一篇文章于2011年12月19日由通讯提交人（CA）提交。经过几次修订，这篇文章于2012年3月23日被公布。这篇文章于2012年5月8日在线公布。
At the time of submission, CA was a PhD student at a research centre (X).
On 21 November 2012, co-author A (also head of the research group) contacted the publisher and editor-in-chief of journal A with a request to retract the published article claiming the following:
• Co-author A claims that this paper was submitted to journal A by CA during her absence (maternity leave).
•共同提交人声称，她和其他7个共同作者（作者B，C，D，E，F，G和H）没有被告知CA期刊A.
•共同作者A声明，本文提出的90％的数据是在研究中心X的实验室执行的工作期间获得的，是X的属性，只能由X人员会员发布，不能分发或分发published without X’s consent. According to co-author A, CA knows this as he signed a contract with centre X.
•共同提交人提到，她最近将更新版本的相同纸张提交给另一个杂志。对于此提交，共同作者A是相应作者。所有作者（包括CA！）同意本出版物。（NB：杂志B是一个患有更高影响因子的杂志，比A.）
2012年12月3日,杂志的主编A informed co-authors A and CA and all of the other co-authors (B, C, D, E, F, G and H) of the possibility of publishing an erratum.
2012年12月6日,法律和合同的办公室r (LCO) of research centre X replied to the editor-in-chief that CA violated contractual obligations with X by submitting the article and transferring the copyright to the copyright owner of the journal. LCO seems to mix up ‘ownership of copyright’ and ‘ownership of results (data)’. So far, no reply from any of the other co-authors has been received although they were copied in on the correspondence.
2012年12月14日，出版商直接联系了CA，要求他寻求他的观点。加利福尼亚州于2012年12月17日回复。从他的回答中，目前尚不清楚他是否完全明白这种情况。他表示，他已经要求联合作者A允许提交这篇文章但“没有答案一年”。他指出，研究是由他完成的，该协调员也贡献了。
On 19 December 2012, the publisher again asked CA the following points:
— Did you get the approval of the other co-authors before you submitted the article? Are there, by chance, documents that prove this?
- 协调人员说，她远离工作一年的产假。您在提交文章时是否意识到这一点？
- 您和研究中心x之间是否存在未观察到这篇文章的合同义务？
On 20 December 2012, the corresponding author replied that “after a long discussion with the Legal Officer (LO) of research institute Y” he remembered the document/contract that he had signed at research centre X and that he now agrees to retract the article, and he asks the publisher to do so.
但是，已发表的文章本身呈现出声音科学。此外，CA和Research Center X之间的法律问题需要与科学纠正文章的撤回的情况分开。（发表的文章中的一个小错误，即在与此期间发现的共同作者A可以通过错误来纠正。）
On 20 December 2012, the publisher informed CA, co-author A and LCO that any contractual obligations between them and centre X will not be part of this issue. LCO corresponded separately with the LO of research institute Y on how to find an ‘amicable’ solution. This ‘amicable’ solution focused solely on the contractual obligations between research centre X and CA. One step in this solution would be submission of the article to the ‘correct’ journal (journal B) by co-author A.
LCO同意罗的友美友好提案，并于2012年12月21日派出了出版商一份声明，其中他不同意该案件仅仅是一个作者争议，而且表示最重要的是相应作者签署的宣言与研究机构X在他的眼中是“比版权和结果的所有权更宽”。他还与来自Institute Y的LO一起调整他们来到不发布的协议。他将推出正式的赔偿索赔。
On 21 December 2012, the publisher received a message from a co-author (the first time that one has replied) in which he mentions that CA published a paper without his approval, that he does not want to be linked to the ‘criminal acts’ of a PhD student, he suggests retracting the paper, as asked by co-author A and the LCO, and he will sue the journal.
In summary, the issues are:
• The corresponding author submitted an article without the knowledge of all or some of his co-authors.
•当时，相应的作者与研究中心X合同。
•文章的科学内容是正确的。自发布以来发生的次要错误可以通过错误纠正。
• Research centre X seems to have put pressure on CA to retract the article because of contractual obligations only. The scientific content was never a case in the correspondence between the different parties
The Forum suggested that there is a lesson to be learnt here: when a journal receives a manuscript, an acknowledgement should be sent to all of the authors, not just the corresponding author, and all authors should be copied in on all correspondence. This will prevent a similar situation arising in the future.
这里可能有法律问题，因为博士生签订了该研究所的合同。所以这个问题可能会被脱离编辑的手中。有些建议缺乏指导和监督失败 - 博士主管在做什么？
Most agreed that there were no grounds for retraction. An author dispute is not sufficient grounds to retract an article if there is no issue with the scientific content of the article. However, as the editor does not have documentation that all authors agreed to the publication, the authors do have some grounds to feel aggrieved and to want a retraction. If the editor can obtain signed consent from all of the authors, then he could consider retraction. Others suggested that the editor should do nothing.
关于最近提交的更新版本的同一文件的问题，另一方面，论坛指出，编辑有权向作者询问本文的副本。作者是否希望纸张缩回，以便他们可以提交给其他杂志（具有更高的影响因素）？如果作者确实将纸张提交到其他日记，则必须对原始纸张有明确的联系。
There are also copyright issues to consider.
在一个手中，一半的论坛建议编辑进一步做得不了什么，一些建议发表关于作者争议的文件的纠正或某种形式的笔记，只有两个人建议撤回。
The editors never received any feedback from anyone involved. They count this as silent agreement to the way they handled this case—involving COPE and publishing the article. The editor considers this case as closed.
Comments
The editors never get a response from the people involved. It doesn't mean that the people accept everything everybody said. It is just because they are not ready; maybe they are not even interested. And I don’t like the editor’s attitude towards this case. They already consider it as closed.
I agree 100% with the editor.
我坚信它缺乏指导和监督失败！
The supervisor do not give attention to this manuscript during one year, after the publication, she wants retract it. If I was the editor, I could say that will not west my time with personal trouble between authors.
May I ask a question? This issue is also my concern for publication. I was working as a research associate in an institute in 2014. Then I got a PhD position form another university in 2015 and I resigned from my previous position. During that time I conducted an extensive research that I have never published. My problem is that my supervisor asked me to be the first and corresponding author in our all publications. However, as he even did not know exactly what I did over past one year, I did not accept that. He also mentioned in our conversation that he is not interested anymore to publish those papers with me, and I cannot also publish papers without his permission. I have to state that based on my contract with that university, all the data are intellectual properties of them.
现在，我想知道我是否可以用我之前的隶属度发布这些文件（将我的名字作为第一和相应的作者，以及我作为第二作者的主管）？他可以声称我不允许提交文件？
预先感谢您的帮助。
long term absences e.g sickness and maternity should not be allowed to hinder the progress of science. If an author is away a long time and has contributed, the corresponding author should be able to submit the paper if the absent author is uncontactable
Indeed, it's conceivable to get a paper distributed without having a PhD: PhD understudies do it constantly. It's conceivable as well as it is a necessity at numerous colleges that your Ph.D proposition be totally founded on friend inspected papers.