Warning to Researchers Using Zenodo: Collaborations Followed by Theft Accusations

Warning to Researchers Using Zenodo: Collaborations Followed by Theft Accusations C.J. Tully ORCID: 0009-0007-5661-7332 Abstract A pattern has been observed in which an individual approaches researchers on Zenodo and related platforms, engages in joint writing or discussion, and subsequently claims that the other parties stole or appropriated their work. These claims have been circulated to third parties and have created reluctance among researchers to continue normal correspondence. This note warns colleagues to exercise caution and to secure a written collaboration agreement before any substantive joint work begins. 1. Observed pattern Researchers have reported being contacted for collaboration or joint writing. After material is exchanged or a paper is prepared, the same individual has asserted that ideas or text were taken from them. These assertions have been sent to other academics, sometimes accompanied by documents or links to repository records. Recipients have described the volume of contact as unwanted and have expressed concern about becoming involved. The public authorship record in the affected cases has not supported the accusations of theft. 2. Practical warning Do not begin joint writing, share unpublished drafts, or agree to co-authorship without a short written agreement that records: who is contributing which elements, ownership of any pre-existing material, authorship order or criteria, and a rule that neither party will circulate claims about the other’s contribution to third parties until direct discussion has occurred. Keep dated copies of all agreements and contribution statements. When depositing on Zenodo, include the contribution statement in the record so the public version is clear. 3. If you are approached Ask for the proposed contribution boundaries in writing before exchanging substantial material. If you later receive messages alleging theft, preserve them but do not recirculate them. Platform reporting tools and repository take-down procedures exist for false or harassing statements; prevention through a prior written agreement remains the more effective step. 4. Conclusion The combination of collaborative overtures followed by public or semi-public accusations of appropriation creates avoidable professional risk. A one-page collaboration agreement executed at the outset substantially reduces that risk. Researchers are advised to treat such an agreement as a precondition for joint work on Zenodo or elsewhere. This note reports a pattern observed in the research community and offers general protective practice. It does not name any individual. Keywords: Zenodo, collaboration risk, authorship dispute, theft accusations, written agreement License: CC BY 4.0