We are anonymous, we are legion

November 2012 Bulletin

praskrishna — 2013-01-06T13:59:11Z

Welcome to the newsletter of November 2012 from the Centre for Internet & Society (CIS). The present issue features an analysis of Section 66A of the IT Act by Pranesh Prakash, comments on the draft Science, Technology and Innovation Policy, an introduction to 12 mobile devices that we are researching as part of the Pervasive Technologies project, submissions of civil society in relation to the revision of International Telecommunication Regulations that are to take place at the ITU's World Conference on International Telecommunications in Dubai, updates from the Wikipedia community on Indic languages, and news and media coverage.

Jobs

CIS is seeking applications for the posts of Research Manager and Programme Officer – Internet Governance. To apply send your resume to sunil@cis-india.org.

Accessibility
India has an estimated 70 million disabled persons who are unable to read printed materials due to some form of physical, sensory, cognitive or other disability. The disabled need accessible content, devices and interfaces facilitated via copyright law and electronic accessibility policies:
Blog Entry Human Machine Interfaces: The History of an Uncertain Future (by Sharath Chandra Ram, November 30, 2012).
Event Participated Workshop on Making ICT and Mobile Phones Accessible for Persons with Disabilities in Nepal (organised by ITU, November 9, 2012). Nirmita Narasimhan was a speaker in the session "Introduction: ICT and Telecom Accessibility, Good Practices in Policy and Industry Initiatives".
Access to Knowledge
The Access to Knowledge programme addresses the harms caused to consumers, developing countries, human rights, and creativity/innovation from excessive regimes of copyright, patents, and other such monopolistic rights over knowledge:
WIPO Transcripts We are providing archival copies of the transcripts of the 25th session of the WIPO Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights held in Geneva from November 19 to 23, 2012: WIPO SCCR 25 Day 1, November 19, 2012 WIPO SCCR 25 Day 2, November 20, 2012 WIPO SCCR 25 Day 3, November 21, 2012 WIPO SCCR 25 Day 4, November 22, 2012 WIPO SCCR 25 Day 5, November 23, 2012
Comments Comments on the Broadcast Treaty and Exceptions and Limitations for Libraries and Archives (by Smitha Krishna Prasad, November 29, 2012). Comments on the Science, Technology and Innovation Policy (Draft) (by Snehashish Ghosh, submitted to the Ministry of Science and Technology, November 26, 2012).
Pervasive Technologies: Access to Knowledge in the Marketplace As a part of the Pervasive Technologies: Access to Knowledge in the Marketplace research project, CIS is researching upon 12 gray-market mobile devices to generate a better understanding of the intellectual property implications of the pervasive mobile technologies available in the Indian market: Workshop Report Exploring the Internals of Mobile Devices — Report from a One-day Workshop at TERI (by Jadine Lannon, November 30, 2012).
Blog Entries ICOMM2012: International Communications and Electronics Fair (by Jadine Lannon, November 14, 2012). Pervasive Mobile Technologies: Meet Our Mobile Devices! (by Jadine Lannon, November 30, 2012).
Upcoming Event 2012 Global Congress on Intellectual Property and the Public Interest (FGV Law School, Rio De Janeiro, Brazil, December 15 – 17, 2012).
Openness The 'Openness' programme critically examines alternatives to existing regimes of intellectual property rights, and transparency and accountability. Under this programme, we study Open Government Data, Open Access to Scholarly Literature, Open Access to Law, Open Content, Open Standards, and Free/Libre/Open Source Software:
Event Organised Autonomy, Access, Infrastructure and Future — A Discussion with C S Lakshmi (CIS, Bangalore, November 29, 2012). A video of the event is published. Art in the Open Source Age — A Talk by Gene Kogan (CIS, Bangalore, November 30, 2012).
Blog Entry Open Government Platform (by Neeta Verma, Alka Mishra and D.P. Mishra, Informatics Magazine, July 2012).
Event Participated Science Gallery Workshop @ Srishti (organised by Srishti School of Art, Design and Technology and Science Gallery at Trinity College Dublin, Srishti School of Art Design and Technology (N2 campus), Bangalore, November 23, 2012). Sunil Abraham participated in this event.
Access to Knowledge Programme Beginning from September 1, 2012, Wikimedia Foundation has awarded CIS a two-year grant of INR 26,000,000 to support and develop free knowledge in India. The A2K team consists of three members based in Delhi: Nitika Tandon, Subhashish Panigrahi and Noopur Raval. Program Manager, Shiju Alex left the organisation. November 16, 2012 was his last working day.
Events Organised Kolkata: Tasting the Sweetness of Wikipedia! (Kolkata, November 3, 2012). First Odia Wikipedia Education Program (Indian Institute of Mass Communication, Dhenkanal, November 8, 2012). Odia Wikipedia Workshop at AML (Academy of Media Learning, Bhubaneswar, November 10, 2012). A Wikipedia Mini-hackathon in Delhi (CIS, New Delhi, November 11, 2012). Wikipedia: State of Tech — A Talk by Erik Moeller (CIS, Bangalore, November 12, 2012). An Odia Wikipedia Workshop at KMBB (KMBB College, Bhubaneswar, November 19, 2012). Follow up to Wikipedia Introductory Session (Bharati Vidyapeeth, Delhi, November 19, 2012).
Events Participated Wikipedia Hackathon (organised by BITS, Hyderabad, October 25 – 27, 2012). Wikipedia Women's Workshop in Mumbai (by Noopur Raval, Vidyalankar Institute of Technology, Wadala, Mumbai, November 4, 2012).
News and Media Coverage ‘Some Indian laws could be challenging’ (Bangalore Mirror, November 15, 2012). A Report of the Odia Wikipedia Workshop held in KMBB College of Engineering, Bhubaneswar (Sambad, November 19, 2012). OdishaDiary conferred prestigious Odisha Youth Inspiration Award 2012 to Odia Wikipedia team (Orissa Diary, November 23, 2012). વિકિપીડિયા ગુજરાતી માં પણ છે (by Harish Kothari, Cybersafar, November 28, 2012).
Blog Entry Typing in Indic Languages from Mobiles made Easy! (by Subhashish Panigrahi, November 19, 2012).
HasGeek HasGeek creates discussion spaces for geeks and has organised conferences like the Fifth Elephant, Droidcon India 2011, Android Camp, etc. HasGeek is supported by CIS and works out from CIS office in Bengaluru. The following event was organised by HasGeek in the month of November: Droidcon India (November 2 and 3, 2012, MLR Convention Centre, Whitefield, Bangalore).
Internet Governance The Internet Governance programme conducts research around the various social, technical, and political underpinnings of global and national Internet governance, and includes online privacy, freedom of speech, and Internet governance mechanisms and processes:
Analysis of IT Act Breaking Down Section 66A of the IT Act (by Pranesh Prakash, November 25, 2012). Fixing India’s anarchic IT Act (by Pranesh Prakash, Livemint, November 28, 2012). Draft nonsense (by Pranesh Prakash, The Times of India, November 24, 2012).
Analysis of Justice AP Shah Report Q&A to the Report of the Group of Experts on Privacy (by Elonnai Hickok, November 9, 2012).
Comments / Submissions to ITU Statement of Civil Society Members in the "Best Bits" pre-IGF Meeting. CIS was one of the signatories of this submission made to the ITU. Submission on India's Draft Comments on Proposed Changes to the ITU's ITRs. CIS was one of the signatories along with Society for Knowledge Commons, Delhi Science Forum, Free Software Movement of India, Internet Democracy Project and Media for Change. Submission by Indian Civil Society Organisations on Future ITRs and Related Processes. CIS was one of the signatories of this submission in response to ITU’s call for public comments. Indian Government's Submission to ITU: We have put up the text of the submission made by the Government of India to the World Conference of International Telecommunications, Dubai on November 3, 2012.
Event Participated India Internet Governance Conference (organised by the Ministry of Communications & Information Technology, FICCI and Internet Society, October 4 -5, 2012). Pranesh Prakash made a presentation. CIS was one of the supporting organisations.
Blog Entries Arbitrary Arrests for Comment on Bal Thackeray's Death (by Pranesh Prakash, November 19, 2012). This was re-posted in Outlook (November 19, 2012), KAFILA (November 19, 2012), and Shail's Nest (November 20, 2012). DoT Blocks Domain Sites — But Reasons and Authority Unclear (by Smitha Krishna Prasad, November 21, 2012).
Upcoming Events Technology Culture and Events in South East Asia — A Presentation by Preetam Rai(CIS, Bangalore, Near Domlur Club and TERI Complex, December 18, 2012, 5.00 p.m. to 6.30 p.m.). DML Conference 2013 (Sheraton Chicago Hotel & Towers - Chicago, Illinois, March 14 – 16, 2012).
Internet Governance Forum Pranesh Prakash, Chinmayi Arun, Malavika Jayaram and Elonnai Hickok participated in the Internet Governance Forum held in Baku, Azerbaijan in the month of November 2012. In total, CIS spoke in 12 panels: Best Bits 2012 (organised by Best Bits, Baku, Azerbaijan November 3 and 4, 2012). Pranesh Prakash and Elonnai Hickok participated in this event. The Privatisation of Censorship: The Online Responsibility to Protect Free Expression (organized by Index on Censorship, Baku, Azerbaijan, November 5, 2012). Pranesh Prakash was a panelist. New Trends in Industry Self-Governance (organised by Oxford Internet Institute, University of Oxford, UK and Media Change & Innovation Division, IPMZ, University of Zurich, Switzerland and Nominet, UK, Baku, Azerbaijan, November 7, 2012 from 4.30 p.m. to 6.00 p.m). Pranesh Prakash was a panelist. Civil Rights in the Digital Age, about the Impact the Internet has on Civil Rights (organised by ECP on behalf of the IGF-NL, Baku, Azerbaijan, November 7, 2012, 4.30 p.m. to 6.00 p.m.). Malavika Jayaram was a panelist. Solutions for Enabling Cross-border Data Flows (co-organised by ICC BASIS and the Internet Society, Baku, Azerbaijan, November 7, 2012). Cloudy Jurisdiction: Addressing the thirst for Cloud Data in Domestic Legeal Processes (co-organised by Electronic Frontier Foundation (Peru) and University of Ottawa, Baku, Azerbaijan, November 7, 2012). What Frameworks for Cross-Border Online Communities and Services (hosted by the Internet & Jurisdiction Project, Baku, Azerbaijan, November 8, 2012). Chinmayi Arun was a panelist. Governing Identity on the Internet (co-organised by Brenden Kuerbis, Citizen Lab and Christine Runnegar, Internet Society, Baku, Azerbaijan, November 8, 2012, 11.00 a.m. to 12.30 p.m.). Malavika Jayaram was a panelist. Law Enforcement via Domain Names: Caveats to DNS Neutrality (organised by Hong Xue, Vivekanandan, Wei Mao and Leo Liu, Baku, Azerbaijan, November 8, 2012). Chinmayi Arun was a panelist. Who is Following Me: Tracking the Trackers (organised by Internet Society and the Council of Europe, Baku, Azerbaijan, November 8, 2012). Malavika Jayaram was a speaker at this event. National IG Mechanisms – Looking at Some Key Design Issues (Baku, Azerbaijan, November 8, 2012). Pranesh Prakash was a panelist. Steady Steps.....FOSS and the MDG's (organised by International Center For Free and Open Source Software and Free Software and Open Source Foundation for Africa, Baku, Azerbaijan, November 8, 2012). Pranesh Prakash was a panelist.
Event Participated Privacy in the Social Networked World (hosted by the Centre for Business Information Ethics, Meiji University, Tokyo, Japan, on behalf of the Asian Privacy Scholars Network, November 19 – 20, 2012). Elonnai Hickok spoke on Transparency and Privacy in India.
Featured in the Media Power to youth (The Hindustan Times, November 3, 2012). The article names Sunil Abraham and Lawrence Liang as some of the young people who are shaping the future. 25 Indians to watch (FT Magazine, November 16, 2012). Sunil Abraham is one among the 25 rising Indian stars to watch out for. Malavika Jayaram named a top lawyer for Internet and e-Commerce in India (WHO’s WHO LEGAL, November 20, 2012).
Media Coverage Information security policy on govt agenda (by Surabhi Agarwal, LiveMint, November 6, 2012). Sunil Abraham is quoted. Law yet to catch up with tech-enabled peeping toms (by Sandhya Soman & Pratiksha Ramkumar, Times of India, November 7, 2012). Sunil Abraham is quoted. India second in requesting user info: Google (by Karthik Subramaniam, Hindu, November 14, 2012). Pranesh Prakash is quoted. Post and be Damned (by Kavita Shanmugham, November 14, 2012). Pranesh Prakash is quoted. India second in keeping tabs on netizens (by Ishan Srivastava, The Times of India, November 15, 2012). India ranks second globally in accessing private details of users (thinkdigit, November 15, 2012). Pranesh Prakash is quoted. Google's 'Transparency Report' sketchy, inconclusive: Government (by Indu Nandakumar, Economic Times, November 17, 2012). Pranesh Prakash is quoted. Women Arrested in Mumbai for Complaining on Facebook (by Neha Thirani and Hari Kumar, New York Times, November 19, 2012). Girls arrested for Facebook post on Thackeray get bail (FirstPost, November 19, 2012). Arrest of girl over Thackeray FB update a clear misuse of Sec 295A (FirstPost, November 19, 2012). Pranesh Prakash is quoted. How to Steer Clear of India’s Strict Internet Laws (by Sangeeta Rajesh and Heather Timmons, New York Times, November 20, 2012). Internet users flay Mumbai girls' arrest over Facebook post (IBN Live, November 20, 2012). Pranesh Prakash is quoted. Arrests over Facebook posts: Why we’re on a dangerous slide (Venky Vembu, FirstPost, November 20, 2012). Pranesh Prakash is quoted. Girl's arrest draws flak on social media (The Times of India, November 20, 2012). Pranesh Prakash is quoted. India's Shame: World Reacts to FB Post Arrest (by Sonal Bhadoria, India Times, November 21, 2012). Pranesh Prakash is quoted. Indian government at second position after U.S.A for demanding user data from Google (WHDI Reviews, November 22, 2012). Pranesh Prakash is quoted. Indians Rank Second For Online Snooping (Indolink, November 23, 2012). Pranesh Prakash is quoted. Civil society & industry oppose India’s plans to modify ITRs (by Shalini Singh, The Hindu, November 23, 2012). Sunil Abraham is quoted. Amnesty International calls for review of 66A of IT act (by Nirmalya Behera, Business Standard, November 28, 2012). Thousands go online against 66A (by Apoorva Dutt, DNA, November 29, 2012). Pranesh Prakash is quoted. The flaw in cyber law (by S Ronendra Singh, Hindu Business Line, November 29, 2012). Sunil Abraham and Snehashish Ghosh are quoted. Govt tweaks enforcement of IT Act after spate of arrests (by Surabhi Agarwal, LiveMint, November 29, 2012). Pranesh Prakash is quoted. Yes, You Can Get Arrested for a Facebook Status Update Now (by David Wagner, Atlantic Wire, November 29, 2012). Pranesh Prakash is quoted. The real Sibal’s law: Resisting Section 66A is futile (by Lakshmi Chaudhry, FirstPost, November 30, 2012). Pranesh Prakash’s blog post on section 66A which was also published in Outlook is quoted.
Videos Women arrested for Facebook post: Did cops act under Sena pressure? (NDTV, November 19, 2012). YP Singh, Alyque Padamsee, Rohan Joshi, Karuna Nundy and Pranesh Prakash took part in a discussion about the arrest of two girls over a Facebook comment. The Last Word: Is there a need to review Information Technology Act? (CNN-IBN, November 20, 2012). Aryaman Sundaram, Pavan Duggal, Pranesh Prakash and Ravi Visvesvaraya Prasad took part in a discussion with Karan Thapar on section 66A of the IT Act. Interview with Pranesh Prakash (by Surabhi Agarwal, LiveMint, November 30, 2012).
Telecom While the potential for growth and returns exist for telecommunications in India, a range of issues need to be addressed. One aspect is more extensive rural coverage and the other is a countrywide access to broadband which is low. Both require effective and efficient use of networks and resources, including spectrum:
Building Knowledge and Capacity around Telecommunication Policy in India Ford Foundation has given a grant of USD 2,00,000 to CIS to build expertise in the area of telecommunications in India. The knowledge repository deals with these modules: Introduction to Telecommunications, Telecommunications Infrastructure and Technologies, Government of India Regulatory Framework for Telecom, Telecommunication and the Market, Universal Access and Accessibility, The International Telecommunications Union and other international bodies, Broadcasting, Emerging Topics and Way Forward. Dr. Surendra Pal, Satya N Gupta, Paranjoy Guha Thakurta, Payal Malik, Dr. Rakesh Mehrotra and Dr. Nadeem Akhtar are the expert reviewers.
The following are the new outputs: DoT — Its Powers and Responsibilities (by Snehashish Ghosh, November 30, 2012). Government Policy and Guidelines (by Snehashish Ghosh, November 30, 2012). TRAI Regulations (by Snehashish Ghosh, November 30, 2012). TRAI Telecommunication Tariff Orders (by Snehashish Ghosh, November 30, 2012).
Newspaper Columns Super WiFi & Shared Spectrum: A Time to Start Sharing (by Shyam Ponappa, Organizing India Blogspot on November 3, 2012 and Business Standard, November 1, 2012). Folly of Mandating Spectrum Auctions (by Jayna Kothari, Hindu Business Line, November 24, 2012).
Event Participated 2nd MPL Faculty Workshop (North Zone) on Teaching Public Policy, Media and Law (Central University, Rajasthan, November 1-2, 2012). Snehashish Ghosh made a presentation on "Building a Telecom Knowledge Repository."
Digital Natives Digital Natives with a Cause? examines the changing landscape of social change and political participation in light of the role that young people play through digital and Internet technologies, in emerging information societies. Consolidating knowledge from Asia, Africa and Latin America, it builds a global network of knowledge partners who critically engage with discourse on youth, technology and social change, and look at alternative practices and ideas in the Global South:
Interview Whose Change Is It Anyway? \| DML2013: As a preparation for the DML conference, Nishant Shah had an interview with Howard Rheingold, a cyberculture pioneer, social media innovator, and author of "Smart Mobs. Watch the video on YouTube.
About CIS CIS was registered as a society in Bangalore in 2008. As an independent, non-profit research organisation, it runs different policy research programmes such as Accessibility, Access to Knowledge, Openness, Internet Governance, and Telecom. The policy research programmes have resulted in outputs such as the e-Accessibility Policy Handbook for Persons with Disabilities with ITU and G3ict, and Digital Alternatives with a Cause?, Thinkathon Position Papers and the Digital Natives with a Cause? Report with Hivos, etc. We conducted policy research for the Ministry of Communications & Information Technology, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions, Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, etc., on WIPO Treaties, Copyright Bill, NIA Bill, etc. CIS is accredited as an observer at WIPO, and has given policy briefs to delegations from various countries, our Programme Manager, Nirmita Narasimhan won the National Award for Empowerment of Persons with Disabilities from the Government of India and also received the NIVH Excellence Award.
Follow us elsewhere Get short, timely messages from us on Twitter Join the CIS group on Facebook Visit us at http://cis-india.org
Support Us Please help us defend consumer / citizen rights on the Internet! Write a cheque in favour of ‘The Centre for Internet and Society’ and mail it to us at No. 194, 2nd ‘C’ Cross, Domlur, 2nd Stage, Bengaluru – 5600 71.
Request for Collaboration We invite researchers, practitioners, and theoreticians, both organisationally and as individuals, to collaboratively engage with Internet and society and improve our understanding of this new field. To discuss the research collaborations, write to Sunil Abraham, Executive Director, at sunil@cis-india.org or Nishant Shah, Director – Research, at nishant@cis-india.org

