Summary: For long months, the Egyptian Minister of Culture resisted accusations of violating intellectual property rights in her latest works, before finally succumbing and resigning from her position after a court ruling convicted her. Is awareness of the limits of copying and quotation still absent even among specialists? Or should education on the importance of intellectual property take greater attention, especially given the emergence of easy technological applications that aid plagiarism intentionally or unintentionally, and also help in uncovering instances of creative theft?

Dr. Jehan Zaki, a professor of Egyptology, barely completed five months in her position as Egyptian Minister of Culture before being forced to resign hours after a judicial ruling by the Court of Cassation convicting her of violating intellectual property rights, in a lawsuit whose legal process began about six months before she assumed her ministerial portfolio related to thought, literature, creativity, and arts.

The rationale for the Egyptian official's resignation stated that she complies with judicial rulings and relieves the government of embarrassment, but embarrassment will likely never leave its place in stories of plagiarism and infringement on others' efforts. Universities, at least, consider that the reputation of professors convicted of such acts is permanently damaged, never tolerate them, and usually do not welcome them among their teaching staff.

Despite the judicial ruling that rejected the minister's two appeals, and despite the resignation, the controversy continues. Some indicate that the matter is relative and subject to opinions, noting that the accusation by writer Sohair Abdel Hamid that the minister copied passages from her book about the life of Egyptian novelist Qut al-Qulub al-Damardashiya, who died in the late 1960s, titled "The Assassination of Qut al-Qulub al-Damardashiya, Lady of the Palace," to include in the book "Coco Chanel and Qut al-Qulub... Braids of Formation and Betrayal" is not understandable, given that Jehan Zaki's book actually includes a reference to Sohair Abdel Hamid's book.

But the decisive response here is that the judiciary has spoken: the literal translation harmed the original creative work and blurred the boundaries between the two works, and therefore the affected writer was materially compensated, equivalent to two thousand US dollars.

Notably, the lack of awareness of the limits of quotation and copying seems absent even among specialists. Meanwhile, scientific and literary thefts in the internet world have become faster to detect. In moments, specialized applications can inform us about the allowed and exceeded percentage of quotations in the content under examination. Although courts still rely on the method of expert committees that scrutinize and verify using their approved methods to reach a reassuring and unambiguous ruling, technology can also contribute to facilitating this process, at least for non-specialists.

Legitimate quotation or transgression?

It is established that denial is the first reaction of those accused of such plagiarisms that go beyond mere influence or permitted and documented quotation, becoming a case of complete violation of intellectual property. Justifications range from misjudgment, lack of intent, coincidence of ideas, or even oversight. Naturally, not every accused of literary or scientific theft is convicted; on the contrary, some creators may feel that their work has been stolen while facts prove exactly the opposite.

Therefore, the journey of verification and ascertainment must be subject to multiple criteria. Although amateur posts online may provide an important spark to start from, then be denied or confirmed, and technical methods may monitor and help, it is the specialized committees that do the complete work.

This is what happened with French physicist and philosopher of science Étienne Klein, who was stripped of his doctorate obtained about 27 years ago, due to the percentage of quotations in the submitted text exceeding 60%, reaching the stage of outright plagiarism. The matter did not stop there; Paris Cité University effectively erased his academic record retroactively over the three decades, and the ruling was harsh even on others whose scientific theses he supervised, as they were considered as if they never existed.

Lack of awareness of the limits of quotation and copying seems absent even among specialists (AFP)

The matter began about 10 years ago with rumblings and scattered accusations from various sources. After research and scrutiny by the media, it turned out that the famous academic, who hosts a well-known science popularization program, had included in many of his books entire passages from works of other authors without referencing them, and he considered that it was due to oversight at the time. At that time, he lost his position as head of the Institute for Advanced Studies in Science and Technology, but he continued to defend himself and indeed retained many privileges.

But about two years ago, some followers of his outputs became suspicious, and indeed algorithms were designed to track texts, concluding that his doctoral thesis included quotations from well-known scientists that he neglected to attribute to them. So Paris Cité University yielded and over 20 months conducted an internal investigation that ended with his conviction for stealing more than two-thirds of his thesis. Here he completely lost his reputation, his program, and was academically banned, ending his career due to the crime of infringing on others' works.

The Limits of Coincidence of Ideas

Thus, algorithm programming helped uncover a 27-year-old academic catastrophe, and academic circles buzzed with this huge news that affected one of the most famous philosophers of the era. The degree of accuracy of the applications, some free and some paid, varies, but the results of some can be misleading. Therefore, there must be a role for other means for specialists.

Dr. Sameh Zarif, Vice Dean for Postgraduate Studies and Scientific Research at the Faculty of Artificial Intelligence at the Egyptian Russian University, says that it is extremely difficult to fully rely on tools of this type in deciding cases of quotation or copying, noting that many materials and documents being compared are not available on the internet at all, so the violation will not be detected as long as the disputed source is not present. He added, "Because most of them are scientific theses or literary works not available in open sources, artificial intelligence applications can only be a helpful step."

In some cases, it may be actual ignorance of the regulations, but regarding the class of intellectuals and university professors, this excuse collapses. If there is no insistence on copying, then at least there is haste, lack of appreciation of the situation, failure to learn the regulations, and opposition to the virtue of verification. Meanwhile, the courage to apologize is likely absent, and resistance remains in control until the specialized committees have their say.

Accusations of literary plagiarism are steeped in antiquity before technology and its developments (social media)