Friday fripperies

With some of the Kats away at INTA in San Francisco, here's some Friday fun, if not quite Friday fantasies....

From South Africa comes the news of a dispute over the mark 'Bafana Bafana', which is the nickname of South Africa's national football team. Several news sites, including German website FAZ, report that a third party (a bsuiness man of the name Stanton Woodrush) managed to register the nick name 'Bafana Bafana' as a trade mark. The South African Football Association (Safa) is now considering whether to buy the mark or whether simply renaming the team might be the better option, albeit perhaps not the cheaper one. According to South African website The New Age both parties are already in negotiations over a sale of the mark. However, it appears that there also politicians involved and a spokesperson for the South African Ministry of Sports is cited as insisting that all South African citizens should be involved "on a consultative process" as regards to the "the handling of the Bafana name". According to the FAZ report the Safa simply forgot registering the trade mark at the South African registry when the nick name first became popular.

Our readers may recall our reports on Louis Vuitton v Plesner on the tussle between the famous fashion house Louis Vuitton and Dutch artist Nadia Plesner over the incorporation by the latter of a Community design-protected pattern owned by the former into Darfurnica inspired by Picasso's painting Guernica (see IPKat reports here and here). The artist herself has published her very personal account of this dispute on her website which makes some interesting reading. The website also includes an English and Dutch version translation of the court decision in the case.

Finally, an update on the rather bizarre German PhD plagiarism saga now involving not only one but two top German politicans as well as the daughter of Bavaria's former state Governor. Some of our readers may recall the IPKat's post on the plagiarism row surrounding former German defence minister and (former) political superstar Karl Theodor zu Guttenberg (naughtily nicknamed "Dr Googleberg") recently resigned from office following allegations that he had plagiarized large parts of his “summa cum laude” doctoral thesis in law.

The University of Bayreuth has now published its findings of an investigation into these accusations. The sobering result: the thesis was sprinkled with deliberate plagiarism. Furthermore, the university found that even if the thesis had been Guttenberg's own work, then it would not have deserved the top mark "summa cum laude". The full investigation results can be retrieved on the university's website here. If you are wondering why the PhD supervisor and the second examiner never noticed anything, then you are definitely not alone.

You would think that this a very rare case, but no, German liberal democrat and media darling Silvana Koch-Mehrin this week (on the right) also decided to quit from all political offices, following allegations of plagiarism in her PhD thesis. These allegations are already being investigated by the University of Heidelberg where Koch-Mehrin graduated with a doctorate in philosophy. As in the case of Guttenberg, Internet activists from the "VroniPlag Wiki website" started the allegations (at this point these are just allegations I should stress). The results of the investigation will be published in early June.

Just because all good things come in threes, we also learnt this week that Veronica Sass, the daughter of German politician Edmund Stoiber, has been stripped of her doctorate in law by the University of Konstanz. This again happened after a tip off by the "VroniPlag Wiki website". According to the findings by the University of Konstanz Frau Sass appears to have copied 40 pages of her thesis from other sources ("word by word") without acknowledging the sources. What's unclear is whether any of the copyright holders have decided to take legal action. The State Prosecution in Hof, Bavaria has the ungrateful task of investigating zu Guttenberg's criminal law liability. Not the last we heard about this ...

The obsession with academic titles seems to me a rather German phenomenon says this Kat but this reflects very badly on Germany's academia. And,it annoys those that worked hard on achieving their degrees without cheating, one might add, grumbles Merpel.

From “Dr Googleberg” to the “Google Book Settlement” - Some news from Germany

Some of the IPKat’s readers may have followed the recent intriguing political scandal surrounding former German defence minister and Germany's political superstar Karl Theodor zu Guttenberg (depicted below on the cover of a new biography about his life), who last Tuesday resigned from office following allegations that he had plagiarized large parts of his “summa cum laude” PhD thesis in Law.

Naughtily dubbed “Dr Googleberg” or “Baron cut and paste” by some parts of the German media, zu Guttenberg decided not to use his Phd title after the initial accusations of plagiarism broke, then wrote to his university (Bayreuth) and asked to “return” his PhD, with the university subsequently deciding to take his doctorate away for good. Further investigations at Bayreuth University are still pending.

The whole story has some interesting legal implications as plagiarising a thesis could qualify as “carrying an academic title without authorization” (section 132 German Criminal Code -unlikely to apply since the PhD was bestowed legally initially) as well as ”criminal disloyalty” (section 266 German Criminal Code “Untreue”) since zu Guttenberg allegedly ordered essays from the scientific services of the Bundestag and used them in his thesis without properly referencing this third party work and due to the fact that he should have only used the services for his work as a member of parliament, not for his personal use. Perhaps most importantly, plagiarizing other’s works without referencing them properly could be copyright infringement under section 109 German Copy Right Act (using someone else’s works non-commercially without authorization).

On the right - the thesis in question

For the copyright infringement provisions to apply the law requires that one of the authors of infringed texts filed a complaint with the relevant authorities (provided that the texts that been copied in the thesis were itself “creations” that fell within the ambit of the copyright act), unless there was a heightened damage to the “legal good copyright” so that there could potentially be a public interest in prosecuting this matter. (See here for a discussion of the criminal law implications (in German)).

It appears that none of the allegedly copied authors has so far filed an official complaint with the prosecution authorities and it is now up to the prosecution authorities in Hof, Bavaria to investigate further after zu Guttenberg resigned from all his official posts and as such is no longer covered by the immunity laws. The university of Bayreuth is also conducting further (internal) investigations as does an interesting internet project called "GuttenPlag Wiki", which appears to have established that more than half of the thesis has been copied.

This Kat was in Germany when the story broke initially and was intrigued by the very high approval ratings zu Guttenberg boasted before and after his resignation. It does hence not come as too much of a surprise that - in typical German fashion - the first third party trade mark application for the trade mark “Guttenberg” in classes 9, 14 and 25 [update: the exact goods covered are not yet published on the official register] has been filed at the German Patent and Trade Mark Office.

Merpel now wonders whether Karl Theodor zu Guttenberg may find a new career as the new Paul (see above right and IPKat posts here and here) Knut, Heidi)?

From Dr Googleberg to the ongoing “Google Book Settlement” class action which also affects German authors and right holders. On its website, the German Collection Society “VG Wort” now informs us that it has again written to Judge Denny Chin of the New York District Court in relation to the “Google Book Settlement” case (The Author’s Guild et al v Google, Inc., case no 1: 05-cv-08136 (DC)).

In its letter to the court of 14 February 2011 (which can be retrieved via VG Wort’s website by clicking here (in English)) the German Collection Society requests an extension of the court deadlines for claiming a cash payment by 31 March 2011 and for claiming the complete removal of works by 5 April 2011. The extension of time should be granted in an interim ruling. VG Wort argues that since it was at present uncertain whether a settlement would be approved by the court, “(VG Wort) cannot be expected to incur the heavy administrative costs which would be involved” (...) “in determining the current status of German books under the existing terms of the settlement.” Furthermore, VG Wort also stresses that it was at present still unclear which German works would be covered by the potential settlement. VG Wort had already submitted an amicus-curia brief to the court ahead of the fairness hearing of 18 February 2010 (see Amerikat's report here) in which it had criticised that it was difficult and almost impossible to determine which authors and publishers were affected by the settlement.

Certainly not the last chapter in this matter.