CIS is grateful to its donors, Wikimedia Foundation, Ford Foundation, Privacy International, UK, Hans Foundation and the Kusuma Trust which was founded by Anurag Dikshit and Soma Pujari, philanthropists of Indian origin, for its core funding and support for most of its projects.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/about/newsletters/november-2012-bulletin

November 2011 Bulletin

praskrishna — 2012-07-24T02:37:09Z

Welcome to the Centre for Internet and Society newsletter! In this issue we bring you the updates of our research, events, media coverage and videos of some past events organized by us during the month of November 2011.

Digital Natives with a Cause?

Digital Natives with a Cause? examines the changing landscape of social change and political participation in light of the role that young people play through digital and Internet technologies, in emerging information societies. Consolidating knowledge from Asia, Africa and Latin America, it builds a global network of knowledge partners who critically engage with discourse on youth, technology and social change, and look at alternative practices and ideas in the Global South:

Key Research

On Fooling Around: Digital Natives and Politics in Asia
by Nishant Shah, Director-Research
Youths are not only actively participating in the politics of its times but also changing the way in which we understand the political processes of mobilisation, participation and transformation, writes Nishant. The paper was presented at the Digital Cultures in Asia conference at the Academia Sinica, Taipei, Taiwan.

Links in the Chain

Analog Relics in the Digital Age, volume 8, issue 4
Guest Editor: Nilofar Ansher
“The scale of inventions has not really leaped, so much as mutated. We had Twitter and Facebook ... (remember notice boards, community centers and pamphlets); they just weren’t so instant, hyperlinked and global in scale. We still use the medium of a mouthpiece and speaker to talk to each other long distance, the difference is in the changed aesthetics of the 21st century – it’s all squarish curves and scratch-proof glass that are more appealing today. Blackboards, writing material, listening devices and memory aids have undergone unprecedented transformations of function and usage, but it’s still about having a blank canvas to write upon with a chalk, pen, paper or iClick”, writes Nilofar in this issue of the Digital Natives newsletter.

Articles/Columns

In Search of the Other: Decoding Digital Natives: Nishant Shah charts the trajectories of our research at the Centre for Internet and Society (Bangalore, India) and Hivos (The Hague, The Netherlands) to see how alternative models of understanding these relationships can be built. This blog post by Nishant Shah was published in DML central on 24 October 2011.

Staff Quoted in the Media

The Write Stuff, Deccan Chronicle, 14 November 2011. Nishant Shah has been quoted in this article.

Pathways for Learning in Higher Education

The Pathways Project for Learning in Higher Education is a collaboration between the Higher Education Innovation and Research Applications (HEIRA) at the Centre for the Study of Culture and Society (CSCS) and the Centre for Internet and Society (CIS). The project is supported by the Ford Foundation and works with disadvantaged students in 9 undergraduate colleges in Maharashtra, Karnataka and Kerala, to explore relationships between Technologies, Higher Education and the new forms of social justice in India.

Article Published by the Media

Learn it Yourself: The peer-to-peer world of online learning encourages conversations and reciprocal learning, writes Nishant Shah. The article was published by the Indian Express on 30 October 2011.

Video of Event Participated

Mobility Shifts 2011 — An International Future of Learning Summit: The summit was organised by the New School and sponsored by MacArthur Foundation and Mozilla. It was held from October 10 to October 16, 2011 at the New School, New York City. Nishant Shah participated in the summit and spoke on Digital Outcasts: Social Justice, Technology and Learning in India. The video of the event is online.

Accessibility

Estimates of the percentage of the world's population that is disabled vary considerably. But what is certain is that if we count functional disability, then a large proportion of the world's population is disabled in one way or another. At CIS we work to ensure that the digital technologies, which empower disabled people and provide them with independence, are allowed to do so in practice and by the law. To this end, we support web accessibility guidelines, and change in copyright laws that currently disempower the persons with disabilities.

