Four of my photographs are being used on the Network18 venture website http://www.in.com without my permission. The images are not hosted on the in.com servers, they are being leeched from my hosting servers. Network18 has very blatantly also provided a link back to where they have copied the images from and insouciantly mentioned “Images maybe subject to copyright.” Yes, it is stupid. Now, the CEO Haresh Chawla might not be aware of this – and he might be aware of this – in case of the latter… it’s a ridiculous business strategy. Below are the screenshots in all their glory – for posterity’s sake – and following are direct links till they get taken down : Image 01 | Image 02 | Image 03 | Image 04 – UPDATE : the images have magically disappeared! you can still see them here using Google’s cache Image 01 | Image 02 | Image 03 | Image 04. Thanks to @poeticgooner for the Google Cache hat tip.

They also sent me an email from the in.com website saying ” Thank you for your feedback. Can you please send us the link. Do let is know if the problem persists”.

Read : India’s copyright proposals are un-American (and that’s bad)

This incident was also covered on Chori.in.

Apparently, in.com uses a Bing.com API, which allows them to use keywords and then display search results on their website. While Bing.com and Google.com have my permission to include my images in their search results, in.com does not. Instead of first using and then removing after being caught, in.com should first take permission. in.com is a “content aggregator”, which means everything on that website does not belong to them [ that’s my interpretation anyway – please correct me if I’m wrong ].

I’m not sure what Network18’s in.com missed – even though my website / blog clearly states “All rights reserved and copyright studioaside.com – they have gone ahead nonetheless. Shame on you Network18 and whoever made this bad decision for you. I’m sure they steal other content too – the written kind. You got a story, you share it in the comments.

Updates from Naina.co on Facebook Twitter Instagram Pinterest | Buy a Print from the Naina.co Store

90 comments

  1. Just wondering… They did mention the source. Why are you so pissed about it? I mean… they are not taking credit for your work. As a matter of fact, they are popularizing it. Shouldn’t you be happy?

    1. Sure Ravi, how about I come to your house, take your car without your permission and drive it around blaring on a loudspeaker “This is Ravi’s car!” I’ll bet my career on whether you file an FIR or not. Or how about I kidnap one of your siblings, make them slave for me and tattoo on their foreheads, your name and your address. That work for you? Popularising my work! Are you kidding? How come they don’t copy Prabuddha Dasgupta’s photographs? Oh wait no – they’re chicken shit to do that because Prabuddha will chew them up and spit them out. Or I could lift your entire website, content and images, all your work and paste it on another domain with a link at the bottom saying “All credit to Ravi” and people come more to my website than yours – how’s that for perspective. I stole a painting from a museum, and I’m now displaying it in my gallery – of course the museum’s been credited with a small sticky note right underneath the painting. That’s ok too right? The museum should be thrilled! [ Thought processes like this make the copyright issue muddy and full of shit and Network18 gets away with it. ]

  2. I completely agree with Ravi had to say above. They are mentioning the source, and providing you a link back. Or perhaps, you should have mentioned on your website upfront saying “Photos should not be used at any other website/media without the explicit permission of the owner i.e. studioaside.com”.

    1. Dinesh read my reply to Ravi’s comment. My website clearly states “All right reserved.” If they don’t understand that means “hands-off” then they should have their asses sued. It’s funny how you say I should have done something to prevent this – should I also tattoo my ass and say that it belongs to my husband so that nobody rapes me? Bullshit.

  3. Also, probably you should disable “hotlinking” images from your server to avoid the “bandwidth theft” which is an offense for sure.

    1. Dinesh, bandwidth theft. Why? Because it costs me money? What about the unlawful use of my images? I make money from my photography – I’m a professional photographer – theft is theft – bandwidth or otherwise. Preventing hotlinking is like never getting out of the house for the fear of being raped. They’re stupid they hotlink to who they’re stealing from.

    1. You wonder about the wrong things Ravi. Yes, I asked them – they invited me to the concert. The images got published in the Rock Street Journal. Would you like a DNA test now?

  4. it’s a fair use.

    I agree with your car/sibling example. However, I feel, there is difference in physical stuff and digital stuff. If you are putting up your stuff online, public space, some people would want to comment, review or even show it. As long as they are giving back the due credit, it’s fine.

    Web won’t be same, if people have to take permission to link to your blog or quote something from your blog? There are some who steal and show without credits, those are the bad guys.

    If you find someone making money out of it or using in wrongful (relative – using your images to do something you have not allowed), then it’s unethical.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use

    Anyway, you should also look at creative-commons licenses. We know, there would be some people who are going to use it anyway, why not apply CC license.

    I am not sure about popularity, etc. But I believe, if you are putting images online, you want people to see and appreciate your work? I guess, a lot more folks saw photographs, along with your name/website(source).

    Hard to explain or understand, matter of different perspective and philosophy.

    1. Abdul! I’ve got tummy stitches laughing!
      Of course there’s a difference in physical and digital stuff – but there’s no difference in “theft”. I’m sure you get that.
      I put my stuff online – on my website – which is open to the public to “view” – not copy and use on their websites. Tell me one thing, imagine I went to MF Hussains’ website [ I don’t know if he has one ], then I use one of his paintings as the opening image on my website and under the image I link back to his website and also say “image maybe subject to copyright”. WTF is that supposed to mean? Fair use my ass. You can link to my blog sure – I’d love that – but you can’t copy my stuff. Even while blogging – I always cite my sources and link back to them AFTER I have taken permission from them to use the content – and that’s the written word I’m talking about – not even images.

      Coming to the issue of making money out of it – Network18 is making money out of it – because this theft helps them keyword their website better and the rank will improve in Google searches. So yeah they’re making money out of it – eventually – we can’t measure it now can we? I have not allowed them to do anything with my images – I don’t want them to touch them. So it’s not fair use.

