Indian Publishing Firm Can't Take A Little Criticism, Threatens Blogger With $1 Billion Lawsuit, Criminal Charges

from the how-not-to-make-a-threat dept

Fri, May 17th 2013 12:32pm — Mike Masnick

Here's a fun one via Popehat. Apparently an Indian publishing firm by the name of OMICS can't take some criticism from a blogger. The blogger, Jeffrey Beall, who is based in the US, has a blog called Scholarly Open Access (he's also a librarian at the University of Colorado, Denver) in which he reviews and critiques various open access programs. As we've discussed, open access is really important for the sharing of knowledge -- but not all open access programs are created equal. In fact, there are serious complaints about many of them. Beall had some choice words for some of OMICS practices, which he claimed involved spamming and bait-and-switch. For what it's worth, Beall is hardly the only one to question OMICS' tactics. The Chronicle of Higher Education discussed OMICS in an article about "predatory" open access journals. As The Chronicle explains:

In 2012, The Chronicle found that the group was listing 200 journals, but only about 60 percent had actually published anything.

OMICS' response to Beall is almost too incredible to be believed, but it threatened to sue Beall for $1 billion and seek criminal penalties as well. Yes, billion with a b -- so insert your Dr. Evil jokes here. Oh, if you're asking under what law?

In India, Section 66A of the Information Technology Act makes it illegal to use a computer to publish "any information that is grossly offensive or has menacing character" or to publish false information. The punishment can be as much as three years in prison.

As Ken White points out, the SPEECH Act clearly protects Beall from any ruling in India. We've been waiting for the first attempt to see that law used to protect someone from some insane foreign claim. If you don't recall, the SPEECH Act says that the US will not recognize foreign civil rulings over speech that would violate US law, such as the First Amendment.

Similarly, criminal charges would be meaningless, because any attempt at extradition to India would require dual criminality -- such that the acts would be criminal in both countries. That's clearly not true here (and it's debatable if they're actually criminal in either country).

Amazingly, when asked about this whole thing by The Chronicle of Higher Education, the lawyer representing OMICS, Ashok Ram Kumar, a lawyer with the firm IP Markets, appeared to double down on the threats and insist that he was "very serious" (TM), though various lawyers are a bit more skeptical of that.

"What he has written is something highly inappropriate," Mr. Kumar said. "He should not have done something like this. He has committed a criminal offense."

While Mr. Kumar said he and his client are "very serious" about the $1-billion amount, Jonathan Bloom, a lawyer with Weil, Gotshal & Manges, in New York, said it seemed more like a publicity stunt. "Sometimes people just want to puff their chests, indicate their reputation, and try to intimidate people that criticize them," Mr. Bloom said.

One thing that is clear, however, is that any company that would send out such a ridiculous threat over a blog criticism isn't a company worth trusting. Whether or not they spam and engage in bait and switch or other predatory practices, we do know with certainty that they send out insane legal threats. That's enough information necessary to decide that OMICS is not a company worth supporting.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: ashok ram kumar, india, jeffrey beall, open access, scholarly open access, speech act, threats
Companies: omics

19 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Coward, 17 May 2013 @ 12:39pm

because a million is so 1966 >.>
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 19 May 2013 @ 1:08am
  
  Re:
  I'm just waiting for the inevitable $1 bazillion lawsuits.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 17 May 2013 @ 12:52pm

"He has committed a criminal offense."
Let's all get some frickin sharks with some lazer beams and hold everyone in the world who says something we don't like ransom for $1 Billion dollars!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it

out_of_the_blue, 17 May 2013 @ 12:54pm

Template hit! Anomaly, lawsuit, won't ever affect anyone else.
Mike loves the trivial crap. I don't.

So here's a far better topic that DOES affect everyone:

Congress: It's not the Glass that's scary - It's the GOOGLE

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/05/17/google_glass_privacy/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 17 May 2013 @ 1:07pm
  
  Re: Template hit! Anomaly, lawsuit, won't ever affect anyone else.
  I wouldn't be at all surprised that you are wanting for Mike to sue you for $1 billion dollars for your comments. lol
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 17 May 2013 @ 1:54pm
  
  Re: Template hit! Anomaly, lawsuit, won't ever affect anyone else.
  I found the article interesting. I find you annoying. But all in all, I trust congress less then Google lately.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Jules, 17 May 2013 @ 6:52pm
  
  Re: Template hit! Anomaly, lawsuit, won't ever affect anyone else.
  You love to comment on every move of the writer, even when he comments on stuff "too trivial" for you. You are the saddest troll I have ever seen anywhere.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- DP, 18 May 2013 @ 12:01pm
  
  Re: Template hit! Anomaly, lawsuit, won't ever affect anyone else.
  If OOTB doesn't like the "trivial crap", the answer is very simple. He doesn't have to read it. In fact, the best thing he can do is to never read anything else again - ever! We would not then have to put up with his inane (substitute "insane" perhaps?) and totally ineffectual comments. It's about time he crawled back into whatever hole he emerged from on the first place, never to be heard of again (hopefully). I can only conclude that he must get some sort of twisted masochistic pleasure by being reported so many times and being slagged off by all and sundry.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - That One Guy (profile), 18 May 2013 @ 4:29pm
    
    Re: Re: Template hit! Anomaly, lawsuit, won't ever affect anyone else.
    You're assuming he reads the articles in the first place, which I'm fairly sure he doesn't do, as it would 'waste' the time he could spend ranting about the articles, the site, Mike, the color of grass, or whatever has his attention at the moment.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 18 May 2013 @ 11:37pm
  
