I have now been blogging for 6 years. And counting. The sheer expanse of years, thanks to being on the wrong side of 60, and the rich experiences and amazing people I have met , make for wonderful subjects when I think of doing a post.
Think of millions of folks like me, writing up stuff , and posting it.
We now have a publicly available mighty source of articles anyone can read. Some read, enjoy, comment and discuss.
And some, use the blogosphere as an infinite sink from which to blatantly pick up articles to fill up their columns in print.
In 2011, one such post of mine, "A touch of a thousand words" was selected by the publishers/editors of the Chicken Soup series of books, for inclusion in the Chicken Soup for the Indian Soul-A Book of miracles. I signed a contract, and was delighted to get my 2 free copies and a payment .
Imagine my consternation when a friend from Delhi, saw my entire Chicken Soup article, published under a title called Soul Soup , in Dec 9, 2012, in the New Delhi edition of the Sunday "The Speaking Tree" weekly edition on page 4. It mentioned my name, the book series, and the publisher. She told me about it, and was aghast when she learned that I had no clue about its appearance, since I was not contacted. She even sent me the hard copy of the paper.
Strangely enough, when I tried looking at the e-version of this , the other articles by folks like Ashwin Sanghi, also on Page 4 that day , showed up , but my article did not show up. The said article by Ashwin Sanghi appeared next to my article column in the actual paper, and should have shown up in the e version.
Something in my contract with the publishers mentioned that people needed to take permission of the publisher before reproducing the article. I checked with the editor and publisher, and was told that no permissions were asked . I have emails saying that.
I hold the copyright to that printed article. The blog post of mine that I submitted that later got selected, appears on my blog with a creative Commons license declarations on screen.
I would like to ask why big media houses like Times of India, with all their resources, libraries, eminent contributors, staff, hardware software and humanware, feel it necessary to blatantly pick up articles written by others in violation of copyright. What stops them from sending a quick email and asking for permission ?
(To be fair, Femina once featured my blog link and some small information about me on one of their pages. They emailed, communicated and took permission before proceeding. And informed me when it appeared in the magazine. No problems. )
I had an earlier experience with another leading Mumbai newspaper, that published another blog post without my explicit permission. I was told I gave permission. I sent them copies of emails exchanged, that clearly asked them to check with me and ask before using my material. And that they never asked for it, regarding that post.
They then said they would not compensate monetarily , as the online page where it appeared was "demonetized" ie it did not earn them revenue !. Despite Google ads showing up with liver transplant,singing classes, housing and Air India ads to name a few. Then I was told Google ads happen by themselves. I had to remind them that surprise, surprise , I knew one needs to sign up for Google AdSense, and one earns from that. I just wondered what someone who didn't know about Google ads would have done . Maybe they thought they could intimidate with jargon like demonetise and lies about Google ads. I have the entire email history record of when this was discussed. After a detailed skirmish, they sent me a cheque and apologized.
Is this a sign of the times ? Is lawlessness, powerhungryness, and blatant lifting, the new mantra amongst the media types ? Are scruples old-fashioned ? Does ambition blind ? Is taking some one's permission a sign of weakness ? And does everything operate on the basis of quid-pro-quid ?
Would their attitude change if I was an advertiser of the paper ?
We see this trespassing attitude everywhere. Chalega. Usme kya hai ? Dekh Lenge. Rules are for others.
See how those in power behave across the country. Personally or commercially.
They say money speaks. Having a lot, and being a big set-up media outfit is a potent combination that sometimes misleads folks.
And makes them forget what the elders/founders taught them when they were little.
To say Please, and May I, and Thank you.
(I am in communication with the folks of TOI. So, I am told, are the publishers. Waiting for a response. Me, that is. None as yet, 24 hours after email was sent. Will update when I hear from them. )
Think of millions of folks like me, writing up stuff , and posting it.
We now have a publicly available mighty source of articles anyone can read. Some read, enjoy, comment and discuss.
And some, use the blogosphere as an infinite sink from which to blatantly pick up articles to fill up their columns in print.
In 2011, one such post of mine, "A touch of a thousand words" was selected by the publishers/editors of the Chicken Soup series of books, for inclusion in the Chicken Soup for the Indian Soul-A Book of miracles. I signed a contract, and was delighted to get my 2 free copies and a payment .
Imagine my consternation when a friend from Delhi, saw my entire Chicken Soup article, published under a title called Soul Soup , in Dec 9, 2012, in the New Delhi edition of the Sunday "The Speaking Tree" weekly edition on page 4. It mentioned my name, the book series, and the publisher. She told me about it, and was aghast when she learned that I had no clue about its appearance, since I was not contacted. She even sent me the hard copy of the paper.
Strangely enough, when I tried looking at the e-version of this , the other articles by folks like Ashwin Sanghi, also on Page 4 that day , showed up , but my article did not show up. The said article by Ashwin Sanghi appeared next to my article column in the actual paper, and should have shown up in the e version.
Something in my contract with the publishers mentioned that people needed to take permission of the publisher before reproducing the article. I checked with the editor and publisher, and was told that no permissions were asked . I have emails saying that.
I hold the copyright to that printed article. The blog post of mine that I submitted that later got selected, appears on my blog with a creative Commons license declarations on screen.
I would like to ask why big media houses like Times of India, with all their resources, libraries, eminent contributors, staff, hardware software and humanware, feel it necessary to blatantly pick up articles written by others in violation of copyright. What stops them from sending a quick email and asking for permission ?
(To be fair, Femina once featured my blog link and some small information about me on one of their pages. They emailed, communicated and took permission before proceeding. And informed me when it appeared in the magazine. No problems. )
I had an earlier experience with another leading Mumbai newspaper, that published another blog post without my explicit permission. I was told I gave permission. I sent them copies of emails exchanged, that clearly asked them to check with me and ask before using my material. And that they never asked for it, regarding that post.
They then said they would not compensate monetarily , as the online page where it appeared was "demonetized" ie it did not earn them revenue !. Despite Google ads showing up with liver transplant,singing classes, housing and Air India ads to name a few. Then I was told Google ads happen by themselves. I had to remind them that surprise, surprise , I knew one needs to sign up for Google AdSense, and one earns from that. I just wondered what someone who didn't know about Google ads would have done . Maybe they thought they could intimidate with jargon like demonetise and lies about Google ads. I have the entire email history record of when this was discussed. After a detailed skirmish, they sent me a cheque and apologized.
Is this a sign of the times ? Is lawlessness, powerhungryness, and blatant lifting, the new mantra amongst the media types ? Are scruples old-fashioned ? Does ambition blind ? Is taking some one's permission a sign of weakness ? And does everything operate on the basis of quid-pro-quid ?
Would their attitude change if I was an advertiser of the paper ?
We see this trespassing attitude everywhere. Chalega. Usme kya hai ? Dekh Lenge. Rules are for others.
See how those in power behave across the country. Personally or commercially.
They say money speaks. Having a lot, and being a big set-up media outfit is a potent combination that sometimes misleads folks.
And makes them forget what the elders/founders taught them when they were little.
To say Please, and May I, and Thank you.
(I am in communication with the folks of TOI. So, I am told, are the publishers. Waiting for a response. Me, that is. None as yet, 24 hours after email was sent. Will update when I hear from them. )