      I do not want to look at CC licenses – I am happy keeping my work fully copyrighted.
      Take the example of the picture of the girl with her finger stuck up her nose – I don’t know who she is – and I don’t have a model release – which means I cannot use the image for commercial purposes – and I can only use it for display / non-commercial – I asked her parents if I could take her photograph and they let me. How can Network18 use her picture?

      I fail to see how there can be “perspective” or “philosophy” involved in theft.
      And what makes you think that because you can’t touch digital good, they are lesser in value? I make logos for a living – you can’t touch a logo unless it’s printed – why isn’t Network18 stealing brand logos then? I’m shocked.

  5. Personally, i do not even like the 4 pics they took! im no “professional” photographer. Again, its a personal opinion.

    Looks on the bright side. many ppl like me never even knew u existed and about ur wrk. Frankly, if someone hotlinked my pics with due credit to me (esp a news feed) id thank them. I know, i run a business myself (not photography)

    1. George, we’re not talking about the quality of images or the quality of the photographer. So I am not going to comment on that.
      And for your bright side, how about you get your sister / wife / mother raped by a politician so that they can make it to international front-page news? Easy shortcut to publicity na – I don’t know any women in your family now but look on the bright side, after the news, I will!

      Since you carry such an opinion, thank heavens I don’t know what you do and neither do I want to. I wouldn’t want to associate with people who hold such a philosophy.

  6. Problem is we don’t take copyright law seriously. And i disagree with abdul .. digital things are as important as physical stuff.. “All rights reserved ” means .. Unless you take consent from the owner of the property don’t use the stuff personally or comercially. its as simple as that.

    1. I agree Pawan – we don’t take copyright law seriously and Indian Copyright law is also quite vague I’ve heard. I keep things simple personally – if it’s not mine, ask. I don’t even blog without seeking permission from someone who’s article I’m going to be referencing. Can’t go wrong with that.

  7. Lol. Ravi, u seriously think about the wrong things. Its her photos and she gives permission to publish or not. She doesnt require publicity on in.com (yuck) naina, sue their thieving asses off.
    Nice pics btw especially the bhayanak maut one.

  8. Indian copyright laws are as good as non-existent.. And people are not really aware of copyrights and their consequences.. Even to make thigs open to all ,people have to copyright it by copyrights like Creative Commons or GPL etc.. I dont get why people think everything on the internet is for free usage.. someone has put her/his efforts/time creating it. you need to take permission to use that stuff ..

  9. Oh u r one angry tiger 🙂

    sad to see that the only argument u can put forth is that of rape and stuff.

    Yes u dont know what i do and the business i am in. And yes, even i wud not want to be associated with u in any way.

    1. Angry tiger? Sure as hell. Wouldn’t you be if someone stole from you? The rape thing put things in perspective for you. Hit where it hurts bad didn’t it? The only argument I put forward was that stealing is bad – you’re the one who wasn’t ready to understand – so I gave an analogy [ analogies usually suck because no two situations are really same ]. Glad we won’t be doing business – maybe we can continue the discussion so I can give another analogy?

  10. What you consider theft, I don’t, in this particular case.

    A lot of us actually embed and share content from/across the web, of course with the due credits

    Many of us cite/quote things without taking permission, of course with due credits. Flickr is good example, some of the best images can be found out there. You can embed/show, as long as you link back to original image-page.

    I hold different views and see things differently, hence different perspective and philosophy.

    You are right, ideally in.com should have taken permission. But it’s common practice to embed/share stuff (with credits, links to source) on web.

    And it’s good to learn that you take permissions from your subjects (or parents or whatever) before clicking any photograph. Not many do it.

    BTW! Many of us show/use others’ logos in our websites/applications for right reasons, of course with appropriate disclaimers (trademark, copyright).

    If you didn’t get it, you won’t get it 🙂

    1. Abdul it isn’t about what you or I think or about philosophy. Theft is theft. It’s like I get 2 liters of petrol for 50 bucks and you get 1 liter for the same amount – you’re being stolen from – technically you’re not giving anything but you’re being charged extra. And all my images in Flickr are copyrighted with all rights reserved – not for linking / usage without permission – same with this website. It’s black and white. There is no room for point of view here.

      And what a “lot of us” do doesn’t make it right. I wouldn’t quote / cite without permission ever. I always write an email to the concerned person and take their fucking permission. What is so difficult to understand in that? Sure you live your life differently – you’re different, all of us, as individuals are different. But this incident is not something to be dilly-dallying over – just because there is easy access online does not mean it can be used like that.

      If I don’t get it, I will take it.

  11. I completely agree with Ravi [not coz i know him] and dinesh.
    Tht is the point of internet..sharing your creations,.. hence youtube, flickr, wikipedia, etc.
    But i think u seem not to know either these websites or the philosophy behind coz u r blinded by ur own work. Naina, I think u are behaving typically like corporates of this world, who sits on thr “copyrighted” materials and hope someday they themselves will be benefited by tht. what abt generating value?
    Just imagine if u make ur work available if not free but “Creative Commons”, ur work can be used by different ppl in diff amazing ways. with credits given to u. who knows what can come out of it. The benefit u already had by this act by Network 18 is tht ppl got to know u. I didnt know who u were a mins ago, but now i know u and ur work.
    I am a supporter of nina paley kind of thinking/open course [so i might me an alien to u copyrighters] and i think the whole copyright thing is a plague in society and so r the ppl who shout “long live copyright”.
    If u understand this, u will be like wikipedia [long lasting] and not like microsoft encarta/britannica [dead/dieing].