Publication

e-Accessibility Policy Handbook for Persons with Disabilities (Russian Version)
Edited by Nirmita Narasimhan
The e-Accessibility Policy Handbook for Persons with Disabilities is now available in Russian. The handbook is a joint publication of ITU, G3ict and the Centre for Internet and Society, in cooperation with the Hans Foundation. Dr. Hamadoun I. Toure, Secretary-General, International Telecommunication Union wrote the preface. Dr. Sami Al-Basheer, Director, ITU-D wrote the introduction and Axel Leblois, Executive Director, G3ict wrote the foreword.

Blog Post

The case for Accessible Banking by Dinesh Kaushal.

Access to Knowledge

The Access to Knowledge programme addresses the harms caused to consumers, developing countries, human rights, and creativity/innovation from excessive regimes of copyright, patents, and other such monopolistic rights over knowledge:

Key Research

Of Jesters, Clowns and Pranksters: YouTube and the Condition of Collaborative Authorship
by Nishant Shah, Director-Research, Centre for Internet and Society
The idea of a single author creating cinematic objects in a well-controlled scheme of support system and production/distribution infrastructure has been fundamentally challenged by the emergence of digital video sharing sites like YouTube, writes Nishant Shah in this essay published in the Journal of Moving Images.

Blog Posts

CIS Hosts Scanned Version of George Orwell’s Books vs. Cigarettes

Comments / Statement

CIS Intervention on Future Work of the WIPO Advisory Committee on Enforcement: The seventh session of the World Intellectual Property Organization's Advisory Committee on Enforcement (ACE) is being held in Geneva on November 30 and December 1, 2011. Pranesh Prakash intervened during the discussion of future work of the ACE with this comment.
Comment by CIS at ACE on Presentation on French Charter on the Fight against Cyber-Counterfeiting: The seventh session of the World Intellectual Property Organization's Advisory Committee on Enforcement is being held in Geneva on November 30 and December 1, 2011. Pranesh Prakash responded to a presentation by Prof. Pierre Sirinelli of the École de droit de la Sorbonne, Université Paris 1 on 'The French Charter on the Fight against Cyber-Counterfeiting of December 16, 2009' with this comment.
Statement of CIS on the WIPO Broadcast Treaty at the 23rd SCCR: The twenty-third session of the Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights is being held in Geneva from November 22, 2011 to December 2, 2011. Pranesh Prakash delivered this statement on a new proposal made by South Africa and Mexico (SCCR/23/6) on a treaty for broadcasters.

Openness

The 'Openness' programme critically examines alternatives to existing regimes of intellectual property rights, and transparency and accountability. Under this programme, we study Open Government Data, Open Access to Scholarly Literature, Open Content, Open Standards, Open Access to Law, and Free/Libre/Open Source Software:

Featured Research

Know Your Users, Match their Needs!
As Free Access to Law initiatives in the Global South enter into a new stage of maturity, they must be certain not to lose sight of their users’ needs. This blog post gives a summary of the “Good Practices Handbook”, a research output of the collaborative project Free Access to Law — Is it Here to Stay? undertaken by LexUM (Canada) and the South African Legal Institute in partnership with the Centre for Internet and Society. Rebecca Schild and Prashant Iyengar from CIS were part of the research team.

Event Organised

Open Access to Academic Knowledge, organised by the Indian Institute of Science and CIS at National Centre for Science Information, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore on 2 November 2011. Tom Dane participated in this event.

Event Participated

3rd Canadian Science Policy Conference, organised by Canadian Science Policy Conference from16 to 18 November 2011 at the Ottawa Convention Centre. Sunil Abraham spoke in the session on Global Implications of Open and Inclusive Innovation.

Announcement

The Wikimedia India Program Trust. A new entity, the “Wikimedia India Program Trust”, has been registered in Delhi. Sunil Abraham is one of the trustees.

Internet Governance

The Internet Governance programme conducts research around the various social, technical, and political underpinnings of global and national Internet governance, and includes online privacy, freedom of speech, and Internet governance mechanisms and processes:

Comments / Submissions

CIS Comments on Finance Committee Statements to Open Letters on Unique Identity: The Parliamentary Finance Committee responded to the six open letters sent by CIS through an email on 12 October 2011. CIS has commented on the points raised by the Committee.
Comments on the National Policy of Information Technology: The NPIT 2011 has the laudable goal of making India a ‘knowledge economy with a global role’ by developing and deploying ICT solutions in all sectors to foster development within India and at a global level. CIS appreciates this initiative of the Department of Information Technology and offers brief comments to strengthen the draft.
CIS Comments on the Draft National Policy on Electronics: CIS submitted its comments to the request for comments put out by the Department of Information Technology on its draft 'National Policy on Electronics'.

Statement

India's Statement Proposing UN Committee for Internet-Related Policy: India made its statement at the 66th session of the United Nations General Assembly, its proposal for the UN Committee for Internet-Related Policy was presented.

Podcast

Professor Balaram talks Open Access : Tom Dane spoke with Professor P Balaram, Director of the Indian Institute of Science about the Open Access movement. A podcast of the interview is online.

Event Report

The 2nd IJLT-CIS Lecture Series — A Post-event Report : The 2nd IJLT-CIS Lecture Series was organised by the Indian Journal of Law and Technology and CIS on the 21st and 22nd of May 2011 at the National Law School of India University, Nagarbhavi, Bangalore. The main theme for this year was Emerging Issues in Privacy Law: Law, Policy and Practice.

Essay in Peer Reviewed Journal

Material Cyborgs; Asserted Boundaries
by Nishant Shah, Director-Research
Nishant explores the possibility of formulating the cyborg as an author or translator who is able to navigate between the different binaries of ‘meat–machine’, ‘digital–physical’, and ‘body–self’, using the abilities and the capabilities learnt in one system in an efficient and effective understanding of the other. The essay was published in the European Journal of English Studies, Volume 12, Issue 2.

Articles/Columns

What is Dilligaf? On the web, time moves at the speed of thought: Groups emerge, proliferate and are abandoned as new trends and fads take precedence. Nowhere else is this dramatic flux as apparent as in the language that evolves online. While SMS lingo – like TTYL (Talk To You Later) and LOL (Laughing Out Loud)– has endured and become a part of everyday language, new forms of speech are taking over. This article by Nishant Shah was published in GQ India.
The Book of Jobs The man who made the computer personal, who changed the face of the digital media industry, who was inspired by Zen philosophy to create an eight-billion-dollar empire, Steve Jobs, died last month. Just a few weeks before his death, in the midst of his painful illness, he told Walter Isaacson, the man chosen to write his authorised biography, “I really want to believe that something survives”. And Isaacson wrote him a fairy tale which will make sure that Jobs will be remembered beyond the gizmos and gimmicks, writes Nishant Shah in this article published in the Indian Express on 12 November 2011.

Staff Quoted in the Media

Is Facebook tracking your virtual footprints? by Sheetal Sukhija in MidDay, 22 November 2011. Sunil Abraham was quoted in this article.
M-governance gains momentum by Vasudha Venugopal in the Hindu, 20 November 2011. Nishant Shah was quoted in this article.
SOPA: The bill that could kill the Internet by Suw Charman-Anderson in Firstpost.Technology, 16 November 2011.
Broadband user base still has a long way to go, by Leslie D’Monte & Deepti Chaudhary in Livemint, 15 November 2011. Sunil Abraham has been quoted in this article.
‘Not mandatory’ but maids, guards get fingerprinted by Hemanth Kashyap in Bangalore Mirror, 9 November 2011. Sunil Abraham has been quoted in this article.
Netizen Report: Transparency Edition by Rebecca MacKinnon in Global Voices Online, 7 November 2011.
Blocking online content: Google gets more requests than govt by Pallavi Polanki in Firstpost.com, 2 November 2011. Pranesh Prakash has been quoted in this article.

Blog Posts

Sources of CIS Funding by Pranesh Prakash on 9 November 2011.

TRAI urged to take action against P2P throttling and DNS hijacking by Anand on 9 November 2011.

Events Organised

Exposing Data: Art Slash Activism organised by Tactical Tech and CIS at CIS office in Bangalore on 28 November 2011. Ward Smith and Stephanie Hankey (Co-founders of TTC), Ayisha Abraham (Filmmaker, Srishti School of Art Design) and Zainab Bawa (Research Fellow, CIS) gave a lecture.

Droidcon India, first Android Conference in Bangalore, organised by CIS in collaboration with Droidcon.com, Bangalore Android User Group, MobileMonday Bangalore and Android Advices on 18 and 19 November 2011 at the MLR Convention Centre, Bangalore.

Events Participated

Western Ghats Portal: Workshop on Biodiversity Informatics organised by the Western Ghats Portal team at the Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology and Environment, 25 November 2011. Sunil Abraham spoke in the session on Scientific Commons and Policy.
Names Not Numbers Mumbai, 26 November 2011. Nishant Shah spoke in a panel on “The New Digital Individual: Is New Technology Liberating or Enslaving?”. The event was organised by Editorial Intelligence and partners which included the British Council and Financial Times, BBC World News, Mumbai first, Vodafone, Trident and Godrej India Cultural Lab.

Upcoming Events

Dialogue Cafe @ Centre for Internet and Society, 2 December 2011, Centre for Internet & Society, 4 p.m. to 6 p.m.
The High Level Privacy Conclave, 3 February 2011, Paharpur Business Centre, Nehru Place Greens New Delhi, 4 p.m. to 6 p.m. This is a closed-door meeting. For participation, get in touch with Elonnai (elonnai@cis-india.org).
All India Privacy Symposium, 4 February 2011, India International Centre, New Delhi. This is a public meeting. For participation, get in touch with Elonnai (elonnai@cis-india.org).

Video

Facebook Resistance Workshop at CIS. This was a workshop for people to learn on how to think beyond the rules and limitations of Facebook, to tweak and play around the features and design to generate useful, creative, and funny concepts and explore how this creative intervention can be turned into a real software developed by the Facebook Resistance.

Telecom

While the potential for growth and returns exist for telecommunications in India, a range of issues need to be addressed. One aspect is more extensive rural coverage and the other is a countrywide access to broadband which is low. Both require effective and efficient use of networks and resources, including spectrum:

Column

Telecom Path-Breaker? (by Shyam Ponappa): Does the draft National Telecom Policy-2011 reflect true brilliance or smoke-and-mirrors? It will be a game-changer if a shared network is implemented effectively, writes Shyam Ponappa in this article published in the Business Standard on 3 November 2011.

Follow us elsewhere

Get short, timely messages from us on Twitter
Follow CIS on identi.ca
Join the CIS group on Facebook\
Visit us at www.cis-india.org

CIS is grateful to Kusuma Trust which was founded by Anurag Dikshit and Soma Pujari, philanthropists of Indian origin, for its core funding and support for most of its projects.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/about/newsletters/november-2011-bulletin

November 2010 Bulletin

praskrishna — 2012-08-07T11:46:10Z

Greetings from the Centre for Internet and Society!

