Springer Nature un-retracts Planck papers, citing “human error”
Today the Retraction Watch list of Nobelists who have retracted papers bids Verabschiedung to Max Planck. After days of scrutiny, Springer Nature has restored two papers by Planck, who won the Nobel for Physics in 1918, reversing a 2011 decision to retract the articles for “copyright violations.” Both articles are back, and now carry the … Continue reading Springer Nature un-retracts Planck papers, citing “human error”
Record details
Published: 7 July 2026
Source: Retraction Watch
Category: News
Topics: Copyright & IP
Retrieved: 14 July 2026
Related evidence
These records share source-supplied organisations, an exact publisher byline, automatic topics or regions. The reason is shown on every link; related does not mean supporting, agreeing with or verifying this record.
Weekend reads: Taylor Swift teaches botany; NEJM retracts key study in Amgen drug; hidden prompts at conference ‘snare AI peer reviews’
Retraction Watch · 4 July 2026
Exclusive: A couple paid more than $800,000 for a gene-editing therapy for their daughter. She died, and it wasn’t made public
Retraction Watch · 23 July 2026
Journal, university investigations launched into gene-editing death following Science-Retraction Watch reporting
Retraction Watch · 30 July 2026
Weekend reads: University and journal investigating gene-editing death; ADA ‘must take accountability’; psychedelic therapy paper faces retraction
Retraction Watch · 1 August 2026
[MàJ] Springer Nature a republié les articles rétractés de Max Planck
Next (FR, ex-INpact) · 9 July 2026
OpenAI may have made a fatal misstep in copyright fight with news orgs
Ars Technica · 9 July 2026
How to cite this record
ethics.ai (7 July 2026), “Springer Nature un-retracts Planck papers, citing “human error”,” evidence record 2630, https://ethics.ai/record/2630 (originally published by Retraction Watch).
Use and limitations
This page is a stable index and citation surface for a source record. ethics.ai did not author the underlying report and has not independently verified every claim. Automatic topics may be imperfect. For consequential use, quote and cite the original publisher.