Naughty, naughty, naughty
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Sach Kohli <[email id snipped]>
Date: 30-Jun-2005 19:36
To: Jaideep Bose <[email id snipped]>
Dear Editor,
I wish to report a striking similarity between three articles that
appeared in Monday's and Tuesday editions of Bombay Times, and those
that appeared in the June 2005 issue of the US edition of Cosmopolitan
magazine.
Monday, June 27
BT: page 6, titled "Give yourself a Break", Gif Attachment:
BT_GiveYourselfABreak.GIF
US Cosmopolitan June Edition 2005: page 179, titled "Give Yourself a
Break", attached file COSMO_giveyourselfabreak.jpg
Tuesday, June 28
BT: page 6, titled "10 Clues He'll be Bad in Bed", GIF Attachment:
BT_10CluesHe'llBeBadInBed.GIF
US Cosmopolitan June Edition 2005: page 203, titled "10 Clues He'll be
Bad in Bed", attached file COSMO_10clueshe'llsuckinbed.jpg
and
BT: page 6, titled "Tap into his Guy Mind-set", GIF Attachment:
BT_TapIntoHisGuyMind-Set.GIF
US Cosmopolitan June Edition 2005: page 238, titled "Tap into his Guy
Mind-set", attached file COSMO_tapintohisguy.jpg
Note: the Cosmo pictures were scanned from a personal copy of the June
2005, US Edition. The Bombay Times pictures were grabbed from your
epaper (epaper.indiatimes.com) service.
Nobody has paid me to do this, nor am I doing this out of any malice.
I'm just a regular reader of the Times. However, the fact that I could
detect three cases of blatant plagiarism in your paper merely out of
buying a single copy of the June 2005 Cosmopolitan issue points to a
rot that a much deeper rot! I can understand that the Bennett
management may not care for the 'editorial integrity' of Bombay Times.
But, when in the period of two days, your esteemed paper blatantly
lifts at least three articles, with their layouts, out of a single
issue of Cosmopolitan US, with minor changes in copy [...]
it simply reeks of lazy incompetence. If this is the regular deal, I
wonder if Bennett Coleman appreciates the legal implications of this
practice??
Yours,
A regular reader, Sach