The Centre for Internet and Society
https://cis-india.org
These are the search results for the query, showing results 51 to 65.
National IPR Policy: Mapping the Stakeholders’ Response
https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/national-ipr-policy-mapping-the-stakeholders2019-response
<b>The first draft of the National IPR Policy was released last December. Following that, a plethora of comments and suggestions was submitted to the DIPP on the same. In this post, I will focus on the comments that were available online and analyse the trends that I was able to find in the same and also highlight the many suggestions put forth by the stakeholders.</b>
<p>Nehaa Chaudhari provided inputs and feedback and also edited this post.</p>
<hr />
<h3>I. Introduction</h3>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">On 24<sup>th</sup> December 2014, the IPR Think Tank constituted by the Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion (DIPP) officially released the <a href="http://dipp.nic.in/English/Schemes/Intellectual_Property_Rights/IPR_Policy_24December2014.pdf">first draft</a> of the National IPR Policy. Following this, in a <a href="http://dipp.nic.in/English/acts_rules/Press_Release/pressRelease_IPR_Policy_30December2014.pdf">press release</a> dated 30<sup>th</sup> December, 2014, the DIPP called for comments and suggestions on the draft from all stakeholders. CIS, through an RTI, asked the DIPP to disclose all the comments received by it. However, the DIPP’s reply, rather vague, stated that it is not in the position to provide the same. (Further details <a href="http://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/national-ipr-policy-series-rti-requests-by-cis-to-dipp-dipp-responses">here</a>).</p>
<h3 style="text-align: justify; ">II. Research Methodology</h3>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">In this post, I have compiled and compared the various submissions that I was able to find online in a <a href="http://spicyip.com/2015/03/more-submissions-on-the-draft-ip-policy.html">SpicyIP post</a> and will provide an analysis of the same.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The <a href="https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/ipr-policy-comments" class="internal-link">spreadsheet</a> that I have created contains a compilation of the many issues that were raised by 15 stakeholders of various affiliations (organisations/scholars/unions). This spreadsheet was put together after reading each submission carefully, and summarizing the same. After dividing the contents of the submissions into the various issues, they were put under certain heads in this sheet. Though there were a few ideas covered by certain submissions that have not been tabulated, all the major and important ones have been covered, in my opinion.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">On the basis of this spreadsheet, the following observations have been made on the feedback of the many stakeholders on the various aspects of the draft.</p>
<h3 style="text-align: justify; ">III. Stakeholders - A Statistical Analyis</h3>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">A total of 15 submissions were taken into consideration for the purpose of this post, and all of them applauded the government for recognizing of the need for a comprehensive policy on IP and the DIPP’s efforts to give the public a chance to play a role in the process of formation of a policy that would affect the country and its economy significantly. However, each submission had its own set of criticisms and suggestions to the various aspects dealt with by the policy. In my analysis there are three broad categories that the stakeholders can be divided into:</p>
<ul>
<li>Research organisations/NGOs.</li>
<li>Industrial representative bodies/Political organisations.</li>
<li>Scholars/Academia. </li>
</ul>
<p>A representation of the stakeholders and the categories that they belong to has been produced below.</p>
<table class="plain">
<tbody>
<tr>
<th>Categories</th><th>Stakeholders</th>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Research organisations/NGOs</td>
<td>Centre for Internet and Society (CIS); Consumer Unity & Trust Society (CUTS); Software Freedom Law Centre (SFLC); Centre for Law & Policy Research (CLPR).</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Industrial representative bodies/Political organisations</td>
<td style="text-align: justify; ">Intellectual Property Owners Association (IPO); National Association of Manufacturers (NAM); International Trademark Association (INTA); IP Federation – UK; ICC’s Business Action to Stop Counterfeiting and Piracy (BASCAP); Swadeshi Jagaran Manch (SJM); American Chamber of Commerce (AmCham – India).</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Scholars/Academia</td>
<td style="text-align: justify; ">Centre for Intellectual Property and Technology Law – O.P. Jindal Global University (CIPTEL); S. Ragavan, B. Baker, S. Flynn; Adv. Ravindra Chingale – NLU Delhi; Prof. N.S. Gopalakrishnan & Dr T.G. Agitha – CUSAT.</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p><img src="https://cis-india.org/home-images/copy_of_Flowchart.png" alt="Flowchart" class="image-inline" title="Flowchart" /></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Out of the comments studied, the largest chunk of stakeholders (46.67%) belonged to the industrial/manufacturing sector, with the other two categories comprising only 26.67% each. This could be attributed to the fact that a country’s IPR policy has a very vital role to play in influencing an industrial firm’s strategy and an unsatisfactory policy could have a serious and adverse effect on the profit-making abilities of an industry.</p>
<h3 style="text-align: justify; ">IV. IP - Innovation / Growth Nexus</h3>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">There are a total of 13 themes that have been identified in the spreadsheet, and out of these 13, the one that the largest number of stakeholders has commented on is the question of there being nexus between intellectual property, innovation and growth. Eleven out of the fifteen stakeholders have given their opinion on this issue.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The opinion on this theme is not very uniform. Some organisations are of the opinion that there is a strong correlation between robust IPR protection mechanisms and innovation in a country, and thus there is a resultant benefit to the economy of the country. For example, the IP Federation of UK claimed that with a strong IPR regime, there is a greater inflow of FDI and R&D expenditure in countries, thus benefitting the country’s economy. On the other hand, there are some stakeholders who believe that there is no nexus and that the underlying assumption made by the draft policy is not backed by any research or evidence. The Centre for Internet and Society (CIS), for example, even cites evidence in its submission to oppose this assumption. The smallest chunk of stakeholders suggests to the Think Tank that in the current draft, there is not enough authority cited by them, and thus, there should be some research that must be done in order to give this assumption some backing. CIPTEL, a research centre based in OP Jindal Global University, stated that there should be a transparent survey conducted on this issue by a neutral agency.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The figure below would give the reader a comparative analysis of the responses from the stakeholders on this particular theme.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><img src="https://cis-india.org/home-images/copy2_of_Flowchart.png" alt="Assumption" class="image-inline" title="Assumption" /></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">All the research organisations/NGOs that presented their views on this assumption are in opposition to the same and have proposed to the Think Tank that it should amend the contents of the policy after taking this incorrectly-made assumption out of the mix.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">A majority of the industrial bodies have supported the existence of a nexus and have stated that by enforcing stronger IPR protection laws, the innovative/inventive environment of a country develops and this in turn encourages investors, which culminates into a rise in the growth of the economy.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Scholars and academia have a difference of opinion amongst themselves and there is no uniform pattern that can be seen in their responses to this issue.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The only political organisation in this analysis, the Swadeshi Jagaran Manch opposes the assumption and states that the policy has turned a blind eye to the development of the country and that there is no analysis on whether there is any effect of the proposed strengthening of IP protection on the various sectors of the economy.</p>
<h3 style="text-align: justify; ">V. International Treaties</h3>
<p>The policy, in its introduction states the following stance on negotiation of international treaties and agreements – “<i>In future negotiations in international forums and with other countries, India shall continue to give precedence to its national development priorities whilst adhering to its international commitments and avoiding TRIPS plus provisions.”</i></p>
<p>On this general theme, 9 out of 15 stakeholders have submitted their comments to the Think Tank. <i> </i>Out of these 9, the category-wise division of the stakeholders is represented by the diagram below.<img src="https://cis-india.org/home-images/copy3_of_Flowchart.png" alt="" class="image-inline" title="" /></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "> </p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The opinion of the stakeholders on this issue varied and there were broadly 3 kinds of responses that were found in the analysis. More than half of these responses (56%) suggested that all negotiations of treaties must be done transparently, with proper consultation of all stakeholders. CUTS, for example, recommended that to increase the confidence of the people in the country’s IP regime, the negotiations must be done with the opinion of all stakeholders being taken into consideration. They also cautioned the government to make sure that any future agreements do not contain any TRIPS-plus provisions. The second category applauded the policy’s pro-global stance towards IPR developments, and has recommended certain treaties that India must sign in order to strengthen its regime (details in spreadsheet). Only one stakeholder, the National Association of Manufacturers of the USA suggested that India’s stance of avoiding TRIPS-plus agreements is in contravention to its objective of keeping up with global IP developments. This point of view is clearly in favour of the USA as TRIPS-plus provisions have always been more beneficial to developed countries than developing countries like India.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Thus, it can be said that almost 90% of stakeholders, from across categories, are satisfied with India’s pro-international stance, and only want the government to be cautious and consult the public before signing treaties on IPR.</p>
<h3 style="text-align: justify; ">VI. Utility Models</h3>
<p>A provision to legalise utility model protection was also a part of the draft policy. Utility models or petty patents are suggested by the policy in order to protect parties like MSMEs and their many innovations which may not satisfy the requirements of regular patent protection and thus losing out from IPR protection, leading to benefits not being reaped properly from these inventions.</p>
<p>This provision was commented on by eight of the 15 stakeholders, making it a little above half of the total. A category-wise division can be found below.</p>
<p><img src="https://cis-india.org/home-images/copy4_of_Flowchart.png" alt="Utility Models" class="image-inline" title="Utility Models" /></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The opinion on utility models was majorly negative across categories, with 75% of the stakeholders believing that utility model protection must be given a second thought and many drawbacks were pointed out such as frivolous litigation, uncertainty in the market, and a drop in the quality of innovation registered in the country. A review of how effective utility model laws are in other countries was suggested before making any final decision. Only 2 out of the 8 stakeholders supported the provision for petty patents and stated that this would give a good means of protection to ‘<i>jugaad</i>’ innovations that are very popular in India and thus believed that such laws would help increase the innovation levels in the country.</p>
<h3>VII. Public Funded Research Labs and Universities</h3>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Only four stakeholders had a say on the issue of grants to Government labs and universities, these organisations being Indian research organisations and academia. The opinion varied from party to party and the Centre for Internet and Society argued that if there was a rise in IP protection for government funded research, it would be against the vision of free and open access to research funded by taxpayers’ money.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The other three stakeholders, namely CIPTEL, CUTS and Adv. Ravindra Chingale emphasised on the importance of merit-based funding instead of funding on the basis of whether an organisation is Government-owned or not. Two of these also suggested that there must be a system of contact between industry and academia to incentivise and utilize innovation properly.</p>
<h3>VIII. Limitations and Flexibilities</h3>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">A very important aspect of any IPR regime is the presence of limitations, exceptions and flexibilities on the rights protected by IP laws, as it allows for the appropriate amount of information being shared for free or at reasonable costs, for furtherance of public interest.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">On this vital issue, most stakeholders had a say and the trends of the feedback on the limitations and flexibilities on IP protection were as expected. There were two broad sets of opinions that could be gathered from the analysis, and while there was a majority (62.5%) of organisations and people who believed that the government must keep up its efforts of providing a good framework for exceptions to IPR protection with measures like compulsory licensing being put in place in order to protect broader interests of the country such as access to reasonably priced medicines and other necessities. The only recommendation that they had was that these measures should be decided after a careful analysis of what the economy really needed in order to develop further.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The opposition, quite understandably came from international industrial bodies representing manufacturers and intellectual property owners who argued that the policy of limitations to IPR protection is discouraging those who want to invest in the country and that it hurts the business of foreign-based companies that operate in India or want to do so in the near future as their intellectual property may not be protected adequately with such a policy in place.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><img src="https://cis-india.org/Flowchart.png" alt="Limitations and Flexibilities" class="image-inline" title="Limitations and Flexibilities" /></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The figure above clearly points out that none of those against limitations being placed on IP protection had an Indian background and all those in favour of the same were primarily Indian-based organisations and academics, with the exception of the American scholars – S. Ragavan, B. Baker, and S. Flynn.</p>
<h3 style="text-align: justify; ">IX. Trademarks</h3>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Only a single stakeholder, the International Trademark Association, was interested in the issue of trademarks. This can be attributed to the fact that this is the only association out of all the stakeholders having a direct interest in trademark law and policy. The organisation suggested that there should be a greater amount of clarity in the trademark examination process and also suggested that there should be an increase in the number of examiners to make the process of trademark registration quicker.</p>
<h3 style="text-align: justify; ">X. Trade Secrets</h3>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">In objective 3 of the draft policy, the Think Tank suggests that to strengthen the IP framework of the country, trade secret protection must be introduced as a formal law. India, today, does not have a law to protect sensitive trading information and there needs to be a formalised contract for there to be any relief for leaking of such information.</p>
<p>The stakeholders supporting the enactment of trade secret legislation were interestingly all industrial bodies representing international companies and firms. Only 2 parties expressed their worries about such a law, and argued that there must be more backing to make this recommendation more convincing. A graphical representation of the stakeholders is given below to provide a clearer picture of the responses.</p>
<p><img src="https://cis-india.org/home-images/copy5_of_Flowchart.png" alt="Trade Secret Protection" class="image-inline" title="Trade Secret Protection" /></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">This chart portrays clearly that international bodies are insistent on the enactment of a trade secret law as this would help incentivise knowledge sharing in the country. In many countries, trade secret protection is formalised legally and these stakeholders argue that for foreign multinationals to feel confident while sharing sensitive information with others in India, the government must follow in the footsteps of such countries and legislate on this matter soon.</p>
<h3 style="text-align: justify; ">XI. On Specialised Courts</h3>
<p>A common suggestion found across 5 of the 15 stakeholder responses was for the creation of a specialised IP judiciary that would be formed by widening the patent bench that was proposed in the draft policy. Such a court would deal only with issues of intellectual property and would consist of judges having special knowledge in the various branches of IP law.</p>
<h3>XII. Conclusion</h3>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The draft policy was released almost a year ago, and since then, much discussion has taken place on the same, with many contradictory opinions and suggestions on the various aspects of the policy. It can be observed from this compilation that industrial bodies have been insistent on stronger IP protection and more incentives to multinationals to invest in India in the form of trade secret legislations, keeping limitations such as compulsory licensing to a minimum, et al.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">On the other hand, a trend could be seen of research organisations and academia having a view that was more in the interest of the public and with the Indian scenario taken into consideration, with the criticism of utility models, TRIPS-plus agreements, and by raising the question of whether the assumption underlying the draft of there being a link between IP protection and a rise in innovation had any basis whatsoever. This post, however, is only a glimpse of the stakeholders’ responses owing to the fact that the DIPP has not officially released the submissions made to it and only the ones that were available online have been taken into consideration.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">It is only a matter of time that the Think Tank releases the final policy and one shall hope that this tedious process of seeking comments and suggestions will bear any fruit with the policy being a balanced one and being aimed ultimately towards the benefit of the country as a whole.</p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/national-ipr-policy-mapping-the-stakeholders2019-response'>https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/national-ipr-policy-mapping-the-stakeholders2019-response</a>
</p>
No publisherAkshath MithalIntellectual Property RightsCopyrightAccess to Knowledge2015-11-24T15:02:17ZBlog EntryNational IPR Policy Series : Comments on the Proposed Intellectual Property Rights Policy to the Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion
https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/comments-on-proposed-ip-rights-policy-to-dipp
<b>On 13 November, 2014, the Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion had released a Call for Suggestions for India's proposed National IPR Policy. This is the Centre for Internet and Society's (CIS) submission for the same.</b>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Submitted by CIS with inputs from Pranesh Prakash, Director, Nehaa Chaudhari, Programme Officer, Anubha Sinha, Programme Officer and Amulya P., Intern. <a href="https://cis-india.org/a2k/comments-on-ip-rights-policy-to-dipp.pdf" class="external-link">Click</a> to view the PDF.</p>
<hr />
<h2 style="text-align: justify;">I. Preliminary</h2>
<p style="text-align: justify;">I.1. This submission presents comments from the Centre for Internet and Society (<strong>"CIS"</strong>)<a name="_ftnref1" href="#_ftn1">[1]</a> on the proposed National Intellectual Property Rights Policy <strong>("National IPR policy") </strong>to the Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion, Ministry of Commerce and Industry, Government of India. <strong>("DIPP"</strong>).</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">I.2. CIS commends the DIPP for this initiative, and appreciates the opportunity to provide comments on the National IPR Policy. CIS' comments are as stated hereafter.</p>
<h2 style="text-align: justify;">II. Principles</h2>
