Ecoport’s bad game is on even in the International Year of Biodiversity

Ecoport’s bad game is on even in the International Year of Biodiversity.

Pankaj Oudhia

Few weeks back I was searching “Ecoport.org” in Google image. Suddenly I found an image of Sida alba. It was in site on Dogon Language dogonlanguages.org/flora_fauna/flora_fauna.cfm. I checked the site and found that someone has added this Ecoport picture by acknowledging the source but not image contributor. I contributed this image to Ecoport. Please see the link for image.

http://ecoport.org/ep?SearchType=pdb&PdbID=55022



I sent warning message to the addresses given in the site. Even after many days neither the academic thief nor the promoters of thief i.e. Ecoport took any action. This academic cheating is still visible through Google.

When I started “Protest Against Ecoport” I made it clear that why Ecoport is not interested in allowing search engines to the database. They want to keep my contributions behind the walls and then distribute in such way so that I can never get information about such thefts. This is one example but I have tens of examples when my Ecoport contributions have been used in this wrong way.

It seems that PROTA is closely associated with Ecoport. My many pictures are on PROTA base. I contributed it to Ecoport. Please see this link for record Boerhaavia diffusa.

http://database.prota.org/PROTAhtml/Boerhavia%20diffusa_En.htm


PROTA used this image without informing me. I know it is not required as per Ecoport rules but still it is required for the sake of readers. I took picture from local herb shop claiming it as roots of Boerhaavia diffusa. I uploaded it to Ecoport and ask for true identification from the experts. Many of them confirmed that it is genuine root. Due to Ecoport policy of keeping information behind the wall I stopped contributions many years back. Very recently I verified the picture again and I found that it is not root of Boerhaavia. There is need to change the caption in Ecoport but Ecoport as barred me to make any correction in my own contributions. I have no way. Through this PROTA record wrong information is reaching to millions of readers. Therefore, through this writing I would like to request the users of Ecoport contributions to verify it through the contributor and take updates.
[After informing about this Error to PROTA. They have corrected it immediately and assured to take special precaution while using Ecoport pictures in future. But this picture with wrong caption is still visible in Ecoport.]

There are hundreds of pictures in Ecoport needing correction and improved captions but I am not able to correct it in Ecoport. Ecoport owners thought that they have extracted every thing from me and now its time to earn from it. This is the reason they are giving my contributors to everyone as these are their own property. When I raised voice against this exploitation the Ecoport Supervisor used bad languages against me and barred me using the Ecoport.

As last resort I am uploading over 34,000 pictures in pankajoudhia.com with correct captions. I have to repeat the work of many years only due to business policy of Ecoport. The United Nations has declared year 2010 as International Year of Biodiversity. I feel that in this year besides all routine work there is need to expose the database like Ecoport engaged in fraud activities.

[Earlier the title of this article was “FAO sponsored Ecoport’s bad game is on even in the International Year of Biodiversity.” I sent it to Mr. Rohan Putter of Ecoport for comments. I received no reply from him but a mail from “Jan Breithaupt” saying
“I am also an FAO plant protection staff member based in East Africa – From some of the recent postings of yours, it became apparent that there are clear misunderstandings from your side concerning FAO and EcoPort and what ‘EcoPort’ is!
- EcoPort is NOT an FAO sponsored enterprise! But I know of many FAO individuals that are EcoPort contributors and also do contribute under FAO-banner.”


This message indicates that Rohan has forwarded my mail to him and he replied my letter. I deleted the words “FAO sponsored” from the title of this article but I am aware Ecoport is sponsored by FAO atleast in front page of Ecoport.org the name of FAO is present as sponsor.

I replied to Jan through this message.

“Thanks Jan for your message. Lets not make our relations bitter by discussion
on Ecoport. It seems that you are not aware of issues raised by me.

The father and son running Ecoport know well the issues raised by me. Also
thousands of readers reading me since year 1990 are aware of these issues. The
father and son are not ready to answer my questions because they have no
answer for it. They have used Ecoport for their personal gain.

Hopefully you know it that I have contributed over 33,000 images and other
research documents to Ecoport. I have invested every thing from my pocket for
it. And then the Ecoport supervisor dares to say that I am Ignorant fool. When
I showed the translated version of supervisor's letter to my people living in
forest and my readers they simply asked for unconditional apology for this
abuse.

Jan right know I am engaged in documentation of over 35,000 cancer
formulations. About 260 formulations are online through pankajoudhia.com. I
feel that I must give priority to this work instead of dealing with Devils
like Ecoport supervisor. God is there to punish such persons.

Give me few months, you will find my Ecoport contributions less than the post
Ecoport contributions.

This is my way of challenging fraud.

(Thanks for answering on behalf of Rohan. I am publishing your letter and my
this answer with the article sent to Rohan.)

regards

Pankaj Oudhia”