In our new "how can we help you?" thread, a reader asks:
How does one protect ownership of a potentially big idea?
How realistic is a fear that someone in the peer-review process will sabotage a paper and steal its idea if they think it is potentially a big idea?
I'm not sure about the peer-review process per se, but I think fears of idea theft aren't necessarily unrealistic or unfounded. I've not only had a few sketchy things happen to me in my career and known other people (including well-known senior people) who've reported similar things. There are also quite a few cases in intellectual history where people took other people's ideas and ran with them. One example is David Hilbert inviting Einstein to give lectures on general relativity at the University of Göttingen (while staying at Hilbert's house!) before Hilbert immediately tried to write and publish a paper to beat Einstein to the field equations. Not that any of us are the next Einstein or whatever, but the point is, there may be people out there who either take big ideas and run with them, either knowing that it's untoward behavior or (for whatever reason) thinking it's just fine to do.
Have other people found this to be a legitimate problem? And are there any ways to protect oneself against it?
Personally, I've simply tried not to worry about it and simply get on with my work. But, in other fields such as Math and Physics, my understanding is that this is sort of what the ArXiv functions as–a place where one can post preprints to 'establish priority' as it were. Of course, we have something similar in philosophy (the PhilArchive), but I'm not sure that professional norms treat it the same way. What do readers think?
Leave a Reply