  Re: Template hit! Anomaly, lawsuit, won't ever affect anyone else.
  And yet here you are, obsessing as usual.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- The Groove Tiger (profile), 18 May 2013 @ 11:42pm
  
  Re: Template hit! Anomaly, lawsuit, won't ever affect anyone else.
  Oh lawks, that was covered here yesterday.
  
  http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130516/15583223111/congress-grandstanding-over-goog le-glass-privacy-concerns-next-up-privacy-concerns-over-your-eyes.shtml
  
  As usual, out_of_the_blue is out_of_the_loop.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
madasahatter (profile), 17 May 2013 @ 2:51pm

Streisand Effect
Do shyster Kumar and OMICS know about the Streisand Effect? I never heard of either OMICS or Scholarly Open Access until recently becuase of shyster Kumar.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Nimas, 17 May 2013 @ 3:35pm

Just once I'd like to see the report
Go something like this:

"While Mr. Kumar said he and his client are "very serious" about the $1-billion amount, Jonathan Bloom, a lawyer with Weil, Gotshal & Manges, in New York, said "HAHAHAHAHAHAH, hahah, hah, oh wow, that's a good one. Oh wait, they're actually serious...heh...ok. Mr Kumar....no, just no."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
nasch (profile), 19 May 2013 @ 1:53pm

Order 66
In India, Section 66A of the Information Technology Act makes it illegal to use a computer to publish "any information that is grossly offensive or has menacing character" or to publish false information.

"Execute Order 66."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Niall (profile), 20 May 2013 @ 6:37am
  
  Re: Order 66
  So if you type your Zip/Post code wrong, or mis-spell a name, you're a criminal? Excellent!
  
  Now, just look for politicians publishing 'false' information...
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Jeanne A. Pawitan (profile), 18 Jan 2014 @ 5:13am

web war is better than lawsuit
In my opinion, a lawsuit won't work.
About Mr Beall's list, some parts are true, as there are many predatory journals, but there are also a lot that do not deserve to be in his list.
Mr Beall disseminated his list via website, so, publishers that feel inappropriately judged by Mr beall should counter-attack via web site also.

I tried to paste websites like this into Mr beall's website, but unfortunately they are removed, instead of defending himself. This make me think that all this counter-webs contain true information, and Mr Beall does not want that the whole world know about his crime.

Therefore, in my opinion, publishers that feel unfairly judged by Mr. Beall, can publish bad facts about Mr Beall in websites. Doing website-war will be more fruitful than a lawsuit.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Jeanne A. Pawitan (profile), 18 Jan 2014 @ 5:20am

websites contra Mr Beall
These are the websites that discredited Mr Beall:

http://fakeconferences.blogspot.com/2013/11/prof-nicola-bellomo-sent-us-this-email.html
http:// iaria-highsci.blogspot.com/
http://bogus-conferences.blogspot.com/2012/12/have-you-hear-about-jeffrey -bealls-big.html
http://jeffreybeallbogus.wordpress.com/2013/11/13/jeffreybeallbogus/#comments
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- H Wallbanger, 27 Aug 2014 @ 4:12pm
  
  Re: websites contra Mr Beall
  This is funny. The writing in the contra sites about Jeffrey Beall are all on free spaces, are written in poor grammar Indian English and have only a couple entries each. The comments on the articles are written in even worse Indian English and basically consist of "this article is the bestest everrrrr"
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
editor, 6 Jan 2015 @ 10:57am

Jeffrey is not dare enough to add publishers like hindawi, Elseiver etc on his list. He is not even brave enough to look at them simply because they are subscribed and seemingly he can not pay for each paper to read and find out what the problem is, let alone to write a post about them and add them on his list. In case if he does, he may not see the next sunrise. Or he may even forget his own name in less than 24 hours. He is indeed a timid Mafia who approaches only publishers and journals which are running from the third world countries or runned by people from those countries. In many of his posts,authors, publishers, and editors from developing countries have been offended drastically and their talent and capabilities, and confidence have been killed and belittled by Jeffery beall. In contrast, people who only put values and try to spread out his list are from those counties. They think that Jeffery is the descended in America and he is a holy prophet whose mission is to guide and tell people what they need to know and what they don’t. Poor them and we are sorry for those who obey him blindly. Whoever he is, people in the US, UK, Europe, Asia, middle east believe that Jeffery is not connected to scholarly work, but ruins the scholarly world. His harsh posts and illogical comments are like an online virus that aims to affect every academician. if you are an author, you could judge if a journal is valid and is worthwhile to publish or not. Don’t let people like Jeffery to influence your decision and change your mind because whatever he does is biased and in fact they are his “personal opinions” [disclaimer tab]. It is a fact that the publishers and journals are not evaluated by an expert team. How an earth do you expect people to take your blog serious, jeffery? who are you? Who has given that power to you? Are you linked to any authority or any well established organization? Although he has developed a criteria to assess journals and publisher, but we believe his criteria is predatory and vanity as he has robbed the constructs from here and there. Hence, it is strongly suggested to avoid taking beall’s comment. list, etc serious.
Note: our discussion and argumentation does not target Misleading metrics companies and Hijacked journals.
More info can be found in this link https://library.ryerson.ca/services/faculty/scholarly-communication/evaluating-open-access-journals/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]