    1. Avinash, I know about Creative Commons and I’ve used photographs from other photographers who allow CC usage – I still ALWAYS write to them and ask.
      I’m not sharing my creations for charity – I am a photographer who earns her bread taking / making pictures.
      You’re saying you didn’t know about me till a minute ago and now you’re also telling me I’m blinded by my own work? Hehehe. Dude. Seriously.
      Instead of imagining how nice it would be to have no war, how about imagining for one moment that you ask before you take? Eh? Sounds good? No?
      I don’t need to Network18 for fucking benefits – I have an awesome Twitter community, I’m great on Facebook and I’m on the top in Google so Network18 can take their sorry ass and crawl into a hole. No thank you for their publicity. And what difference does it make if you know me and my work now? Are you telling me that you’re going to now hire me for photography just by visiting my website once? Is that how you think business online works?

      Nina Paley’s stuff is awesome – but how many films has she made under CC? Site Sings the Blue … and?

      We all make money child and those who don’t are Wikipedia. [ You do know that there are millions of people contributing to Wikipedia right and that a lot of information might be incorrect right? ] And nothing in this world is long-lasting. Microsoft has been around longer than Wikipedia.

      I don’t shout “long live the copyright” and how would you know that anyway – what I shout / not. Come work for free for a month for me, I’ll credit you with a tweet online everyday – then we’ll talk about your “perspective”.

      Oh. Your comment is all over the place – it’s like I don’t know what I’m defending anymore – you’re bringing in too many other variables that have nothing to do with this specific case.

    2. And Avinash, you got to know about me not because Network18 publicized my work but because I publicized their copyright violation.

  12. This has happened to my friend who is budding photographer, his picture was used on the cover of an indian novel without his permission. And just cause he was student they tried to placate him with 5k cash. In India rules and regulations have not be set to govern the digital space and to protect artists who showcase their work here. In Naina’s case her anger is justified, and those out here who find it hard to comprehend it will probably realize only when something they create is exploited by others.

    1. Arrey yaar Milind – thanks – it’s true that till it doesn’t happen to you, it seems frivolous. But that’s a human condition. Pity.

  13. Sometimes you can make your point with decency and politely. You don’t have to use unrelated and sometimes offensive examples (analogies). You don’t have to shout to be heard.

    No body is denying your point, but I am just trying to share what I know about this web/internet.

    BTW! Flickr guidelines allow anyone to embed any photo as long as they link back:-

    http://www.flickr.com/guidelines.gne

    Thanks.

    -abdul

    1. Why is a rape analogy offensive and where are you when a rape actually happens hundreds of times a day in this country? If an analogy bothers you so much, you should be a crusader against rape. It’s all easy to talk about online no? Sorry, I don’t mean to make it personal for you – but it is personal for me – would it change your perspective if I told you I’d been molested as a child? It would now wouldn’t it 🙂 [ Like I said, human condition! We’re pathetic that way, us humans. ]

      And you’re right about the Flickr guidelines – I didn’t know about that. Thanks.
      But that’s not helping this incident in any case – the images were linked-to from my website.

    2. Er Abdul, sorry to burst your bubble but Flickr guidelines read : “Do link back to Flickr when you post your Flickr content elsewhere.” It says when YOU post YOUR Flickr content elsewhere. Not when you post someone else’s content elsewhere.

  14. Geez guys, lay off, will ya?

    Naina is a copyright holder for her work/images, and if she wanted those images to be used by others without permission, she may as well have gone ahead and put a CC/Attribution license on them. She chose to use a All Rights Reserved license, and that is unambiguous in its definition.

    Go to Flickr’s advanced search and you’ll see what I mean. You can search for content that is a) Creative Commons with attribution and b) available for commercial use. Combine the two and you can pick up images and put them to your own commercial use.

    Shouldnt the license of someone’s work be the creator’s prerogative? Unfortunately, the sense I am getting from these comments is that copyright law is for idiots to respect in India, and that no amount of analogies will get the point across to the unbelieving.

    And, about creating value, I suppose it’s about fair that an individual artist gets ripped off and a big corporate like N18 profits, right?

  15. “And all my images in Flickr are copyrighted with all rights reserved – not for linking / usage without permission”

    That was in response to above 🙂

    over and out.

  16. I think everybody is confusing Creative Commons license and just plain copyright.

    If you say something is copyrighted, it can’t be used or replicated in any form whatsoever without the written permission of the author.

    In the case of material licensed under Creative Commons, you can use it on your own web site, book or whatever provided you give credit to the author (and a link back if possible).

    In this case Naina has every right to not only complain but also sue if necessary. There is no disputing this fact.

    1. Aditya, they hotlinked straight from my website so my website stats showed them as referrers. Apparently they use a Bing.com API which allows them to aggregate content / images based on keywords.

  17. I think you should just go and completely sue them!!!
    And for everybody over here who does not understand – It is upon the Creator of any kind of work, published online to decide what kind of copyright or license he/she wants to give his/her work. And hence, it is upto Naina to chose whether she wants a CC or a full copyright.
    And if Naina had decided that these images were under full copyright, then legally, network18 has no right whatsoever to publish them anywhere – whether they provide a link back or not!
    So its not about popularity etc. – its just about Naina’s rights over her creative work. And whether or not SHE wants to share them.

  18. First things first: quickly stop image hot linking – here are the instructions to follow that will change what your image looks like – if someone uses it on their domain:

    http://www.davidairey.com/stop-image-theft-hotlinking-htaccess/

    Secondly, there is a thin line between making fair use and copyright violation. Google image search shows your images to the world when they search for it. Is that copyright violation too? So from a legal point of view – in.com can actually make an argument that they are not violating your copyrights. They are just providing a “search” or “discovery” service. I’m not saying thats right or wrong. But I am saying that its a legal grey area. And so the best thing for you to do is to prevent hotlinking in the first place.

    If they then copy your images and put it up on their own servers – their discovery argument gets completely blown away – and you can go after them with both guns loaded.

    1. Thanks Ankesh – very helpful. Very very helpful. I just spoke to a copyright lawyer and am sending him details. And I totally understand about the grey area. Bing and Google are search engines and I love it that my images are available there – so if someone finds them, they should come to me [ because the image links back to my website ] and ask me for usage. There shouldn’t be anything grey in that – that’s what the lawyer said. So I CAN go after in.com with both guns loaded even now.

