Language, technology and the law : anti-plagiarism software and students' academic writing

Plagiarism is of grave concern for academic institutions in the twenty-first
century. Institutions utilise plagiarism policies, honour codes and regulations to ensure students develop a sense of educational integrity. Technology has recently afforded new methods for staff to detect plagiarism – through antiplagiarism software. This paper explores perspectives of seven teachers across five faculties to Turnitin.com (an anti-plagiarism software package) at a large Australian university. The findings indicate that software such as Turnitin.com may assist in the quest to detect text-matching, and perhaps reduce plagiarism. It should not, however, be considered the panacea for plagiarism. Plagiarism policies should also reflect cognisance of the existence of a 'plagiarism continuum' (Sutherland-Smith, 2003) through the use of technology. This research highlights the broader need for institutions to reformulate plagiarism policies in light of cross-cultural perspectives of authorship and attribution of text.

Restorative justice and the human rights of offenders : convergences and divergences

Restorative justice has gained significant momentum as a justice reform movement within the past three decades, and it is estimated that up to one hundred countries worldwide utilize restorative justice practices. Although claims about the role of restorative justice in protecting human rights are repeatedly made in the restorative justice literature, they are seldom supported by empirical evidence or a thorough analysis of human rights and their justification. In this paper, we discuss how the assumptions underpinning restorative justice practices impact on offenders' human rights, and their points of convergence and divergence. We argue that while these assumptions can protect certain offender rights, they may violate others. We finish with some suggestions about how to reconcile the tensions between human rights and restorative justice, focusing in particular on the relationship between community needs and individual well-being.

Repairing the rupture : restorative justice and the rehabilitation of offenders

Restorative justice is a social justice movement that aims to deal with consequences of crime through repairing and restoring relationships of three key stakeholders: victims, offenders, and communities. Unfortunately, it is often unclear where offender rehabilitation fits within the constructs of repair and reintegration that drive this justice paradigm. An analysis of the relationship between restorative justice theory and offender rehabilitation principles reveals tensions between the two normative frameworks and a lack of appreciation that correctional treatment programs have a legitimate role alongside restorative practices. First, we outline the basic tenets of the Risk–Need–Responsivity Model and the Good Lives Model in order to provide a brief overview of two recent models of offender rehabilitation. We then consider the claims made by restorative justice proponents about correctional rehabilitation programs and their role in the criminal justice system. We conclude that restorative justice and rehabilitation models are distinct, although overlapping, normative frameworks and have different domains of application in the criminal justice system, and that it is a mistake to attempt to blend them in any robust sense.

Distributive justice and the Nash bargaining solution

Suppes-Sen dominance or SS-proofness (SSP) is a commonly accepted criterion of impartiality in distributive justice. Mariotti (Review of Economic Studies, 66, 733–741, 1999) characterized the Nash bargaining solution using Nash’s (Econometrica, 18, 155–162, 1950) scale invariance (SI) axiom and SSP. In this article, we introduce equity dominance (E-dominance). Using the intersection of SS-dominance and E-dominance requirements, we obtain a weaker version of SSP (WSSP). In addition, we consider α − SSP, where α measures the degree of minimum acceptable inequity aversion; α − SSP is weaker than weak Pareto optimality (WPO) when α = 1. We then show that it is still possible to characterize the Nash solution using WSSP and SI only or using α -SSP, SI, and individual rationality (IR) only for any a Î [0,1)[01). Using the union of SS-dominance and E-dominance requirements, we obtain a stronger version of SSP (SSSP). It turns out that there is no bargaining solution that satisfies SSSP and SI, but the Egalitarian solution turns out to be the unique solution satisfying SSSP.

Catastrophic loss and the law : a comparison between 2009 Victorian Black Saturday fires and 2011 Queensland floods and Cyclone Yasi

This article explores insurability relating to loss occasioned by catastrophic events in Australia in the context of the current legal regulatory regime. The analysis includes two case studies, in which we juxtapose the Victorian Black Saturday fires in February 2--9 with the Queensland flooding and Cyclone Yasi (December 2010 - February 2011). We argue that the different responses to, and economic losses stemming from, these events illustrate the urgent need for a national regulatory and insurance regime for the prevention and alleviation of disasters and the management of their consequences.

Medical and scientific authorship: a conflict between discipline rules and the law

When the results of medical collaborations are to be published, questions of authorship arise. Which members of the research team are to be acknowledged as authors of the paper? In what order are they to be acknowledged? Institutional rules will generally determine the attribution of authorship to members of the research team. However those rules are most unlikely to be consistent with the legal rules governing authorship and its attribution, most of which will apply regardless of a team’s adherence to institutional rules. This article examines the meaning of authorship in the medical community, and in the legal community under the copyright laws. It considers various formulations of the institutional rules governing authorship, as well as editorial practices. Through consideration of a hypothetical scenario, the consequences of the disparity between authorship norms in law and in medicine are elaborated.

Domestic violence and the law in the Turks and Caicos Islands: directions for law reform

Includes bibliography