News Updates

The internet’s new billion: New web users — in countries like Brazil and China — are changing the culture of the internet.
http://bit.ly/hKUb5n

‘Piracy is now a mainstream political phenomenon': “Piracy has become a mainstream political phenomenon,” said Sunil Abraham, executive director of the Centre for Internet and Society in the city. The piracy that he was referring to was not the piracy of the high seas but the piracy of intellectual property.
http://bit.ly/gMC1Br

Open standards policy in India: A long, but successful journey: Last week, India became another major country to join the growing, global open standards movement. After three years of intense debate and discussion, India's Department of IT in India finalized its Policy on Open Standards for e-Governance, joining the ranks of emerging economies like Brazil, South Africa and others. This is a historic moment and India's Department of Information Technology (DIT) deserves congratulations for approving a policy that will ensure the long-term preservation of India's e-government data.
http://bit.ly/dGo6Qo

Information, the world's new capital - Digital Natives: Information is the new capital and currency of the world, Nishant Shah, of the India-based Digital Natives with a Cause, told Bizcommunity.com yesterday, 10 November 2010, as the three-day workshop on digital and internet technologies that brought together young delegates from nine African countries ended in Johannesburg, South Africa. "If the 20th century was the age of the industrial revolution, the 21st century is now actually the age of the knowledge information," Shah said.
http://bit.ly/dpXIKY

What it means to be a child today: They move seamlessly between reality and virtual reality. The digital landscape they inhabit comprises generations — not of family — but of technology such as Web 2.0, 3G, PS4 and iPhone5. Their world has moved beyond their neighbourhood, school and childhood friends to encompass a 500-channel television universe, the global gaming village, the endless internet. These are the children born in the last decade and half — possibly the first generation that has never known a world without hi-tech.
http://bit.ly/cz3nBJ

Report: Digitally Open: Innovation and Open Access Forum, 23 Oct 2010, Doha, Qatar: A summary of the event "Digitally Open: Innovation and Open Access Forum" held in Doha.
http://bit.ly/catHoi

DOC 2.0: A Resources Sharing Mela by NGO Documentation Centres: A Resource Sharing Mela and Meet of DCM (Document Centres Meet) at the Centre for Education & Documentation in Domlur, Bangalore.
http://bit.ly/dnwQMf

Wi-Fi Direct promises range, bandwidth higher than Bluetooth: Sharing, printing and connecting for Wi-Fi devices is going to be more convenient than ever with soon-to-be-launched technology Wi-Fi Direct, which enables devices to connect to each other without a conventional Wi-Fi hub. This article by Ramkumar Iyer was published in the Hindu on 31 October 2010.
http://bit.ly/aUul9f
Access to Knowledge in the Age of Intellectual Property: Access to Knowledge in the Age of Intellectual Property charts the rise of the access to knowledge movement, a movement in which Open Society Foundations have played a key role. It maps the vast terrain of legal, cultural, and technical issues that activists and thinkers aligned to the movement negotiate every day.
http://bit.ly/9nkQFM

Social Mashup!: Save the Date Join us to meet India’s most passionate, innovative, and curious start-up social entrepreneurs for two groundbreaking days of conversations, connections and inspiration. This event will be held on 2-3 December 2010 at the Indian School of Business in Hyderabad.
http://bit.ly/bKKcar

Digitally Open: Innovation and Open Access Forum: Promoting Openness in Today's Digital World
http://bit.ly/961Ieg

Crisis for identity or identity crisis?: The hurry with which the government is pushing its most ambitious project to assign a number (UID) to every citizen without any feasibility study or public debate has raised many questions. http://bit.ly/8Zt9mf

Upcoming Event

Identity, Identification and Media Representation in Video Game Play: An Audience Reception Study: Adrienne Shaw from the Annenberg School of communications, who is a visiting fellow at MICA is giving a public talk on research on representation in video games on 27 November 2010 at the Centre for Internet and Society in Bangalore.
http://bit.ly/909xkU

Research

My Bubble, My Space, My Voice Workshop - Perspective and Future
The second workshop for the “Digital Natives with a Cause?” research project named “My Bubble, My Space, My Voice” took place at the Link Center of Wits University, in Johannesburg, South Africa from 6 November 2010 to 9 November 2010. Samuel Tettner, Digital Natives Co-cordinator shares his perspective on the workshop.
http://bit.ly/bPX6Xd

Archive and Access: Call for Review
The Archive and Access research project by Rochelle Pinto, Aparna Balachandran and Abhijit Bhattacharya is a part of the Researchers @ Work Programme at the Centre for Internet and Society, Bangalore. The project that attempts to look at the ways in which the notion of the archive, the role of the archivist and the relationship between the state and private archives that has undergone a transition with the emergence of Internet technologies in India has been put up for public review. http://bit.ly/d4o809

Just Where We Like It
The micro space for status updates might become the new public space for discussion. Nishant Shah's column on Digital Natives was published in the Sunday Eye of the Indian Express on 21 November 2010.
http://bit.ly/96cK8q

Taking It to the Streets
The previous posts in the Beyond the Digital series have discussed the distinct ways in which young people today are thinking about their activism. The fourth post elaborates further on how this is translated into practice by sharing the experience of a Blank Noise street intervention: Y ARE U LOOKING AT ME?
http://bit.ly/ciyiiR

Talking Back without "Talking Back"
The activism of digital natives is often considered different from previous generations because of the methods and tools they use. However, reflecting on my conversations with The Blank Noise Project and my experience in the ‘Digital Natives Talking Back’ workshop in Taipei, the difference goes beyond the method and can be spotted at the analytical level – how young people today are thinking about their activism.
http://bit.ly/bHAvDE

The 'Beyond the Digital' Directory
For the past few months, Maesy Angelina has been sharing the insights gained from her research with Blank Noise on the activism of digital natives. The ‘Beyond the Digital’ directory offers a list of the posts on the research based on the order of its publication.
http://bit.ly/b3TK3C

First Thing First
Studies often focus on how digital natives do their activism in identifying the characteristics of youth digital activism and dedicate little attention to what the activism is about. The second blog post in the Beyond the Digital series reverses this trend and explores how the Blank Noise Project articulates the issue it addresses: street sexual harassment.
http://bit.ly/cM1HFf

Change has come to all of us
The general focus on a digital generational divide makes us believe that generations are separated by the digital axis, and that the gap is widening. There is a growing anxiety voiced by an older generation that the digital natives they encounter — in their homes, schools and universities and at workplaces — are a new breed with an entirely different set of vocabularies and lifestyles which are unintelligible and inaccessible. It is time we started pushing the boundaries of what it means to be a digital native.
http://bit.ly/9J82YY

Accessibility

e-Accessibility Policy Handbook for Persons with Disabilities
The Centre for Internet and Society is proud to announce the launch of its first publication, the “e-Accessibility Policy Handbook for Persons with Disabilities" in collaboration with the G3ict (Global Initiative for Inclusive Information Communication Technologies) and ITU (International Telecommunications Union), and sponsored by the Hans Foundation. The handbook is compiled and edited by Nirmita Narasimhan. Dr. Hamadoun I. Toure, Secretary-General, International Telecommunication Union has written the preface, Dr. Sami Al-Basheer, Director, ITU-D has written the introduction and Axel Leblois, Executive Director, G3ict has written the foreword.
http://bit.ly/gfKNYO

Intellectual Property

Statement of CIS on the Work of the Committee in the 21st SCCR
The twenty-first session of the Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights was held in Geneva from 8 to 12 November 2010. Nirmita Narasimhan attended the conference and represented the Centre for Internet and Society.
http://bit.ly/fJVNPI

We’ve All Got Some Baggage
America’s newest trade agreement is not going to kill only iPods. The article appeared in the Tehelka Magazine Vol 7, Issue 45, Dated November 13, 2010
http://bit.ly/cVrpWd

Internet Governance

Consumer Privacy - How to Enforce an Effective Protective Regime?
In a typical sense, when people think of themselves as consumers, they just think about what they purchase, how they purchase and how they use their purchase. But while doing this exercise we are always exchanging personally identifiable information, and thus our privacy is always at risk. In this blog post, Elonnai Hickok and Prashant Iyengar through a series of questions look through the whole concept of consumer privacy at the national and international levels. By placing a special emphasis on Indian context, this post details the potential avenues of consumer privacy in India and states the important elements that should be kept in mind when trying to find at an effective protective regime for consumer privacy.
http://bit.ly/eEs5Qx

CIS Responds to Privacy Approach Paper
A group of officers was created to develop a framework for a privacy legislation that would balance the need for privacy protection, security, sectoral interests, and respond to the domain legislation on the subject. Shri Rahul Matthan of Tri Legal Services prepared an approach paper for the legal framework for a proposed legislation on privacy. The approach paper is now being circulated for seeking opinions of the group of officers and is also being placed on the website of the Department of Personnel and Training for seeking public views on the subject. The Privacy India team at CIS responded to the approach paper and has called for the need for a more detailed study of statutory enforcement models and mechanisms in the creation of privacy legislation.
http://bit.ly/eVTwVC
Privacy and Banking: Do Indian Banking Standards Provide Enough Privacy Protection
Banking is one of the most risky sectors as far as privacy is concerned due to the highly sensitive and personal nature of information which is often exchanged, recorded and retained. Although India has RBI guidelines and legislations to protect data, this blog post looks at the extent of those protections, and what are the areas that still need to be addressed.
http://bit.ly/flq09V

Privacy and Telecommunications: Do We Have the Safeguards?
All of you often come across unsolicited and annoying telemarketing calls/ SMS's, prank calls, pestering calls for payment, etc. Do we have any safeguards against them? This blog post takes a look at the various rules and regulations under Indian law to guard our privacy and confidentiality.
http://bit.ly/hnTwKp

Privacy, Free/Open Source, and the Cloud
A look into the questions that arise in concern to privacy and cloud computing, and how open source plays into the picture.
http://bit.ly/awpCyF

Privacy Concerns in Whole Body Imaging: A Few Questions
Security versus Privacy...it is a question that the world is facing today when it comes to using the Whole Body Imaging technology to screen a traveller visually in airports and other places. By giving real life examples from different parts of the world Elonnai Hickok points out that even if the Government of India eventually decides to advocate the tight security measures with some restrictions then such measures need to balanced against concerns raised for personal freedom. She further argues that privacy is not just data protection but something which must be viewed holistically and contextually when assessing new policies.
http://bit.ly/9rvQPt

American Bar Association Online Privacy Conference: A Report
On 10 November 2010, I attended an American Bar Association online conference on 'Regulating Privacy Across Borders in the Digital Age: An Emerging Global Consensus or Vive la Difference'. The panelists addressed many important global privacy challenges and spoke about the changes the EU directive is looking to take.
http://bit.ly/dy41zc

Telecom

3G Life
You can video chat, stream music and watch TV on your phone. Offering high-speed internet access, 3G would change the world of mobile computing. Nishant Shah's article was published in the Indian Express on 14 November 2010.
http://bit.ly/gyxaW2

Ideology and ICT Policies
For better policies, decision-makers need to know their own and others’ biases, and consider what others are doing, writes Shyam Ponappa in an article published in the Business Standard on 4 November 2010.
http://bit.ly/dbl3Ai

Looking forward to your feedback. Please feel free to write to us for any queries or details required. If you do not wish to receive these emails, please do write to us and we will unsubscribe your mail ID from the mailing list.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/about/newsletters/november-2010-bulletin

Nothing to Kid About – Children's Data Under the New Data Protection Bill

Shweta Mohandas and Anamika Kundu — 2022-03-10T13:19:52Z

The pandemic has forced policymakers to adapt their approach to people's changing practices, from looking at contactless ways of payment to the shifting of educational institutions online.

The article was originally published in the Indian Journal of Law and Technology

For children, the internet has shifted from being a form of entertainment to a medium to connect with friends and seek knowledge and education. However, each time they access the internet, data about them and their choices are inadvertently recorded by companies and unknown third parties. The growth of EdTech apps in India has led to growing concerns regarding children's data privacy. This has led to the creation of a self-regulatory body, the Indian EdTech Consortium. More recently, the Advertising Standard Council of India has also started looking at passing a draft regulation to keep a check on EdTech advertisements.

The Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC), tasked with drafting and revising the Data Protection Bill, had to consider the number of changes that had happened after the release of the 2019 version of the Bill. While the most significant change was the removal of the term “personal data” from the title of the Bill, in a move to create a comprehensive Data Protection Bill that includes both personal and non personal data. Certain other provisions of the Bill also featured additions and removals. The JPC, in its revised version of the Bill has removed an entire class of data fiduciaries – guardian data fiduciary – which was tasked with greater responsibility for managing children's data. While the JPC justified the removal of the guardian data fiduciary stating that consent from the guardian of the child is enough to meet the end for which personal data of children are processed by the data fiduciary. While thought has been given to looking at how consent is given by the guardian on behalf of the child, there was no change in the age of children in the Bill. Keeping the age of consent under the Bill as the same as the age of majority to enter into a contract under the 1872 Indian Contract Act – 18 years – reveals the disconnect the law has with the ground reality of how children interact with the internet.

In the current state of affairs where Indian children are navigating the digital world on their own there is a need to look deeply at the processing of children’s data as well as ways to ensure that children have information about consent and informational privacy. By placing the onus of granting consent on parents, the PDP Bill fails to look at how consent works in a privacy policy–based consent model and how this, in turn, harms children in the long run.

1. Age of Consent

By setting the age of consent as 18 years under the Data Protection Bill, 2021, it brings all individuals under 18 years of age under one umbrella without making a distinction between the internet usage of a 5-year-old child and a 16-year-old teenager. There is a need to look at the current internet usage habits of children and assess whether requiring parental consent is reasonable or even practical. It is also pertinent to note that the law in the offline world does make the distinction between age and maturity. For example, it has been highlighted that Section 82 of the Indian Penal Code, read with Section 83, states that any act by a child under the age of 12 years shall not be considered an offence, while the maturity of those aged between 12–18 years will be decided by the court (individuals between the age of 16–18 years can also be tried as adults for heinous crimes). Similarly, child labour laws in the country allow children above the age of 14 years to work in non-hazardous industries, which would qualify them to fall under Section 13 of the Bill, which deals with employee data.

A 2019 report suggests that two-thirds of India’s internet users are in the 12–29 years age group, accounting for about 21.5% of the total internet usage in metro cities. With the emergence of cheaper phones equipped with faster processing and low internet data costs, children are no longer passive consumers of the internet. They have social media accounts and use several applications to interact with others and make purchases. There is a need to examine how children and teenagers interact with the internet as well as the practicality of requiring parental consent for the usage of applications.

Most applications that require age data request users to type in their date of birth; it is not difficult for a child to input a suitable date that would make it appear that they are over 18. In this case they are still children but the content that will be presented to them would be those that are meant for adults including content that might be disturbing or those involving use of alcohol and gambling. Additionally, in their privacy policies, applications sometimes state that they are not suited for and restricted from users under 18. Here, data fiduciaries avoid liability by placing the onus on the user to declare their age and properly read and understand the privacy policy.

Reservations about the age of consent under the Bill have also been highlighted by some members of the JPC through their dissenting opinions. MP Ritesh Pandey suggested that the age of consent should be reduced to 14 years keeping the best interest of the children in mind as well as to support children in benefiting from technological advances. Similarly, MP Manish Tiwari in his dissenting opinion suggested regulating data fiduciaries based on the type of content they provide or data they collect.

2. How is the 2021 Bill Different from the 2019 Bill?

The 2019 draft of the Bill consisted of a class of data fiduciaries called guardian data fiduciaries – entities that operate commercial websites or online services directed at children or which process large volumes of children’s personal data. This class of fiduciaries was barred from profiling, tracking, behavioural monitoring, and running targeted advertising directed at children and undertaking any other processing of personal data that can cause significant harm to the child. In the previous draft, such data fiduciaries were not allowed to engage in ‘profiling, tracking, behavioural monitoring of children, or direct targeted advertising at children’. There was also a prohibition on conducting any activities that might significantly harm the child. As per Chapter IV, any violation could attract a penalty of up to INR 15 crore of the worldwide turnover of the data fiduciary for the preceding financial year, whichever is higher. However, this separate class of data fiduciaries do not have any additional responsibilities. It is also unclear as to whether a data fiduciary that does not by definition fall within such a category would be allowed to engage in activities that could cause ‘significant harm’ to children.

The new Bill also does not provide any mechanisms for age verification and only lays down considerations that verification processes should be undertaken. Furthermore, the JPC has suggested that consent options available to the child when they attain the age of majority i.e. 18 years should be included within the rule frame by the Data Protection Authority instead of being an amendment in the Bill.

3. In the Absence of a Guardian Data Fiduciary

The 2018 and 2019 drafts of the PDP Bill consider a child to be any person below the age of 18 years. For a child to access online services, the data fiduciary must first verify the age of the child and obtain consent from their guardian. The Bill does not provide an explicit process for age verification apart from stating that regulations shall be drafted in this regard. The 2019 Bill states that the Data Protection Authority shall specify codes of practice in this matter. Taking best practices into account, there is a need for ‘user-friendly and privacy-protecting age verification techniques’ to encourage safe navigation across the internet. This will require looking at technological developments and different standards worldwide. There is a need to hold companies accountable for the protection of children’s online privacy and the harm that their algorithms cause children and to make sure that they are not continued.

The JPC in the 2021 version of the Bill removed provisions about guardian data fiduciaries, stating that there was no advantage in creating a different class of data fiduciary. As per the JPC, even those data fiduciaries that did not fall within the said classification would also need to comply with rules pertaining to the personal data of children i.e. with Section 16 of the Bill. Section 16 of the Bill requires the data fiduciary to verify the child’s age and obtain consent from the parent/guardian. The manner of age verification has also een spelt out. Furthermore, since ‘significant data fiduciaries’ is an existing class, there is still a need to comply with rules related to data processing. The JPC also removed the phrase “in the best interests of, the child” and “is in the best interests of, the child” under sub-clause 16(1), implying that the entire Bill concerned the rights of the data principal and the use of such terms dilutes the purpose of the legislation and could give way to manipulation by the data fiduciary.

Conclusion

Over the past two years, there has been a significant increase in applications that are targeted at children. There has been a proliferation of EduTech apps, which ideally should have more responsibility as they are processing children's data. We recommend that instead of creating a separate category, such fiduciaries collecting children's data or providing services to children be seen as ‘significant data fiduciaries’ that need to take up additional compliance measures.

Furthermore, any blanket prohibition on tracking children may obstruct safety measures that could be implemented by data fiduciaries. These fears are also increasing in other jurisdictions as there is a likelihood to restrict data fiduciaries from using software that looks out for such as Child Sexual Abuse Material as well as online predatory behaviour. Additionally, concerning the age of consent under the Bill, the JPC could look at international best practices and come up with ways to make sure that children can use the internet and have rights over their data, which would enable them to grow up with more awareness about data protection and privacy. One such example to look at could be the Children's Online Privacy Protection Rule (COPPA) in the US, where the rules apply to operators of websites and online services that collect personal information from kids under 13 or provide services to children that are directed at a general audience, but have actual knowledge that they collect personal information from such children. A form of combination of this system and the significant data fiduciary classification could be one possible way to ensure that children’s data and privacy are preserved online.

The authors are researchers at the Centre for Internet and Society and thank their colleague Arindrajit Basu for his inputs.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/ijlt-shweta-mohandas-and-anamika-kundu-march-6-2022-nothing-to-kid-about-childrens-data-under-the-new-data-protection-bill

Notes for India as the digital trade juggernaut rolls on

basu — 2022-02-09T15:04:36Z

Sitting out trade negotiations could result in the country losing out on opportunities to shape the rules.

The article by Arindrajit Basu was published in the Hindu on February 8, 2022

Despite the cancellation of the Twelfth Ministerial Conference (MC12) of the World Trade Organization (WTO) late last year (scheduled date, November 30, 2021-December 3, 2021) due to COVID-19, digital trade negotiations continue their ambitious march forward. On December 14, Australia, Japan, and Singapore, co-convenors of the plurilateral Joint Statement Initiative (JSI) on e-commerce, welcomed the ‘substantial progress’ made at the talks over the past three years and stated that they expected a convergence on more issues by the end of 2022.

Holding out

But therein lies the rub: even though JSI members account for over 90% of global trade, and the initiative welcomes newer entrants, over half of WTO members (largely from the developing world) continue to opt out of these negotiations. They fear being arm-twisted into accepting global rules that could etiolate domestic policymaking and economic growth. India and South Africa have led the resistance and been the JSI’s most vocal critics. India has thus far resisted pressures from the developed world to jump onto the JSI bandwagon, largely through coherent legal argumentation against the JSI and a long-term developmental vision. Yet, given the increasingly fragmented global trading landscape and the rising importance of the global digital economy, can India tailor its engagement with the WTO to better accommodate its economic and geopolitical interests?

Global rules on digital trade

The WTO emerged in a largely analogue world in 1994. It was only at the Second Ministerial Conference (1998) that members agreed on core rules for e-commerce regulation. A temporary moratorium was imposed on customs duties relating to the electronic transmission of goods and services. This moratorium has been renewed continuously, to consistent opposition from India and South Africa. They argue that the moratorium imposes significant costs on developing countries as they are unable to benefit from the revenue customs duties would bring.

The members also agreed to set up a work programme on e-commerce across four issue areas at the General Council: goods, services, intellectual property, and development. Frustrated by a lack of progress in the two decades that followed, 70 members brokered the JSI in December 2017 to initiate exploratory work on the trade-related aspects of e-commerce. Several countries, including developing countries, signed up in 2019 despite holding contrary views to most JSI members on key issues. Surprise entrants, China and Indonesia, argued that they sought to shape the rules from within the initiative rather than sitting on the sidelines.

India and South Africa have rightly pointed out that the JSI contravenes the WTO’s consensus-based framework, where every member has a voice and vote regardless of economic standing. Unlike the General Council Work Programme, which India and South Africa have attempted to revitalise in the past year, the JSI does not include all WTO members. For the process to be legally valid, the initiative must either build consensus or negotiate a plurilateral agreement outside the aegis of the WTO.

India and South Africa’s positioning strikes a chord at the heart of the global trading regime: how to balance the sovereign right of states to shape domestic policy with international obligations that would enable them to reap the benefits of a global trading system.

A contested regime

There are several issues upon which the developed and developing worlds disagree. One such issue concerns international rules relating to the free flow of data across borders. Several countries, both within and outside the JSI, have imposed data localisation mandates that compel corporations to store and process data within territorial borders. This is a key policy priority for India. Several payment card companies, including Mastercard and American Express, were prohibited from issuing new cards for failure to comply with a 2018 financial data localisation directive from the Reserve Bank of India. The Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) on data protection has recommended stringent localisation measures for sensitive personal data and critical personal data in India’s data protection legislation. However, for nations and industries in the developed world looking to access new digital markets, these restrictions impose unnecessary compliance costs, thus arguably hampering innovation and supposedly amounting to unfair protectionism.

There is a similar disagreement regarding domestic laws that mandate the disclosure of source codes. Developed countries believe that this hampers innovation, whereas developing countries believe it is essential for algorithmic transparency and fairness — which was another key recommendation of the JPC report in December 2021.

India’s choices

India’s global position is reinforced through narrative building by political and industrial leaders alike. Data sovereignty is championed as a means of resisting ‘data colonialism’, the exploitative economic practices and intensive lobbying of Silicon Valley companies. Policymaking for India’s digital economy is at a critical juncture. Surveillance reform, personal data protection, algorithmic governance, and non-personal data regulation must be galvanised through evidenced insights,and work for individuals, communities, and aspiring local businesses — not just established larger players.

Hastily signing trading obligations could reduce the space available to frame appropriate policy. But sitting out trade negotiations will mean that the digital trade juggernaut will continue unchecked, through mega-regional trading agreements such as the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) and the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP). India could risk becoming an unwitting standard-taker in an already fragmented trading regime and lose out on opportunities to shape these rules instead.

