since the statements of a school's American view of Constitution itself, is the author in 1989 through multi reading, serious consideration of beam and made academic achievements. This is obviously not a fact? "A constitution and a time" it is copy the thesis, ignoring the intellectual labor, but deny by oath, with Mr. Nie said, "I ask, how can the world is such a reason?" 

                                        Three. 

The above three examples, a typical reflection of "a constitution and a time" the authors sophistry. The author not only rhetoric, but also out of thin air, make trouble out of nothing. 

For example, the paper introduces the Zhang Zongyuan translation of "the American constitution", had "according to scholar Yang Yusheng research"; in the chapter's views as well as the "constitutional interpretation America Bu Boolean" and its translator Shen Yunchang's comments, in the comment to indicate "quoted from" thesis. Therefore, the author did not put these paragraphs as copy content. 

However, and it is plagiarism clumsy article death does not acknowledge the situation is different, although the author has not these marked "quoted from" and "according to scholar Yang Yusheng research" text as plagiarism, but Professor Nie is claiming that the accused him of plagiarism, and moaning: "how is this it? Such a copy? If it is copied in you, only that you confuse right and wrong, concoctive fact; only that you have the subjective intention of illegal occupation of other people's money; can explain you to blackmail and impose exactions on 10000 yuan of the despicable purpose, can set axiom, conscience, personality at disregarding, raise the framed, slander." 
      
Here the so-called "blackmail and impose exactions on 10000 yuan" in the "10000 yuan", is in my first letter to Professor Nie inadvertent insertion. The November 17th academic criticism starting this letter, have explained: "the original letter mistook a yuan print as ten thousand yuan, also correct". Unfortunately, the Hunan University law school professor was even more squarely and not see, and see not letter, all the overseas websites but in to his "respect" the letter said: "what is more, he published his letters on the site, plus the last call notes, 'the original letter error in a yuan print as ten thousand yuan', trying to hide in his letter to me blackmail, which revealed his intentions." 

                                       Four. 

Nie Lu Zi Professor paying concluded that: "you in the letter to my slander, libel, completely contrary to the" copyright law "and the" copyright law "and" Regulations for the implementation of Higher School of philosophy and Social Sciences, academic norms (Trial) "the relevant provisions, completely contrary to the objective facts, resulting in social evaluation of my lower, on my reputation infringement." 

Mr. Nie although in Nanjing University read doctor of philosophy, but after all he law research in Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, the Chinese most authoritative research institutions have done postdoctoral researchers, therefore, I believe that he should understand the "law of the people's Republic of China" and the "Regulations for the implementation of" copyright. As a professor at the Hunan University law school, for his behavior is not contrary to the "copyright law" and "Implementing Regulations", Mr. Nie also should know. As for the "Higher School of philosophy and Social Sciences, academic norms (Trial)", I as one of the main drafters of the "academic", it is safe to say, Professor Nie "a constitution and an era of the" plagiarism "completely contrary to" the "academic" about "academic reference the provisions of the standard". Not only that, here also remind NIE is, "Higher School of philosophy and Social Sciences, academic norms (Trial)" has been explicitly stipulated in the "academic achievements:" standard "in university teachers shall not in any way plagiarism, or misappropriation of others' academic achievements." But, unfortunately, the existing facts sufficient to show "a constitution and a time" are not buckle "plagiarism, plagiarism or misappropriation of others' academic achievements". 

Professor Nie not only boast without shame and said "I didn't copy your article, no violation of your intellectual property", but also on the "claiming that many sporadic concoctive fact, framed, slander my letter (such as" XXXX "letter to the editorial department, law Chinese academy and Hunan University law school) for my reputation, has constituted a serious infringement, to my work, and life has brought great harm, make social evaluation I reduce my reputation, to cause actual damage, bring mental pain and give me my relatives, I request you to immediately stop the infringement, eliminate the effect, make an apology, and compensation the spirit of the loss to me. Otherwise, I will be brought to court reputation infringement lawsuit." 