<p style="text-align: justify;">II.1.1. The characterization of intellectual property rights may be two- fold- <em>first,</em> at their core, intellectual property rights, are temporary monopolies granted to <em>inter alia,</em> authors and inventors; and <em>second, </em>they are a tool to ensure innovation, social, scientific and cultural progress and further access to knowledge. This dual nature and purpose of intellectual property protection is particularly critical in developing economies such as India. Excessive intellectual property protection could result in stunted innovation and negatively impact various stakeholders. <a name="_ftnref2" href="#_ftn2">[2]</a> It is therefore our submission that the development of the IPR Policy be informed by broader principles of fairness and equity, balancing intellectual property protections with limitations and exceptions/user rights such as those for research, education and access to medicines.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">II.1.2. These comments will evaluate the recent developments in the intellectual property regime in India and point out instances for possible reform.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">II.1.3. These comments have been divided into five sections, dealing with patents, openness, open access to scholarly works, copyright, and negotiating free trade agreements in that order.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">III. <strong>Detailed Comments</strong></p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">III.1. <strong>Patents</strong></p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">III.1.1. <strong>Key Issues Regarding Patents</strong></p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">III.1.1.1. The key issues involving patents in India include compulsory licensing, uncertainty in software patenting, slow pace of examination of patent applications, <em>inter alia</em>.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">III.1.1.2. CIS submits that the Indian intellectual property regime contains numerous safeguards to ensure that monopolies of intellectual property are not exercised to the detriment of the public and that the National IPR Policy should continue to reflect these ideals.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">III.1.2. <strong>Software Patents and Dual Monopoly </strong></p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">III.1.2.1. Presently, software in India may be copyrighted and computer related inventions are patentable. CIS is of the opinion that this results in an ambiguity that could potentially result in a dual monopoly over the same subject matter. This ambiguity around the legality of software patents and the scope of patents on computer related inventions has existed since the Parliament introduced the term "per se" to section 3(k) through the Patent (Amendment) Act, 2002, persisting despite repeated attempts<a name="_ftnref3" href="#_ftn3">[3]</a> to bring about clarity in the law (the most recent one being the Draft Guidelines on Computer Related Inventions, released in 2013 by the Indian patent office).</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">III.1.2.2. CIS believes that software is currently adequately protected under copyright, and does not merit patent protection. The software industry in its infancy grew by leaps and bounds in the absence of patents, and imposing twenty year monopolies is stunting the development of software, especially, in an industry where technology changes every two to five years.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">III.1.2.3. Therefore, CIS is of the opinion that the National IPR Policy should recognise the danger of software patenting, and encourage the adoption of and development of alternatives to a strict intellectual property regime, for instance, Free/Open Source/Libre Software.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">III.1.3. <strong>Compulsory Licensing of Patents</strong></p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">III.1.3.1. CIS believes that the current regime allowing for compulsory licensing of patents in India helps achieve a balance between the two concerns of rewarding inventions and making them available to the public during times of need, of the rights of the patent holder with his obligations to ensure availability of products at a reasonable price by allowing third parties who do not own the patent to license the use of the patent during the term of protection.<a name="_ftnref4" href="#_ftn4">[4]</a> CIS believes that such a balance cannot be arrived at merely by market mechanisms. CIS further believes that achieving such a balance is important for a developing country like India as we have special concerns regarding access to healthcare and access to technologies that will protect our national interest.<a name="_ftnref5" href="#_ftn5">[5]</a></p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">III.1.3.2. Therefore CIS submits that the National IPR policy should continue to make positive allowances for government involvement in this space, through the compulsory licensing of patents in certain situations.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">III.1.4. <strong>Alternative Licensing Mechanisms</strong></p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">III.1.4.1. CIS believes that government participation in the patenting regime ensures that all interests are taken on board and the social costs of patents are kept in mind. CIS is of the opinion that the National IPR policy should be formed after careful consideration of alternative patent licensing mechanisms that could help achieve a balance between the interests of different stakeholders particularly because as a developing economy we have greater needs for access to medicines and technologies to ensure economic development.<a name="_ftnref6" href="#_ftn6">[6]</a></p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">III.1.4.2. On patent pools: In the interests of ensuring development of technology and innovation while balancing the social costs of patents, CIS submits that the National IPR Policy should consider alternative licensing mechanisms such as patent pools which present an efficient legal arrangement to the different problems that arise when companies have complementary intellectual property rights and these rights are essential to new technologies being used and employed<a name="_ftnref7" href="#_ftn7">[7]</a>. Such a licensing could be done with government participation to ensure standard royalty rates and standard agreements.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">III.1.4.3. On tailoring patent strengths: Our patent system provides for a one size first all approach to patent terms. CIS believes that the National IPR Policy could suggest the adoption of a more studied approach to differential patent strengths that properly balances out the benefits of the innovation against social costs of patents both in the form of monopoly pricing and threats to subsequent pricing is required to ensure that our patent system is fair equitable and in our national interest.<a name="_ftnref8" href="#_ftn8">[8]</a></p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">III.1.4.4. On royalty caps: CIS believes that the National IPR policy could encourage bringing back royalty caps for certain sectors as a means of regulating the market and ensuring that access to technologies is unharmed. CIS believes that this will serve the larger national interest and ensure technological development.<a name="_ftnref9" href="#_ftn9">[9]</a></p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">III.2. <strong>Openness</strong></p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">III.2.1. <strong>Free and Open Source Software</strong></p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">III.2.1.1. Free and Open Source Software ("FOSS") has emerged as a key agent in information technology policy making in India. There has been an increased importance of free and open source software in education, governmental agencies, as recently demonstrated by the Indian Government's decision to shift to open source software, in sync with the Digital India initiative.<a name="_ftnref10" href="#_ftn10">[10]</a></p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">III.2.1.2. CIS believes that the IPR policy should encourage free and open software in education, governmental agencies etc. CIS believes that this shift in open source software is necessary to keep our IPR policy in sync with developments in the digital world.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">III.3. <strong>Open Access to Scholarly Works</strong></p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">III.3.1. <strong>Open Access Policies and Scientific and Scholarly Works</strong></p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">III.3.1.1. The benefits of implementing an open access policy with regard to scientific and scholarly works are manifold. Providing open access to scholarly research will ensure percolation of cutting edge research into the society. It has been often argued that restricted access to government funded research is unethical, since scientific research conducted by government agencies is partly, if not entirely, funded by the taxpayers' money.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">III.3.1.2. <strong>Government Initiatives Towards Open Access</strong></p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">III.3.1.2.1. CIS believes that the steps taken in this regard by the Department of Biotechnology and Department of Science to make scientific research publicly available by developing an open access policy are laudable, especially from the view of increasing access to research undertaken at these institutions.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">III.3.1.2.2. There are several other government agencies which have implemented open access policies, namely, the Council of Scientific and Industrial Research, Indian Council of Agricultural Research and Institute of Mathematical Sciences. CIS believes that this is step in the right direction</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">III.3.1.2.3. Copyright is the key instrument to effect open access policies. CIS believes that the work should be appropriately copyrighted to allow for free and open access to any interested person.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">III.4. <strong>Copyright</strong></p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">III.4.1. <strong>Exceptions for Fair Dealings</strong></p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">III.4.1.1. The 2012, Amendment Act extended fair dealing exceptions in several ways; to sound recordings, videos, to the making of three dimensional works from two dimensional works,<a name="_ftnref11" href="#_ftn11">[11]</a> to storing of electronic copies at non-commercial public libraries, <a name="_ftnref12" href="#_ftn12">[12]</a> to rights of commercial rental.<a name="_ftnref13" href="#_ftn13">[13]</a> While the Act touched upon some of the burning issues with regard to limitations and exceptions to copyright, CIS believes that it did miss out on laying down clear rules for issues like exceptions for educational institutions, libraries and archives which is currently being negotiated at the standing committee of the WIPO as an international instrument,<a name="_ftnref14" href="#_ftn14">[14]</a> parallel importation of books for non-commercial libraries, and extending the current exceptions for education to distance education and digital education. CIS is of the opinion that while this was a step in the right direction the IPR policy should continue the trend of extending exceptions for fair dealing and should encourage forming general guidelines for fair dealings as it would help achieve goals of education and scientific and cultural progress.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">III.4.1.2. CIS believes that it would be beneficial if general guidelines for fair dealing were provided for. These guidelines must not take away from existing fair dealing exceptions under the law, but should act as a framework to understand what constitutes fair dealing. CIS submits that this coupled with support for the International Treaty for Limitations and Exceptions for Libraries and Archives<a name="_ftnref15" href="#_ftn15">[15]</a> and for International Treaty for Limitations and Exceptions for Educational and Research Institutions <a name="_ftnref16" href="#_ftn16">[16]</a>would help serve national interest as it would help reduce the freezing effect by reducing the costs of using copyrighted work legitimately and ensure social and cultural progress. CIS submits that the National IPR policy should encourage the international instruments aimed at providing for exceptions and limitations for fair dealings.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">III.4.2. <strong>Exceptions for Government Produced Works</strong></p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">III.4.2.1. CIS believes that the current exceptions for use of government produced works are far too limited and taxpayers must be free to use the works that they have paid for.<a name="_ftnref17" href="#_ftn17">[17]</a> CIS submits that the National IPR policy should encourage the broadening of exceptions with regard to government produced works.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">III.4.3. <strong>Compulsory Licensing</strong></p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">III.4.3.1. The Act allowed for compulsory licensing of foreign works<a name="_ftnref18" href="#_ftn18">[18]</a> and put in place statutory licenses for broadcasters<a name="_ftnref19" href="#_ftn19">[19]</a> CIS believes that this was a positive step that will encourage cultural and scientific education in India. CIS submits that compulsory licenses for copyrighted works help achieve goals of education, of scientific and cultural progress. CIS submits that the National IPR policy should encourage compulsory licensing of copyrighted works in certain situations for the promotion of access to knowledge and information.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">III.4.4. <strong>Protection of Authors/ Performers Rights</strong></p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">III.4.4.1. The Act allowed for protection of author's rights regarding storing of their work in electronic medium<a name="_ftnref20" href="#_ftn20">[20]</a> and for protection of rights of performers both commercial <a name="_ftnref21" href="#_ftn21">[21]</a> and moral.<a name="_ftnref22" href="#_ftn22">[22]</a> CIS believes that while this is in itself a positive step, there is need to ensure that such moral rights are not abused by authors or rights holders to stop discourse or to stop fair use and adequate measures to ensure the same must be put in place to avoid excessive intellectual property rights. CIS submits that the National IPR policy should discuss limitations to moral rights of authors and performers to make room for fair dealings.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">III.4.5. <strong>Users Rights Regarding Cover Versions Of Songs</strong></p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">III.4.5.1. The Act allows for users to make cover versions of a sound recording required provided they comply with rules regarding notices and royalties. CIS believes that this is potentially problematic as even recording companies have acknowledged that the non-commercial cover versions help in increasing the popularity of the original and therefore help in the growth of the film and music industry and this new law could possibly stop individuals from making such cover versions due to fear of violating the law and therefore harm the film and music industry. Therefore, CIS believes that the National IPR policy should consider measures to provide more rights to the users in order to ensure development of the music and film industry; CIS believes that this is an instance of excessive intellectual property and is harmful to all stakeholders involved.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">III.4.6. <strong>Relinquishment of Copyright and Creative Commons</strong></p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">III.4.6.1. The amended Section 21 of the Act now only requires a simply public notice from the author to relinquish his copyright as opposed to an application to the registrar of copyrights. CIS believes that this is a positive step as now the requirement under the rules can easily be satisfied by using a Creative Commons Zero license.<a name="_ftnref23" href="#_ftn23">[23]</a> CIS submits that the National IPR policy should undertake similar steps to encourage the usage of creative commons licenses and thereby facilitate access to knowledge.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">III.4.7. <strong>Term of Protection of Copyrights</strong></p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">III.4.7.1. The Act provided for an extension of term of copyright for photographs to almost double its earlier duration, <a name="_ftnref24" href="#_ftn24">[24]</a> CIS believes that this is possibly harmful as it could lead to copyrighted works not entering the public domain for unnecessarily long periods of time and thereby harm progress in science and culture. In this regard CIS further believes that since the term of protections provided under our copyright law for all works extends beyond our international obligations, The National IPR policy should try to ensure that scientific and cultural development are not hindered by excessive terms of protection that go beyond the minimum owed under our international obligations.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">III.4.8. <strong>Protection Of Rights Management Information</strong></p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">III.4.8.1. The amendment Act provided for protection of rights management information (RMI) and provided for both criminal and civil remedies in instances of unauthorised alteration or removal of RMIs.<a name="_ftnref25" href="#_ftn25">[25]</a> CIS believes that these provisions are unnecessary as India does not have obligations to do so under international treaties and there is no actual demand for these rights as it is yet unclear how these rights help authors or performers. CIS submits that these provisions increase the costs for users who want to legitimately break these digital locks to obtain accessible formats for the information and that so long as the rights holder does not have an obligation to ensure that their works are accessible, provisions such as these cripple creativity and stunt industry growth.<a name="_ftnref26" href="#_ftn26">[26]</a> Therefore CIS submits that the National IPR policy should help achieve a balance of concerns of users who want to legitimately break these digital locks on the one hand and the need to prevent digital piracy on the other.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">III.4.9. <strong>Intermediary Liability</strong></p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">III.4.9.1. CIS submits that due to the IT (Intermediary Guidelines) Rules, 2011, there is a freezing effect on free speech on the internet as these rules are procedurally flawed and go against the principles of natural justice.<a name="_ftnref27" href="#_ftn27">[27]</a> CIS believes that such a restraint on free speech harms creativity and innovation, to this end CIS submits that the National IPR policy should ensure free speech is not unfairly hindered by rules regarding copyright infringement.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">III.4.10. <strong>Criminalization of Copyright Infringement</strong></p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">III.4.10.1. Individual non-commercial infringement of copyright is a crime under Section 63A of the Copyright Act <a name="_ftnref28" href="#_ftn28">[28]</a> and is punishable by imprisonment which can extend to three years or a fine that can extend up to rs. 2,00,000/- CIS believes that this is an instance of excessive intellectual property protection; CIS is of the opinion that the civil remedies available for copyright enforcement are enough for copyright protection and that the criminal remedies under the Copyright Act, 1957 function only to ensure that there are obstacles to free and legitimate use of copyrighted material. CIS believes that such provisions are harmful for innovation within India and impose unnecessary costs on users.<a name="_ftnref29" href="#_ftn29">[29]</a> Therefore CIS believes the National IPR policy should reconsider the question of criminalisation of copyright infringement and should ensure that any penal consequences are proportional to the act committed.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">III.4.11. <strong>Concluding Remarks on Copyrights</strong></p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">III.4.11.1. In conclusion while India has what some call the most balanced approach to intellectual property law in the world today, <a name="_ftnref30" href="#_ftn30">[30]</a> one that balances both the interests of the author and the copyrights holder as well as the end user and the overall public interest, there is room for improvement as far as adapting to the internet age is concerned, especially considering the easy appeal of forming an intellectual property regime that is excessive and in the end harms all the concerned stakeholders.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">III.5. <strong>Free Trade Agreements (FTAs)</strong></p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">III.5.1. <strong>Need for Transparency Regarding FTA Negotiations</strong></p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">III.5.1.1. India has lately been negotiating Free Trade Agreements with several developed nations, these are closed door negotiations and the texts of the meetings are not available to the public. CIS believes that these texts should be made available to the public to ensure transparency and to ensure all stakeholders know of any developments, CIS believes that public knowledge of the positions of various actors in any negotiation process will help ensure that such positions are taken keeping in mind the interests of all stakeholders and will ensure that any outcome from such negotiations will be in national interest.