Alternatives exist; negotiations need not mean compromise. For example, exceptions to digital trade rules, such as ‘legitimate public policy objective’ or ‘essential security interests’, could be negotiated to preserve policymaking where needed while still acquiescing to the larger agreement. Further, any outcome need not be an all-or-nothing arrangement. Taking a cue from the Digital Economy Partnership Agreement (DEPA) between Singapore, Chile, and New Zealand, India can push for a framework where countries can pick and choose modules with which they wish to comply. These combinations can be amassed incrementally as emerging economies such as India work through domestic regulations.

Despite its failings, the WTO plays a critical role in global governance and is vital to India’s strategic interests. Negotiating without surrendering domestic policy-making holds the key to India’s digital future.

Arindrajit Basu is Research Lead at the Centre for Internet and Society, India. The views expressed are personal. The author would like to thank The Clean Copy for edits on a draft of this article.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/the-hindu-arindrajit-basu-february-8-2022-notes-for-india-as-the-digital-trade-juggernaut-rolls-on

Not Surprised by Indian govt's data localisation directives: Michael Dell

Admin — 2018-10-18T01:37:17Z

The Indian government's attempts to ensure that companies adhere to data localisation norms will spawn similar requests from other countries, Michael Dell, the founder and chief executive of Dell Technologies, said.

The blog post by Anand J. was published in VCCircle on October 17, 2018.

However, he acknowledged that the country's concerns are genuine given the privacy and security implications of data. "If you don’t know where your data is or it has gotten into the wrong hands, it can be a very, very dangerous problem," Dell told The Economic Times. He added, "I would not be surprised if pretty much every country in the world creates something like this."

Dell's comments come in the backdrop of India's draft Personal Data Protection Bill, data localisation efforts and data mirroring requirements for payment firms as required under the diktat by the Reserve Bank of India.

Under the RBI direction, even the multinationals like Visa and MasterCard have to ensure that Indian customer data is stored locally. Though the last date for these companies to comply with the directive expired on Monday, the central bank will not penalise them as of now.

In the interview, Dell also acknowledged that information is more valuable than applications and problems will arise when data gets leaked or compromised. "Every business at the end of the day is based on some kind of trust or assurance," he told ET.

However, industry lobby Nasscom and internet watchdog Centre for Internet and Society had told TechCircle that some of the data localisation norms are rather strict and will prevent internet businesses from being truly open and free.

"Data localisation mandates should be narrowly tailored. Ideally, data should be localised based on the sector. For instance, military, intelligence and law enforcement might need strict localisation rules. There is no policy objective that will be served by localising social media data," CIS director Sunil Abraham had told TechCircle in an interview some months ago.

Nasscom's policy director Ashish Aggarwal told TechCircle that the industry lobby did not see the recommendations as a balanced approach in terms of localisation. "If imposed, this will cause a disproportionate cost to the industry," he had said.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/vccircle-october-17-2018-anand-j-not-surprised-by-indian-govt-data-localisation-directives

Not Everyone Plays by the Rules in the Digital Playground: Addressing Online Child Sexual Exploitation

praskrishna — 2016-10-05T15:08:40Z

Japreet Grewal spoke at a panel on 'Prevention through Awareness and Education' at a meeting titled 'Not Everyone Plays by the Rules in the Digital Playground:Addressing Online Child Sexual Exploitation' that was organised by the International Centre for Missing and Exploited Children, Singapore (ICMEC) and TULIR - Centre for the Prevention and Treatment of Child Sexual Abuse, India on October 3-4, 2016 at India Habitat Centre, New Delhi.

Click the links below to access:

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/not-everyone-plays-by-the-rules-in-the-digital-playground-addressing-online-child-sexual-exploitation

Northeast exodus: Is there a mechanism to pre-screen social media content?

praskrishna — 2012-09-04T04:06:46Z

The government has passed the blame buck on social media and blocked hundreds of websites, which it claims, hosted hate speech and inflammatory content, enough to incite violence. But is it feasible to pre-screen objectionable or provocative content, and reject it before posting so that there is no chance of such rumours?

The article by Wahid Bukhari was published in merinews on August 23, 2012. Pranesh Prakash is quoted.

The government took the action after Home Minister RK Singh alleged that the exodus of northeastern people from southern states such as Bangalore, Mumbai and Pune was a result of the panic and rumours created because of the content uploaded on these websites, many according to him were created by elements across the border in Pakistan. Though many suspected that Mr Singh's claim was an excuse to save the government from its inefficiency in controlling the riots, and the exodus of the northeastern people who were seen boarding the trains to their home states with their belongings amid fears of reprisal attacks.

Was the action meant to pass on the inefficiency buck or not - the government has, at least, managed to shift the focus of the media from exodus to the debate - as to whether social networking sites or websites promoting hatred should be blocked or not - given the democratic rights of every citizen to freedom of speech and expression.

Around a hundred more websites have been reported promoting hate speech and Google, Facebook and other social networking sites like Twitter have been asked to remove such content as soon as possible but in this whole debate one question remains unanswered: How does removing a post from Twitter or Facebook make a difference, several hours after it was published? One might argue even an hour is enough for an inflammatory picture or comment to incite violence or hatred. As a consequence, one might demand that a comment is screened before it is posted on a website, otherwise it doesn't serve any purpose.

Whether pre-screening is technically possible, Pranesh Prakash maintains: "Given the amount of content uploaded on the larger social networks, pre-screening content is just not possible, while removal upon complaint is. They don't have editors like newspapers do; importantly, they shouldn't."

Perhaps, a mid way is to intervene prior to registration on social media websites. All those who register should be made aware of the content that's not permissible, and make them aware of relevant laws and repercussions of breaking them if their complicity is proved. Similarly, these sites can be asked by the Indian government to continuously remind registered users as well as general public, through mass media advertizing, about what kind of content is not permissible. The government, from its side, can strengthen cyber laws to empower sites such as Facebook and Twitter to curb posting of provocative content due to presence of these stringent laws.

Terming the government action unfortunate, Mr Prakash who is a programme manager with the Bangalore-based research and advocacy group, The Centre for Internet and Society believes that government botched up at so many levels. “I don't think the government should be going after Facebook, YouTube, or Twitter. It should be going to them, to work with them on removing content,” Mr Prakash suggests. "The larger social networks have dedicated complaints mechanisms, which the government could have asked them to run 24x7 for a few days, and to expedite that process, and both complained itself and asked the public to use the complaints process,” he adds.

Though Pakistan has rubbished the claims that it has any role in fomenting trouble, but it has also asked the Indian government to provide it with evidence so that it could nab the accused. Whether or not there is any evidence is a secondary question, the primary blame will always rest with both the state and central governments who failed to stop the exodus of fear-stricken people from the northeast.

Experts like Mr Prakash are wondering why the government didn't pay back in the same coin by using the social media to dispel the rumours. “It is a pity that they notified a new policy to encourage governmental use of social media only today; they sorely needed it this last week,” Mr Prakash rues.

The government has blocked content related to thirty Twitter accounts but another surprising thing is that only accounts using the web interface have been blocked, and such accounts can still be accessed on BlackBerrys or other smartphones.

The only visible thing government did on ground when the exodus started taking place in Bangalore was the setting up of helplines but did they help in preventing the exodus - there are enough reasons to believe against it. "There were some complaints that the people attending some of these helplines could only speak in Kannada, and not the English or Hindi that people calling for help were expecting. Even such positive steps were executed badly." Mr Prakash informs.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/news/www-merinews-com-wahid-bukhari-august-23-2012-northeast-exodus

Noose tightens on freedom of speech on the Internet

praskrishna — 2015-03-27T01:01:18Z

A worrying trend has emerged in the last few years, where intermediaries around the world are being used as chokepoints to restrict freedom of expression online, and to hold users accountable for content.

The blog post by Gabey Goh was originally published by Digital News Asia and mirrored in Malaymail Online on March 26, 2015. Jyoti Panday gave her inputs.

“All communication across the Internet is facilitated by intermediaries: Service providers, social networks, search engines, and more,” said Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) senior global policy analyst Jeremy Malcolm.

“These services are all routinely asked to take down content, and their policies for responding are often muddled, heavy-handed, or inconsistent.

“That results in censorship and the limiting of people’s rights,” he told Digital News Asia (DNA) on the sidelines of RightsCon, an Internet and human rights conference hosted in Manila from March 24-25.

This year, the government of France is moving to implement regulation that makes Internet operators “accomplices” of hate-speech offences if they host extremist messages.

In February, the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) and the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) urged ICANN (the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers) to ensure that domain name registries and registrars “investigate copyright abuse complaints and respond appropriately.”

Closer to home, the Malaysian Government passed a controversial amendment to the Evidence Act 1950 – Section 114A – back in 2012.

Under Section 114A, an Internet user is deemed the publisher of any online content unless proven otherwise. The new legislation also makes individuals and those who administer, operate or provide spaces for online community forums, blogging and hosting services, liable for content published through their services.

Due to the potential negative impact on freedom of expression, a roadmap called the Manila Principles on Internet Liability was launched during RightsCon.

The EFF, Centre for Internet Society India, Article 19, and other global partners unveiled the principles, whose framework outlines clear, fair requirements for content removal requests and details how to minimise the damage a takedown can do.

For example, if content is restricted because it’s unlawful in one country or region, then the scope of the restriction should be geographically limited as well.

The principles also urge adoption of laws shielding intermediaries from liability for third-party content, which encourages the creation of platforms that allow for online discussion and debate about controversial issues.

“Our goal is to protect everyone’s freedom of expression with a framework of safeguards and best practices for responding to requests for content removal,” said Malcolm.

Jyoti Panday from the Centre for Internet and Society India noted that people ask for expression to be removed from the Internet for various reasons, good and bad, claiming the authority of myriad local and national laws.

“It’s easy for important, lawful content to get caught in the crossfire. We hope these principles empower everyone – from governments and intermediaries, to the public – to fight back when online expression is censored,” she said.

The Manila Principles can be summarised in six key points:

Intermediaries should be shielded by law from liability for third-party content
Content must not be required to be restricted without an order by a judicial authority
Requests for restrictions of content must be clear, be unambiguous, and follow due process
Laws and content restriction orders and practices must comply with the tests of necessity and proportionality
Laws and content restriction policies and practices must respect due process
Transparency and accountability must be built in to laws and content restriction policies and practices

“Right now, different countries have differing levels of protection when it comes to intermediary liability, and we’re saying that there should be expansive protection across all content,” said Malcolm.

“In addition, there is no logic in distinguishing between intellectual property (IP) and other forms of content as in the case in the United States for example, where under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, intermediaries are not liable for third party content but that doesn’t apply to IP,” he added.

The Manila Principles have two main targets: Governments and intermediaries themselves. The coalition, led by EFF, will be approaching governments to present the document and discuss the recommendations on how best to establish an intermediary liability regime.

This includes immunising intermediaries from liability and requiring a court order before any content can be taken down.

With intermediaries, the list includes companies such as Facebook, Twitter and Google, to discuss establishing transparency, responsibility and accountability in any actions taken.

“We recognise that a lot of the time, intermediaries are not waiting for a court order before taking down content, and we’re telling them to avoid removing content unless there is a sufficiently good reason and users have been notified and presented that reason,” said Malcolm.

The overall aim with the Manila Principles is to influence policy changes for the better.

Malcolm pointed out that by coincidence, some encouraging developments have taken place in India. On the same day the principles were released, the Indian Supreme Court struck down the notorious Section 66A of the country’s Information Technology Act.

Since 2009, the law had allowed both criminal charges against users and the removal of content by intermediaries based on vague allegations that the content was “grossly offensive or has menacing character,” or that false information was posted “for the purpose of causing annoyance, inconvenience, danger, obstruction, insult, injury, criminal intimidation, enmity, hatred or ill will.”

Calling it a “landmark decision,” Malcolm noted that the case shows why the establishment and promotion of the Manila Principles are important.

“Not only is the potential overreach of this provision obvious on its face, but it was, in practice, misused to quell legitimate discussion online, including in the case of the plaintiffs in that case – two young women, one of whom made an innocuous Facebook post mildly critical of government officials, and the other who ‘liked’ it,” he said.

