My Answers to HW3case, Q3

 

Q3 (34 pts. max, 17 min) Finally, write up your case on another posting to your blog with the following subheadings:

“The facts of the case.” Dr. Naseer allowed Dr. Alston to visit and observe various groups at his lab. Dr. Naseer researched reactor design and showed Dr. Alston some of his work. A while after Dr. Alston visited Dr. Naseer’s lab, he published a paper that used identical theorems, background information, and results as Dr. Naseer did. Dr. Alston never gave credit to Dr. Naseer for the paper he wrote on reactor design.

“Analysis.” Dr. Alston was definitely wrong for not asking Dr. Naseer if it was alright to use his research. Dr. Alston was even more in the wrong for not collaborating with or crediting Dr. Naseer for the research Dr. Alston used in his paper. Neither the intentions nor outcome of Dr. Alston’s actions were good or beneficial.

“Conclusions.” Dr. Alston was denounced by Dr. Naseer and most of Dr. Naseer’s colleagues. However, he did not receive much punishment because Dr. Naseer did not have a non-disclosure agreement with Dr. Alston.

“Future environment.” A future environment for this case would be if Dr. Naseer had finally discovered a revolutionary reactor design. The reactor design would cause a breakthrough in the scientific community. But still, Dr. Alston stole and published a paper on the reactor design without Dr. Naseer.

“Future scenario.” If this case were to play out in the future scenario, Dr. Alston would undoubtedly be ruined. Dr. Alston’s reputation would plummet, and he would be kicked out of the scientific community. Dr. Naseer might also be able to pursue legal action against Dr. Alston.