<a name="_ftnref31" href="#_ftn31">[31]</a> CIS therefore submits that the National IPR policy should encourage transparency with regards to negotiations for free trade agreements.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">III.5.2. <strong>FTAs with Developed Nations and TRIPS Plus Standards</strong></p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">III.5.2.1. Leaked drafts of the European Union- India FTA negotiations have revealed that provisions on intellectual property protection were extensive and affected the pharmaceuticals sector, these provisions, if agreed upon, could go well beyond India's obligations under the WTO and under the Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) Agreement. In fact, developed countries including the US <a name="_ftnref32" href="#_ftn32">[32]</a> and EU<a name="_ftnref33" href="#_ftn33">[33]</a> have tried time again and again to encourage developing countries to adopt standards of IP protection in bilateral or regional trade investment agreements that go beyond TRIPS <a name="_ftnref34" href="#_ftn34">[34]</a></p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">India has repeatedly indicated to the WTO that it was not willing to commit to an agreement beyond TRIPS.<a name="_ftnref35" href="#_ftn35">[35]</a> These commitments could include data exclusivity protection measures, ever-greening of patents etc. <a name="_ftnref36" href="#_ftn36">[36]</a></p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">CIS believes that despite the growing pressure from developed nations regarding various FTAs,<a name="_ftnref37" href="#_ftn37">[37]</a> India must hold its ground and ensure that concerns about India's national interest and the difference in the development levels of the European Union or other developed countries and developing countries like India are kept in mind while negotiating obligations under international agreements. Therefore CIS believes that the National IPR policy should ensure that TRIPS plus standards are not acceptable to India as they will undermine our national interest and hinder development at the national level.<a name="_ftnref38" href="#_ftn38">[38]</a></p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">III.5.3. <strong>Shift from Multilateral Forums to Bilateral FTA negotiations</strong></p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">III.5.3.1. CIS believes that the trend of shift in negotiations from a multilateral forum such as the WIPO or the WTO to a bilateral or a regional forum <a name="_ftnref39" href="#_ftn39">[39]</a> is harmful as certain flexibilities are built into the TRIPS and therefore multilateral negotiations based on TRIPS will help pursue India's interests better. And therefore when possible, India must prefer negotiations at multilateral forums as opposed to bilateral or regional treaties, CIS believes that the National IPR policy should reflect the same preferences. <a name="_ftnref40" href="#_ftn40">[40]</a></p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">IV. <strong>Concluding observations</strong></p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">IV.1. On patents, CIS submits that the National IPR policy reconsider software patenting, that encourage open source software, continue and strengthen that compulsory licensing and consider and study alternative licensing mechanisms as means to achieve a balancing of the interests of different stakeholders.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">IV.2. On openness, CIS submits that the IPR policy should encourage free and open software in education, governmental agencies etc.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">IV.3. On open access to scholarly work, CIS commends the work done by government agencies so far and submits that the IPR policy should encourage open access to scholarly works.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">IV.4. On copyright, CIS submits that the IPR policy work toward strengthening and extending fair dealings provisions, supporting international instruments that strengthen fair dealing, encourage compulsory licensing. CIS submits that the IPR policy should work towards ensuring that protections for copyright such as terms of protection, intermediary liability, protection of rights management information, criminalisation of copyright infringement etc., do not harm other legitimate interests of users or unnecessarily restrict free speech.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">IV.5. On FTAs, CIS submits that the IPR policy encourage transparency with regard to FTA negotiations, ensure that TRIPS plus standards are not accepted as they would harm national interest and to encourage multilateral negotiations over bilateral free trade agreements.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">IV.6. CIS welcomes the initiative of the DIPP to form a National IPR policy, CIS believes that it is essential that such an IPR policy avoid excessive intellectual property rights protection and is formed keeping in mind goals of development and national interest.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">IV.7. CIS is thankful to the DIPP for the opportunity to provide comments on the National IPR policy and would be privileged to work with the government on this and other matters in these areas.</p>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<hr />
<div id="ftn1">
<p><a name="_ftn1" href="#_ftnref1">[1]</a> <a href="http://www.cis-india.org">www.cis-india.org</a> (Last Accessed: 30/11/14).</p>
</div>
<div id="ftn2">
<p><a name="_ftn2" href="#_ftnref2">[2]</a> The Washington Declaration on Intellectual Property and Public Interest concluded after the Global Congress on Intellectual property and Public Interest in August 2011 attended by over 180 experts from 32 countries articulate this position perfectly. Available at: <a href="http://infojustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Washington-Declaration.pdf"> http://infojustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Washington-Declaration.pdf </a> (Last Accessed:29/11/14)</p>
</div>
<div id="ftn3">
<p><a name="_ftn3" href="#_ftnref3">[3]</a> Shashank Singh, Guidelines for Examination of Computer Related Inventions: Mapping the Stakeholders' Response, Available at: <a href="http://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/guidelines-for-examination-of-computer-related-inventions"> http://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/guidelines-for-examination-of-computer-related-inventions </a> (Last Accessed: 30/11/14).</p>
</div>
<div id="ftn4">
<p><a name="_ftn4" href="#_ftnref4">[4]</a> N.S. Gopalakrishnan, Compulsory License Under Indian Patent Law, MPI Studies on Intellectual Property and Competition Law, Vol.22, 2015, pp.11-42.</p>
</div>
<div id="ftn5">
<p><a name="_ftn5" href="#_ftnref5">[5]</a> Raadhika Gupta, Compulsory Licensing under TRIPS: How Far it Addresses Public Health Concerns in Developing Nations, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, Vol.15, September 2010, pp.357-363. Available at: <a href="http://nopr.niscair.res.in/bitstream/123456789/10211/1/JIPR%2015(5)%20357-363.pdf"> http://nopr.niscair.res.in/bitstream/123456789/10211/1/JIPR%2015(5)%20357-363.pdf </a> (Last Accessed: 30/11/14).</p>
</div>
<div id="ftn6">
<p><a name="_ftn6" href="#_ftnref6">[6]</a> Id.</p>
</div>
<div id="ftn7">
<p><a name="_ftn7" href="#_ftnref7">[7]</a> Nehaa Chaudhari, Pervasive Technologies: Patent Pools, Available at: <a href="http://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/patent-pools">http://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/patent-pools</a> (Last Accessed: 30/11/14).</p>
</div>
<div id="ftn8">
<p><a name="_ftn8" href="#_ftnref8">[8]</a> One of the measures along which we could have differential patent strengths could be the time for the invention to reach the market, see, Benjamin N Roin, The case for Tailoring Patent Awards Based on the Time-to-Market of Inventions, UCLA Law Review, Vol.61, 2013, Available at: <a href="http://dash.harvard.edu/bitstream/handle/1/10612849/Case%20for%20Tailoring%20Patent%20Awards%203-15-13.pdf?sequence=1"> http://dash.harvard.edu/bitstream/handle/1/10612849/Case%20for%20Tailoring%20Patent%20Awards%203-15-13.pdf?sequence=1 </a> (Last Accessed: 30/11/14).</p>
</div>
<div id="ftn9">
<p><a name="_ftn9" href="#_ftnref9">[9]</a> Sunil Abraham, Patented Games, Available at: <a href="http://cis-india.org/a2k/patented-games">http://cis-india.org/a2k/patented-games</a> (Last Accessed: 30/11/14.</p>
</div>
<div id="ftn10">
<p><a name="_ftn10" href="#_ftnref10">[10]</a> See Nabi Hasan, Issues and Challenges in Open Source Software Environment with Special Reference to India, Available at: <a href="http://crl.du.ac.in/ical09/papers/index_files/ical-43_144_317_1_RV.pdf"> http://crl.du.ac.in/ical09/papers/index_files/ical-43_144_317_1_RV.pdf </a> (Last Accessed: 30/11/14).</p>
</div>
<div id="ftn11">
<p><a name="_ftn11" href="#_ftnref11">[11]</a> Section 52(1), the Copyright (Amendment) Act, 2012.</p>
</div>
<div id="ftn12">
<p><a name="_ftn12" href="#_ftnref12">[12]</a> Section 52(1) (n), the Copyright (Amendment) Act, 2012.</p>
</div>
<div id="ftn13">
<p><a name="_ftn13" href="#_ftnref13">[13]</a> Zakir Thomas, Overview of Changes to the Indian Copyright Law, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, Vo.17, July 2012, pp.324-334.</p>
</div>
<div id="ftn14">
<p><a name="_ftn14" href="#_ftnref14">[14]</a> See conclusions of the chair at the 23<sup>rd</sup> session of the Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights at the WIPO, Available at: <a href="http://www.eifl.net/wipo-sccr23-conclusions">http://www.eifl.net/wipo-sccr23-conclusions</a> (Last Accessed: 30/11/14).</p>
</div>
<div id="ftn15">
<p><a name="_ftn15" href="#_ftnref15">[15]</a> For draft proposal of the treaty see IFLA, Treaty proposal on Limitations and Exceptions for Libraries and Archives, Available at: <a href="http://www.wipo.int/edocs/mdocs/copyright/en/sccr_27/sccr_27_2_rev.pdf"> http://www.wipo.int/edocs/mdocs/copyright/en/sccr_27/sccr_27_2_rev.pdf </a> (Last Accessed: 30/11/14).</p>
</div>
<div id="ftn16">
<p><a name="_ftn16" href="#_ftnref16">[16]</a> See The Draft WIPO Treaty on Exceptions and Limitations for the Persons with Disabilities, Educational and Research Institutions, Libraries and Archives, proposal by the African Group (document SCCR/22/12).Available at: <a href="http://www.wipo.int/edocs/mdocs/copyright/en/sccr_22/sccr_22_12.pdf"> http://www.wipo.int/edocs/mdocs/copyright/en/sccr_22/sccr_22_12.pdf </a> (Last Accessed: 30/11/14).</p>
</div>
<div id="ftn17">
<p><a name="_ftn17" href="#_ftnref17">[17]</a> See Section 52(q) of the Copyright Act, 1957.</p>
</div>
<div id="ftn18">
<p><a name="_ftn18" href="#_ftnref18">[18]</a> Section 31 and 31A, the Copyright (Amendment) Act, 2012.</p>
</div>
<div id="ftn19">
<p><a name="_ftn19" href="#_ftnref19">[19]</a> Section 31D, the Copyright (Amendment) Act, 2012.</p>
</div>
<div id="ftn20">
<p><a name="_ftn20" href="#_ftnref20">[20]</a> Section 14(1), the Copyright (Amendment) Act, 2012.</p>
</div>
<div id="ftn21">
<p><a name="_ftn21" href="#_ftnref21">[21]</a> Id.</p>
</div>
<div id="ftn22">
<p><a name="_ftn22" href="#_ftnref22">[22]</a> Section 38B, the Copyright (Amendment) Act, 2012.</p>
</div>
<div id="ftn23">
<p><a name="_ftn23" href="#_ftnref23">[23]</a> CIS, Comments on Draft Copyright Rules, 2012, available at: <a href="http://cis-india.org/a2k/feedback-to-draft-copyright-rules-2012">http://cis-india.org/a2k/feedback-to-draft-copyright-rules-2012</a> (Last Accessed: 29/11/14).</p>
</div>
<div id="ftn24">
<p><a name="_ftn24" href="#_ftnref24">[24]</a> See Pranesh Prakash, Analysis of the Copyright (Amendment) Bill, 2012, Available at: <a href="http://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/analysis-copyright-amendment-bill-2012"> http://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/analysis-copyright-amendment-bill-2012 </a></p>
</div>
<div id="ftn25">
<p><a name="_ftn25" href="#_ftnref25">[25]</a> Section 65B, The Copyright (Amendment) Act, 2012.</p>
</div>
<div id="ftn26">
<p><a name="_ftn26" href="#_ftnref26">[26]</a> Pranesh Prakash, Technological Protection Measures in the Copyright (Amendment) Bill, 2010, Available at: <a href="http://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/tpm-copyright-amendment">http://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/tpm-copyright-amendment</a> (Last Accessed: 29/11/14).</p>
</div>
<div id="ftn27">
<p><a name="_ftn27" href="#_ftnref27">[27]</a> Rishabh Dara, Intermediary Liability in India: Chilling Effects on Free Expression on the Internet, 2011, Available at: <a href="http://cis-india.org/internet-governance/intermediary-liability-in-india.pdf"> http://cis-india.org/internet-governance/intermediary-liability-in-india.pdf </a> (Last Accessed: 30/11/14).</p>
</div>
<div id="ftn28">
<p><a name="_ftn28" href="#_ftnref28">[28]</a> Section 63A, Copyright Act 1957.</p>
</div>
<div id="ftn29">
<p><a name="_ftn29" href="#_ftnref29">[29]</a> See Right to Share: Principles on Freedom of Expression and Copyright in the Digital Age, Article19, Available at: <a href="http://www.article19.org/resources.php/resource/3716/en/">http://www.article19.org/resources.php/resource/3716/en/</a> (Last Accessed: 29/11/14).</p>
</div>
<div id="ftn30">
<p><a name="_ftn30" href="#_ftnref30">[30]</a> V Premanath, S Sivaram, Intellectual Property Systems in India: Progressing towards Greater Maturity and Diversity, Available at: <a href="http://iimahd.ernet.in/users/anilg/files/Articles/Emerging%20IPR%20Consciousness,%20vikalpa.pdf"> http://iimahd.ernet.in/users/anilg/files/Articles/Emerging%20IPR%20Consciousness,%20vikalpa.pdf </a> (Last Accessed: 29/11/14).</p>
</div>
<div id="ftn31">
<p><a name="_ftn31" href="#_ftnref31">[31]</a> Jan Wouters, Idesbald Goddeeries, Bregt Natens etc, Some Critical Issues in the EU -India Free Trade Agreement Negotiation, Working Paper No.102,KU Leuven Centre for Global Governance Studies, <a href="https://ghum.kuleuven.be/ggs/publications/working_papers/new_series/wp101-110/wp102-wouters-goddeeris-natens.pdf"> https://ghum.kuleuven.be/ggs/publications/working_papers/new_series/wp101-110/wp102-wouters-goddeeris-natens.pdf </a> , February 2013, p.16.</p>
<p>Monika Ermert, Lack of Transparency in EU-India FTA Talks Spurs Requests for Halt, ip-watch, Available at: <a href="http://www.ip-watch.org/2010/09/03/lack-of-transparency-in-eu-india-fta-talks-spurs-requests-for-halt/"> http://www.ip-watch.org/2010/09/03/lack-of-transparency-in-eu-india-fta-talks-spurs-requests-for-halt/ </a> .</p>
</div>
<div id="ftn32">
<p><a name="_ftn32" href="#_ftnref32">[32]</a> The current policy of the US Trade Representative is seen to be reflected in the 2002 Trade Act available here: <a href="http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-107hr3009enr/pdf/BILLS-107hr3009enr.pdf"> http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-107hr3009enr/pdf/BILLS-107hr3009enr.pdf </a> See HR3009.</p>
</div>
<div id="ftn33">
<p><a name="_ftn33" href="#_ftnref33">[33]</a> The current trade strategy for the EU can be found here <a href="http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2014/july/tradoc_152643.pdf">http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2014/july/tradoc_152643.pdf</a> .</p>
</div>
<div id="ftn34">
<p><a name="_ftn34" href="#_ftnref34">[34]</a> Commission on Intellectual Property Rights, Integrating Intellectual Property Rights and Development Policy, Available at: <a href="http://www.iprcommission.org/papers/pdfs/final_report/ciprfullfinal.pdf"> http://www.iprcommission.org/papers/pdfs/final_report/ciprfullfinal.pdf </a> , p.174.</p>
</div>
<div id="ftn35">
<p><a name="_ftn35" href="#_ftnref35">[35]</a> C. Correa, 'Negotiation of a Free Trade Agreement European Union-India: Will India Accept Trips-Plus</p>
<p>Protection?', (2009) Oxfam Deutschland and Evangelischer Entwicklungsdienst Analysis,</p>
<p><a href="http://www.oxfam.de/files/20090609_negotiationofafreetradeaggrementeuindia_218kb.pdf"> http://www.oxfam.de/files/20090609_negotiationofafreetradeaggrementeuindia_218kb.pdf </a> .</p>
</div>
<div id="ftn36">
<p><a name="_ftn36" href="#_ftnref36">[36]</a> S. Sharma, 'the EU-India FTA: Critical Considerations in a Time of Crisis', (2009) Centad Working Paper.</p>
</div>
<div id="ftn37">
<p><a name="_ftn37" href="#_ftnref37">[37]</a> Asit Ranjan Mishra, India to negotiate FTAs with emerging market nations, Livemint, Available at: <a href="http://www.livemint.com/Politics/RlJNxUXovjNVaRzQt9KXmO/India-to-negotiate-FTAs-with-emerging-market-nations.html"> http://www.livemint.com/Politics/RlJNxUXovjNVaRzQt9KXmO/India-to-negotiate-FTAs-with-emerging-market-nations.html </a> .</p>
</div>
<div id="ftn38">
<p><a name="_ftn38" href="#_ftnref38">[38]</a> Sisule F Musungu and Graham Dutfield, Commission Multilateral Agreements and a TRIPS -Plus Word: the World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO), Available at: <a href="http://www.iprsonline.org/ictsd/docs/WIPO_Musungu_Dutfield.pdf">http://www.iprsonline.org/ictsd/docs/WIPO_Musungu_Dutfield.pdf</a>.</p>
</div>
<div id="ftn39">
<p><a name="_ftn39" href="#_ftnref39">[39]</a> For Trends, See Beginda Pakpahan, Deadlock in the WTO: What is next? Available at: <a href="http://www.wto.org/english/forums_e/public_forum12_e/art_pf12_e/art19.htm"> http://www.wto.org/english/forums_e/public_forum12_e/art_pf12_e/art19.htm </a> .</p>
</div>
<div id="ftn40">
<p><a name="_ftn40" href="#_ftnref40">[40]</a> See Amit Sengupta, Do not trade away our lives, Vo.9, No.2, Indian Journal of Medical Ethics, 2012, Available at: <a href="http://www.issuesinmedicalethics.org/index.php/ijme/article/view/88/1047"> http://www.issuesinmedicalethics.org/index.php/ijme/article/view/88/1047 </a> .</p>
</div>
</div>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/comments-on-proposed-ip-rights-policy-to-dipp'>https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/comments-on-proposed-ip-rights-policy-to-dipp</a>
</p>
No publishernehaaCall for CommentsAccess to KnowledgeCopyrightIntellectual Property RightsPatents2015-04-12T11:39:16ZBlog EntryMHRD IPR Chair Series: Information Received from IIT Roorkee
https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/mhrd-ipr-chair-series-information-received-from-iit-roorkee
<b>This post provides a factual description about the operation of Ministry of Human Resource Development IPR Chair’s Intellectual Property Education, Research and Public Outreach (IPERPO) scheme in IIT Roorkee.</b>
<p>Nehaa Chaudhari provided inputs, analysed, reviewed and edited this blog post.</p>
<hr />
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The author has analysed all the data received under various heads such as income, grants from MHRD, planned and non planned expenditure, nature and frequency of programmes organised and the allocation of funds for the same. Throughout the course of observation and presentation of the analysed data, the author seeks to trace the presence of unjustified underutilisation of funds by the aforementioned university as provided by the MHRD during the period of 2003-2014.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">To collect the information for the given study, an RTI application was filed to the Indian Institute of Technology, Roorkee on 6/02/2015 by the Centre for Internet and Society. The reply to RTI application was received on 16/02/2015.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">These are the documents received by CIS from IIT Roorkee:</p>
<ul>
<li>For RTI Response <a href="https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/iit-roorkee-receipt-of-rti" class="internal-link">click here</a> (IIT Roorkee -Receipt of RTI- 20.4.15)</li>
<li>For complete supporting documents <a href="https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/iit-roorkee-response-and-report" class="internal-link">click here</a> (IIT Roorkee – Response and Report)</li>
</ul>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Hereinafter, in order to receive any information about IIT Roorkee’s RTI reply, kindly refer to the above mentioned links.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Following are the queries mentioned in the RTI application along with their replies.</p>
<ol>
<li style="text-align: justify; "><b>Reports on the implementation of the IPERPO scheme of the Ministry of Human Resource Development and the implementation of the MHRD IPR Chair funded under the scheme at IIT Roorkee from 2003-20014<br /></b>Reply: The University documented the minutes of the Departmental Faculty Committee Meeting where proposals for forming Departmental Administrative Committee, syllabus for new institute electives, duties of Departmental Research Committee, forming Institute Time Table Committee, conversion of existing LR1 computer lab and teaching scheme of autumn semester 2013 were deliberated upon. The University also organised various events such as Training of Trainers programme and International Conclave on Innovation and Entrepreneurship. </li>
<li style="text-align: justify; "><b>Documents indicating the date on which such an IPR Chair was set up at your institution and a copy of the application made by IIT Roorkee to the MHRD for instituting such an IPR Chair and documents received by IIT Roorkee from the MHRD approving the same<br /></b>Reply: According to the Office Memorandum (dated 04 May 2012) of IIT Roorkee, Dr P.K. Ghosh had been appointed on the position of Professional Chair on IPERPO with effect from April 27 2012. A suitable financial grant of Rs. 208.02 lakhs was demanded for a period of five years. </li>
