David Velleman (NYU) writes:
The live-blogging of Martha Nussbaum's Locke lectures would be a good occasion for a discussion of the professional ethics of this practice. The lectures have not been published. Copies of the lectures are accessible online to Oxford students and faculty, and others can request them with an online application, but they are not otherwise available. In any case, I am raising the question not only about this particular instance, in which there is limited distribution of the lectures, but also about cases in which material presented in person has not been distributed in writing at all. Is it ethical to publish someone's ideas before he or she has published them, without obtaining permission and granting an opportunity for correction? Is it no longer possible to present work in progress without having someone else's version of it published before one has had a chance to revise and publish it oneself?
Thoughts from readers?
