|
Part
39, Issue # 98 - January 9, 2003
The Organizing Secretary of INPEX 02 & Secretary of the Philatelic Congress of India, B K Sinha has responded to 'Latest on INPEX 02' in issue # 97 of December 26, 2002 his response is given below:
"I am forwarding the email message I had sent out in reply to the India Post letter. There were not 3 points to be complied with - but six.
There were three points we could never comply to (meaning: all points not complied and hence no frames). My reply to the DoP is self explanatory and in no way "jeopardizing the future of philately in India for petty immediate personal gains."
The objections we could not comply with were:
a. Conducting the Pigeon Flight (we still in the dark how they are remotely connected to this).
b. The logo has the similarity of a stamp which was used without their permission (we believe that the Department has a notion that they have a copyright on all the stamps - presuming they do so, the design is not identical but similar, and hence does not violate any law. Did they seek the permission from the people of Orissa when they used the picture of the Konark Horse....we feel the DoP would now ask the catalogue publishers Gibbons, Scott, etal, not to use their stamp images).
c. They indicated it was a criminal offense for publicising images of fake postage stamps (we had very clearly mentioned that the images were artworks of PROPOSED STAMPS - whether they intend issuing them is another matter).
If you still feel I have erred in my opinion on this matter, I shall publicly tender my apologies if I have a proper reasoning from your end."
We are not carrying the letter he is supposed to have e-mailed to India Post on December 26, 2002, as it is India Post's prerogative to respond to that.
Sinha's has done his best to confuse the matter further instead of tendering an apology, not necessarily public, but to India Post.
We believe that persons controlling PCI, by glossing over Orissa Philatelic Association's shortcomings in organizing earlier national, MILLEPEX 2000 in the name of the super-cyclone, have emboldened and encouraged Sinha & Company to repeat similar activities.
There were 6 points in India Post's letter of December 13, 2002, concerning the official website of INPEX 02. However the compliance desired by India Post was summed up in three points where the first point itself covered all the 6 points relating to the official website of INPEX 02 and as we see it is not complied with completely. The second point in the compliance desired was about printed material where nothing has been done. The third point was regarding the posters and banners of INPEX 02.
Sinha and Sahoo have been involved in organizing several "Pigeon Post" in Orissa at various occasions mainly the state level philatelic exhibitions. Therefore it is very strange when Sinha feigns ignorance about the role of post office in creating philatelic souvenirs - Pigeonogrammes in this case.
And it definitely is not our job to educate them on legal matters such as Copyright; we had once tried to explain the Antiquities Act to him but to no avail.
We disagree that they had "very clearly" mentioned that the images were artworks of proposed stamps as it was not the case. When was Sinha expected to know as the Organizing Secretary of INPEX 02 and the designer of those stamps "whether they intend issuing them"? Not even eleven days before their release?
The truth is that the namedropping is their way of working. India Post told them in May 2002 that they are not supporting this exhibition but Sinha & company till the evening of December 13, 2002 not only claimed India Post's patronage but also kept on flaunting their name at many junctures. Somehow Sinha has to figure out for himself that the number of exhibitors, dealers, sponsors, and advertisers would not have been a miniscule fraction if it were publicly known that neither India Post nor Orissa Tourism is involved with INPEX 02.
|