thank you also for the additional points you made, which raise important aspects to be considered.
2) We discussed whether we should include other conference papers explicitly, but then we realized that this would mean that we also would have to specify other kinds of publications. Therefore we agree to just use “publication” as an umbrella term.
Your question regarding publications in other languages is an important issue that we should clarify. We do not want to exclude the possibility to publish a RR that makes research accessible to the English-speaking community, which was previously only available in a different language – provided that the previous publication is clearly referred to and that it is not just a literal translation. We will work out a corresponding formulation for the proposed publication ethics statement.
3) The plagiarism-check would be done by the IPC. Of course, the criteria will be made more explicit, but as you said, this does not have to be part of a publication ethics statement.
4) As you said, the obvious solution would be that the conference proceedings editors are responsible for the corrections section. If this turns out to be too much extra work (which I do not expect), we can of course discuss whether someone else could be responsible for this.