论文部分内容阅读
6月初,本刊收到湖北荆沙日报编辑陈礼荣同志的来信、来稿,陈稿就湖北日报双休特刊的《阿桂渴盼重圆大学梦》一文被浙江一位撰稿人改编后署上自己的名,转发在国内三家有影响的周末报上一事作出评述(全文附后),陈礼荣认为这是一种不尊重原作者著作权的现象,希望本刊关注类似事件,并在刊物上展开讨论。 为慎重起见,本刊向湖北日报记者、最先报道此事的沈阳晚报记者、当年录取阿桂的学校沈阳工业高等专科学校的领导,以及浙江的那位撰稿人一一进行了详细的调查。浙江的那位撰稿人承认,他只向湖北日报记者刘吉元和沈阳工业高等专科学校党委苗书记作了电话采访,认为靠电话采访也不大可能在新闻事实上超越湖北日报的报道。 本刊约请新闻出版署政策法规司覃少波和《新闻出版报》孙月沐同志就此事发表看法,还希望读者参与讨论。讨论的内容包括:一、明显区别于“单纯事实消息”的新闻作品,如通讯、特写、调查报告、新闻评论等应不应该有著作权?记者在采访时对别人的报道和其他材料的参考借鉴到什么程度为宜?记者自己虽也进行了采访,但如果主要是把别人的稿件改头换面然后署上自己名字,这种做法合适不舍适?二、现在“一稿多投”的现象带有一定的普遍性,对这种现象如何认识?三、刊用别的报刊(或通讯社)的稿件,不注明?
In early June, we received a letter from Comrade Chen Lirong, editor in chief of Hubei Jurisprudence Daily. The manuscript submitted by Chen Xie on the double break in Hubei Daily reported that “A Gui thirsts for a serious university dream” was adapted by a Zhejiang writer. (Reprinted), Chen Rongrong think this is a phenomenon that does not respect the original author’s copyright, I hope this issue will pay attention to similar incidents, and in the publication on the discussion. For the sake of caution, the journal went to Hubei Daily reporter, the reporter of Shenyang Evening News who first reported the incident, the director of Shenyang Industrial College which admitted the school of A Gui, and the writer of Zhejiang conducted a detailed investigation one by one . The writer in Zhejiang admitted that he only made telephone interviews with reporter Liu Jiyuan from Hubei Daily and secretary Miao Miao from Party Committee of Shenyang Polytechnic. He did not think it was possible to surpass the coverage of the Hubei Daily by the fact of the press. The magazine invited Press and Publication Administration Policy and Law Department Qin Shaobo and “Press and Publication News” Comrade Sun Yue Mu made his comments on the matter, but also hope that readers participate in the discussion. The content of the discussion includes: 1. Should there be no copyright in news works that are clearly distinguished from “purely factual news”, such as newsletters, feature articles, investigation reports, news commentary, etc.? Reporters should learn from others’ reports and other materials during the interview To what extent is appropriate? Although the reporters themselves also conducted interviews, but if the main part is to change someone’s manuscript and place their names on them, this practice is not appropriate? Second, there is now “a draft for more” phenomenon with A certain degree of universality, how to recognize this phenomenon? Third, the publication of other newspapers (or news agency) manuscripts, do not specify?