  19. @Naina: There is no denying that In.com was wrong to have taken your photos. Clearly, they have violated your copyright. So indeed, shame on them and I hope they have learned a thing or two from your blog post.

    But hey, so what? Life moves on, this is just one dot in the infinite noise of the internet. How do you even know that I’m printing your photos as postcards and selling them in a remote village in Nepal (I’m not)? And will you write a blog post again if you find out? How many blog posts will it take for you realize that no matter how loudly you shout, things are not going to change on the internet anytime soon?

    I somewhat agree with Abdul regarding real stuff and digital stuff. Not many will dare to flick a printed photograph from your table. That is immoral, that’s stealing and will lead to a slap in the face. But put the same photos online and you yourself are surrendering all your rights. You can choose to write “ALL RIGHTS RESERVED” in H1 format, but people, and unfortunately even big companies can (and will) choose to ignore it. Some will go further by even removing your watermark. Either you have to live with that, or never upload anything online.

    When I was new to photography, I used to be so darn worried that people are going to steal my photos from the internet. But then I though, you might lose even printed photographs if you stick them at a public sidewalk – doesn’t matter if it’s clearly written – “these photos are copyrighted”.

    Everyone who is worried about this kind of issue should place a BIG (really BIG) & prominent watermark on every photograph. Or better never upload anything that they think should absolutely not be copied by anyone.

    And although, in.com was thoughtful enough link back, I repeat that their action is inexcusable. You should probably write them a nice mail and teach them about creative commons license. Probably also teach them how to search for CC licensed photos on Flickr? Or even better threaten to sue them? 😉

    P.S: I changed the license to all my photos (http://flickr.com/prakaz) to Creative Commons few years ago, and it has given me peace of mind 🙂

    1. Hey Prakaz, so nice to hear from you.

      1. Since I don’t put ugly watermarks on my images, it should tell you something about how I feel about peace of mind.

      2. Saying that in.com was “thoughtful” is ridiculous.

      3. Sure life moves on – don’t we move on when a loved one dies? Even if it from doctor’s negligence, we can’t do shit and it doesn’t help to rail against the unfairness of it all. But what kind of a human being would I be if I didn’t do something to help change the system so that no one else has to lose a loved one to negligence? Same with my photographs. Same with this incident. I am not going to let someone walk all over me and then show gratitude to them for it.

      4. I will write as many blog posts as it takes.

      5. I will also find out more about copyright laws and the IPC so that I know how this works and I will then help other photographers who care about their work so as not to see it be wasted on websites like in.com – in.com is a content aggregator, nothing more.

      6. If you agree that there is difference between intellectual property and real physical property and that one can be copied blatantly and the other can’t, then THAT right there is our problem – and I’m not saying it’s your problem – it’s an issue which is not allowing us to solve the Indian Copyright laws.

      7. Why stop at not worrying about photographs being stolen – I could die tomorrow – hell I should then sleep with every guy in town – because once I die there will be no sex! Yes, people are murdered, things are stolen and photographs are copied – the happening does not make it ok to happen.

      8. You’re contradicting yourself in your comment – on the one hand you’re saying it’s unfortunate and on the other you’re saying “live with it”. I will not apologize for not wanting to live with something that’s unfortunate. I might not have the power to stop global warming with a blog post, but I can do something about stolen photographs online.

      9. Peace of mind is relative. I am not going to CC my photography – that’s my choice and that give me peace of mind. Personal.

      10. Most top level professional photographs don’t put much of their work online – not because they’re worried it might get copied but because once published online, print value of their work goes down and museums will not showcase their published work. At the end of the day, all these decisions are capitalist decisions – so is theft.

      Noida is a very unsafe city for women. So technically, if I want to avoid getting molested / raped, I should, in all good sense, never venture out of the house after 9 p.m. at night without male company. But I am not going to do that am I? I like my freedom – which doesn’t mean I wear a bikini and walk on the road at 9 p.m. – it means I stay alert and staying alert doesn’t mean you’re losing peace of mind. I can’t comment on Nepal but living in India means living with shit but with peace of mind.

      Thanks for the comment – very thoughtful one at that!

  20. Naina, I’m sorry you have to deal with such morons who don’t understand the fundas of copyright and intellectual property. I mean both Network18 and some of the fools posting here.

    1. Hehehe Kailash 😀 the worst part is that there are so many “opinions” on something that should be black and white. I blame us people for making the simple, complex.

  21. Naina, it depends on what do you want now?

    Here is a list of cases who have faced it before- http://blogs.gonomad.com/traveltalesfromindia/2010/02/plagiarism-of-the-photos-posted-on-the-internet-indian-media-cases.html

    Here are two of mine one with Mint and the other with HT Brunch.

    http://blogs.gonomad.com/traveltalesfromindia/2010/02/mint-issue-an-update.html

    http://blogs.gonomad.com/traveltalesfromindia/2009/12/a-picture-of-mine-in-brunch-but-without-any-credit-to-me.html

    But then everyone deals with such issues in their own way. You decide what you want and then go after it. Don’t get swayed by what others say.

    1. Thanks Mridula – my goodness – I just read your links and blogs posts – what a pity. I’m still trying to wrap my head around what to do next. I have not decided yet. Peace of mind is important but I don’t want this to happen again – so maybe an example needs to be set.

  22. Well, I totally understand your reaction Naina, but probably being a little more cool-minded about this would have paid off in the end. I would just have send them a bill for the usage of your footage. I mean who knows, probably they would have been willing to pay for it.

    1. Hmmm. You think that would’ve worked eh? If Network18 doesn’t have the sense to seek permission before publishing a copyrighted image, I am reasonably sure they would not pay me for unfair use now would they. I’ve already received one email from them telling me “So you can see the images have been removed…”. I do agree that a stable/cool-head can help cause more damage to the offending party but in this case, there is a larger thing at play here – Network18 is a content aggregator – there are larger questions to be asked here – Indian Copyright Laws and how to deal with such theft, etc. I’m never sure what to do with all this. Still finding out – talking to a copyright lawyer now.

