Serious mulling over some ethical issues on copyright matters

Introduction
This matter has been weighing on my mind for quite some times. Of course, it can all be a hypothetical problem but I’ve my moments of doubt lately. Please ignore the who-where-&-when but pay close attention to the issue at hand (& perhaps advise me later at the end).

Literature review
Before we proceed, let me tell you this story – quite complicated, I dare said. It all started a long time ago, at time when standards, rules & regulations that governed the current institution are quite lacking indeed especially when it comes to enforcement. So, it happened that this person, based in another institution, is interested in doing a doctoral research here. He chose his committee members for supervising his thesis diligently which included among others a friend of his (remember that we are all graduate aka ‘mature/old’ students so it’s possible to have your contemporary as your said supervisor). Since doing research take a lot of commitment and investment in terms of money & effort & at the same time he’s doing it on his own (i.e. not sponsored & still working full time) he eventually (jointly-) applied for a research grant with the aforementioned committee member aka friend (there might be others involved but I’m not sure). After a certain time passed by (which involved a lot of grunting & hard-work) he’s ready for submission of his thesis. Sadly, by this time, a certain standard has been established & the same friend has risen in rank as administrator, and he was told that he cannot submit the thesis since it was considered as a group-work under the grant and by the way, what was his contribution towards the research again (Ph.D. is only granted for original contribution towards new knowledge)? Last I heard, he quitted the program after trying to submit another piece of work which wasn’t quite justified the amount of sweats & effort that underwent the whole period spent earlier.

Methodology
As for the next scenario, in the interest of protecting all the relevant parties involved (nothing to do with anyone dead or alive), I’m going to write as the first party again. For simplicity let’s use ‘me-&-my-main-supervisor’. Bear in mind, over-simplification in the modeling of the current state of affairs is absolutely necessary in order to highlight the ‘research problem’.

Pre-research: How to choose your supervisors?
There are two categories of faculties. On one hand, there are those that insist, “It’s your research so you choose your own topic & I’ll guide you along the way (provided it’s something to do with my area of expertise).”
On the other hand, there are those who said, “If you want to do research with me, you’ve to do my way i.e. my topic of interests…”
I fall under the second category, since my proposed topic (economics of migration) was rejected out right but I was really interested to pick her brain (at that time lah).
*This bit is relevant later on*

Current research-in-progress: How to divide the works?
There are supervisors that tightly controlled every aspect of the research (from A to Z literally) & there are those who basically give you a free rein over the matter. Don't forget to factor in the kind of student (hardworking or not-so-) and also the surrounding environment.

Post-research: Whose name should come up first?
Let’s assume that both of you co-authored a paper for submission to a journal or conference as part of your research progress. There are few choices available here. You could follow the alphabetical order of the respective surname (my ayah’s name comes first). Or you could put the ‘titled’ author (especially Professor, Ass. Prof, Dr.) in front in order to increase the probability of acceptance by the editors and at the same time stroke his/her ego further. When it come to the weightage given to each author for the purpose of career advancement (to apply for professorship ka, confirmation ka), of course 2 co-authored paper weighted a lot more than, say a paper wrote by 5 people. But usually each author gets the same proportion regardless how the burden of works is distributed amongst them. It’s also possible for you to completely wrote a paper and merely invite a professor to be your co-partner-in-name (Ali Baba or ghostwriter ke nih?) for reasons stated above.

Empirical Analysis
The real question now is whose work is it?
You? Or your supervisor?
Somebody might argued (again) that, “Since it’s my research area, & I bring you in when I could actually choose anybody (like employing a research assistant – yeah, you’re right!) so by right the copyright belongs to me. So, I’m going to submit it as my research.” There goes your effort for the past 4 years down the drain. (You can never submit the same piece of work to the different journals/publications much more for different purposes of evaluation)
This problem arises since most candidates submitt the thesis as a complete research at the end of 3 or 4 laborious years while supervisors are free (as per common practice) to submit any component of the research at any time during the research period.

Given the strong basis of the relationship between supervisors & supervisees, something could be said for a person who knowingly and intentionally do damage to the bright future of another brilliant academic-in-the-making eh? But is it possible for me to be jumping into the wrong conclusions?

Concluding Remarks

P/s: Today's tot- "Be miserable. Or motivate yourself. Whatever has to be done, it's always your choice" - Wayne Dyer

I honestly don't know what to think anymore. What’s your take on this?