<li style="text-align: justify; "><b>Documents detailing the release of grants to the MHRD IPR Chairs under the IPERPO Scheme</b><br />Reply: As it appears from the reply filed by IIT Roorkee to the RTI filed by the CIS, Rs. 30,00,000.00 of the Grant in aid was sanctioned to the University by the MHRD during the financial year 2010-2011 and nil amount was utilized for the purpose of it. At the end of the year, the balance sum of Rs. 30,27,041 (including the interest) was surrendered to the Government.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify; "><b>Documents relating to receipts of utilisation certificates and audited expenditure statements and matters related to all financial sanctions with regard to funds granted to the MHRD IPR Chair established under the IPERPO scheme at IIT Roorkee</b><br />Reply: IIT Roorkee has replied with a series of Statement of Expenditure ranging from 2010-2014 that explains its rate of expenditure and amount of interest accumulated and surrendered to the Government along with the unutilized amount. In the financial year 2011-2012 the unutilized expenditure was 3,105,159.00 which came down to 11,74, 026.00 in 2012-2013 due to which a grant of Rs. 24,00,000.00 was extended to the University by MHRD for the financial year 2013-2014.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify; "><b>Documents regarding all matters pertaining to finance and budget related the MHRD IPR Chair under the IPERPOs scheme established at IIT Roorkee</b><br />Reply: CIS did not receive any sort of clarity on matters pertaining to finance and budget related to MHRD IPR Chair under the IPERPO scheme as the response for this question was coupled with the previous question on utilization certificates.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify; "><b>Details of the IPR Chair’s salary under the IPERPO Scheme indicating whether this amount is paid over and above the professional’s usual salary</b><br />Reply: According to the RTI reply, the position of Chair Professor is awarded for a period of three years or upto 68 years of age, whichever is earlier. The pay of Chair Professor is fixed as per the rules and guidelines of Professional Chair in the institute.</li>
</ol>
<p>2.0 Comparative Analysis between University Response and the guidelines of MHRD Scheme Document</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><a class="external-link" href="http://copyright.gov.in/Documents/scheme.pdf">The Scheme Document of MHRD</a> is a comprehensive document which consists of guidelines regarding Intellectual Property Education, Research and Public Outreach. It talks about a list of objectives, purposes, conditions and eligibility criteria for a University to ensure in order to implement IPERPO in a truest sense. This document provides the procedural as well as qualifying conditions for an Institute to ensure or fulfil before applying for the MHRD grant. Some of these conditions include maintenance of utilization certificates, audit reports, expenditure statements and event information which would be open to access on demand by MDHR or Comptroller and Auditor General of India.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">A. Objectives:</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">As it appears from the reply statement of IIT Roorkee, each and every event organised after the establishment of IPR Chair in 2012, where the funds from the grant have been utilized, is done to promote the scholarly as well as academic interests in the field of Intellectual Property. Even before applying for the MHRD grant, the University has organised many National Seminars and has started various short term courses in order to encourage research and excellence in Intellectual Property. This fact completely resonates with the core objective of MHRD scheme document, i.e. strengthening the academic and research discourses in the field of Intellectual Property.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">B. Eligibility: <br />IIT Roorkee is recognized by the University Grants Commission. Therefore, it fulfils the eligibility criteria mentioned in the scheme document.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">C. Conditions for Grant of Assistance <br />There are several conditions laid down in the scheme document which need to be fulfilled by the concerned University in order to successfully receive the grant. The underlying condition is the dissemination and development in the field of Intellectual Property Rights.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">According to the documents available with CIS, IIT Roorkee has organised at least 27 events in the field of IPR ranging from introduction of new electives, National Workshops and Symposiums, Expert Lectures, Infrastructure Development, Online portals for IP Administration and awareness and infrastructure development.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">3.0 Financial Analysis of IIT Roorkee’s IPR Grant</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">According to the RTI reply, the IPR Chair at IIT Roorkee was established in the forenoon of 27th April 2012 with Dr P.K. Ghosh as its Chairman. Dr Ghosh was promised an Honorarium payment of Rs. 30,000 per month and a Contingency payment of Rs. 20,000 per month.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">3.1 Financial Year 2010-2011</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><img src="https://cis-india.org/home-images/GrantUtilization.png" alt="null" class="image-inline" title="Grant Utilization" /></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">In this financial year, the IPR Chair was not established at IIT Roorkee. The total grant received by the University was Rs. 30, 00,000.00 out of which Rs.0 was utilized for the purpose of it was sanctioned.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><img src="https://cis-india.org/home-images/copy_of_GrantUtilization.png" alt="null" class="image-inline" title="Grant Utilization" /></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">At the end of the financial year, the remaining amount of Rs. 30,00,000, (due to Nil utilisation) along with the interest of Rs. 27041 was either surrendered to the government or adjusted towards the grants-in-aid payable during the next financial year.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">3.2 Financial Year 2011-2012</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><img src="https://cis-india.org/home-images/copy2_of_GrantUtilization.png" alt="null" class="image-inline" title="Grant Utilization" /></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The IPR Chair was still not established at the University. The opening balance was the amount carried forward from the previous year (30,27,041) upon which interest of Rs. 1,17,117 was received making the total receipt to be 31,144,158. Out of this, a total of Rs. 38,999 was utilised for travelling and miscellaneous expenditure. At the end of the year, the remaining of amount of Rs. 3,105,159 was either surrendered to the government or adjusted towards the grant-in-aid payable during the next financial year 2012-2013. As per the documents available with CIS, the statement of expenditure for this financial year has not been submitted by the university.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">3.3 Financial Year 2012-2013</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><img src="https://cis-india.org/home-images/copy3_of_GrantUtilization.png" alt="null" class="image-inline" title="Grant Utilization" /></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">In this financial year the IPR Chair was established with Dr. P.K. Ghosh as its Chairman. The Opening balance was the amount carried forward from the previous financial year (31,05,159) upon which an interest income of Rs.1,25,376 was received along with a refund of advance amounting to Rs. 42,968. Out of the total receipt of Rs. 32,73,503 the total expenditure of the University on the current financial year was Rs. 20,99,477. The remaining amount of Rs. 11,74,026 was either surrendered to the government or adjusted towards the grants-in-aid payable during the next financial year 2013-2014.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">3.4 Financial Year 2013-2014</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><img src="https://cis-india.org/home-images/copy5_of_GrantUtilization.png" alt="null" class="image-inline" title="Grant Utilization" /></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">In this financial year, the University received a grant of Rs. 24,00,000 from the government along with the amount carried forward from the previous financial year (Rs.11,74,026) upon which an interest income of Rs. 55,892 was received. Out of this, a sum of Rs. 24,01,045 was utilised as contingency expenditure. The remaining amount of Rs. 12,28,873 has been either surrendered to the government or adjusted towards the grants-in-aid payable during the next financial year 2014-2015.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><img src="https://cis-india.org/home-images/copy6_of_GrantUtilization.png" alt="null" class="image-inline" title="Grant Utilization" /></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">In this financial year, the expenditure on library (5,00,979) is the only sum which exceeded the sanctioned amount (5,00,000). Moreover, there has been no expenditure on Outreach Program and Clinics. The honorarium payment to the IPR Chair Professor is similar to the sanctioned amount (3,60,000) but there’s a difference in his contingent payment (1,39,645 instead of 2,40,000). The total amount of expenditure in this financial year is Rs. 24,01,045.</p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/mhrd-ipr-chair-series-information-received-from-iit-roorkee'>https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/mhrd-ipr-chair-series-information-received-from-iit-roorkee</a>
</p>
No publisherKaran Tripathi and Nehaa ChaudhariIntellectual Property RightsCopyrightAccess to KnowledgePervasive Technologies2015-11-21T07:26:45ZBlog EntryMeeting of the Global Network on Flexible Limitations and Exceptions
https://cis-india.org/news/info-justice-public-events-flexibility-network
<b>American University Washington College of Law organized a meeting of the Global Network in Washington D.C., on September 12 to 15, 2012. Pranesh Prakash was one of the 25 participants. </b>
<h2>Agenda</h2>
<p><b>September 12<br /></b></p>
<table class="plain">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>4:00-6:00</td>
<td>
<p>Recent Developments in Fair Dealing In Canada Room 603 | (<a class="external-link" href="http://media.wcl.american.edu/Mediasite/Play/05899ed8a93048bfa4a91214b47d6f4c1d">Webcast</a>) Peter Jaszi, Ariel Katz, Howard Knopf, Martin Senftleben, Michael Carroll</p>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p><b>September 13</b></p>
<table class="plain">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>5:00-6:00</td>
<td style="text-align: justify; ">PIJIP Welcoming Reception, Room 600. The reception will be a joint welcome for the L&E Network and a concluding reception for an Orphan Works meeting with librarians hosted by Pam Samuelson and the Berkeley clinic.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>5:30-9:00</td>
<td>Public Knowledge hosts the 9th Annual IP3 Awards. Ronald Reagan Building, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW <br /></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p><b>September 14<br /></b></p>
<table class="plain">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>9:00</td>
<td>Welcome Introduction</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>9:30</td>
<td>Discussion of the model open text</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>12:30</td>
<td>Lunch</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>1:15</td>
<td>Review of draft 3-Step paper (to be circulated)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>2:15</td>
<td>Roundtable on current developments in local contexts</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>3:30</td>
<td>Review of the current state of the TPP negotiations and U.S. proposed text on Limitations and Exceptions</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>5:00</td>
<td>Transport to Leesburg – site of TPP meeting</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>7:00</td>
<td>Dinner reception with TPP IP negotiators</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p><b>September 15</b></p>
<table class="plain">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>9:30</td>
<td>Discussion of the model arguments and counterarguments document</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>11:30</td>
<td>Discussion of a possible report of findings to accompany the models</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>12:30</td>
<td>Lunch</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>1:15</td>
<td>Roundtable on the way forward<br />
<ul>
<li>What work should we prioritize between this meeting and the December Global Congress?</li>
<li>What research is the group currently engaged in that may bear on limitations and exceptions?</li>
<li>How could this group define future uses of the network after the Global Congress? One example might be a book or other collection of case studies reporting on how laws actually work in given countries.</li>
</ul>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>3:15</td>
<td>Roundtable on local forums continued: where are L&E interventions needed most?</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>4:00</td>
<td>End of meeting</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p>The following individuals participated:</p>
<ul>
<li>Martin Senftleben</li>
<li>Pedro Paranagua</li>
<li>Pedro Mizukami</li>
<li>Dick Kawooya</li>
<li>Hong Xue</li>
<li>Jennifer Urban</li>
<li>Pam Samuelson</li>
<li>Ahmed Abdel Latif</li>
<li>Peter Yu</li>
<li>Andrew Rens</li>
<li>Carlos Affonso Pereira de Souza</li>
<li>Oliver Metzger</li>
<li>Gwen Hinze</li>
<li>Peter Jaszi</li>
<li>Michael Carroll</li>
<li>Sean Flynn</li>
<li>Meredith Jacob</li>
<li>Matt Sag</li>
<li>Jonathan Band</li>
<li>Ariel Katz</li>
<li>Howard Knopf</li>
<li>Alberto Cerda Silva</li>
<li>Pranesh Prakash</li>
<li>Allan Rocha de Souza</li>
<li>Sylvie Nerisson</li>
<li>Lila Bailey</li>
</ul>
<p>Read the original published in infojustice.org <a class="external-link" href="http://infojustice.org/public-events/flexibility-network">here</a></p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='https://cis-india.org/news/info-justice-public-events-flexibility-network'>https://cis-india.org/news/info-justice-public-events-flexibility-network</a>
</p>
No publisherpraskrishnaCopyright2012-10-04T05:59:56ZNews ItemMarch - May Newsletter
https://cis-india.org/about/newsletters/march-may-2021-newsletter
<b></b>
<h3>Cybersecurity, and Emerging Technology</h3>
<ol>
<li><strong>Doctrinal clarity</strong> and <strong>institutional coherence</strong> are essential for a robust cybersecurity posture. Arindrajit Basu and Pranesh Prakash analyze this in an opinion piece in <em>The Hindu</em>. [<a href="https://4jok2.r.ag.d.sendibm3.com/mk/cl/f/mkAIQo7C4IZmt9JYL5DoADKYnQqxm9fka-gdBSvoA81rsg6GEgy07tjzn0qNQvz4PxT4dYB5ZeNQ1Bbi1ubYUR0z6z8dy3e5FK9grxNzzgZSO0IUwVPm8behwp6dBjhS3_xc9_d4Bz234TH-U0qMpqF9sJzKUGtQ7MZi0hnzsUaVhsA2VGsqoSC3xrrr1cD9ZX8AlcPmIR3uj5moIhV9EfHcU2EHOQqhu6OCGcfuUBS-tgGe1iBvbOikAjEWMJin4Q61Rd8p31vaLtqTwVe2uw">link</a>]</li>
<li style="text-align: justify; ">U.S. and Indian decisions about <strong>Huawei</strong> have implications not just for their separate relations with China, but the <strong>U.S.-India bilateral</strong> as well. Arindrajit Basu and Justin Sherman co-authored an article in <em>The Diplomat</em> examining Huawei’s role in India [<a href="https://4jok2.r.ag.d.sendibm3.com/mk/cl/f/M0GGHsg5EtZWdtPNqwbeCiMiN7elnvi6aLYTpAVn0gw7se-z20XDgj6jfb79INZxyFmGtDXDcD0pf_RfRo3K_RyXEav9HKy_gV1G8nDVPhoN8Kp2G9-NLUeUCXxW6WYbiyyWDZdKwxzd4PsyoxybVKoJ9XH7JhsVFDPhN0ySqc8Mi6MD0zq8q_CRT9dDkdCC2queRjZdcOr4eoC8YPjU-LVpaxJGge0rOaPrYmM3oe__OoIjvA">link</a>]</li>
<li>In an article for <em>The Wire</em>, Aman Nair points out that India might miss out on <strong>NFT (non-fungible tokens)</strong> which is set to become a mainstay in the modern digital zeitgeist. [<a href="https://4jok2.r.ag.d.sendibm3.com/mk/cl/f/wKv_Gt32QSHdLE3-ykqX_8DMhA2QohVdjXJn-C65rBN_0nsI9LCIhp3WrANkb-8cDzw1rSkKGrJ0gyPwV_p9aqBIOu3ioMRLjQmVdwMwcVH6nVHELvDJiebOfI5HgW0DS2jvjYUGiFNuBE4y5k7D6hcdEnmRXZ0cGaM-VT0qPJcw28gDhe7eJcg_rmvGhHbJBm_h0VnZfNJyjqZ8CFoiIU0z3QaGDqk16_gOlCYYR98VTEehLBYUs8ymz6Fggw">link</a>]</li>
<li>Arindrajit Basu and Andre Barrinha co-wrote for the <em>EU Cyber Direct</em>, <strong>on outer space diplomacy in the 1960s</strong> and why cyber (security) diplomacy isn’t quite progressing as well or as fast. [<a href="https://4jok2.r.ag.d.sendibm3.com/mk/cl/f/Ud7YZJn5YKOmIROHOUMyLVB-69aNwlb-FParRXYStS_vdQ3SDwErMwxNQlu8iFNnUlSI5lejtsIHgERXyVY3xzTjRGyNP9_sR-uAyfxusTZlSMU3qNs5OPlSJfRErWBEkj_TiT2y1QQwZH8brbn6P8H4S1rDBX1QFICDOe5HjYF2GOdrgzwA1vaeJB6YrFcn2BUNmpsDD4f0mKwcYkCVVFCYgOtbj1-59CoswRfSqgA">link</a>]</li>
<li style="text-align: justify; ">Arindrajit Basu, Irene Poetranto and Justin Lau co-wrote an article for <em>Carnegie Endowment for International Peace</em> which captures some <strong>concerns with the United Nations OEWG process</strong> dealing with cyber norms and the absence of discussion at the forum on key issues. [<a href="https://4jok2.r.ag.d.sendibm3.com/mk/cl/f/G-0Ok05_UomEqWTkmsuUXGq9V-i2zMa0ul5zzkfLKC8Rj5rCGsl12lrJl7tfGzORBxTOYoVPoLUlHF_KaD2z05TyeW3cQDqaxvlhUDxfr2Z9n64Lbe1_p8FYKFvLXrsNVAoEbxsCbOncqzkKgVebcxHe_HF5Murx9aVk6Ps9ik34I4Sj3y26-_Nj98iLwMPZO0rs8hYNZbvsjcUbyGxm6G5xlfjakhy-UsjioXEGdz7zQdV6O_FCG1BoP1Rvm8fPxvdK1JEbGkedHgwk9ENn9na2J6I">link</a>]</li>
<li style="text-align: justify; ">In an article for the <em>Observer Research Foundation</em>, Arindrajit Basu writes about how India must avoid getting its <strong>data policy</strong> caught up in tired existing machinations and instead forge <strong>a new path that prioritizes Indian strategic interests</strong>. [<a href="https://4jok2.r.ag.d.sendibm3.com/mk/cl/f/eZHdtXVJIePupyeXaX8RUlkusvtOgHe4VHCDeiVpkTS0P4ji1lGib5cqvQX0nGf5iIx6vb52mwWtd9Z5G5z71_dGvd89c5xn2JyZ-f9cdOWTAsHKRwxo_Tk2Kp7Dfb4JEi4r2Sd5r3dHPc3YmRMYLseDLnESCpmxnPkbX5y1sMitN5OUu4x1ydiYZxfB3FKVZjnnXSCAmB2yPWS7pL4cGcVWpJ1PqBoqPAvvs_Ofqyg58K7inxfax-5tIPk5wyLsEARP92qYgPo">link</a>]</li>
<li style="text-align: justify; ">Aman Nair, Arinjay Vyas, Pallavi Bedi, and Garima Saxena authored a <strong>response to the Supreme Court E-committee’s draft vision document of phase III of the E-courts project</strong>. This response recommends consideration be given to the digital and gender divide, and lack of clarity in the document on several data-related aspects. [<a href="https://4jok2.r.ag.d.sendibm3.com/mk/cl/f/eLr3hXFonL5hfAUH5ux5zoQcTrY2PxRDO9kflkNqtcUObBbYWm-vqp7v4Ex0g_o7YtCokB315adj-1k_QwDebJ1k9G626m1MGuTYmlfKdwSVl7mYsfna4Dy96z8Eb7iJ7gtcZZF8s5JQCGN1ux3PiYvgDrxbs3MeXeZizpIZsm9OsPvCGzvC5HbxkhfdFG2B6853ajax3xofJRcucZ2Jc1AFEg5iAVrwiopY0SFIb99XHRESaUFEP9KYNs2bC1nAXaAW4AU7OPG_">link</a>]</li>
</ol>
<h3>Privacy</h3>
<ol>
<li style="text-align: justify; ">The proposed <i>Personal Data Protection Bill, 2019</i> is being deliberated by the Joint Parliamentary Committee and is expected to be tabled in the Monsoon Session of Parliament. Pallavi Bedi and Amber Sinha co-authored a white paper to examine the <strong>personal data implications on welfare delivery models in India</strong> and to suggest ways to operationalise key provisions. [<a href="https://4jok2.r.ag.d.sendibm3.com/mk/cl/f/_Gjo4q_RVbTa0sA8X1FOhYiB4McMtr_8JgcG33Uf9nXIX9VsXvDxzVvYABfOz-DyVN14iCoyotGqfkjezyNjJFt4RsiYkw6m0UFNhGd9NYLj3fkrn8IfKwI3YJtO9-FrkgMxcCOTc1PdedlPXPGO2cafHCYUaLhHNMXIepnX2L2KC-mG_-l0Fjx5m-GvmP6GcXg1eyOyNZjrCL8eFWzyCT9XVDv8afLm2D3F0l-28tz-MwSJRRqc4vIjV0PCykM6NXQ">link</a>]</li>
<li style="text-align: justify; ">Shweta Mohandas authored an article for <i>Rajiv Gandhi National University of Law Student Research Review (RSRR)</i><span>. In this article, which forms a part of RSRR’s ‘</span><i>Excerpts from Experts Blog Series</i><span>,’ Shweta examines whether </span><strong>Indian data protection legislation can act as a check on growing workplace surveillance</strong><span>. [</span><a href="https://4jok2.r.ag.d.sendibm3.com/mk/cl/f/5X-z4Ay91QvhUYmdHomWwzdgLp7eCubPpwLyaH1H0MWiyiQfU9PIIQSg2Nshk2mfLJYrb65hiGIj3xyuffXiDnOu9lbwfFsrQCL6D5DnQ9HkvOoZHcq3_Kgf9NVKSAX7tv-aqy00L3jjJtbWbvfaqwnagmdUVSLEP9E7S6s-UTBvO-KCO82DhWELF0Od6dhVrbr0WvVi980IX67IkCiSNaKwpuNwSXuYS9bgD0s">link</a><span>]</span></li>
<li style="text-align: justify; ">Aman Nair and Arindrajit Basu examine the changes in the context of <strong>data sharing between WhatsApp and Facebook as being an anticompetitive action in violation of the Indian Competition Act, 2002</strong><span>. Having previously </span><a href="https://4jok2.r.ag.d.sendibm3.com/mk/cl/f/u35U0gu1I7Y81i6OYu20wN7zgiA4FxKWowVPgk7Gmafn69IJLoZapqrfCSWui33Sh0ntbkPajjtW_p35C3qMoCP5xcrC2dHSO3DX9MZ7uFNbJZ-p_NRBv5bOZ_1jKeH2KYBYohqWlZ83VVG3CDvNl1AK_4xmNrr9L578OragYyJQo2U93bxHbLw1fnLc1CPWqkfZvcmydFo1HGyNBeFpRqiTVn6ytQjyAiUw2Gisx7itlxVHmb_QCuSd0T8nD47U4UBH_i_dg6PN5R4PcjU">examined</a><span> the implications of WhatsApp’s changes to its privacy policy in 2021, this issue brief is the second output of the series examining the effects of the changes. [</span><a href="https://4jok2.r.ag.d.sendibm3.com/mk/cl/f/jOUH-SfgRCjdp9DORlyEL16nnyJ_ogGha0d2DdYJGcRnBOiZt6F3SuhZzZYX8t1umpAtId1_80WNiW3Y6CgGDA-TYQ2hORCBWeOvvoPphGzr0DfCy_6tD8QQMzgb3mCm1GXECkmJM_kTL9kfRrj8GVpe3DHJ7_jX3pKBQx9HHWKqkgftY_8wTG6zCG4J8HZC-1Hv66BsR1didil6DVh-HtetydLcMzlikdBj4bvxTjzFRAoLvsyeBH9PaoDRJuUXTYR5-8BcE8ITu2TyiOyc_ME2kuDJ3DJiE4PDeNHutpTJyuc7lqwp-g">link</a><span>]</span></li>
<li style="text-align: justify; ">In a blog-post, Pallavi Bedi provides recommendations for the <strong>Covid vaccine intelligence network (Co-Win) platform</strong><span>. She says that as a first step it is essential that Co-Win has a separate dedicated privacy policy which conforms to the internationally accepted privacy principles and enumerated in the Personal Data Protection Bill. [</span><a href="https://4jok2.r.ag.d.sendibm3.com/mk/cl/f/o19mW5Vyy3giilmnC_ef5khZu85qA-A3uDr687psJN0UhAkPY43mYt7Jaw7cXwy0NJK7ky9IvnklXsGPIME4bYH2cCVK_NeXEhZK-N6RRRSSDFUG33BpdaFtUD3cqIxrsEV_-ILCXF4SDN3IBmJFKeJDBFZA4bLuUWEzsAhBQbnFcbGuITTNq74cViuBSO-p09OT9-AtzOUgce0Brhta6YmU5iSmpMGW2XWhWTw3ueesRR_8fjDkF7XoLDGCMmkdjvAeyfbCIee0z-30EbUN5sbLzCCHVUHmuYVPzqtLeV8">link</a><span>]</span></li>
</ol>
<h3>Freedom of Expression, and Intermediary Liability</h3>
<ol>