  23. It’s ridiculous that so many people commenting above have no idea about copyright violation, and worse – they think that everything on the ‘internet’ should be free for all. I forget who mentioned it, but some dude actually said things are free on youtube, and blah! Wow, I had no idea that google was such a benevolent party and that so many designers, photographers, writers, bloggers and artists were doing all this work for free! Isn’t it a happy little world for these traditional media drones!

    Anyway…I hope you get through to the right people and get this sorted. And I like the rape example. That’s the only thing these chauvinist drones understand.

    1. Thanks Sasha – yeah on the rape example – most people don’t get it and then they get pissed when I use this analogy. I think it’s a brilliant one. Most people do take the internet for granted. A guy had copied my images earlier and posted them on his blog. I left a comment asking him to remove them and he promptly called me up to apologize and said he was a newbie – a garage mechanic actually – and that he ran the blog on the side because he liked the power of the internet. I was stunned that someone with probably little education and a garage day-job understood the internet better than most people in the corporate world. Only a matter of time and more such cases getting publicized.

  24. I think its being blown out of proportion, as long as there is a link back to the source, it should be ok. I agree with George these things only make the amateur artists more popular, people should really learn to chill a bit. Also the rape analogy is so typical, whenever people have to spite others they attack their mothers and daughters. Just so typical. Extremely cheap taste.

    1. Attack is when someone steals another person’s copyrighted stuff. I don’t even know George let alone his family. It was only to put it in perspective. Not to actually suggest that someone should get raped. I think that should be the intelligent deduction.

      Incidents like the Network18 thing happen precisely because you think this is being blown out of proportion – as long as there is a link back to the source, it “should” be ok – which means you don’t know. Sharing an opinion without knowing is probably not an intelligent thing don’t you think Pad?

      How does a content-aggregator website like in.com copying my stuff make am “amateur” artist like me popular? Did you see my images there? Did any of your friends see them there? The only reason you’ve even heard about any of it is because I chose to “blow it out of proportion” – so technically, I sent some publicity their way.

      I wasn’t spiting anyone – impossible without knowing the person – I was spiting their half-baked opinion – if they take it personally, they’re welcome to it. I didn’t beg them to come and share their opinion here – they said what they had to and same for me. Who’s blowing it out of proportion now?

    1. How can you say I bring in the rape perspective into anything and everything? Please don’t take it personally – I wasn’t trying to suggest anything – nor was I judging you – I don’t know you enough to judge you. I was making a point and you’ll have to admit I made it. Please be born a woman in your next lifetime – and be born in India – then we’ll talk about being shallow.

  25. Well…here’s the Naina I don’t know in spite of having known you for so long !
    Carry on the crusade – Network18 certainly deserves a dose of their own medicine.
    But after having read each and every comment, I just realise one thing – junta here is trying to pacify you down only b’coz they think you don’t deserve as much screen/blog space as NW18. Just b’coz it’s big and popular (the general perception – and I don’t necessarily share the same opinion) doesn’t mean you can’t (or already haven’t) beat them. Most of the comments I read today are more disdainful (probably a strong word to use – but I think it’s apt right now) towards you since they don’t know you and your work. They think NW18 apologised (did they – or it was just one of those copy-paste templated e-mails) and that should end the matter!
    Well, I probably won’t agree with your rape analogy (as you yourself said – no 2 analogies are the same), but it does convincingly get your point across to most of them who simply don’t understand the bigger picture and the precarious nature of copyright law ! I think everybody should go back and read “Atlas Shrugged” and understand the notion and concept of “Intellectual Property”.
    Any further progress with the copyright lawyer ?

    1. Arrey Kisalay 🙂 A lifetime is not enough to get to know someone else and the online world is limited even more so in that process. It’s ok – I am not going to judge the opinions here as reflective of the humans beings who wrote them – our opinions are colored by how much we know. And I’m the last person who can claim to know even an iota of what this world has to offer. But let me not get philosophical here.

      I will be creating a detailed list of stuff with regards to this case and emailing the lawyer tomorrow.

      Oh and Network18 did not apologize. Their email was a template reply at best. Someone else also replied personally but I’m not going to name them and their email will help me get some access to the right people – namely the legal department of Network18.

      Precarious is the WORD! When it comes to copyright law. I’m soon going to find out how this is supposed to work and how it actually works 🙂

  26. Hi Naina,
    Firstly I am sorry to hear this happened with you!! Secondly after reading comments and responses upto some Abdul guy, i was F**king tired and thought this is C**P Man. I am wondering, for the concerned above if they even knew the meaning of plagiarism… Come on, people need eduction right now…. If this was allowed, I would have the same book published liked 1000’s of time. If we intentionally copy something and do not acknowledge is “Theft” and if we copy something and acknowledge it without permission, guess what it is still “theft”. These people are absolutely crazy, they need to realise that something available on the internet is not free to use, unless mentioned specifically and if they are wondering what does “all rights reserved” means, “this belongs to me (Owner) and do not use without permission”.

    I am really sorry to say but in most of the conversations above, all the guys who are talking all this crap, I wonder if I get they facebook/social media image and I just add the text “joker” at the center of the image and post it on my website. I am sure these guys will be right Pissed Off… the matter of fact is I find them to be joker is a personal opinion… ha ha

    Good Luck
    Nidhi

  27. You are welcome and I am working one something and this is good example to show…. Guess what i am “copying” you Logo and creating a website saying the Logo was designed by “Naina Redhu” wondering will that work…. Heck why your Logo, i am going to the use “Emblem of India” (Sorry that is more recognizable than your Logo” and guess what no one know’s who designed that, so all i have to say Logo may be subject to copyright to “Province of India”

    for all the people above, if they do not know… open your wallet and check the back of any credit/bank card…. even though the card is mine, the money is money is mine it clearly states property of the “Bank Name”….. ha ha

  28. Guess What….. I just checked my “Indian Passport” on the Last Page it clearly states This Passport is a Property of Government of India. Even though i own it still does not belong to me… ha ha… wondering if these guys got the concept of virtual/property of others….

