Popular social media storytelling organisation Humans of Bombay (HoB) has found itself in a soup after the founder of Humans of New York (HoNY) Brandon Stanton, called them out for the alleged appropriation of his work. The controversy started with HoB filing a suit against a similar storytelling page People of India (PoI), alleging copyright infringement. The Delhi High Court has issued summons to PoI, who allegedly used photographs and stories that were identical to or imitative of HoB’s works.
Ever since Brandon posted his reaction, social media has been abuzz with posts directed at HoB, pointing that they did not give proper credit to HoNY. Here is all you need to know about the controversy.
Humans of New York was started in 2010 by Brandon Stanton. According to their website, it was started as a “project to photograph 10,000 New Yorkers on the street and create an exhaustive catalogue of the city’s inhabitants". Later, the blog started to carry quotes and short stories and expanded their work to 12 other countries — Pakistan, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, DR Congo, South Sudan, Kenya, Ukraine, India, Vietnam, Mexico, and Jerusalem. They also carry several story series, including ones on American war veterans and Syrian refugees in Greece, Hungary, Croatia, and Austria.
Humans of Bombay, started as a Facebook page in 2014 by Karishma Mehta, tells the stories of Mumbai-residents. Their website states that the intention of the page is “to connect strangers” and “to listen” to people’s stories. It also says that HoB is now a community with 3.2 million people and has by now told 6,000 stories.
People of India was founded by Drishti Saxena and operates primarily on Instagram, but also has pages on Twitter and Facebook. While their Facebook and Instagram pages were started in 2019, PoI’s Twitter account was made in September 2023. The platform publishes short video stories about people from different walks of life.
HoB filed a petition at the Delhi High Court seeking to pass an order restraining PoI from infringing their copyright, including the use of their literary works, materials, films, and creative expressions. HoB stated that they engage in “substantial research”, approach people interested in telling their stories, and present them in an audiovisual format.
They alleged that PoI started an “identical portal/service having identical content”, and that they have “replicated a large number of images and videos” from their platform. HoB also said that PoI was approaching the same subjects who were shown on the HoB website in order to create an “imitative platform”. They further submitted a set of screenshots to substantiate their allegations.
On September 18, Justice Prathiba M Singh, after hearing advocates Abhishek Malhotra, Shilpa Gamnani, and Ishita Goel who appeared for HoB, said that the images “prima facie” showed that there was “substantial imitation and in fact, in some cases, the photographs/images are identical or imitative”. The court also issued a notice to PoI, asking them to submit a written statement in the matter, along with an affidavit of admission or denial of the allegations. The case has been posted for hearing on October 11.
Following the case, several legal news portals carried articles about it. Responding to one of these, on September 20, Brandon stated that he remained silent “on the appropriation” of his work because HoB did “important stories”, and that they cannot be suing another person for doing the same. “I've stayed quiet on the appropriation of my work because I think [HoB] shares important stories, even if they've monetized far past anything I'd feel comfortable doing on [HoNY]. But you can't be suing people for what I've forgiven you for. I’ve always loved [Humans of Amsterdam] because Debra has stayed so true to the art, and has never viewed the stories that she shares as the “front end” of a business,” he said.
Soon after this, several social media users started sharing video clips of Karishma Mehta talking about how she “stumbled” upon the idea of HoB. It is a video from a Tedx Talk she gave five years ago, where she said, “Out of the blue, I stumbled upon the idea of Humans of Bombay and I started it and it clicked." She also said that there was a lot of “sacrifice” behind the platform as it could not be monetised in the first three years, during which time she was financially dependent on her family. Their online store also states that she started HoB “on a whim”.
On September 23, HoB expressed shock at Brandon’s “cryptic assault” on their efforts to protect their “intellectual property”, “without understanding the background of the case”. Their statement read, “As with the hundreds of Humans of chapters around the world, we love and understand the power of storytelling. It's therefore shocking that a cryptic assault on our efforts to protect our intellectual property is made in this manner, especially without understanding the background of the case. Perhaps, before jumping the gun on this matter, you ought to have equipped yourself with information about the case and also about what HoB is trying to achieve. HoB is all for the power of storytelling. But it should be done honestly and ethically.” The statement also said that they had emailed Brandon requesting a conversation to provide further details. “We believe in the honourable court of India and will request patience for the law to take its course after hearing all facts of the matter,” they said.