The court however, upheld section 69A of the Act, which allows the Government to block online content; and Section 79(3), which makes intermediaries such as YouTube or Facebook liable for not complying with government orders for censorship of content. — Digital News Asia

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/malaymail-online-gabey-goh-march-26-2015-noose-tightens-on-freedom-of-speech-on-the-internet

Non-Discrimination and Equal Opportunities Policy

praskrishna — 2020-07-29T06:59:09Z

Preliminary

This Non-Discrimination and Equal Opportunities Policy ("Policy") states the internal policy of the Centre for Internet & Society ("CIS") with regard to non-discrimination at the workplace and equal opportunities during recruitment.
This Policy is internal to CIS and is meant to provide a safe, diverse and comfortable workplace at CIS. This Policy is not legally mandated and, therefore, is not judicially enforceable in India. This Policy is without prejudice to any anti-discrimination provisions of applicable law including, but not restricted to, the provisions of:
- Article 17 of the Constitution of India;
- the Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955,
- the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989;
- the Sexual Harassment of Women at the Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013;
- Sections 354 and 509 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; and,
- the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995.

Non-discrimination

CIS will not adversely discriminate, and prohibits other adverse discrimination at the workplace, on the basis of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth, descent, sexual orientation, gender identity, disability, age or any of them ("Discrimination Characteristics"). CIS will not condone any adverse discrimination against any person on its premises, whether that person is in its employment or otherwise.
Any person who believes himself or herself to have been subjected to adverse discrimination on the basis of the Discrimination Characteristics is encouraged to bring the matter to the attention of the Diversity Committee of CIS at the earliest practical opportunity. No person will be punished, retaliated against, or limited in employment or other opportunity for exercising anything set out in this Policy, or for filing a complaint, furnishing information for, or participating in an investigation, or any other activity related to the administration of this Policy.
Any adverse discrimination or other action or behaviour that constitutes a violation of law will be reported to the police.

Equal Opportunities

CIS provides equal opportunities to its employment, consultancy or otherwise without regard for the Discrimination Characteristics. All actions of CIS with regard to its employees, consultants, advisors, interns and staff, including but not limited to those relating to compensation, benefits, transfers, leave, layoffs, training, education, and assistance, will be made without regard for the Discrimination Characteristics.
Notwithstanding anything contained in the previous paragraph, if CIS reasonably believes that its employment, workplace or premises do not adequately represent the balance of diversity of persons who share one or more of the Discrimination Characteristics, it may, with the aim only of redressing that imbalance, take positive discriminatory action in respect of persons who share that aspect, or those aspects, of the Discrimination Characteristics that are sought to be adequately represented.
Any person who believes himself or herself to have been subjected to adverse discrimination, or impermissible positive discrimination, on the basis of the Discrimination Characteristics is encouraged to bring the matter to the attention of the Diversity Committee of CIS at the earliest practical opportunity.

Diversity Committee

The Interim Diversity Committee of CIS is comprised of:

Pallavi Bedi
Torsha Sarkar
Gurshabad Grover

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/about/policies/non-discrimination-equal-opportunities-policy

Non human intelligence is closer than you think!

nishant — 2012-05-24T06:36:57Z

In one of the research projects that I have been involved in, I was recently a part of a jury, for a contest which required on-line voting. It sounded like a fun thing, giving the participants a chance to bring in their inherited networks and also expanding the reach of the contest entries.

Nishant Shah's article was published in FirstPost on April 25, 2012.

We were just about to close shop and announce the clear winners who had a landslide victory in the contest, when following up on a clue – a simple mismatch between the number of people who had visited the webpage and the number of votes polled – sniffed up by a colleague, we were suddenly faced with the suggestion that a lot of the votes cast in the contest were by non-human actors.

The first instincts for many of us involved were that an act of deception or fraud had happened. It felt natural, to most of us that when we asked for votes, we were specifically looking for human votes. Our relationship with technologies – digital or otherwise – has been primarily defined through usage. We use technologies so that we can perform an intended task. Especially with transparent and wearable portable technologies, we constantly think of them as disposable extensions which help execute our ideas and actions with efficiency.

In this one-way functional understanding of technologies, we often forget that these technologies are not merely tools. More often than not, the technologies that we interact with and engage with, shape the ways in which we look at the world. This is true even of the simplest of tools – If you have a hammer in your hand, the whole world appears to be a nail.

Within large-scale digital networks this becomes so much more complicated because the lines between human and non-human actors within those networks are very blurred. Our engagement with the network is not merely to use it as a conduit for communication. The network is an intelligent entity. It grows, learns, watches and responds to our different actions. There are actors within the network which can perform actions which might resemble, if they are not exactly the same, as the human actions in the same environment.

In fact, we are often faced with non-human actors – call them bots, scripts, artificial intelligence, or any other name – which are more efficient in performing certain repetitive and recursive actions which are necessary to sustain the network, that the human actor might be unable to cope with.

Think of your favourite social network and realise that there are so many ways by which the interface and the network, aided by a range of non-human actors, are interacting with you constantly to customise and ease your interactions within the network. Anthropomorphised guides give you tours of new applications. Email based bots notify of activity in your network. Sniffers detect your browser, your ISP, your connectivity speed, your browser, your access device, your preferred language, your customised settings, etc. to render the social network legible on your screen.

We increasingly depend upon these transparent workers, very much like the magical servants in Beast’s enchanted castle in the fairy tale about Beauty and the Beast. If you do a measure of who you interact with the most within a network you will quickly realise that what you actually interact with, within a network, is these non-human actors who facilitate your peer-2-peer connections in the digital domain.

And this is not limited to your social networking systems. As we move towards a more intuitive internet that operates through multiple nodes and forms pervasive and persuasive networks of being, we are increasingly living with non-human actors who can mimic life more efficiently in their native environments. The bots that perform edits on Wikipedia entries to clean the language and correct styles are made out of code.

Scripts that relay information about your usage so that it gets logged, tracked and visually presented in Google Analytics are also bits and bytes. The IVR that you use for your financial transactions or indeed the very systems which authenticate your credit card details, without you worrying about fraud is because it is done without human intervention. It is despite these transactions, or perhaps, because of it, that we refuse to think of technologies as sapient.

We often think of ourselves in technology terms and sometimes also Disnefy our gadgets by giving them names and talking of them as almost-human. However, when it comes to questions of actions or doing things, there is a false presumption that the human proposes and the technological does it, despite the contrary evidence that we generally have the technological dictating terms and us following them through within digital networks.

We resolved our small crisis by counting only the human votes. But that resolution is not one that we will be able to live with for long. We are soon going to enter worlds where the non-human actor in the network is going to have equal rights, agency, will and choices, and it will perform actions that will have equal credibility as the human one. If not more.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/non-human-intelligence

Noida cyber cell gives tips on preventing WannaCry attack

praskrishna — 2017-06-07T01:18:22Z

The attackers targeted a weakness found in older versions of Microsoft Windows.

The article by Juana McKenzie was published in the World News Journal on May 20, 2017.

Since late last week, the WannaCry cyber scourge has blocked customers the world over from accessing their data - unless they paid a ransom using Bitcoin. Here's what you should do to protect yourself.

Third, and perhaps more important: like the emperor's new clothes, even this new-fangled ransomware isn't as sophisticated as it's cracked up to be. If you're unsure about the legitimacy of something, delete it.

When Microsoft sells software it does so through a licensing agreement that states the company is not liable for any security breaches, said Michael Scott, a professor at Southwestern Law School.

It pays to know the proper file extensions that are available.

If you happen to come across files such as worklog.doc.exe, or financial_statement.xls.scr, do not open them as the files are most likely malicious.

'And this most recent attack represents a completely unintended but disconcerting link between the two most serious forms of cyber security threats in the world today - nation-state action and organised criminal action'.

Then there's the USA government, whose Windows hacking tools were leaked to the internet and got into the hands of cybercriminals.

However, a cyber security expert working with the Centre for Internet and Society, Udbhav Tiwari working on vulnerabilities such as these, said as most ATMs in the country especially of the public-sector banks run on outdated operating systems, or are not updated regularly, they can be easily compromised.

No. This strain of ransomware was spread from device to device by taking advantage of an old security hole in some versions of Microsoft's Windows operating system.

Microsoft released a patch for this vulnerability in March and, on the heels of the attack Friday, even took the unusual step of releasing fixes for older versions of Windows that are no longer supported, such as Windows XP, Windows Server 2013, and Windows 8. This included the release of the patch in March and an update on Friday to Windows Defender to detect the WannaCrypt attack.

As there are different types of ransomware, there is no single, easy solution to restore your computer if it has been infected. Enterprises need to test patches before installing them to ensure that they don't have compatibility issues with existing applications and break existing workflows.

Security experts have hailed Microsoft's decision to publicly call out the U.S. government and the NSA's decision to stockpile cyberweapons.

"As software has become ever more complex, interdependent and interconnected, our reputation as a company has in turn become more vulnerable", Gates wrote in an email to employees identifying trustworthy computing as Microsoft's top priority. Such software will act as the first line of defence by blocking auto downloads and actively scan for suspected threats on the PC.

The culprit was "ransomware" known as WanaCryptOr 2.0, or WannaCry.

Europol said a special task force at its European Cybercrime Centre was "specially created to assist in such investigations and will play an important role in supporting the investigation".

Kaspersky said it was seeking to develop a decryption tool "as soon as possible". If the ransomware has locked your entire PC, as WannaCry has done, combating it is more hard. Backups often are also out of date and missing critical information.

Cloud storage services such as Google Drive, Microsoft OneDrive, Dropbox and Box offer large amount of storage space for a monthly or yearly subscription fee.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/world-news-journal-juana-mckenzie-may-20-2017-noida-cyber-cell-gives-tips-on-preventing-wannacry-attack

No, India did NOT oppose the United Nations move to “make internet access a human right”

Pranesh Prakash and Japreet Grewal — 2016-07-13T16:09:31Z

Last Friday, the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) passed a resolution titled “The promotion, protection and enjoyment of human rights on the Internet.”

The article by Pranesh Prakash and Japreet Grewal was published in Factordaily on July 13, 2016.

Several media outlets, including T he Verge, India Today, and BuzzFeed, reported that the resolution was ‘opposed’ by China, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Africa and India. The Verge, for instance, reported that these countries “specifically opposed” a clause of the resolution that “condemns unequivocally measures to intentionally prevent or disrupt access to or dissemination of information online and calls for all countries to refrain from such measures”. This is pure bunkum. Some media organisations have also been reporting that the UNHRC resolution “declares that access to the Internet is a human right”. This too is fiction.

What’s the truth? The UNHRC resolution covers wide ground, including the reaffirmations of two previous resolutions, which stated that the same rights that people have offline must also be protected online as well. As ARTICLE19, an international free speech NGO, notes: “The draft resolution goes further than its predecessors, including by stressing the importance of an accessible and open Internet to the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals, as well as in calling for accountability for extrajudicial killings, arbitrary detentions and other violations against people for expressing themselves online.” Importantly, the resolution “unequivocally condemns” internet shutdowns, such as the one that happened in Kashmir just last week after security forces killed guerrilla Burhan Wani.

This resolution was, in fact, adopted without any opposition. So why the brouhaha over countries like India?

Here are the facts

There were four separate amendments, two of which were proposed by Belarus, China and Russia (referred as L85, L86 in this article) and the other two were proposed by Belarus, China, Russia and Iran (referred as L87 and L88). None of these amendments comment on the paragraph in the resolution that condemns intentional disruption of access or dissemination of internet services. So the headlines in most of the reports are just plain wrong. Let’s examine each of these four amendments one by one

In L85, an amendment was suggested to a paragraph that refers to past resolutions by the UNHRC and the UN General Assembly relating to freedom of expression and the right to privacy online. The amendment, which proposed including a reference to a previous UNHRC resolution on the rights of children online, was later withdrawn.