<li style="text-align: justify; ">In February, the Advertising Standards Council of India (ASCI) had issued draft rules for <strong>regulation of digital influencers</strong>, with an aim to <em>“understand the peculiarities of [online] advertisements and the way consumers view them,”</em> as well as to ensure that: <em>“consumers must be able to distinguish when something is being promoted with an intention to influence their opinion or behaviour for an immediate or eventual commercial gain.”</em> Torsha Sarkar and Shweta Mohandas respond with comments and recommendations to the rules. [<a href="https://4jok2.r.ag.d.sendibm3.com/mk/cl/f/nP6_NZer0OIQv_bMG6p9Vzx-uTdYi17sYHl0xdFjMYzEzv9xmTvSG73K8_7sq4J6NPdQ5sNA5eaQvAwMHBrYkAt2mGFF9SLlrCSfNZ3K6rpRyst36jbtHpdD3_Pc9ukKdBW3_lhiGpISLi7H2TBa0BumRk2JV3PFdUBH6R3kk0ywJuvcHeJJWxAsnyydYY2s2_iRpo5Sc0MvHbC8vlDCoI6mtuL0_PC6B2eL0G8wZqbtwYYM2hNO-DfobKXJV16nfGC8GxASmN2FmH07pif0Cn5xSXoeadfmwb-Fox-B03UAn-0THELMM1beVubJWnOAOrPXoA5JIZ7CQe5x3g">link</a>]</li>
</ol>
<h3>Copyright, and Access to Knowledge</h3>
<ol>
<li> Anubha Sinha explains what the draft national science, technology and innovation policy means for <strong>open access to scientific literature</strong> for Indians. This article was published in <em>The Wire Science</em>. [<a href="https://4jok2.r.ag.d.sendibm3.com/mk/cl/f/CJjg4ihUvxLz1chJKcO03n5_Ydr9rvEDH_kFGYPs7_aijAvgsioqcqvZU0n41Ly6CNagHY1Upc0-3eCPsdo3GxXWC6baFyPSXImgs7tRy-Tio7TdRDS1qHU9i5YghNVjsoIunFozlrsutZGnXjXNF6Ce04lDrZ0g0dOdBIDt-InCeubeq35RnbIj3Qb2jdf2vwlkcAeyC925K6WeyzPM7sGUAVmMH1wKu9pmN-bgHJfNRodxOWODiF_o5vmu6g25UP6IdunHwUKorudI_0RopdHXBA">link</a>] </li>
<li> In an article published in <em>Info Justice</em>, Anubha Sinha provides a summary of the progress of the <strong>copyright infringement suit against Sci-Hub and LibGen</strong> in India. [<a href="https://4jok2.r.ag.d.sendibm3.com/mk/cl/f/Jg1NJZxuFnR-Srq0Tz1RS3XZZ17cL4JxJFlOY2g12wpoHPIxsc-lW18hjUe7sg309BNiO1i0V_yLGaQsQiAzILlWe2zd3ctx4dTTFvyFbs_Ds1w3W91GNEdoWszaryWzeKs-ZSDZYR1IPZa4ZGXpOrd21RiKK6InuJVXGZRN6WJzmgdBr4ZWre9-NP3AxduZDFnzXrjfCho6iDPhS7CuR8ZW4bFCwkmvCr70-yTDLLkT2DUmkB-caRfvMxukUyr1fjilhp-3vJwEt1gHi0HP-kpyx3wac8mjFxSCbsVg-5AiRMti">link</a>] </li>
</ol>
<h3>Digital Cultures, and Social Justice</h3>
<ol>
<li style="text-align: justify; ">In a research paper, Noopur Raval offers critical historical insights from the fields of international development, anthropology, and postcolonial history to caution against both the possible harms of <strong>gender disaggregated datafication</strong>, as well as the consequences of <strong>non-participatory datafication of women</strong>. [<a href="https://4jok2.r.ag.d.sendibm3.com/mk/cl/f/WmB3X2tO_c8hEDCY-QCDD1tTPBIEB7Gt4bFRLY7mNCB3X5sRuV6npbW4eIX8ta-lGod2fia1v8ZTxZurtXczkJQbBg5ckgKRSG3eYKfG9ntQ5qRKVkq12g9YEmZ1eP1raJjh5p5aHQ-0MhUsQafyvBQpzVEdDK9ZJecvYAq3GyD42aSWkS0iQ17sS9WCDchDhFQn20CS7MAEmZm6rM0yymmNBqTHRR7GuKxP3edQqiMTblOufA4mhx62YuIgqn_mRv5uOPqxevVBmTtlTTyMmZihFccK">link</a>]</li>
<li>Kaarika Das, a research scholar at NIEPA and Sravya C, a researcher in the Humanizing Automation project at IIIT Bangalore published <strong>a study on migrants in India's Gig Economy</strong>. [<a href="https://4jok2.r.ag.d.sendibm3.com/mk/cl/f/H6Jr3Xykf4-nxghqRxErQtEVs4TH-l3S2LVhiXIisAPDyUCm6fiWyLGCI_V9jrofmSaX7B1sFEjjVvhsqbNcHpKz6_ztX9o6ZMp-BRrke6HgLScE3FYxJKKFhtGyp_w_xUwJu1jybdsltHMKm1oNjRgYm4Z_hbpUTmJlK72raCD6jC7VjvTmuJmIGZLFa1J18o0IoImVO8VLqbV_lUigTVBNQWqZsgl_TyjYf3a6H8oLBlG4fo3jIXAsU5S2aySLzNO9u46C1Zv5g-D3wc6jChAhrMcOtcp2NNeEOJRw_n-nzYNrfVNwwLKdIOY">link</a>]</li>
<li>Sameet Panda and Vipul Kumar wrote a blog for <em>Privacy International</em> pointing the <strong>failures in the digitisation of India’s food security programme</strong> in light of the <strong>exclusion of married women of Odisha</strong>. [<a href="https://4jok2.r.ag.d.sendibm3.com/mk/cl/f/czsORnDtqHr4eMfKxD9huAqfK9BfJ_oZWslVsCoG63dJQwSqFhMbQzBgtolMXmsnvl3TuEaSJXOIWWc6z-EcMaMSfZwAZR6Tixu7KVE3u343x0qCePCh6k_Mbyo1ckxpCdq6R4M2f8b-8PdxHsW1OzgIALcgF63n63DmmmP3krIGfTsWj-kO03xSa6lho6qrFDnEQeDW6zuMc8mHf-o34ogIveNxvYoa_gtPEag390DefdFa5not77SmRSLeLd-oAFxkcQ_jrSEiEnyjD9UNdb0COOFbk8KlrD2y7SBM27_5U_oRY1tHFTDIpBT3z4k">link</a>]</li>
<li>Shreya Ghosh, a research scholar at the Centre for Political Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi authored an article in <em>EPW</em> on <strong>access to welfare and health for women during the initial phase of the pandemic</strong>. [<a href="https://4jok2.r.ag.d.sendibm3.com/mk/cl/f/WrUVPoWi-5LlI7z8_qy9HVtjyDoIgjSdclz7-wdA1OV2tG7GWSuUQ-F31hf1TpaGumhcxYeQJE9vqj1LRYpoKJfaHyCQHx_Dnt8PcNB2eEvQAbtHEdjAZLIu6Pno55XvtCJ33EBRdNRU-tu0Tt8j_lXT_nSChepY18OpIu69PUGNBI7Lsp6pkOo4LXhtUKdImoitU_-lBg1-paVePznLYRWL7bhk5rm_OrIsJPZuKbEnew8kXTwbDvjUgZbD">link</a>]</li>
<li>Ambika Tandon and Aayush Rathi in a research paper, <strong>“Fault lines at the Front lines”</strong> analyze the <strong>changing employment conditions for domestic workers</strong> in the growing platform economies of South and Southeast Asia. By analyzing different platform designs and comparing regulations in <strong>India, Indonesia, Pakistan and Vietnam</strong>, the authors present a thorough picture of the situation for domestic workers in the new economy. [<a href="https://4jok2.r.ag.d.sendibm3.com/mk/cl/f/kPMoaM42DpjpGxHbzGnAXycfRBu9fPzVJ6jQoyePUjDKKV9KMz8HDo8M3h5fDoOFAynoCq8ARyzHdBIkACBBy8eWHRWjcbXslejcnZZIn2LP-BsWh_Sr4FMl2AWDTQktt8tlZAZ2PcTfL_KE1sYJD1d4522v3eLvu_QUX8LCXvuznSIusIe7e_vFu3MNdylOuSIK_-L61Uin8gAEZ-eO4DDwYaE42Uc0">link</a>]</li>
<li>In a blog post published by <em>Ethical Source</em>, Ambika Tandon throws light on <strong>artificial intelligence and allied technologies</strong> that form part of <strong>Industry 4.0</strong> in the future of work. [<a href="https://4jok2.r.ag.d.sendibm3.com/mk/cl/f/Hrd-w4fWPa8ThFlmr-Zw_-LR96KsoFTBchzDQ8QwDJALcjcwz1fCn49RAws3-xmNATUZIYUaSQT4nJxodQvSgrzlzKXEOdj64Sx8aRvtkyPaolpAml7hSDcczWdPJPaZISxUxCl9S1DHnfujOulrLkdqgEf1xPsWSQk_TQZJU4dOE7Vnqm_pmCnFVs_WLo4yQ2P00Td3VYd78HikHsyLC3yqju4">link</a>]</li>
<li>Ambika Tandon and Aayush Rathi authored a chapter titled <strong>“Care in the Platform Economy: Interrogating the Digital Organisation of Domestic Work in India”</strong> in a book titled <em>“The Gig Economy: Workers and Media in the Age of Convergence.”</em> [<a href="https://4jok2.r.ag.d.sendibm3.com/mk/cl/f/-vxAl0-OSphrFabwlh8Ir2yhdE_cYeWryiSavWFOByLbxWzlndVfgl1K0awHZjD1J6LmUbu2OaoCgNKL3Dcozv_hQ9WEi1MeQdSRmT1kKProU_9fJexLKPbw80T69AfzXMtjpfX_6zYPpWohxsh1xxOwK86Vs5S_x73hOG7hhuQxFfy4VF4co0Ls2jX-Wi7-L4pf-SBVBekVFuObAI6dOsUwWyywiSYldGbFbxxPfyVegmZuKMtD4bBycNBw_B__X1IogiPK5fj0851hxFM4eo5Wl2s0dZY37-UhpKL4xS0gLZI9UozMux7JbmzM4jpZT1AAGGCNlYb4DM3_Alf0YHI1KQ">link</a>]</li>
</ol>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='https://cis-india.org/about/newsletters/march-may-2021-newsletter'>https://cis-india.org/about/newsletters/march-may-2021-newsletter</a>
</p>
No publisherpranavInternet GovernanceCopyrightAccess to Knowledge2021-08-08T15:45:45ZPageMaharashtra's Copyright Policy Makes Education Unaffordable
https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/asia-times-june-20-anubha-sinha-maharastras-copyright-policy-makes-education-unaffordable
<b>In an alarming development for Indian students, Balbharati – the Maharashtra state bureau of textbook production and curriculum research – has issued a copyright policy that forces all publishers, digital educational-content creators, and coaching classes to obtain expensive licenses for developing material directly or indirectly relating to Balbharati’s content.</b>
<p>The article was <a class="external-link" href="http://www.atimes.com/maharashtras-copyright-policy-makes-education-unaffordable/">published in Asia Times</a> on June 20, 2018.</p>
<hr />
<p>The stated object of the policy is to prevent commercialization of Balbharati’s physical and digital material.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><a href="http://ebalbharati.in/main/publicHome.aspx">Balbharati</a> is responsible for setting curriculum and content for Classes 1-10, which is followed by Maharashtra state board schools. It is estimated that that <a href="https://www.hindustantimes.com/mumbai-news/number-of-private-unaided-schools-in-maharashtra-double-in-four-years/story-0066HyTQBPlgQg3NzlX57L.html">around 85,000 schools in Maharashtra</a> follow Balbharati’s prescribed content and syllabus, and the policy is set to affect students’ access to affordable supplementary material in state board schools, especially – most of which belong to the vernacular-rural section of society.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The government faced a backlash from various groups after the policy was released last week.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><a href="http://www.dnaindia.com/mumbai/report-balbharti-policy-leaves-private-publishers-in-the-lurch-2622487">Parents have expressed serious concerns</a> about the impending increase in the prices of educational material; publisher groups have already <a href="https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/pune/balbharati-text-bureau-tweaks-licence-fee-rule-for-tutorials/articleshow/64620428.cms">declared</a> that the burden will be passed on to students. Some booksellers have <a href="http://www.dnaindia.com/mumbai/report-balbharti-policy-leaves-private-publishers-in-the-lurch-2622487">stopped selling </a>material altogether until the issue is resolved.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><a href="https://www.hindustantimes.com/pune-news/private-publishers-seek-cm-s-help-to-address-balbharati-copyright-fee/story-w9PzOfxj1ouAgMyJlSTorM.html">Digital and print publishers</a>, booksellers and <a href="http://www.printweek.in/news/publishers-unhappy-balbharati-registration-rules-29712">coaching classes</a> are the ones directly affected, apart from the students, some of whom have lodged appeals with the state education minister, Vinod Tawde, to roll back the policy. Faced with the ire of multiple groups, the state government <a href="https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/pune/balbharati-text-bureau-tweaks-licence-fee-rule-for-tutorials/articleshow/64620428.cms">released a revised policy</a> with a new license-fee structure. The new structure is based on “Balbharati Specific Turnover” slabs (defined as turnover of an entity from Balbharati related content), which depends on the nature of content produced – physical, digital, or tuition classes content.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">A license is required of any person involved in the business of developing educational material such as guides, reference books, questions or tests, chapter summaries, model practice question papers, interactive digital content and software, with fees chargeable on a per subject, per medium, per grade basis.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The revisions to the policy only allow for a reduction in licensing fees, and it is likely that the government is still in ignorance of serious legal defects in it. Drafted with support from global consulting firm KPMG, the policy uses copyright as an instrument to justify the collection of license fees by making two fallacious assumptions: first, that all material produced by Balbharati is copyrightable; and second, that any dealing in Balbharati’s material, directly or indirectly, amounts to copyright infringement.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">For example, the <a href="http://cart.ebalbharati.in/BalBooks/pdfs/1003030024.pdf">English Kumarbharati</a> for Class 10 uses Tagore’s historic poem “Where the mind is held without fear…,” which is a work in the public domain now, and then proceeds to provide certain academic exercises for the reader.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Similarly, for science and mathematics syllabi, where basic facts and fundamental principles are provided and explained, is the Maharashtra government trying to establish copyright over such material, implying that this is creative material that has been developed by Balbharati’s staff?</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Much of the content in Balbharati books deals with subjects that have been known to mankind for hundreds of years. Copyright law protects only expression of ideas, and not the ideas per se. Any supplementary material developed by another publisher over Balbharati’s syllabi should not amount to infringement, provided it is not a substantial copy-paste of Balbharati’s own expression in the books – and this is a conservative view of the scenario.</p>
<h3 style="text-align: justify; ">Indian copyright law</h3>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">In fact, the Indian Supreme Court in the <a href="http://www.ebc-india.com/downloads/ebc_v_modak.pdf">Eastern Book Company vs Modak</a> (2008) case held that, “to establish copyright, the creativity standard applied is not that something must be novel or non-obvious, but some amount of creativity in the work to claim a copyright is required. Selection and arrangement can be viewed as typical and at best result of the labor, skill and investment of capital lacking even minimal creativity, which does not as a whole display sufficient originality so as to amount to an original work of the author.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">“To claim copyright, there must be some substantive variation and not just a trivial variation, not the variation of the type where limited ways of expression available and author selects one of them.”</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Thus the policy fails to appreciate fundamental developments in Indian law and places a barrier to creation of all kinds of educational material – without distinguishing between various kinds of supplementary material and showing precisely as to what nature and quantum of use as per Balbharati would qualify as infringing.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Interestingly, the previous version of the policy contained an FAQ (frequently asked questions) section that elaborated principles of copyright law. However, this section has been removed in the latest version. In any case, the FAQs presented incomplete explanations of Indian copyright jurisprudence, making references to outdated case law.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">As noted earlier, publishers and digital content development companies are already suffering from the ramifications. In places where the quality of classroom teaching and learning is sub-par, it is unacceptable to deprive students access to <a href="https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/mumbai/costly-balbharati-licences-may-not-have-any-takers/articleshow/64361276.cms">affordable</a> guides, reference books, digital content, and so on by unreasonably deeming indirect usage of Balbharati’s content as infringing activity.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Given India’s socio-economic conditions, it would be fatal to implement policies that seek to create a self-serving market of educational licenses for the state, very much at the expense of ensuring quality and affordable education. At the very least, the Maharashtra government should have conducted a proper public-consultation exercise before arriving at such a policy that stands to affect students and other stakeholders in the education system adversely.</p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/asia-times-june-20-anubha-sinha-maharastras-copyright-policy-makes-education-unaffordable'>https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/asia-times-june-20-anubha-sinha-maharastras-copyright-policy-makes-education-unaffordable</a>
</p>
No publishersinhaCopyrightAccess to Knowledge2018-06-26T14:22:30ZBlog EntryLand and Social Justice - An introduction to Georgism
https://cis-india.org/a2k/events/land-and-social-justice-an-introduction-to-georgism
<b>Cherry G Mathew will be giving a public talk on Georgism at the office of the Centre for Internet and Society in Bangalore on April 12, 2013, from 5 p.m. to 7 p.m.</b>
<h3>Abstract</h3>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">In his popular book of the 1870s "Progress and Poverty", Henry George examined the causes of Poverty in contemporary America, and proposed very specific solutions for economic justice. "His genius has been glowingly acknowledged by such renowned figures as philosophers John Dewey and Mortimer J. Adler, presidents Woodrow Wilson and Dwight D. Eisenhower, scientists Alfred Russel Wallace and Albert Einstein, essayists John Ruskin and Albert Jay Nock, jurists Louis D. Brandeis and Samuel Seabury, columnists William F. Buckley and Michael Kinsley, and statesmen Winston Churchill and Sun Yat-sen.", while being heavily criticised by Karl Marx (who referred to George's teaching as "Capitalism's last ditch."<a href="#fn*" name="fr*">[*]</a></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">This talk will make a brief introduction to George's Ideas, and then will attempt to draw discussion on their relevence to information and current copyright and intellectual property landscapes.</p>
<h3 style="text-align: justify; ">Cherry G. Mathew</h3>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Cherry G. Mathew is a British Chevening Scholar and an Open Source Kernel Hacker. He has worked on the Linux kernel in the past, and is an active FreeBSD and NetBSD developer/committer. He is an Electronics Engineer by basic training, with a Masters in Evolutionary and Adaptive Systems. He has worn various hats professionally, from Technical Developer, Roboticist, Free Software campaigner, CEO, volunteer teacher and currently software consultant. His current area of professional work is the Xen hypervisor and BSD kernels. His non-technology hobbies include outdoor pursuits and swing dancing.</p>
<hr />
<p><a class="external-link" href="https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/131Wt1xsux_Llc_Itcs2hbegZIC7kAgfysvwYwk02yWI/edit?usp=sharing">Click</a> to see the presentation</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr*" name="fn*">*</a>]. <a class="external-link" href="http://bit.ly/13HZg7m">http://bit.ly/13HZg7m</a> (Retrieved on March 29, 2013).</p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='https://cis-india.org/a2k/events/land-and-social-justice-an-introduction-to-georgism'>https://cis-india.org/a2k/events/land-and-social-justice-an-introduction-to-georgism</a>
</p>
No publisherpraskrishnaIntellectual Property RightsCopyrightAccess to KnowledgeEvent2013-04-28T07:06:03ZEventJune and July Newsletter
https://cis-india.org/about/newsletters/june-july-2021-newsletter
<b>The newsletter presents the work done in the months of June and July 2021.</b>
<h3>Announcements</h3>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">We are pleased to announce the launch of a <strong>seminar series</strong> to showcase research around digital rights and technology policy, with a focus on the Global South. The CIS seminar series will be a venue for researchers to share works-in-progress, exchange ideas, identify avenues for collaboration, and curate research. It will also seek to mitigate the impact of Covid-19 on research exchange, and foster collaborations among researchers and academics from diverse geographies. For more details on the first session, <strong>on Information Disorders</strong>, and to register, click here: [<a href="https://4jok2.r.ag.d.sendibm3.com/mk/cl/f/5rYRQ0U6yOrzlX_5e9iqnD_UB7xRMkmO8EVgecX5S9vDUhOLzn5WpJ0OxgmH2vkh7APoOqCGaRVN7fbP4hfGnUPT63lb2O87rMGdk4RE4xpKcYzABQ2MhfjmOr_3FkIJtbxITjKFXrZRVlI-An9WPxyiN-QtsOJjpxV0baaFxLqDmy_TnlrW_FLKnXYXkTNBbxlIifakqN_m9fPpBaaaMJF_KetoeIUtNQIoHYTtcIQhNoelJ8-I28gyVM1-9w61Ew">link</a>]</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">We are also hiring for two full time remote positions:</p>
<ul>
<li>Research Associate: Access to Knowledge Programme: Apply by <strong>August 13</strong> [<a href="https://4jok2.r.ag.d.sendibm3.com/mk/cl/f/tn9z7DynIuxWFSSRGmZ50s_HYg65AwLX75HcYf9qBiEJsrkj6teE0WzDGHWCezRU7S0d4Li9WxClerez9wuhwJFHRpki4ynQYqrFoAh7dKnqJKulAW_7VyZIrgxsBri_sYFlGanbqT0IW-9HdYDbVbqyjvgAUl06_OlaHwOMDzO833kR5cT3BwaLUSDOhZqfFvwVNZav-DBH1q9Kr9bWXdtPe_g_wDm-PW3lMxudyF7SKkCLrGceKAec1QiU">link</a>]</li>
<li>Communication Designer: Apply by <strong>August 20</strong> [<a href="https://4jok2.r.ag.d.sendibm3.com/mk/cl/f/lskNSP_MjDCNYOT2PmiuZiGB29gga3crwxuXyJYEF8rdPYDDerNnNYnnCV-GG8rdnyqkxU4eJofgQXU1-iS2IPRRGRRtBXXEaUSVB3mioQNSRwwIecWmm2TIFkfi2fAL7grkxRKKKAX2PG87TiWk8hdmOUqcqtEX9dqbsudTQ3xgmZOio5BOC4GL6mxMzN_9Q5_YzOzZxSZzpT7SMm1J_HASTKNuUktcaESwbMV7PO5sPic41ymaDT8">link</a>]</li>
</ul>
<h3>Cybersecurity, Privacy, and Emerging Technology</h3>
<ol>
<li style="text-align: justify; ">Following the MCA notification <strong>mandating disclosures of crypto currency</strong> holdings by companies, Aryan Gupta, in an issue brief, discusses the policy landscape in the United States of America, United Kingdom, and Japan with particular emphasis upon <strong>definition, accounting practices, and taxation, with respect to crypto currencies.</strong> [<a href="https://4jok2.r.ag.d.sendibm3.com/mk/cl/f/IapPj_hXCzk7v6Hf21yy36-Sz8hRKHv8zkjWHYoTB7Tu5pnKDAw25QMx5zjerDAadU3BAHF2npDH_q9m81nhsGEbEBQqfWIksFuU7FqAIoREOxap2dkrtGy-X49B1okL_K-zz4zOgG1nyg6ct03r-xSZw_C94Cc8MzubQ2tzmsZjEYGRlxHywlK8a7988SepnX7wbWd2aDt6rhgDNxSBU6AJh3DeygvFctc-wWW9F-Q5e81ADlC9Xei9IoYdHlJrbvOMikdM2WlvJLzb0vnVlDJqd_7x4B7_XdshOYFQ4YRljV4O">link</a>]</li>
<li style="text-align: justify; ">We submitted comments in response to the Supreme Court E-committee’s draft vision document of <strong>phase III of the E-courts project</strong>. Aman Nair, Arinjay Vyas, Pallavi Bedi and Garima Saxena submitted their general comments and recommendations, and comparatively analysed the <strong>integration of digital technology into the judiciary in both South Asia and Africa</strong>. [<a href="https://4jok2.r.ag.d.sendibm3.com/mk/cl/f/a-ADiN4WA0-BN9-GzZs_TH-rDZ6m1ii-4HzEzLfXdwVXmGyrIYBcuU7EMPd865oDaqEYSihJoqjxTyuC4usIwryJorATCH47YWEUlUAXce8b2TudJcdAsWryfDvls0WhJFQ9TTw4Bt5ZPfdDmToylNX9ECLuOvO851uSycsDHetWiQhQXaDELUcbQKXBZEbhxtFos2ugg4PHwLXNhwM9iKMb1Q-4OuONy6YcnpFcB3fVUeLvWVp4aBEngQVUnvfLfeVdMvGWNoDk">link</a>]</li>