  29. @Kisalay – Thanks !! Trust me, all these guys above would be in real trouble if they tried any of this C**P techniques in Publishing. My degree was all about Quality and Performance Management and we had to do research for all modules and write an assignment for 3000 words, we could not copy anything from any one, we had to paraphrase it and still reference it, else would not pass the module and the reason “work does not belong to me”… and guess what there is a software called Turnit In… all the assignments and dissertation (which is 15000 words) is submitted to that software and if found plagiarised … I am awarded a BIG FAT ZERO…

    People need to Learn…. DOES NOT BELONG TO ME = DO NOT USE

    And for all those who are saying regarding analogy of RAPE/MOTHER/SISTER…. ANSWER ME…. I am not using that analogy…. Naina has to talk in the language that you guys can understand.

  30. Nidhi, I think I read about this someplace else as well. There’s some Act / Legislation somewhere which clearly states that the document is given to you only for identification / travel purposes but it definitely is the property of the Govt. of India. I can’t really place where I read this, but maybe you could dig it. Did you know if your passport is mutilated / lost / damaged, there’s a very long tedious process to get a new one issued – which includes a series of steps such as a public notice in one of the national dailies, a gazetted notification and what not ? Crazy !!!

  31. @Kisalay… Yup i know what you are talking about….. leave the crazy bit in the work about it… just imagine… it is my image, my passport, i paid for it… still i have to do all that, why because as per law, even though this is all me, my identity belongs to someone else (Govt. of India)… but this is off the topic or way above the level for the people above…. for them we are not talking about the same issue… but the fact is we are still talking about the single concept of “What belongs to whom”

  32. @Naina….. Just read a comment by someone regarding “New Artist” and giving more publicity…in response, i am sure you (naina) are not looking for popularity and recognition from the kind of crowd that comes to these stupid sites…. You have a very niche market and nice clients (past & present) and i am definitely sure you will continue your success…

  33. “the images have magically disappeared”

    That’s what you wanted, right?? Why are you going on and on and on about it? I bet you spend hours each day looking in the mirror.

    1. Lisa, or whoever you really are, not only do I spend hours staring at myself in the mirror, my laptop screen is built in such a way that it reflect my lovely face all day long and to top it all I also take pictures of myself everyday to hang on the walls of my home and maybe even the neighborhood walls. So? What’s your point?

      As for what I wanted, I’m sure my copyright lawyer, I and Network18 can settle that without involving you in it.

      What you so scared of using a disposable email / fake name and identity?

  34. Naina,
    Understand your concerens and totally agree on the copy right part of digital media – fully support you on this.
    Only difference of opinion is regarding usage of foul language directly or indirectly aimed at some people and usage of examples like the “rape” one seems to be inappropriate in the public domain. I do agree we all use such stuff on casual talks , but need to be careful while publishing. My humble opinion only, you may disagree.

    Cheers!
    Sreejith

    1. Sreejith I understand your point but what I’ve written is “mild” at best. You should’ve read some of the comments other people left for some of the commentors – comments I haven’t approved 🙂

  35. Lisa,

    What is the connection of your statement, ‘I bet you spend hours each day looking in the mirror.’

    with

    ‘The important fact that the images belonging solely to Naina are being used commercially without her permission. It is Naina’s hard work, if it were your hard work, you would not be saying what you have said’

    Stick to the topic of ‘Hard Work not to be used without permission and for free’

    So, why don’t you let the intelligent people do the talking and maybe you go and take a good rest and relax?

  36. As for free publicity, Shut up :-), there is no such thing as free publicity.

    People who believe in themselves and are not afraid to work hard, do not need “free publicity” even on the very first day they walk into the corporate world.

    Cheers.

  37. George

    If you do not understand the problem voiced by Naina. You should keep your comments to yourself.

    You do not like the photographs. Who asked you for your opinion on the quality of the photographs.

    What is more important is that you are thoroughly enjoying mocking Naina.

    And yes Naina is a Tiger, her honesty, dedication and courage to stand by her work is probably something you will never understand.

    So? What does that say about you?

    And all the people who respect Naina definately do not want to be associated with you in any which ways.

    Good Riddance to Bad Rubbish.

  38. Very smart and apt comments below from Tushar,

    “Naina is a copyright holder for her work/images, and if she wanted those images to be used by others without permission, she may as well have gone ahead and put a CC/Attribution license on them. She chose to use a All Rights Reserved license, and that is unambiguous in its definition.”

    It is the creator’s prerogative. I dislike my hard work used without my permission. It is Naina’s choice.

    One cannot apply ones own meaning to the term ‘All Rights Reserved’ You have to take the universal educated meaning.

  39. This is so crazy,

    I just finished reading all the posts and I can only say, how utterly sad I feel that there are such fools in existence and they are actually going out of their way to show how stupid they are.

    There is nothing wrong in Naina’s use of the rape analogy. It is very clear that Naina did not mean any dis-respect.

    The meaning simply meant rape = violation. Something wrong happened.

    Naina put it across in a very professional manner. However, Ravi and Dinesh were not understanding the seriousness of the situation and more importantly, both of them were actually laughing it off as something totally not significant.

    So, Naina had to use a strong term to explain to them. That’s all there was to it.

    If Ravi and Dinesh had not put it across so lightly, Naina would have had no need to use a strong term.

    Naina, you have a shining personality, very few have it. Your writing on this blog shows courage, brilliance and a professionalism par excellence. You are way too good.

