Researcher flags AI peer review as copyright violation

A researcher has publicly stated they will report ethical transgressions if peer reviewers use proprietary AI tools to evaluate unpublished manuscripts without consent. Hendrik Erz asserted on Bluesky that pre-publication research remains under author copyright until formal transfer to a journal, making unauthorized AI processing a potential infringement. This position challenges emerging practices where reviewers may utilize large language models to assess technical content or summarize findings. The statement highlights a legal gray area regarding intellectual property rights during the blind review process, distinct from post-publication training data disputes. While no specific incident was cited, the declaration signals growing friction between traditional academic confidentiality norms and generative AI adoption in scholarly communication. Publishers and institutions have yet to establish universal standards governing third-party AI tool usage in confidential peer review workflows.