<li style="text-align: justify; ">Google’s new Privacy Sandbox platform promises to <strong>preserve anonymity when serving tailored advertising</strong>. But does this new framework help users in any way? Maria Jawed’s analysis reveals that Google’s gambit to <strong>reorient the ad-tech ecosystem under the garb of privacy</strong>, ultimately ends up undermining it. [<a href="https://4jok2.r.ag.d.sendibm3.com/mk/cl/f/pwRhJ3bFqQSxSMBZ-qNYKO59aoQ95F8ro9x-8vBy2QDQiBpNFb-qLH4I8Ph-o65OT_bJnNcMoJzFBig6nxqFFcT7qtvR0b6bakvkH4pQRJalgbpLCylKEblBaFkiAudZPamJaz7XIeQ3mMQNQcnk9jxhjGW4yu6YFB8-h_G4nYcZg9lJCj35EZMG-bdl79YR6VEUb9jVxmNFoDXuTiUBCHjeSqP8yqPgHS40nzZgSqD7JMoGiSPT6G7K1xwQUBQLKzlCjKGGoaioxOOWS7qw8BrAQtuKIc4xxRvos-IkyJUA0g1W8wUqjNK7NvYR">link</a>]</li>
<li style="text-align: justify; ">Pandemic technology is taking a toll on data privacy, especially in the absence of any legal framework; these tools are being used for purposes beyond managing the pandemic. In an article published in the <i>Deccan Herald</i>, Aman Nair and Pallavi Bedi argue that <strong>India’s digital response to the pandemic</strong> has stoked concerns that surveillance could pose threats to the privacy of the personal data collected. [<a href="https://4jok2.r.ag.d.sendibm3.com/mk/cl/f/Aye_SwuSiE165Jg5KCM8Xlu9VfO971hqjgMyX4Gv278-mjdbOrJ-pT_WYUbbFG0344IvZPu_ZqcvDp0hcVjfGVaWGAhKvBZDinhfhGSD7VvAE53bWwBah-W8vKt_3F0VP70pUKqESr5WztG-fPEOtB94MghogG528WknuMCtyA29jFZg7JvA2Qy1mR4MHAwQq2tJjvzyA_woJHqaQ2zW9at0DVmsSszAoApTe76XUE-ZoPMUtpNXT464bp-CYx1vY0jeFHyECbR6gHkoBNl-h4pwjkz2i9yOaOntXmNuf1kTX2ARhZpiMNjSmnYMf_5K_vEoGzQK0w1N6CuYG9dHLX2l">link</a>]</li>
<li style="text-align: justify; ">In a piece for <i>The Wire</i>, Aman Nair analyses <strong>Tether, a lesser known crypto currency</strong> that is at the heart of a $3 trillion market. Issued by Tether Limited, Tether forms the foundation for modern day crypto trading and could potentially be one of the <strong>biggest schemes in financial history</strong>. [<a href="https://4jok2.r.ag.d.sendibm3.com/mk/cl/f/YKCj-XnMRae1xKW-I5Vc2QZ531_WbOyKyzDAaHwXjqatVsRL9KTiy0LW50cP7Thc5zIV1vTZpRlnJuXzfYGNyOH92MtVSacioSMhehA-8TpG62qt1HMjOndXVcukp5TrJ_Z4jhyr_B0qg7hItuk5fJ9-Kw1Hh-SiRjvYGdVX_ZD2dY8NxTfKn4f7GnqP2bzHT3HWNO9yPzA6KfVPSawYFVLyyIf46leO7oJ5SIKyT4MawaPTtu9FDH5nfhMMgdm9YIFYIkuc12ZF8vargG4gMd608s5mt8kg1hpub4d3pi3o">link</a>]</li>
<li style="text-align: justify; ">India has 500 million internet users — over a third of its total population — making it the country with the <strong>second largest number of internet users</strong> after China. With this comes several kinds of digital threats that an average digital consumer in India must regularly contend with. Pranav M.B. attempts to identify the <strong>existing state of digital safety in India</strong>, with a report that maps digital threats in the country. [<a href="https://4jok2.r.ag.d.sendibm3.com/mk/cl/f/7DnN6eodtvhnJdNwrTh3BU4_wJCm2_Ct9eG7-nmis2QkS4qgiiX4--Qa0TTqxqJqUNHmn3xnedwSoNGVRd0smQAgaFGQ1PLpfwVhmYPO4vaXGiF0dkcRjZTHk1W5mCRTZ4CpIx2zKt4yn1WKAy3dIBxa-xnoEQMUY4YrZRqeQr1M_JwHV3KmHWG2J1CgmXUdY13h6bQ9QEDL16a5G-eN6zH8ttyLM2kXF30BnXgkAL11Sl_vZs9AdeR_UoDQJKObf3BEoq8">link</a>]</li>
<li style="text-align: justify; ">Since last year, there have been regular questions around the <strong>anti-competitive practices</strong> of digital platforms. After 46 US states filed an antitrust case against Facebook along with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) in December 2020, Kamesh Shekar analyzed these developments in a blog post. [<a href="https://4jok2.r.ag.d.sendibm3.com/mk/cl/f/svyv1CoITzbqrsIl54oOKHsVb5xbZsOjr-IIfJndIFs4FbasMTa8xPr308vsVz_owTEDCl52kc-B-8gqND7dedFPmINs25UkG8kwkeYNcktOKUUty9Zms5UqyAXnyBUFkrbccLYTL8X7DtYXy9UCoLj6i9kGiUgJyNR_ePM-32LsWT2dzMRvY3MLjtyTTeWzqv1kPYcud-kpCxX9zMid4KJZIY7fJSLCsCPiXvrcc5RjQ6wO8SxOlNzRwDLztrG9MlWjBAOom4m32Hc3Az86wUcL5h_dTnpcqiHVCjudMiD2Wz9hKAcXbBF-mMlrTS61GXYC3B9PEMLilqy1XdCSLA">link</a>]</li>
<li style="text-align: justify; ">Recently, the Indian government mandated <strong>online messaging providers to enable identification of originators of messages on their platforms</strong>. In an academic paper for the <i>NUJS Law Review</i>, Gurshabad Grover, Tanaya Rajwade and Divyank Katira conduct a legal and constitutional analysis of this ‘traceability’ requirement, how it can be implemented, and how these methods come with serious costs to usability, security, and privacy. [<a href="https://4jok2.r.ag.d.sendibm3.com/mk/cl/f/7VVDI4qoefdH1M0wYht5ypELl3sgVp1Sbz2TM_DsnX0l0o2wb-2Jq0wob7as43ltZn6ZssVx21Kb6WNIz16SwxuNYxLMwFaVL7Yqu-8eX3FzktAgtzePud71Rw38aDqYPUcb7aIzIkcrEgohiTTqr4KBZglu-g5Vc21w3pwXDKyjSXh_jk_8EIqLlZ2GF5ItEZspJwQGD9VzftHVEmz5AdqcK0Zcar_OOU9nGP8JrckN9xehbcAxzJ9V7lbKaLa6fVq_xbwLO2UqdClq7XIpCoUf9EgkKQ">link</a>]</li>
<li style="text-align: justify; ">The National Digital Health Mission: Health Data Management Policy seeks to establish a digital health ecosystem by creating a <strong>unique health identity</strong> (UHID) for every Indian citizen. Pallavi Bedi points out that hasty implementation of the policy without adequate safeguards not only risks the <strong>privacy and security of medical data</strong>, but also undermines trust in the system leading to low uptake. [<a href="https://4jok2.r.ag.d.sendibm3.com/mk/cl/f/I2XtCVqE0YUtaHHNBuG2SqhPciFDA8vAFssL8OFfrAIIw4IF4i0pC5aKw-bZofPUZI2o59tp6OVhScUGULq-yqLWvlZRi8AvmUhsS6gOvkWJJnC3Jpjyu5u2I2wysy-Q4Kt4TAOMgvcyr49ledwzRKHEo0lsRhQdFZ4VJMq10oyuB5bMF0vIWCJ3VqXUrb41hRJI5OUhxzXiGZmznPSy0p-gua0i5SvyeIn-uZTQjOFvdP5He9mT3HSsaw">link</a>]</li>
<li style="text-align: justify; ">In our comments to the proposed amendments to the <strong>Consumer Protection (E-Commerce) Rules, 2020</strong>, our analysis focuses on eight points: Definitions and Registration, Compliance, Data Protection and Surveillance, Flash Sales, Unfair Trade Practices, Jurisdictional Issues with Competition Law, Compliance with International Trade Law and Liabilities of Marketplace E-commerce Entities. [<a href="https://4jok2.r.ag.d.sendibm3.com/mk/cl/f/KsxrVD9CtofFFSJKNnNl4rbZSQJxomJbHYtB6gaF-CJrz6NTc3iLI__BZ3Af7DRwDzklM6bD3o3OU8Z9g2llAOWtrNsQdWfxmaky4BZfyHArp59Ciryun36-inqvCvTtCz4MfM_SxYe7DWZQjbigMwPTuyM1nTjfuZZESbCU0kHL5uxK09aQvMmYUfBPfBjrUuCPSnz1q_SHSOh38kHHRw6JdIuOl-FX_Fu_pSAFCPpBCjmoqiyRpWbgQQw3C8dbSnJ9sMWXbopXwWS99f4vPqMGK6Tn7w6tWJqmQa8hA3wAQsH8wJgl315nOQ">link</a>]</li>
</ol>
<h3>Freedom of Expression, Intermediary Liability and Information Disorders</h3>
<ol>
<li style="text-align: justify; ">The recent “Infodemic” clearly shows that <strong>disinformation costs people’s lives</strong>. CIS, and the Global Disinformation Index have published a report that examines <strong>the risk of disinformation on digital news platforms in India</strong>, creating an index that is intended to serve donors and stakeholders with a neutral assessment of news sites that they can utilise to defund disinformation. [<a href="https://4jok2.r.ag.d.sendibm3.com/mk/cl/f/oAbyvMS6qTJApmJnnokcclFKfhiXT90qwxve7vAzjNgoVJE7zL3znp9z-jVBaY_A_UghvzrqrbzPyQ8MWgNOqFX_zmz-LXX_QXxpTHcJCq0iQbudFAskKA4MQbW9ipPMHHkvCZ4sjD9YJ-f76ZHCOVs8aTp09SRza6UxxFqz2Lf-wyXOBkjjnSojLEnIzg_6Xyg-MV80GnR0MyptpLT6Ox44jMpuKSDNkziRqXdVFv2UiHFPUq5_kQFItEunUPazzjbXiO6aT6InqGhlHTpBpFR1ojSmP1YOtTCl7efQ-b_jHIbk-BBXDoDE4JF-TskvA8NvEln98dD-0ADQRopsvLp9XWDGiQ">link</a>]</li>
<li style="text-align: justify; ">Torsha Sarkar, Gurshabad Grover, Raghav Ahooja, Pallavi Bedi and Divyank Katira examine the legality and constitutionality of the <strong>Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021</strong>, highlighting potential benefits and harms that may arise from the rules, and making recommendations to retain the rules within constitutional bounds, and retain consistency with human rights based approaches to content regulation. [<a href="https://4jok2.r.ag.d.sendibm3.com/mk/cl/f/xeCVOWx8opFVXsJsk8tGp7BqtYUkK2zovJDarS6GLbKTR6VL0JLLSA-ap81tloriYQLLg6Cv1HxAws110HUv2UUabdK0aCbOvdeL2AtTWGD4zL7LEsC1gAIHyvP5DCYWo8flbZwKL0UNrMa-Bp8mmAOPTNTaHHyHjt6SyvidPNrc2nvjuwWNDsgPITp_PBAYDBmfwu02GfVr14URroyiEeqExwha0b0RlSPhrunshSDIXND6-AaBkVuGJ8VdnE-bMD7FHdAa559EsTcyhmnPiIYanR9fmV6UQHb7Q65yD7jENV3-lbzRCkAjki09Qvia1nxacxBIWHb-w3_PlbB7GkJXbl8_qVZHEWhyzTnAxVoGA-je-7W-x-eFOetThpo">link</a>]</li>
<li style="text-align: justify; ">The passage of the <strong>Intermediary Liability Rules, 2021</strong>, has also formalized the legal requirement for the utilization of automated tools in content moderation. In a blog-post for the <i>KU Leuven’s Centre for IT and IP (CITIP) Blog</i>, Shweta Mohandas and Torsha Sarkar analyze the requirement in light of concerns of freedom of expression of Internet users. [<a href="https://4jok2.r.ag.d.sendibm3.com/mk/cl/f/kfCCqzfLNuv79Hdeo_EA2wt5o0LRgortN3TKK_wup26r0wlpxdBW0C-m_IDPDssS9Ie8vuBmq3TrK6Bo0jfGRs1qD89TEU2wzVysBv9kAjUiosw2pXQiNir2ylQAnNBxnwyCe_qibQIf9UOGjlvP8d8iB1XZ1QPqQUl_yHKFDrPUme0OS2EUpis_rSoVy1ZOfH-GGHo7iNYRMcqqjbmCKtfZjmLvWY86v2Zk2EjLPXr8OA">link</a>]</li>
<li style="text-align: justify; ">Our comments to the <strong>Cinematograph (Amendment) Bill, 2021</strong>, authored by Tanvi Apte, Anubha Sinha, and Torsha Sarkar, examine the <strong>constitutionality and legality of the Bill</strong> and whether the proposed amendments are compatible with established constitutional principles, precedents, previous policy positions and existing law. [<a href="https://4jok2.r.ag.d.sendibm3.com/mk/cl/f/Ao1Sghs95JSFnpzMq8bTUYQ0z1F6uZOfg6M2Stt2ceVvCf4b0iB_3f-Yx7uywoASrATvOSS6uPYTVbP8x_JLqoD9QfvjD5soYvlNJBd87FuNyxqAb4wQ8cjOuN7B44pRo65xvX9K29eBGFp7fgv-AD_ok80j4SXnAZ6LrYClxPiHC48fiisVOW7McLfsFpLtUsns1u6MIG_7FMAKNY0GHFxa5xs3lM21mrhkEcC6I7sbimtF0jmOkid5nzYbcOrtQ5ZsvrdxSRllmmOy">link</a>]</li>
<li style="text-align: justify; ">Tanvi Apte and Torsha Sarkar, in a submission to the <strong>Facebook Oversight Board</strong> in Case 2021-008-FB-FBR: Brazil, Health Misinformation and Lockdowns, answer questions set out by the Board which concerned a post made by a Brazilian sub-national health official, and raised questions on <strong>health misinformation and enforcement of Facebook's community standards</strong>. [<a href="https://4jok2.r.ag.d.sendibm3.com/mk/cl/f/h-QObkDu8td1bmkfzIEHJlAmS10MohQnXiyqHQKNEnQkEpvkdTxLkKV3yJO7CcTJGDcS0kRQVTDEE8KNbb-551uGYLiaV3wFoxJ9tGnvMBaqvtPgYgxZbnAMOowSxN7gQJTqSOZwzMVQtSbr449f6KC0Bb208ApIh2a8OX_HCRwn2BYpoTvqUfeyFZyp2qoyW5LbeAe9P-JTlFrDaB7oFBXvTHvlJfTRrT6ZeLlkQqA_RqMOga71-sxDIxBo0vvn-9r28DcTePg3p659lJ0CWQMCXiz4tY1p3cLrJgKl3K3fjignnvexZpNwk91paBQ_Bia2DDUxc1Vxmvci1p3AASg3FtYqL5l1">link</a>]</li>
<li style="text-align: justify; ">In an essay for the <i>Indian Journal of Law and Technology (IJLT)</i>, Torsha Sarkar analyzes issues rising out of the recent <strong>litigation between Trump and Twitter</strong>. Torsha examines intermediary liability issues under American law, and draws parallel for India, in light of the ongoing litigation around the suspension of advocate Sanjay Hegde’s Twitter account. [<a href="https://4jok2.r.ag.d.sendibm3.com/mk/cl/f/JxA_S2DzStQUHeEVzf9_Df15_QnK0WHgMEjaaCqNjLmfXPAS4teU_fvrDtG9R4OwwOzWYiAXWPE3QFaxOZvJ5VCHuwincnLyGpYpWME0K5x8CJwyW0vUhC-stExhsSV_5pLmEtfaVyzcGRaXsJ4jGnLWnrADSdYzpPjUTPAb6hKDDL5BBjLjzvRt14_y3_9RNos99UKlpOCv9UFR6gC6cmOQmqte1UICPRw54oI7TUMC8TfPow-JZGmeA8lmMtODPi5dPN91euSX0g">link</a>]</li>
</ol>
<h3>Copyright & Access to Knowledge</h3>
<ol>
<li style="text-align: justify; ">The Indian Parliamentary Standing Committee on Commerce’s report weighs on several aspects of the <strong>Indian IPR system and issues of protection and enforcement</strong>. In a blog post, Anubha Sinha summarily notes the observations and recommendations of the Committee on the Copyright Act, 1957 which stand to impact <strong>access to knowledge</strong>. [<a href="https://4jok2.r.ag.d.sendibm3.com/mk/cl/f/20Alo2_Tse_JJBXG7sp9tp3Jf_qIUy2ksAvhoVH4heonMxDYRQK4nweCNF8LP29mpKvznQC8vljEX7TCv-Wb6SQREV5ph4uYOVIgz4wf36MaGTw8T5dkCxjqttA5V1tzNxdpfKi1WqQJKSFJ3o9Eog0uVFhHd3wXaYwiukkD3WHoDeYkOSZR_DYTGlm6nebmtCjaRRhTqwGMPYkZsKxM2td9xO2GBfP-J5R8llhxsrl1MvaUyiRBLIASh1l_KNpvCtlix-3Hot2VozymMTWyPG15W6s">link</a>]</li>
<li style="text-align: justify; ">The 41st edition of the Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights (SCCR) organized by the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) was held from 28 June to 1 July. Anubha Sinha participated in the event as a speaker and delivered statements on the <strong>Protection of Broadcasting Organisations</strong> [<a href="https://4jok2.r.ag.d.sendibm3.com/mk/cl/f/VysBbmMrMfJH2U5C8TeeVWtBq8wqBadivgBYyh26sNYegYdfaR4Tg_G6v1FqMgyVD6KAm3Z1tKWm256qR0VlPwGircBtmecePp2_-24cYoFWCoDH5v_5MuytzvKUIHkSlZ4cXN9CtUZ9t-92oeqAe5qm_CDhT0Xu7G5OZKn1_9s56JlL7E9FiWa0U5l2PYeonXi9H026DNWNaOPHQ8nvvYlmvIcTkwvKWQ">link</a>], and on <strong>Limitations and Exceptions</strong> [<a href="https://4jok2.r.ag.d.sendibm3.com/mk/cl/f/TBrEeBXDldm7nDPpsENoKMft-G03I54LhjmedXzSkg1RPImWfwqhCZ7bwXpwsXbIuVvOLd7G0RtA7PgCDKqHKcYjWzHr1K8Dd8oSUYIasd8N_tlEiMedkl8eTmoz5Cm_cLV8NlYLzIbsrHCxZhhPUApqXJprQ39qHf89pyRS2Zcw1HUYW8d-rVWobmlbW4MVr0EvBz0gbWpz3NLbh9W71pVK1VN9j-ge--ine3yx-uSoyel8qUGs0mPqw0NXp0nEUnIP32r3qHvdjzEbz4Ynagm2ww">link</a>]. Readers can access the notes from Day 1 [<a href="https://4jok2.r.ag.d.sendibm3.com/mk/cl/f/W_H8QjZ4FUv92dhzAdWKRTS508l6DEy7YOb8mnsf-ZzcQeMZe8TCW3XG5Fs7j1BO678zXMJn5jZiXL2eI4ZVNjrE6Sz8XcQs5fJ4z1EZSQTr-vMsaJsroyckdwmtQnOepz5KMLPZl4OnPm6ERcnJGBCVp6v7PZgpxVBGp5PR9Fo4e_TncX2qm_q_aB_e9s3I2vp8PReJJVYoEl53xIqWKkBqXlWk2RbqOQ">link</a>], Day 2 [<a href="https://4jok2.r.ag.d.sendibm3.com/mk/cl/f/DRaLcVvuB-VfY7fjrVtjA5hPHTFt2KwIt2hsH4mjuuYlzJLCv5r9O3R5-4Rg72Bhvw3kMYaowZuZorJN8DXJjhf5NABvf519ig4SyCsIUri4mXWjDA1lmCHY_Oe1WfTq_VLVxwOb4XYp8VVnKIIcgAg1kseXVSENaugyRZI3otS_IUn_zNwEkw2PdFEojqryYcf5kiEADKQ5sRuVH8WB9pncRKgCvpOfFA">link</a>], and Days 3 & 4 [<a href="https://4jok2.r.ag.d.sendibm3.com/mk/cl/f/dTkOebRyoXNDfdFetpwM6-mmRSpH7gwM1RL-SJmGMrbF25H9Y4-lo-nQ8HINcrM1eUmX9nqvpmoL26wsIsbAhOJ3MQygMDJpTQc-RNGk07WOUyH4GFUuejBJzsRBkQn44CEDxkcSQBzyLQHGjKakTPDRFszrjnLqD3e9jXfs77ie7wKRazrFjyssNPscxSg8xmrcfv89klVCo-Ts6ApD6nuRi3t0nndX2DAQ_hw_WlYLCgfmyw">link</a>].</li>
<li style="text-align: justify; ">The CIS Access to Knowledge team published a comparative analysis of two prominent Wikimedia initiatives, <strong>Wikipedia Asian Month</strong> and <strong>Project Tiger</strong>, to understand prevailing challenges and opportunities, and strategies to address the same. Nitesh Gill in a two-part report outlines the research questions and methods of this study [<a href="https://4jok2.r.ag.d.sendibm3.com/mk/cl/f/HZI5YNgRhNViR9DS-ewrTbGX-5PkynXGEMDr5kfCauCk2OYuygd2I3Da7Tp1kyhG1Oboc0MxIelbvOqpVQHHq0JVRgbyEVMPZiTWPhQENwnv_pfOR8KYHZzzLKv7Tc-iFk6qBgCCDSbnwjmA7sfiC3FDHFvqzbEGlMMUIg1XvcRNu6fFBWe2S1W5lsdZD00dY0r-w8o3IkzCSbKwHqJMld7CQvl48lpzGHtKFreKT_MiB33iis0Fehz-nrz7DlT-k2GLTpwScqX4DcHrLjWb7A">link</a>], and then presents some of the observations and learnings [<a href="https://4jok2.r.ag.d.sendibm3.com/mk/cl/f/bdLNf3_CCDaXpSzzhYF_2ThcU-LuTFb6k6HDcZ_4myjIWm-GlwXcDVQweGpaYjKKt4NmMol-HxoPucMx6w3-HC4QUmPULVJ882x8AMHaRehpgFh9t8cYPB6VPyjXNgcbzjSfOQXE6GpUDhrGYYg6KTmuH6t7F1qlOcoc_qlglL4vz5yCBL8Ri03yfZZVcfheY5Ly5lUb3WSZMpsO1u6n6KaRC_YFemwGu0sWsWgjW-XPRSNAyxHKeGLlUS7eN7wNvx-iLCLb2-VhEtN64QZHaxUd724J8Fg5">link</a>].</li>
</ol>
<h3>Labour and Social Justice</h3>
<ol>
<li style="text-align: justify; ">In a flagship report on <strong>domestic and care workers on digital platforms</strong>, Aayush Rathi and Ambika Tandon argue that digital platforms are complicit in discriminating against workers on the basis of their identities, and that domestic workers continue to remain in precarious positions without any legal recognition or support. This work was jointly authored between the Centre for Internet and Society and the Domestic Workers’ Rights Union. [<a href="https://4jok2.r.ag.d.sendibm3.com/mk/cl/f/sm3NIXtD7ClOE3mjbw6fg2ZvZB0TI3dh6rnb4vb6Hv0Ev_VwikRY-XOESwuw3-Gfglvi7OHT5l-PthXPf2rn3UDbiRRE3jaRzidnzl5uPs6ZqdtktRRVINgR3CCtZ-grN_QKqZN9KefjfMYgB7klWARTLAkZbSsKmoyrLiIZ0XMVXkYWu_F1do2eH73g_cTDDyKJiQiq9wWsbLzwjsEWoZ1uR0H2wqUp1ZOfkEyfkTbU0YojEnLVenrB-X7HDp812pjRMqHbw1qAskYpol6w_Tca">link</a>]</li>
<li style="text-align: justify; ">The ongoing pandemic has raised very valid questions of <strong>access and infrastructure in India</strong>, especially during a time when the Internet and digital technologies are essential, and in many ways the ‘new normal’. P.P. Sneha and Anasuya Sengupta write in <i>Seminar Magazine</i>, outlining some key <strong>challenges in digitalisation and representation of non-dominant/marginalised languages</strong> on the Internet, through reflections on two recent projects related to languages and the Internet. [<a href="https://4jok2.r.ag.d.sendibm3.com/mk/cl/f/iWhSEkwBqINHVVX-zy-cEtFRkWyCSoGeumeW2KNYU8gylOUgjNWiIceMev9vAcoTdrNvCoBtuZKcHSmrG3oEZ5Wypr7VRmrecPMNbuxUDoIF4FJGIlzAPeQ8dpdyeeHeQqANiU3oUN2xKTpRQ5Tin8PUoWRfMm5YXh_iougUbkun-Tq6NSjRkmvbiWXeZyphO9R44QWTrxDm2wWOdlCh2reGxocxbpNMzDPlGmxnA18sMsFi73SksnR9lQh76ylSM2iIYr3ptZk61DznsmUdfr0BK-GQL7HcD4M">link</a>]</li>
<li style="text-align: justify; ">With the onset of the national lockdown on 24th March 2020 in response to the outbreak of COVID-19, the fate of millions of migrant workers was left uncertain. In addition, lack of enumeration and registration of migrant workers became a major obstacle for all state governments and the Central Government to channelize relief and welfare measures. Ankan Barman compiled a report to <strong>qualitatively assess health conditions of migrant workers and access to welfare</strong> during the first COVID-19 lockdown, in three host-states, Tamil Nadu, Maharashtra and Haryana. [<a href="https://4jok2.r.ag.d.sendibm3.com/mk/cl/f/hU5-1FD3nbo69KurjQmXES36QSFtRZSHr4FuCzsscEMQOUOZD523Cc-iKliMQQWvm7AFZQ2JJtrcPhNeqoAS7ASS2X0_c9D3D_yvS9IuqLpt_xHpSUdVxnh85ZSVlSr07zj4mucQogJy6c2ZHw6zgQAmLQGkcl4xr__txUaycSpVKrqmHcBb3RBw2YkBTvxRfFnll2FcPmmfFYhGf1_SGM1baLyoZscYZ96h-AB1tHzg4Lao2KfFIhJ-RxHtC67r1nytTWNCRy8pY4QWmx2g-kBw0EAD4vl94LmPX10tdqmvBreDz3xxfN4o9h0OHfEzZARXb2dQFnHltqvRjPq5msyzW69oXuZZsDs0pcS6yYA">link</a>]</li>
<li style="text-align: justify; ">Between July to November 2019, Indian Federation of App-based Transport Workers (IFAT) and International Transport Workers’ Federation (ITF) conducted 2,128 surveys across six major cities: Bengaluru, Chennai, Delhi NCR, Hyderabad, Jaipur, and Lucknow, to determine the occupational health and safety of app-based transport workers. Findings from the survey have been compiled as a report which <strong>reveals the complete absence of social security and protection of workers in a digital platform economy.</strong> [<a href="https://4jok2.r.ag.d.sendibm3.com/mk/cl/f/J4FjrBD647MV8lneM-mPFxr7IWwYeETEgk17OI3lDkqNVRmfoRqhmAs1CqZXDQx-MyEntGeO7vOMUu6lslvGQbMg4Pp6Gvpz7GaUrXiOXti7YGBNPHMzLCP3BsDeYstDOYNs6Rry3eMUvPI-mV1kh6aNGWf_WlBXjwoevFZdwmt660vTJbRaUGuI1Cc45TFmp3ur5qDJNg3vaTXElkuEvo7Dz9rPcEHOTDNy-k2LW3cX9mOB_QNC5yt4sy0CCWvf-2yHAYa_2j6pVmVx2PwbbSrfMfSdK0-WL1PSZpcAHlqcRVU05C5Js__byzmLjmWUKO-kMbw">link</a>]</li>
</ol>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='https://cis-india.org/about/newsletters/june-july-2021-newsletter'>https://cis-india.org/about/newsletters/june-july-2021-newsletter</a>
</p>
No publisherpranavInternet GovernanceResearchers at WorkCopyrightAccess to Knowledge2021-08-10T15:57:16ZPageInterviews with App Developers: [dis]regard towards IPR vs. Patent Hype – Part II
https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/interviews-with-app-developers-dis-regard-towards-ipr-vs-patent-hype-2013-part-ii
<b>The following is a second post within a series reporting on interviews conducted with 10 of Bangalore's mobile app developers and other industry stakeholders. Within this research, CIS attempts to understand how they engage with the law within their practice, particularly with respect to IP. Here we examine how these developers responded to a question on legal protection for their works.</b>
<p align="justify">Before one can identify the solution, one must first identify the problem. Yet, in order to understand the problem, we must first understand the individuals involved and the how the problem affects these individuals. We hope that the findings of this preliminary research initiative will provide sufficient groundwork to understand the problems that exist and the different ways of approaching them before determining the most suitable prospective option in changes at the policy level. In this case, the individuals under study are the key contributors to the mobile app space within India; and the problem, being those faced by them as they attempt to navigate an emerging and ambiguous ecosystem.</p>
<p align="justify">Previously, we looked at responses that were given across these mobile app developers interviewed which revealed how they orient notions of intellectual property within their practice and own products, specifically. Findings that were made included deductions that the majority of those interviewed developed mobile app products for clients, and in turn assigned ownership of their products to their clients. Just as well, they commonly shared an interest in leaving the services sector to create products of their own, with some of them already having made the transition within their business model.</p>
<h3><b>Question 2: “How is your IP protected?”</b></h3>
<p align="justify">Next, we asked how they go about protecting their intellectual property to get a feel of who is protecting their apps and who is not. In asking this question, we hoped to learn how they go about protecting their work via legal means. Across their various responses, we observed many patterns and contradictions which are conveyed here with reference to comments made across interviews. It is important to note, however, that no causal relations intend for be argued for, only suggested correlations.</p>
<p><b>How they responded</b></p>
<p align="justify">When asked, those interviewed responded with a variance in answers. Some simply stated that their work is not protected, while a few mentioned that they acquired trademark or intend to apply for trademark protection. One interviewee had a patent pending in India and the US, as well. In many of our conversations, developers mentioned that their code for their apps is under open source licenses, and a couple others entailed sharing that the content is under creative commons licenses, “individual licenses,” or joint copyright. Additionally, within one interview, one mentioned the use of encryption tools as a technical means of protection for their work.</p>