    It is indeed very difficult to ignore and forgive such sad and frustrated people for their ignorance 🙂 I know I could not do it and hence my reply to them.

    Hats of to you and a GRAND SALUTE TO YOU 🙂

    Cheers.

  40. “95 mentions & RT’s, 76 comments & counting : http://ht.ly/2oN28 Network18’s antics. Indian Copyright Issues.” ~ Tweeted by Naina.

    I bet we all know what you are gaining here, and I see you did a pretty good job at it. Its something they all do every time they go beating their chest about some copyright violations. Your insignificant presence is now known to all and sundry, no prize for guessing who should you be thanking for those 95 mentions RTs. Its a shame you are actually selling that on twitter, flaunting your 95 mentions to gain what exactly? Like what are you trying to do by this blog post anyway? If you thought Network 18 violated your legal rights, you go right ahead sue them if you think you have a case. If you manage to win it then come and tell all that “look this was a violation and the Courts are on my side. Why this noise on your blog?”

    Network 18 is too big to bother themselves with this, they sent you a mailer and moved on, but you can’t this is your 15 mins of fame, you are trying too hard to claim the space.

    @Neha
    The rape analogy is NOT perfect. Sometime back when a politician used that word in her speech against Mayawati we condemned her and rightly so cause it deserves condemnation. Its a tactics, using derogatory treatment to the women of the opponents is a centuries old war practice. The same gets translated to our conversations in such analogies. Its worse to see it coming from a woman. Read up the flaming comments by various internet trolls across the web and you’ll see such comments only come from cheap trolls. Not expected from a respectable person like Naina.

    You wrote — “Your writing on this blog shows courage, brilliance and a professionalism par excellence”

    Pray tell Neha, how is Naina’s writing this post brilliant and courageous? Brave would be if this is actually taken to the court instead of making empty noises.

    And professionalism? If anybody on this thread is going overboard with the jargons, expletives, abuses its none other than Naina herself. She takes no time in jumping to abuses with sexual connotations. In simple words every time she is threatened with an argument, she runs out of strong points and logic and starts getting personal.

    I ask again, what is the point of this blog post? Can you, Naina, answer me without getting personal?

    You moderate comments. So I doubt if my comment will ever show up.Last time I didn’t leave my real email, this time I did. I am for real in case you are wondering.

    1. Thank you Padmaja for congratulating me and “them”.

      I’m having a ball of a time – not with the content of the blog post – but with the content of the comments. [ Oh wait, maybe I offended the piety of someone’s soul by using the word “ball”.
      “Why this noise on your blog?” Er. Because it’s my blog and the noise is in the comments – the blog post was a simple “This is what happened.” I haven’t written anything in the blog post that is even slightly opinionated. And it’s my blog you know. I can do whatever I like with it. At least I’m not violating anyone’s copyright.

      And Madam, what makes you think I have an insignificant presence? And why does it so inflame your passion that I might be using this as free publicity? Even if I am, are you jealous?

      And you’re calling me a respectable person too. In your comment.

      Padmaja, how can you humanly expect me to reply to you without getting personal when you’re so clearly attacking my person?

      It is also your problem that you didn’t leave your email last time – who cares anyway. To feel insulted by any of the negative opinions in the comments would mean that I would first actually have to value the people who made those negative comments. I don’t even KNOW those people!

      It’s all entertaining at best.

      And I am very very grateful to the people who RT’d the story and mentioned it on their blogs and Twitter streams and am even more grateful to the people, including you Padmaja, who have taken time to comment on this blog post. It gives a small glimpse of the opinions we hold with regards to the subject of the internet and copyright laws. It has also been insightful on how blogging and Twitter work – how a simple blog post about an incident can turn into a whole new story in itself and how the comments can veer so wildly away from what the blog post was about.

      P.S. Yes I moderate comments, it’s my fucking blog.

  41. Pad (Padmaja)

    Wow. You need to relax and take it easy. You sound so desperate and for no reason, you are taking it personally? Slow down a little.
    You are behaving as though the complaint made by Naina is against you :-). It is not. So just chill and maybe you should go and dance or go climb a tree. It can be relaxing for some. Just a thought from my side.
    More important, I did not say the analogy is perfect. It is clearly your interpretation for your personal gain, what it is I do not know, neither do I care 🙂
    I said that Naina did not mean any dis-respect with the analogy. You do not need to go overboard all over again, thereby very conveniently removing the attention from the discussion of using property belonging to another person without permission.
    Gosh! My praising Naina has you all worked up. Do I need your permission as to what qualities I can praise about Naina. I think not. You are taking it very personally 😀 Pray tell me why?
    Naina has allowed your comments. What does that tell you about Naina and what does that tell us all about you.
    Cheers and Keep Smiling, try it, it makes a difference

  42. Hi there Naina,
    Not only are you absolutely in the right. I also approve of your methods (whether you’ve thought it through carefully or not) of making your displeasure known.
    Network18 stole your work – if you actually sued them and tried to get satisfaction in court, it would all get quietly buried and you’d maybe get paid a paltry sum after much buggering around. This way, the ensuing publicity may just embarrass them enough to make an exemplary payment just to get you to shut up.
    Best of luck!
    DD

  43. Naina.

    My only wish is you stop clarifying your stand on this to these buggers. There’s no doubt who is at fault here – and I fully support you. Please go ahead with your other projects and do NOT waste time answering such stupid comments from people not in the know about copyright laws.

  44. @Padmaja…. Nice to see your point of view…

    How true it is Naina is getting all the Publicity.. question…. “What the heck is your problem with it??

    Naina’s Professionalism… bla bla bla…question… “Have you seen other entries made on this Blog”

    Naina’s Language…. Abusive/Sexual connotations…. question… “Why is it bothering you? Is it the Wall in your Living Room, where she is writing?”

    Naina’s is making Personal Attacks…question…. “What about Network 18’s Personal Attack at Naina’s Property?”

