Log has written
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 24, 2009

During her lengthy campaign, Sachar was told, by way of tenuous justification, that newspapers often used “free” Internet photos. It reinforces a common misconception that content on amateur blogs and Flickr is devoid of copyright protection, a misconception that Muralidaran is fighting to shatter.

Muralidaran, a software engineer in Chennai, has had his photos plagiarized twice, by a Tamil media house and then by a Hyderabad city portal.

In both cases, he doggedly pursued the matter until he became one of the very few complainants to extract a legal admission and levy a retroactive charge, known as a licence correction fee. (Under the terms of those agreements, Muralidaran cannot name the two media companies.)

“Publications cite fair use, but that only applies if they really have no other alternative, which is not true here,” Muralidaran says. “Even a lot of Creative Commons-protected content can only be used in non-commercial work. A newspaper is not non-commercial.”

Another misconception, held even by Muralidaran, is that soft copies fall outside the ambit of Indian copyright law.

“That isn’t true at all,” says Saikrishna Rajagopal, managing partner of law firm Saikrishna and Associates. “The Indian Copyright Act prohibits reproducing work in any material form, and that includes electronic form.”

Publications continue to steal images, Rajagopal says, because they get away with it. “They think nobody will take action,” he says. “If you can create a disincentive to infringement, so that if you’re caught, you’re made to cough up a substantial sum of money, then they’ll think twice.” (Saikrishna and Associates is outside counsel for HT Media on unrelated ongoing legal matters.)

But until courts are willing to award daunting damages in such lawsuits, and process them faster and smoother, Muralidaran’s brand of aggressive bluster may have to work instead.

“I called the publication and threatened to sell my equipment to bribe the police, have their offices sealed and their hard drives confiscated for cyber crime, then sue under Section 420 for fraud and also for sexual harassment,” he says. “That’s when they finally realised that I wasn’t going away.”

samanth.s@livemint.com

READ MORE ARTICLES BY:
 
dustin Said:


Hi, I was the staff writer for Simplifly magazine and can guarantee that it one year on the job we have never lifted, plagiarised pictures or failed to pay photographers. I request the writer to please produce evidence of such plagiarism in our magazine before making random and fallacious accusations. I could as easily say that Mint lifts copy from Wikipedia.

Posted On 10/10/2008 2:51:54 PM
Re: Mridula Said:


For Simplifly please look at the content page of your February 2008 issue. There is a correction about a photograph that was credited to someone whereas it was originally from a blog.

Posted On 10/21/2008 10:31:33 PM
R Said:


Yes yes ... its a big problem :o) http://nitawriter.wordpress.com/2008/05/30/a-major-indian-newspaper-steals-a-bloggers-photograph/

Posted On 10/12/2008 4:22:31 PM
Ravi Said:


Why dont these people buy stock photographs instead of cheaply copying them. http://www.dreamstime.com/res859183

Posted On 10/13/2008 5:09:11 PM
Elijah Said:


Truly amazing! this is absolutely fantastic and very interesting!! Escoofield- http://alotofit.com Have Fun!

Posted On 10/14/2008 2:27:24 PM