<div class="pullquote" style="text-align: justify; ">“The concept of securing IP is relatively new within the Indian context... it becomes a question of priority between innovation and protection" — Aravind Krishnaswamy, Levitum</div>
<p align="justify">Of the developers interviewed, many exhibited some sort of confusion or misunderstanding related to the protection of their works by means of intellectual property rights (IPR). Those interviewed seemed to either express an interest to acquire IPR in the future for their products in the forms of patent or trademark protection, or expressed their appreciation for openness source licensing—or both! Beneath these immediate responses, however, many repeated patterns, as well as contradictions, are revealed. Conversations that followed within these interviewed entailed the opportunity to hear from personal experiences and opinions on different areas within their practice intersecting IPR.</p>
<p><b>Reasons for IPR protection</b></p>
<p align="justify">If a startup or SME is bootstrapped with very little cash flow to begin with, what would provoke or inspire one to pursue the process of acquiring patent protection then? Aravind Krishnaswamy of startup, <a class="external-link" href="http://levitum.in/">Levitum</a>, considers “the concept of securing IP is relatively new within the Indian context.” So if this is the case, why did so many developers interviewed express an interest in IPR?</p>
<p align="justify">For those who did express interest in acquiring IPR as protection for their mobile app products, most seemed to express an interest in proving ownership over their work, or preventing problems in the future. One developer's commented on how the mobile app market is a “new and potentially volatile area for software development.” For this reason, it was imperative that he and his team attempted to avoid trouble in the future, and ensure that they going about mobile app development the right and moral way.</p>
<p align="justify">Within another interview, developer, John Paul of mobile app SME, Plackal, explains his motives for seeking to acquire patent protection, the application for which is currently pending in India and the US: "For us, applying for a patent is primarily defensive. And if it does get infringed upon, it would give us a good opportunity to generate revenue from it." For the company's trademark, they sought to be able to enforce their ownership over their product's brand: “As a precautionary, we've trademarked the app so that should there be a situation where the app is pirated, we can claim ownership for that app.”</p>
<p><b>Security not so easily attainable</b></p>
<div class="pullquote">“To some extent, IPR law is only accessible after moving away from the startup phase."—John Paul, Plackal</div>
<p align="justify">However, for the startup especially, such protection does not come without a cost. For this reason, IPR is generally perceived as a gamble or tradeoff. It becomes a “question of priority between innovation and protection,” says Krishnaswamy. He continues in saying that, "I feel like even if it’s a great idea if someone else copies it, that’s some level of validation, but as a small company I’d rather be nimble in terms of how we build it up and get it to a certain point. We're trying to move fast and get something going, and then figure it out.” For Krishnaswamy and his team, securing a patent on an area where they feel they feel they have unique work is on their list of things to do, “It's something for us to revisit in the future.”</p>
<p align="justify">Paul explains that he and his team didn't always have IPR within reach: “To some extent, IPR law is only accessible after moving away from the startup phase.” So what discourages startups from acquiring IPR, or simply seeking it out?</p>
<p align="justify">Patent attorney and IP consultant, Arjun Bala explains that “there is a lot to figure out. One aspect is filling it out, the other is how you write it so that it is easily granted and gives you the right sort of patent protection you are looking for. It is a very complex process that requires a lot of technical and legal expertise.” But even if one successfully manoeuvres the IPR system, is protection guaranteed?</p>
<p align="justify">Business Financial Strategist of Out Sourced CFO & Business Advisory Services, Jayant Tewari, illustrates the lack of security for the SME in the patent system, specifically, in saying, “Since a patent becomes public domain on filing, it can be effectively infringed based on the filing, even before it is granted.” Tewari continues in stressing the irrelevance of patents for SMEs due to the difficulty of enforcement: “the infringement will be adjudicated after 2 years at an immense cost to the SME patent-holder, who will go commercially belly-up due to the infringement. The regime does not protect the SME at all.”</p>
<div class="pullquote" style="text-align: justify; ">“It is easy to say 'this is the method and no once can copy', but unless the look and feel is the same, it is very hard to demonstrate that you have been infringed on.” <br />—Samuel Mani, Mani Chengappa & Mathur</div>
<p><b>Nevermind enforcement...</b></p>
<p align="justify">Not only did our interviews shed light on the difficulty for a startup developer to apply for and be granted protection for their intellectual property, but also for the enforcement of such. Partnering Lawyer, Samuel Mani, of technology-focused law firm, <a href="https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/www.mcmlaw.in" class="external-link">Mani Chengappa & Mathur</a>, speaks to us about the extensive procedure required to prove one's ownership over their IP: “To demonstrate copyright infringement, it requires going into millions of lines of code—unless it is the interface that is copied, which is easily visible.” Mani continues on the enforcement of patent protection by saying, “For a patent, the scope is even wider. It is easy to say 'this is the method and no once can copy', but unless the look and feel is the same, it is very hard to demonstrate that you have been infringed on.”</p>
<p><b>Planting the initial seed</b></p>
<p align="justify">If there is arguably so much risk associated with applying for IPR protection, as well with enforcement, what specifically gets startups thinking about IPR initially within their practice? What experiences help them formulate their opinions on the matter, and which forms of IPR do they seek out?</p>
<p align="justify">Across interviews conducted, one particular observation entailed the tendency for developers to have worked in the past for corporate employers that have dealt with cases of infringement or have acquired IP protection. Almost half of those interviewed shared the fact that they worked for a corporate employer and became better familiar with different notions of intellectual property through that experience. It may not be too farfetched to suggest, then, that for the developer the idea of acquiring IPR protection is one that may be reinforced from previous employers or other successful development companies with IPR of their own.</p>
<p align="justify">Cofounder and developer for a medium-sized software development enterprise, Anoop[1] explained that it wasn't until after the success of his enterprise's first application with $1 million in sales, that they started thinking about intellectual property and began to understand the value of it. This newly attained understanding, however, had not been enough to sufficiently equip his team with the knowledge to properly secure protection. For them, going after patent protection turned out to be a pursuit in vain.</p>
<p><b>Loss of faith in patents for SMEs</b></p>
<p align="justify">Anoop shares his disappointing experience after attempting to secure a patent for one of their mobile apps:</p>
<p class="callout"><i>“We burned our fingers with patents. We spent a lot of money for a game we invented about 3 years ago. We had a law firm in the US to help us. We applied for it, and it went through 3-4 revisions, costing us $25-30,000. We finally closed the file when we could not get it due to an existing patent. We were really surprised." </i></p>
<p>After much disappointment from not being successful in their attempts to acquire patent protection, however, Anoop came out of the experience with a new outlook on patents and their role for SMEs:</p>
<p class="callout"><i>“They're meant for large companies as means to bully your competitor. Only big players with the capacity to file for a patent as soon as it takes off benefit. The existing system doesn’t really work for startup companies. In India and anywhere. It’s an expensive process. If you’re a startup who’s just bootstrapping, there’s no guarantee that you will get it. It’s going to take you years.”</i></p>
<p align="justify"><b>Patent hype</b><br />Anoop is a prime example of developers in the startup space that fall victim to the promises of the patent system—only to be spat back out having exhausted their time and earnings. Already being aware of the probability for failure, Mani strongly discourages going after patent protection as a means of staying in the race. “With people spending millions on litigation, it is a recipe for disaster, especially considering the inherent delay of the Indian system.” For this reason, Mani stresses the importance of applying for the <i>right </i>protection.</p>
<p align="justify">Mani also suggests that the patent debate is driven by self-interest—people who simply make money off of application filing, regardless of whether or not the case succeeds. As a lawyer in the IT space, Mani claims to have turned away several prospective clients looking to patent their products when he insisted that such means of protection was not suitable for their product and interests...which brings us to an additional area of heated debate: the patentability of mobile apps.</p>
<p><b>Can mobile apps be patented?</b>[2]</p>
<p align="justify">One concept that seemed to receive contested responses across interviews is that of the patentability of mobile apps in the first place. When asked if mobile apps could be patented, former lawyer and startup founder, Vivek Durai, of HumblePaper, put it blatantly in responding, “absolutely not.” Others offered explanations of the Indian Patent Law nuances regarding when a mobile app is patentable and when one is not.</p>
<p align="justify">While consulting a SME with their own patent application, Bala explains their approach to ensure the mobile app's eligibility for patent protection, while providing some insight into the Indian patent system:</p>
<p class="callout"><i>“One approach that we've taken to getting a patent in India is it's not just a pure software, but a software plus a hardware—as in it requires a specific hardware to function. If [the software] makes the hardware perform better, then it has a technical effect... In which case, we have a better chance of getting a patent in India. If your software is agnostic to hardware, however, it is much more difficult to receive a patent in India.” </i></p>
<p align="justify"><b>To patent or not to patent? (or any IPR for that matter)</b><br />To Tewari, on the other hand, the question of whether a mobile app can be patented is one entirely irrelevant. The question Tewari introduces into the developer's market strategy is not 'can I patent my app?' but instead, '<i>should </i>I do so?' In response to which; he would predominantly reply: <i>No</i>.</p>
<p align="justify">“How [startup] mobile app developers regard IP laws—or better yet, disregard—is fine for their sake,” argues Tewari. Alternatively, he suggests developers learn how to maneuver the laws, to prevent themselves from arriving at any sticky situations after unknowingly using another's code. To his clients who have mobile apps of their own, he advises to use an open source equivalent of a piece of code if they do not have the rights to it. Doing so will help keep infringement upon others at a minimal and prevent litigation against oneself.</p>
<div class="pullquote" style="text-align: justify; ">“How [startup] mobile app developers regard IP laws—or better yet, disregard—is fine for their sake."—Jayant Tewari, Out Sourced CFO & Business Advisory Services</div>
<p align="justify">Not all developers interviewed, however, aspired to acquiring patent protection. In fact, some strongly opposed software patents, while expressing their appreciation for openness across the developer community. The other side to the IPR-Open Source dichotomy will be examined in the blog post to follow, after which, we will then look at accounts of infringement and threats of litigation across mobile app developers interviewed.</p>
<p><b>To recap<br /></b></p>
<p align="justify">By looking closely at the individual experiences across mobile app developers interviewed, we hope to begin to map out the mobile app ecosystem and the ways in which industry players engage with each other regarding their IPR. We also hope to begin to shed light on the different attitudes towards the law within one's practice, and how they shape their decisions related to their work. Only after doing so, may we be able to sufficiently assess how India's current IP laws govern this landscape.</p>
<p align="justify">Stay tuned for the next in this blog series! We hope that you may benefit from our findings in your own practice as a mobile app industry player or enthusiast, as well.</p>
<p align="justify"><b>Notes:</b><br />[1] <i>Name changed to protect the interviewee's identity</i></p>
<p align="justify">[2] In conducting interviews, our goal was not to test the legitimacy of responses, but instead, to map them out across various industry stakeholders. For this reason, this blog series will not be able to sufficiently respond to legal question, such as whether or not mobile apps are patentable to begin with. We intend to, however, undergo legal analysis of the Indian IPR system at its intersection with the mobile app space in India at a later stage in this project.</p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/interviews-with-app-developers-dis-regard-towards-ipr-vs-patent-hype-2013-part-ii'>https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/interviews-with-app-developers-dis-regard-towards-ipr-vs-patent-hype-2013-part-ii</a>
</p>
No publishersamanthaAccess to KnowledgeCopyrightPervasive TechnologiesResearchPatents2014-08-19T03:51:39ZBlog EntryInternational Copyright Law
https://cis-india.org/a2k/news/international-copyright-law
<b>Anubha Sinha will be attending the 2016 IViR Summer Course on International Copyright Law as a beneficiary of the OSF Civil Society Scholarship in Amsterdam from July 4 to 8, 2016. The event is being organized by the University of Amsterdam.</b>
<p>For more info <a class="external-link" href="http://www.ivir.nl/courses/icl/icl-programme.html">click here</a>.</p>
<hr />
<table style="text-align: justify; ">
<thead>
<tr>
<th colspan="3" scope="col">
<p style="text-align: left; "><span><strong>Monday July 4</strong></span></p>
</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>
<p>8:45-9:15</p>
</td>
<td>
<p><em>Welcome</em></p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
<p>9:15-9:30</p>
</td>
<td>
<p><em>Opening Session </em><br /> by Bernt Hugenholtz</p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
<p>9:30-12:30</p>
</td>
<td>
<p><em>‘International Framework’ </em><br /> by Bernt Hugenholtz</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>This session sets out the framework of international copyright protection, and describes the main norms of the Berne Convention, the TRIPS Agreement, the WIPO Copyright Treaty and various bilateral instruments.</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
<p>14:00-17:00</p>
</td>
<td>
<p><em>‘TRIPS and Other Trade Agreements'</em><br /> by Daniel Gervais</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>This session focuses on the Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property, administered by the WTO, and other more recent trade agreements. It takes a look at the negotiation process leading to their adoption, at the decisions from the WTO Dispute Resolution Panel and the impact on developing nations.</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
<p>18:00-21:00</p>
</td>
<td>
<p><em>Boat tour on Amsterdam canals and welcome dinner </em></p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<div style="text-align: justify; "></div>
<div style="text-align: justify; ">
<table>
<thead>
<tr>
<th colspan="3" scope="col">
<p style="text-align: left; "><strong><span>Tuesday July 5</span></strong></p>
</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>
<p>9:30-12:30</p>
</td>
<td>
<p><em>'Copyright and Competition Law'</em><br /> by Thomas Vinje</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>In principle, the objectives of copyright law and competition law are complementary in that they are both meant to promote creativity and innovation. In some cases, however, the exercise of exclusive rights runs afoul of competition rules. This session describes how these two fields of law interact.</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
<p>14:00-17:00</p>
</td>
<td>
<p><em>‘Recent Case Law of the Court of Justice of the EU'</em><br /> by Stef van Gompel</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>This session examines the recent case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union, which has been very active in issuing preliminary rulings interpreting various provisions of the Directive on Copyright in the Information Society and others. This leads to further harmonization of copyright within the EU but it also holds its share of ambiguities.</p>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify; "></div>
<div style="text-align: justify; ">
<table>
<thead>
<tr>
<th colspan="3" scope="col">
<p style="text-align: left; "><strong><span>Wednesday July 6</span></strong></p>
</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>
<p>9:30-12:30</p>
</td>
<td>
<p><em>'Collective Administration of Rights'</em><br /> by Daniel Gervais</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>Sometimes required by law and other times necessary due to practical reasons, rights owners must exercise their rights through collecting societies. This session outlines the general workings of a collective administration of rights system, and considers its future in a digital environment.</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
<p>Afternoon</p>
</td>
<td>
<p><em>(free)</em></p>
</td>
<td>
<p> </p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Evening</td>
<td><em>(free)</em></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify; "></div>
<div style="text-align: justify; ">
<div>
<table>
<thead>
<tr>
<th colspan="3" scope="col">
<p style="text-align: left; "><strong><span>Thursday July 7</span></strong></p>
</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>
<p>9:30-12:30</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>‘<em>The EU Copyright Reform Package</em>’<br /> by Martin Senftleben</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>Following its Digital Single Market Strategy, the European Commission is in the process of rolling out plans to modernise the EU copyright framework. This session discusses these plans and examines their implications.</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
<p>14:00-17:00</p>
</td>
<td>
<p><em>'Limitations & Exceptions for Libraries and Archives'</em><br /> by Lucie Guibault</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>Archives and libraries increasingly wish to engage in digitization projects, e-lending and other relevant activities. This session explores in what way the WIPO agenda and relevant EU Directives provide room for such activities.</p>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify; "></div>
<div style="text-align: justify; ">
<div>
<div>
<table>
<thead>
<tr>
<th colspan="3" scope="col">
<p style="text-align: left; "><strong><span>Friday July 8</span></strong></p>
</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>
<p>9:30-12:30</p>
</td>
<td>
<p><em>'Database Protection'</em><br /> by Bernt Hugenholtz</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>In Europe, makers of databases enjoy an exclusive right on their databases pursuant to the European Directive on the legal protection of databases. This session examines the scope and content of the sui generis right on databases, and discusses the case law from the European Court of Justice and the national courts.</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
<p>14:00-17:00</p>
</td>
<td>
<p><i>'Digital Copyright Controversies'</i><br /> by Fred von Lohmann</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>This session discusses the changes brought by the digital networked environment with respect to copyright infringement liability. It describes in greater detail the liability regimes that apply to Internet intermediaries, the challenges posed by user generated content online, as well as emerging solutions to these controversies.</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>17:00-19:00</td>
<td><em>Closing reception</em></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='https://cis-india.org/a2k/news/international-copyright-law'>https://cis-india.org/a2k/news/international-copyright-law</a>
</p>
No publisherpraskrishnaCopyrightAccess to Knowledge2016-05-15T15:32:23ZNews ItemIndian Law and "Parallel Exports"
https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/indian-law-and-parallel-exports
<b>Recently, a lawyer for the publishing industry made the claim that allowing for parallel importation would legally allow for the exports of low-priced edition. Here we present a legal rebuttal of that claim.</b>
<p>Recently, on publisher/editor/writer Divya Dubey's blog, Saikrishna Rajagopal, a highly respected copyright lawyer and founding partner of Saikrishna & Associates, <a class="external-link" href="http://dearddsez.blogspot.com/2011/01/thomas-abrahams-rebuttal-to-why.html">claimed that</a> we had misconstrued the law with regard to export of books from India, and that allowing for parallel importation would harm that.</p>