    Naina Courage…..Sue Network 18…..question….”Do you know Court Case = Long, time consuming + slap on the Hand and Public Humiliation = Life Long Shame + Lesson for Future?

    Naina’s Reference… RAPE…. question… “What do you have to say about the word Plagiarism?”

    Naina’s Free Publicity…. 15 minutes of FAME…. question….”Dont you think because of this Blog entry, so many people came to know about Network 18?”

    In conclusion…. Do not bother give me a speech or something…. I am not looking for a well articulated piece of work…. Give me ANSWERS to my questions to the POINT!!

  45. Naina,

    I respect your thoughts. But a food for thought.

    Was just checking some of your posts at facebook and this includes postings related to @Ustream NASA live (http://bit.ly/bZiCQd), @andyrutledge Francisco Inchauste (http://bit.ly/bepof7) etc. besides others. You have posted content of other websites at facebook (I guess without their permission) and this post contains thumbnail of pictures that are copyrighted by respective owners.

    Shouldn’t you stop doing this before asking In.com folks to do exactly similar stuff with your pictures.

    Anshul

    1. Anshul, it’s a very good question and pertains to the whole copyright discussion overall. I don’t claim to be an expert on copyright laws / plagiarism either.

      To answer you, on Facebook, what you see on my stream, links to other people’s content and images – which have been tweeted / posted on facebook by the owners themselves and in some cases, people have asked to RT them or re-publish them. They give permission. When someone RT’s my tweet / status update with links to my images, on Facebook, they have permission – because Facebook is a sharing platform – like my content appears on Google / Bing – so if you find a link to my content – it is only a link – and IN CONTEXT. If someone want to publish my content on their own website, they ask. This is very different from what happened with in.com. What I post on Facebook is not to increase hits / impressions on MY website. I could explain each status update to you – like Andy’s tweet that I RT’d that was pointing to Francisco’s website – where have I copied / plagiarized “All rights reserved” content? If I wanted to post images from Francisco’s images on my blog, I would ask and then, if allowed, would host the image on my server and link to Francisco’s image on his website – and I would also write where I got it from and it would probably be accompanied by good / bad critical evaluation and a piece of content saying why I chose to include his work on my blog. Not like what in.com did and still does – nothing on their website is their own – as it seems from the Bing API they use. It is not user-posted content – maybe I’m wrong on that count – I haven’t researched it.

      I post my All rights reserved images in my status updates all the time – that does not mean that people have permission to use that image on their websites. It implies permission to share the same tweet / link on their respective lifestreams.

      So two very different uses. In the case of in.com and in the case of what is done on Facebook.
      You could also look at what posterous.com and tumblr.com do – there is a lot of content aggregation going on there – but there is user permission – if you are a part of Tumblr / posterous then other users on the same platform can re-publish your content with a link back to the original posting. Again, different from the in.com story.

      I have no intentions of becoming a copyright lawyer so I do not know the details of which is perfectly right and which is perfectly wrong as a universal use-case. Copyright laws have many grey areas. I’m sure I could come up with some rules / privacy guidelines on Facebook that would either help make your case stronger or mine.

      Finally some good stuff in the comments.

    2. Sorry Anshul, I also forgot to mention the monetizing part. On Facebook, when I post / re-publish a status update / share a story, I am doing only that – sharing. I am not monetizing the page on which I share that content by posting ads – in.com does that. Takes my content, publishes it on their website and also monetizes that page with ads. Shouldn’t I be the one getting paid instead of in.com making money with the ads using my content?

  46. Hmmmmmmmmmmmm !!!
    I think everyone must have stolen the images from net, for their personal usage/benefit, who think “Its not wrong to use the images without photographer’s permission)
    😉
    And … The THIEVES have no right to comment on if its ethical or not and Its good or bad !!!
    Looser 😀

  47. I was reading some more comments that ppl have posted here – and am exasperated. “you should be glad someone is advertising your work” blah! “digital media is different” and what not. And you patiently are replying. Hmm. 🙂
    Of course we don’t know what copyright is, as a nation. We have pirated DVDs selling openly on the streets, or pirated/copied books to fake brands on any kind of products u can think of. Nokia? Nike? KFC? You name it, we have copied it. And we flaunt it.

    And you are cribbing about a photo? Hmm.

  48. ohh goshh ! stumbled upon here while checking out chori.in.
    i was initially surprised looking at the list of incidents listed there but after reading the comments here, i m speechless.
    Kudos to Naina for still keeping your patience and ONLY use rape analogies. Assholes deserved some direct abuses in HINDI for not reading enough before commenting on any subject and they were arguing !

    it was hilarious with a negative feeling. it is bocz of people like these, things get under the cover and never amplified as they come out with the expert opinions targeted towards shutting down things.

    worst is i always feel we have some REAL SCREWED up relationship with money. Like none of them had ANY understanding of CC license or reason of its origination or what actually is IP.
    We find it totally correct and pay for a bollywood flick which is not gonna teach us anything but if someone is doing a philosophical discourse on life, we [somehow obviously] expect it to be free. we never want NGOs to make money but we want them to work. and that is what all of them were applying here too.

    This and much more was created inside me while reading, btw wut happend to it afterwards?

  49. I am one big fan of Naina’s but Ashish Tulsian, well written comment to sum it up.

    For all those guys who are fighting against Naina’s case,(I can understand we steal it and say we support opensource) howmuch ever you steal, its not going to help. Financially the model doesnt work out, you might get few clicks but it wont return the efforts and your knowledge.

    If we add creativity to efforts and knowledge, and keep creating solutions for your business and your customers and try not aping others – thats when it becomes sustainable. I say this after copying many’s work and its just not sustainable. Especially beginners, dont end up being distant cousins of others by trying those aggregator model or copy-pasting things.

    Instead focus on a solution and build business around that can be called your OWN.

Comments are closed.