In L86 the proposed amendments both added and removed some text, and was hotly opposed by organisations like ARTICLE19. The proposed amendment said that the same rights people have offline must also be protected online, in particular, freedom of expression and the right to privacy, in accordance with articles 17 and 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), a multilateral treaty adopted by the United National General Assembly to respect civil and political rights of individuals. Major additions: Some text on right to privacy and a reference to Article 17 of the ICCPR, which is about privacy. Major deletions: a reference to the Universal Declaration on Human Rights, and language stating that that freedom of expression is “applicable regardless of frontiers and through any media of one’s choice”, which is present in article 19 of the ICCPR. However, article 19 of the ICCPR is incorporated by reference even in the proposed amendment! So is there a real loss in purely legal terms? Not really.

The amendments in L87 sought to replace the term “human rights based approach” that stressed on the need to provide and expand access to the internet, and to replace it with the term “comprehensive and integrated approach.” The problem is that there is no clarity about what a “human rights based approach” to providing and expanding access to the internet is. What does it even mean? Is there a “human rights based approach” to spectrum auctions and spectrum sharing? Or the laying of fibre optic cables? Or anything else associated with internet access? If there is, indeed, a human rights based approach to providing and expanding access to the internet, it should be spelt out, rather than simply calling it that. Similarly, the term “comprehensive and integrated approach” is equally vague.

Even if one harbours reservations about these amendments, none of these amendments could be reasonably be characterised as “opposing” the condemnation of Internet shutdowns or “opposing” online freedoms.

Finally, in L88, the amendments proposed that the UN resolution should acknowledge concerns about using the internet and information technology for spreading ideas about “racial superiority or hatred, incitement to racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance.” In the light of this, it is difficult to understand how adding concerns relating to hate speech to the resolution is seen as “being opposed” to online freedoms, especially when there is no direct action contemplated in the proposed amendment.

Indeed, in Paragraph 9, gender violence is mentioned, and in Paragraph 11, incitement to hatred is mentioned. Adding an additional, more specific reference can hardly be construed as being opposed to online freedoms. After all, states have a positive obligation to enact laws to prohibit hate speech under Article 20 (2) of the ICCPR, which is a centrepiece of international human rights law.

Even if one harbours reservations about these amendments, none of these amendments could be reasonably be characterised as “opposing” the condemnation of Internet shutdowns or “opposing” online freedoms. And factually, no states (including India, China, South Africa, Russia, and more) voted against the resolution.

A game of Chinese whispers

So why did so many prominent news organisations around the world get it so wrong? My theory is that it happened because organisation like ARTICLE19 put out press releases on what they perceived as the ‘weakening’ of the resolutions by the amendments examined above, and their regret that even democratic states like India and South Africa voted for these amendments. This was wrongly portrayed in much of the media as opposition by these countries to the resolution itself, to online freedoms, and particularly as opposition to the idea of condemning internet shutdowns. Thanks to the Chinese whispers nature of news reporting, this mistaken idea spread far and wide without any of the reporters bothering to check the original UN documents.

It is shameful if India condemns internet shutdowns at the UNHRC while deploying them for purposes such as preventing cheating during an examinations, during Ganesha visarjan, during Eid, during wrestling matches, and during protests.

However, regardless of the faulty reportage, there is a real crisis in India, with organisations like Medianama and the Software Freedom Law Centre having counted at least nine internet shutdowns this year alone, and at least 30 since 2013. It is shameful if India condemns internet shutdowns at the UNHRC while deploying them for purposes such as preventing cheating during an examinations, during Ganesha visarjan, during Eid, during wrestling matches, and during protests.

We at the Centre for Internet and Society have previously explained why a Gujarat High Court order allowing for an internet shutdown during riots was wrong in law, and violated our Constitution as well as our international human rights obligations. That is something the India media ought to be focussing far more on, but aren’t.

Lastly, it would also be welcome for the individual civil society organisations that signed an open letter to UNHRC members to explain why they too believed that these amendments would have significantly harmed our freedoms online. We see it instead as a case of ‘human rights politics’ being played out, when none of the proposed amendments would have had much of a negative legal impact, but only a political impact.

Should civil society organisations really get worked up about these?

Edited by: Pranav Dixit

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/factordaily-pranesh-prakash-and-japreet-grewal-july-13-2016-no-india-did-not-oppose-un-move-to-make-internet-access-a-human-right

No UID Campaign in New Delhi - A Report

praskrishna — 2012-06-20T03:51:45Z

The Unique Identification (UID) Bill is not pro-citizen. The scheme is deeply undemocratic, expensive and fraught with unforseen consequences. A public meeting on UID was held at the Constitution Club, Rafi Marg in New Delhi on 25 August, 2010. The said Bill came under scrutiny at the meeting which was organised by civil society groups from Mumbai, Bangalore and Delhi campaigning under the banner of "No UID". The speakers brought to light many concerns, unanswered questions and problems of the UID scheme.

Since 2009, when the UID Bill was presented to the general public by Nandan Nilekani, the project has been characterized as a landmark initiative that will transform India, bring in good governance, and provide relief and basic services for the poor. The scheme is rapidly being put in place; the draft Bill has been put before the Parliament of India and the resident numbers and data have been collected.

The UID proposes to take the finger prints and iris scans of every resident of India for authentication of each individual. J. T. D'Souza, an expert in free software technology exposed the flaws of the entire technical aspect of the UID project. He presented the risks and loopholes that technology such as iris and fingerprint scanners pose, and the risks in using a biometric system as a form of identification system. Contrary to the claim of the UID authority, that a scheme based on biometrics is foolproof, he explained how fingerprints are not unchanging, both fingerprints and iris scans can be easily spoofed (with a budget of only $10), and there are many ways in which the technology can break, be inconsistent, or be inaccurate.

From a human rights perspective the lack of democracy in the entire project was stressed. Usha Ramanathan reiterated the fact that no white paper was issued, the Bill has not gone through the Parliament and yet citizens’ data is being collected, citizens were given only a two week period to comment on the Bill, and in practice the UID number will not be voluntary for individuals.

The UID authority has posited the scheme as bringing benefits to the poor, plugging leakages in the Public Distribution System and the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (MGNREGS), as well as enabling inclusive growth by providing each citizen with a verifiable and portable identity. These claims were debunked. An identity number will not fix the waste of grain that takes place every day, the portability of the number raises new problems of accessibility and distribution of resources, and the MGNREGS system is already working to be financially inclusive with a majority of its members already having a bank account.

In response to hearing the presentations of the speakers and the comments by the audience, senior Member of Parliament of the Revolutionary Socialist Party of India (RSP), Abani Roy called for the launching of a massive campaign to resist this expensive and dangerous project through which several companies will gain massive contracts from the public exchequer.

The campaigners for No UID plans to hold further meetings across the country and lobby Parliamentarians in the coming months.

For more information contact: Mathew Thomas (Bangalore) mathew111983@gmaill.com, Elonnai Hickok (Bangalore) elonnai@cis-india.org , Sajan Venniyoor (Delhi): +91-9818453483 - Bobby Kunhu (Delhi): +91-9654510398

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/no-uid-campaign

No to homosexuals, yes to their vote

praskrishna — 2014-04-04T09:54:39Z

The ad appears at the bottom of the page. It has BJP’s symbol and Modi’s photograph displayed prominently.

The article by Yogesh Pawar was published in DNA on March 21, 2014. Sunil Abraham is quoted.

In a hotly contested election where every vote will count, the scramble among political parties to scrounge for votes is understandable. Yet, what would you make of a party that hates a community but wants their votes? The BJP had opposed any move to nullify Supreme Court's order re-criminalizing consensual sex among consenting adults, dealing a huge setback to any move to scrap or dilute Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). Party chief Rajnath Singh went to the extent of saying, "Gay sex is not natural and we cannot support something which is unnatural."

This is why the gay community across the country has expressed surprise to find a BJP ad asking for votes on the popular gay social media dating website grindr. The ad which will obviously lead to to a lot of red faces in the BJP, appears at the bottom of the page has both the party' lotus symbol and their prime-ministerial candidate Narendra Modi's photograph displayed prominently. It exhorts voters to vote BJP to stop price rise.

"This exposes the party's hypocrisy," guffawed India's pioneering gay rights activist Ashok Row Kavi. "So you want our votes and not us. I'm glad this has happened. The country will finally know the true face of falsehood of the party."

He's not alone. Many from the community have taken to social media sites like facebook and twitter to make their disgust known. Counselling psychologist Deepak Kashyap is one of them. "So, #BJP says it'd never support the "unnatural act" of homosexuality, but #NaMO has no qualms about asking for support on gay dating apps, like grindr! What a sham(e)!" he posted.

Linking most homophobia with an intense struggle with latent homosexuality Kashyap, the University of Bristol pass-out and equal rights activist for the LGBTQ community told dna, "Whatever makes you jump up in your chair, essentially makes you insecure about your own condition in some way or the other." According to him, similar results were shown in a research called 'Is Homophobia Associated with Homosexual Arousal?', by Georgia University published in the Journal of Abnormal Psychology.

When reached for comment, the BJP's National IT head Arvind Gupta said, "I am not aware of such an ad being placed on this website. If this is indeed true we will take it up with the advertising agency responsible." BJP spokesperson and Lok Sabha candidate from New Delhi Meenakshi Lekhi too told dna, "This is the first I am hearing of such an advertisement," and added, "In the first instance it seems like a deliberate act of mischief in the poll season to embarrass our party."

Centre for Internet and Society, Executive Director Sunil Abraham felt the ad on grindr may have to do more with the lack of knowledge than anything else. "We find many ads by top Indian corporate brands on pirate websites. This happens because people are still not completely conversant with negotiating with advertising networks when it comes to websites."

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/news/dna-march-21-2014-yogesh-pawar-no-to-homosexuals-yes-to-their-vote

We are anonymous, we are legion

November 2012 Bulletin

Pervasive Technologies: Access to Knowledge in the Marketplace

Access to Knowledge Programme

HasGeek

Media Coverage

Videos

November 2011 Bulletin

Key Research

Links in the Chain

Articles/Columns

Staff Quoted in the Media

Pathways for Learning in Higher Education

Article Published by the Media

Video of Event Participated

Publication

Blog Post

Key Research

Blog Posts

Comments / Statement

Featured Research

Event Organised

Event Participated

Announcement

Comments / Submissions

Statement

Podcast

Event Report

Essay in Peer Reviewed Journal

Articles/Columns

Staff Quoted in the Media

Blog Posts

Events Organised

Events Participated

Upcoming Events

Video

Column

Follow us elsewhere

November 2010 Bulletin

News Updates

Upcoming Event

Research

Accessibility

Intellectual Property

Internet Governance

Telecom

Nothing to Kid About – Children's Data Under the New Data Protection Bill

1. Age of Consent

2. How is the 2021 Bill Different from the 2019 Bill?

3. In the Absence of a Guardian Data Fiduciary

Conclusion

Notes for India as the digital trade juggernaut rolls on

Holding out

Global rules on digital trade

A contested regime

India’s choices

Not Surprised by Indian govt's data localisation directives: Michael Dell

Not Everyone Plays by the Rules in the Digital Playground: Addressing Online Child Sexual Exploitation

Northeast exodus: Is there a mechanism to pre-screen social media content?

Noose tightens on freedom of speech on the Internet

Non-Discrimination and Equal Opportunities Policy

Preliminary

Non-discrimination

Equal Opportunities

Diversity Committee

Non human intelligence is closer than you think!

Noida cyber cell gives tips on preventing WannaCry attack

No, India did NOT oppose the United Nations move to “make internet access a human right”

No UID Campaign in New Delhi - A Report

No to homosexuals, yes to their vote