An increasing number of scientific articles are reprinted (partially or fully, in the original language or in translation) by other scientists who then attach their own names to them. Simultaneously, grant proposals and even PhD dissertations are being plagiarized by peer reviewers entrusted with their evaluation. An analysis of these appropriations shows that plagiarism, while typically analogized to copyright infringement, is in fact conceptually and practically distinct from it. Because it involves the disruption of the relationship between the work and the name of the author, I argue that plagiarism should be better conceptualized as a "crime of kinship." This perspective proves much more effective at identifying the specific damages produced by these forms of appropriation while also providing a new window on the nature of the author function in science.
