Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The right is closely linked to passing off, defamation and other non-statutory causes of action, which may be used to supplement a claim for infringing the right to object to false attribution. [22] David Vaver, writing in the International Journal of Law and Information Technology , goes as far as to say that the right to object to false ...
the right to object to false attribution of work (s. 84); the right to privacy of certain photographs and films (s. 85). The moral rights of an author cannot be transferred to another person (s. 94) and pass to their heirs on his death (s. 95): however, they may be waived by consent (s. 87). The right to object to false attribution of a work ...
The moral rights include the right of attribution, the right to have a work published anonymously or pseudonymously, and the right to the integrity of the work. [2] The preserving of the integrity of the work allows the author to object to alteration, distortion, or mutilation of the work that is "prejudicial to the author's honor or reputation ...
Chronological snobbery – a thesis is deemed incorrect because it was commonly held when something else, known to be false, was also commonly held. [100] [101] Fallacy of relative privation (also known as "appeal to worse problems" or "not as bad as") – dismissing an argument or complaint due to what are perceived to be more important problems.
Fundamental attribution error, the tendency for people to overemphasize personality-based explanations for behaviors observed in others while under-emphasizing the role and power of situational influences on the same behavior [115] (see also actor-observer bias, group attribution error, positivity effect, and negativity effect).
False attribution may refer to: Misattribution in general, when a quotation or work is accidentally, traditionally, or based on bad information attributed to the wrong person or group A specific fallacy where an advocate appeals to an irrelevant, unqualified, unidentified, biased, or fabricated source in support of an argument.
In philosophical logic, the masked-man fallacy (also known as the intensional fallacy or epistemic fallacy) [1] is committed when one makes an illicit use of Leibniz's law in an argument. Leibniz's law states that if A and B are the same object, then A and B are indiscernible (that is, they have all the same properties).
In law, there is a known exception to the assumption that moral culpability lies in either individual character or freely willed acts. The insanity defense – or its corollary, diminished responsibility (a sort of appeal to the fallacy of the single cause) – can be used to argue that the guilty deed was not the product of a guilty mind. [17]