Originally, in October 12, 2005To Nie's letter, the author has clearly pointed out: in view of the infringement, "to write to your excellency, and were sent to you in a copy of the Law School of Hunan University, China Law Academy of Social Sciences Institute. Please check." It says here is very clear, the letter was pointed out to him the plagiarism, according to "indicate a constitution and a times" published author is now a postdoctoral research professor at the Hunan University School of law and China Academy of Social Sciences researcher of this information, in order to ensure that the letter can be transmitted to the hands, they were according to the two units of address and postcode professor Xiang Nie letter. Exceeding one's expectations is, such a simple normal action, actually have an ulterior motive to distort as "multiple sporadic concoctive fact, framed, slander my letter (such as" XXXX "letter to the editorial department, law Chinese academy and Hunan University law school)". In accordance with this unwarranted claims, as if I were to "Tribune", Chinese Academy of Social Sciences Institute of law and the Hunan University law school "multiple sporadic concoctive fact, framed, slander my letter". This is groundless rumors and slander. 

In fact, I will only give Professor Nie letter copied "Tribune" editor in chief of a, not to this print editorial office (because the editor is a friend of my fairly respectable). I have never written to the study of law China Academy of Social Sciences Institute and Hunan University law school this two units (although I reserve the right to do so). In fact, until January 17th I was released "about" a constitution and a time > plagiarism -- to Professor Nie Zilu letter ", I only send to the plagiarist I Nie professors (according to the two address, send a, Ping Ji), at the same time copied" Tribune "editor in chief. In only two individuals (possible) special condition receives the letter, you Zha Zha shouts "what to my work, and life has brought great harm, make social evaluation I reduce my reputation, to cause actual damage, in a spirit of pain" and give me and relatives, the not worry, why? 

As for the so-called "requires you to immediately stop the infringement, eliminate the effect, make an apology, and compensation for mental loss to me. Otherwise, I will be brought to court reputation infringement lawsuit ", also does not have what get excited over a little thing. What is called "the mouse shouts"? What is called the "blame"? Professor Nie vivid performances, will likely provide examples. 

                                       Five. 

9 • 11, nothing in the world is impossible. This is my four year ago feeling. "A constitution and a time" once again confirmed, this character not empty. 

Just imagine, a Nanjing University doctoral, postdoctoral China Academy of Social Sciences, Hunan University law school professor, copying me such a taught at China University of Political Science and Law Professor 16 years ago in the article, and published in the Journal of China University of Political Science and Law "Tribune", then ran to America website shouting blame accuse, or even bite, thief, and shameless audacity requirements "to immediately stop the infringement, elimination of influence, make an apology, and compensation for mental loss to me. Otherwise, I will be brought to court reputation infringement lawsuit." So funny, so the absurdity of the situation, but I do, who can easily for gospel truth? 

"The surname Nie how forget who is copied by others? The world is big, Nothing is too strange., Mo its right." Friends in the message of emotion, and the phrase of, what I can say? 

Alack! 

Notes. 
[1] November 17, 2005 academic criticism. Law review, historical review, mesh network of academic exchanges, USA political and legal network, the sea cloud sail forum website forwarding. 

[Note: the night of November 20th, an unknown teaches young scholars from Beijing Institute of Technology School of humanities, call that new threads, a professor at Hunan University law school criticized my article -- "Yang Yusheng's so-called" academic criticism "article and I reply article". From the logo "XYS20051118", this paper released in November 18, 2005. This is the Tsinghua University professor Liu Bing described as "the credibility of death" website, has always been the main platform of network attack me, so I never read. Because the professor had an official accusation, and grass, this draft response. ] 

November 21, 2005 morning 

Yang Yusheng: Professor, director, China University of Political Science and Law American politics and Law Research Center, founder and director of academic criticism 


Academic criticism (www.acriticism.com) firstNovember 21, 2005