<p>Mr Rajagopal writes:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The fundamental legal infirmity that I find in Mr. Prakash’s argument are twofold:<br />1. That current Indian Law allows export of low priced editions;<br />2. That the proposed proviso would not include within its scope 'exports'.</p>
<p>1. As regards the argument that current Indian Law allows export of low priced editions, the two John Wiley cases of the Delhi High Court of May 2010, make it abundantly clear that current Indian Copyright Law precludes export of low priced editions. Pertinently, an appeal was preferred in one of the Wiley cases and was dismissed. These judgments are therefore final now and therefore authoritatively, interpret Indian Copyright Law as it stands today.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>I was wrong regarding the question of export of low-priced editions. There are are two Delhi High Court judgments which came out in May 2010 on export of books, holding that export of Low-Priced Editions meant for India to countries outside is unlawful (<em>John Wiley & Sons Inc. & Ors v. Prabhat Chander Kumar Jain & Ors</em> and <em>John Wiley & Sons Inc. & Ors v. International Book Store & Anr</em>). However, in the first judgment Justice Manmohan Singh clearly held that it would be unlawful to export without permission of the rights owner regardless of whether we followed the doctrine of national exhaustion (disallowed parallel importation) or the doctrine of international exhaustion (allowed parallel importation), and the "the question of exhaustion of rights of owner in copyright does not arise at all".[1] Thus Mr. Rajagopals's fears are, thankfully, unfounded.</p>
<p>Mr. Rajagopal continues:</p>
<blockquote>2. As regards Pranesh’s argument that the proposed amendment does not cover ‘exports’, this argument is completely specious. In order to determine at what stage a copyright owner loses its right to control further sale and distribution of a copyrighted product, the statute itself needs to be looked into to determine what standard of exhaustion of rights has been contemplated. If the proposed proviso becomes law, it would be a clear indicator to a Court that Indian Copyright Law follows international exhaustion, namely, that once a product is legitimately sold anywhere in the world market, the copyright owner loses/exhausts the right to control further distribution and sale, including export and import. It is because the copyright owner exhausts rights globally that the proposed amendment is allowing for genuine copies of books sold in the international market, to be legally imported into India. This being the case, there is almost unanimity amongst IP Lawyers that export of low priced editions would also be considered legal, in view of the proposed amendment. This is not just our Indian view, but also the view of other international IP experts who have had an opportunity to look at the implications of this proviso.<br /></blockquote>
<p>The copyright owner, under a proper appreciation of the Indian law,
never has the right to control "further sale and distribution" (as per s.14(a)(ii) of the Copyright Act), contrary to Mr. Rajagopal's assertion. Once a
copy is in circulation (e.g., is sold), the copyright owner no longer has the exclusive
right to put that copy into circulation, nor to control its further sale /
distribution in any manner. This is the limitation on the owner's right that allows libraries exist. This is how second-hand book shops exist. If this limitation of the copyright owner's right did not exist, libraries and second-hand book shops would need to take permissions from the owner for each copy of each book that they lend or sell.</p>
<p>Imports and exports are two distinct things. India's following of the principle of "international exhaustion" means that the right to first sale is exhausted <em>in India</em>, when the work is legally published anywhere <em>internationally</em> (i.e., regardless of where that copyrighted work is legally published). The principle of international exhaustion doesn't not exhaust the right of first sale <em>internationally</em>—the word "international" is used to indicate where the <em>publication</em> has to take place for exhaustion to occur, and not where the <em>exhaustion</em> takes place. After all, Indian law on a matter cannot determine whether a book can or cannot be sold anywhere else in the world (which is precisely what it would do if it is to hold that rights are exhausted internationally by virtue of a book being printed in India).</p>
<p>Having done research on this point for the past week, I have not been able to come up with any legal articles or cases to directly oppose Mr. Rajagopal's claim that the legality of book exports from a country can depend on whether it follows national or international exhaustion. It is such a novel claim that no one has made it so far, and so no one has thought to oppose it. I know of no other IP lawyers in India or internationally who agree with
Mr. Rajagopal's claim that allowing for parallel importation in India will have
an impact on the exports of low-priced editions from India.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Most pertinently, when the Wiley judgments which related to export of low priced editions, were being pronounced in Court, the Hon’ble Judge casually remarked that the law laid down in cases may soon become redundant if the proposed legislation comes into force.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>As noted above, the judge specifically stated in the written judgment itself that as per the court's reasoning, the question of whether the export of low-priced editions is legal is not related to the question of exhaustion of rights of the owner: "<em>. . . as the express provision for international
exhaustion is absent in our Indian law, it would be appropriate to
confine the applicability of the same to regional exhaustion. Be that as
it may, in the present case,</em> <em>the circumstances do not even otherwise
warrant this discussion </em>. . . <em>the question of exhaustion of
rights of owner in the copyright does not arise at all</em>". </p>
<p>To get a little bit more technical, Justice Singh rules that there is a difference between first sale (exhaustion) vis-a-vis the owner and first sale vis-a-vis the licensee. He states that only rights of the licensee have been exhausted, and that the rights of the owner being exhausted do not even arise. But he is quite clear that this difference would apply regardless of whether we follow international exhaustion or national exhaustion.</p>
<strong>Update (2011-02-15): </strong>For the tabularly inclined, here's a summary of what it means for a country to follow "national exhaustion" or "international exhaustion":
<div align="center"> </div>
<table class="plain">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td align="center"><br /></td>
<td align="center">What "Exhaustion" Means<br /></td>
<td align="center"><br /></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th align="center">Where copyrighted work is first circulated<br /></th>
<th align="center">Where right of circulation is exhausted <br /></th>
<th align="center">What this is termed<br /></th>
</tr>
</tbody>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td align="center">In any country<br /></td>
<td align="center">In all countries<br /></td>
<td align="center">[- Not possible.<br /><br />- Law in one country<br />can't dictate law in another.<br /><br />- Exhaustion of right of circulation<br />
"in all countries" can only be <br />
declared so through an <br />
international treaty<br />
(e.g., the way TRIPS makes a book<br />copyrighted in all countries if <br />it is copyrighted in any country)<br /><br />- Art. 6 of TRIPS doesn't allow for this interpretation.]<br /></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="center"><strong> In any country<br /></strong></td>
<td align="center"><strong>Domestic territory<br />
</strong></td>
<td align="center"><strong>International exhaustion<br />
</strong></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="center"> Domestic territory<br /></td>
<td align="center">In all countries<br /></td>
<td align="center">[- Not possible.<br />
<br />- Law in one country <br />can't affect law in another.<br /><br />- Exhaustion of right of circulation<br />
"in all countries" can only be <br />declared so through an <br />international treaty<br />(e.g., the way TRIPS makes a book<br />
copyrighted in all countries if <br />it is copyrighted in any country)<br /><br />- Art. 6 of TRIPS doesn't allow for this interpretation.]<br /></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="center"><strong> Domestic territory<br />
</strong></td>
<td align="center"><strong>Domestic territory<br />
</strong></td>
<td align="center"><strong>National exhaustion<br />
</strong></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p> </p>
<p>Thus it is seen that the "national" or "international" exhaustion only determines the question of where the book has to be first circulated for exhaustion to happen. It can never change <em>where</em> the right of first circulation is exhausted (which in either case can only happen at a territorial level). </p>
<p>The implication of the right of circulation being exhausted world-wide is that no country can by law prevent parallel importation. The TRIPS Agreement, via Article 6, decided to give each country the right to choose to allow or disallow parallel importation. This was despite a great effort by developing countries to get international exhaustion codified as the worldwide norm.</p>
<p>To make this even more clear, I propose the following thought experiment.<br /><br /><strong>X</strong> - national of <strong>New Zealand</strong>, which follows international exhaustion.<br /><strong>Country 1</strong> - a country that follows national exhaustion / doesn't allow parallel imports<br /><strong>Country 2</strong> - a country that follows national exhaustion / doesn't allow parallel imports<br /><strong>Country 3</strong> - a country that follows international exhaustion / allows for parallel imports<br /><br /></p>
<ul><li>Example 1: If <strong>X</strong> buys a book from <strong>Country 1</strong> and sells that book in <strong>Country 2</strong>, he is in violation of <strong>Country 2</strong>'s laws, regardless of the laws in <strong>New Zealand</strong> and <strong>Country 1</strong>.</li><li>Example 2: If <strong>X</strong> buys a book from <strong>Country 1</strong> and sells that book in <strong>Country 3</strong>, he is <em>not</em> in violation of the law (either in <strong>New Zealand</strong> or in <strong>Country 3</strong>).</li><li>Example 3: If <strong>X</strong> buys a book in <strong>New Zealand</strong> and sells that book in <strong>Country 2</strong>, he is in violation of <strong>Country 2</strong>'s laws, regardless of the laws in <strong>New Zealand</strong>.</li><li>Example 4: If <strong>X</strong> buys a book in <strong>New Zealand</strong> and sells that book in <strong>Country 3</strong>, he is <em>not</em> in violation of the law (either in <strong>New Zealand</strong> or in <strong>Country 3</strong>).</li></ul>
<p><br />If one takes "international exhaustion" to mean that the right is exhausted in <em>every country</em>, then <strong>Example 3</strong>
would be wrong. But that would be absurd, since we know from experience
that it is correct: Buying a book in New Zealand and selling it in the
United Kingdom (which follows national/regional exhaustion) is unlawful. So obviously "international exhaustion" doesn't mean that.</p>
<p>Similarly, if one takes "national exhaustion" to mean that after sale a book cannot be exported, that
would imply that <strong>Example 2</strong> is faulty. But we know from
experience that this is not so: Buying a book in the United Kingdom and selling it in New Zealand is lawful. So obviously "national exhaustion" doesn't mean that.</p>
<p>Thus, it is only the act of import that is ever affected by the question of national vs. international exhaustion, and never exports.</p>
<h3>Notes</h3>
<p> [1]: Justice Manmohan Singh writes: "As per my opinion, as the express provision for international
exhaustion is absent in our Indian law, it would be appropriate to
confine the applicability of the same to regional exhaustion. Be that as
it may, in the present case, the circumstances do not even otherwise
warrant this discussion as the rights if at all are exhausted are to the
extent to which they are available with the licensees as the books are
purchased from the exclusive licensees who have limited rights and not
from the owner. In these circumstances, the question of exhaustion of
rights of owner in the copyright does not arise at all." (Para 104).</p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/indian-law-and-parallel-exports'>https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/indian-law-and-parallel-exports</a>
</p>
No publisherpraneshConsumer RightsCopyrightAccess to Knowledge2011-08-04T04:47:07ZBlog EntryIndian Copyright Act, 1957 (as amended by the Copyright (Amendment) Bill, 2010)
https://cis-india.org/a2k/publications/amended-copyright-act
<b>This is a version of the Indian Copyright Act, 1957, as it would appear if the Copyright (Amendment) Bill, 2010, were adopted in toto. This has been produced to aid commentators, and is not meant to serve any other purpose. Errors may remain in it, despite my best efforts. If you find any, please e-mail <pranesh@cis-india.org>. (Version 0.96 / Last updated: Friday, May 28, 2010) </b>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='https://cis-india.org/a2k/publications/amended-copyright-act'>https://cis-india.org/a2k/publications/amended-copyright-act</a>
</p>
No publisherpraneshCopyrightAccess to Knowledge2011-08-22T13:28:42ZFileIndian Copyright Act, 1957 (as amended by Copyright (Amendment) Bill, 2010)
https://cis-india.org/a2k/publications/amended-copyright-act.html
<b></b>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='https://cis-india.org/a2k/publications/amended-copyright-act.html'>https://cis-india.org/a2k/publications/amended-copyright-act.html</a>
</p>
No publisheradminIntellectual Property RightsCopyrightAccess to Knowledge2011-08-24T06:58:10ZFileIndia- EU FTA: A Note on the Copyright Issues
https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/india-eu-fta-copyright-issues
<b>In this blog post, Nehaa Chaudhari gives us an overview of some of the provisions of the Free Trade Agreement (FTA) and the copyright issues identified therein. </b>
<hr />
<p style="text-align: justify; "><a href="https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/india-eu-fta-copyright-issues.pdf" class="internal-link">Click to download the India-EU FTA: A Note on Copyright Issues</a> (PDF, 205 Kb)</p>
<hr />
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Against the backdrop of ongoing negotiations dating back to 2007, and, more recently, with parties being unable to make substantial progress on the Indo-EU FTA<a href="#fn1" name="fr1">[1]</a> this note presents an overview on some of the provisions of the FTA and the copyright issues identified therein. This note deals with the issues on two levels- first to examine the impact of intellectual property right provisions in FTAs in general and second to apply these generic principles to the Indo- EU FTA specifically.</p>
<h2>Introduction</h2>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Investment agreements, of which bilateral investment treaties are a part, and investment chapters in various FTAs often result in an increase in the effective levels of intellectual property protection in one of the countries that is a part to the agreement. This can be done either explicitly, where ‘investment’ may be defined to include IP, or implicitly, for instance, through an expropriation provision.<a href="#fn2" name="fr2">[2]</a> This has concurrently witnessed the growing realization that the promotion of these increased IP standards is not suited to the need of developing countries. Therefore, it has been observed<a href="#fn3" name="fr3">[3]</a>that there is now an attempt by the developed countries to use FTAs as a forum to push for higher standards of IP protection in developing countries, and to restrict the scope of the flexibilities offered by TRIPS, most notably in the sectors of protection of plant varieties, patents and access to medicine, farmers rights and access to information.<a href="#fn4" name="fr4">[4]</a>This approach is inherently problematic, because it then infringes on the developing countries’ ability to achieve their developmental objectives.</p>
<h2 style="text-align: justify; ">Dismantling the Arguments In Favour of Increased IP Protection</h2>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">A prevalent view of thought is that in order to increase Foreign Direct Investment (FDI), developing countries would have to increase their IP protection. This section of the paper seeks to argue that this might not necessarily be the case.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">An illustration of the aforesaid proposition may be <i>Heald’s </i>criticism<a href="#fn5" name="fr5">[5]</a> levied on <i>Mansfield’s </i>paper<a href="#fn6" name="fr6">[6]</a> arguing that there was a direct correlation between the level of intellectual property protection in a country and the foreign direct investment into that country. Further, a study<a href="#fn7" name="fr7">[7]</a> conducted under the aegis of the United Nations has suggested that there was a ‘considerable incentive’ for countries to use the flexibilities provided under TRIPS to maximise net benefits for their development; stating that while in countries with a capacity to innovate stronger IPR protection can reap some benefits in terms of greater innovation at home and a greater diffusion of technology, the same cannot be said about nations without such a capacity, and may in fact impose additional costs.<a href="#fn8" name="fr8">[8]</a></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Specifically in the area of copyright, it has been observed that increased copyright protection can hamper the growth and development of knowledge based industries. <i>Sanya Smith </i>argues that those who control copyright have a ‘significant advantage’ in the knowledge based economy, and says that in the current scenario where ownership of copyright is largely in the hands of industrialized nations, this places developing nations, and smaller economies at a significant disadvantage.<a href="#fn9" name="fr9">[9]</a> She also goes on to argue that increasing copyright protection alone does not seem to be sufficient to stimulate industries, and there may other factors involved. Additionally, copyright could also significantly increase the cost of creative industries.<a href="#fn10" name="fr10">[10]</a> More fundamentally however, access to information and knowledge are amongst the most affected areas as a result of tightening of copyright laws, leaving students, academicians, researchers, scientists and persons with print disability significantly disadvantaged.</p>
<h2>Implications of the Copyright Provisions in the Proposed Indo- EU FTA</h2>
<p class="MsoListParagraph" style="text-align: justify; ">Based on the general discussion earlier, this section of the paper seeks to examine the proposed and long debated Indo- EU FTA for the concerns enumerated earlier. As things currently stand, both parties have failed to reach a consensus on various substantial differences, and a ministerial meet originally scheduled for June seems unlikely to take place.<a href="#fn11" name="fr11">[11]</a></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">It has been observed<a href="#fn12" name="fr12">[12]</a> that the Indo- EU FTA<a href="#fn13" name="fr13">[13]</a> includes various provisions that preserve the flexibilities offered under the TRIPS framework. This is extremely critical from the perspective of developing countries, given that access to knowledge is an extremely important ideal to be preserved. For instance, as noted by Knowledge Ecology International<a href="#fn14" name="fr14">[14]</a>the proposed FTA includes Articles 7 (Objectives) and 8 (Principles) of the TRIPS<a href="#fn15" name="fr15">[15]</a> by reference. Further, the language of Article 13 under the proposed FTA explicitly recognizes the importance of the Doha Declaration, which is a positive step.<a href="#fn16" name="fr16">[16]</a> It has been said however, that stronger language where the parties ‘affirmed’ their obligations under the Declaration could have been used.<a href="#fn17" name="fr17">[17]</a> However, this does not take away from the fact that many of the provisions of the proposed FTA are extremely problematic, as will be discussed in the forthcoming parts of this paper.</p>
<h3>Problematic Provisions</h3>
<p class="MsoListParagraph" style="text-align: justify; ">The main concern that has emerged from this FTA is the fact that some of its provisions dealing with IPR go beyond the mandate as under the TRIPS Agreement. For instance, as pointed out by Shamnaad Basheer to Intellectual Property Watch, various provisions now provide for intermediary liability, which isn’t present in TRIPS. He also adds however, that if the initial stand of the government that India would not go TRIPS plus continues to hold, the government should indeed adopt a strong stance and not cave in to the said provisions.<a href="#fn18" name="fr18">[18]</a> An overview of some of the problematic provisions has been presented hereafter:</p>
<h4>International Obligations</h4>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">As per the proposed treaty, protection granted by the parties should be in accordance with the Berne Convention, the Rome Convention and the WIPO Copyright and Performance and Phonograms Treaties. Snehashish Ghosh in his blog post<a href="#fn19" name="fr19">[19]</a> writes that the EU stipulates compliance with Articles 1 through 22 of the Rome Convention for the Protection of Performers, Producers of Phonograms and Broadcasting Organizations (1961), Articles 1 through 14 of the WIPO Copyright Treaty – WCT (Geneva, 1996), Articles 1 through 23 of the WIPO Performance and Phonograms Treaty – WPPT (Geneva, 1996). It is critical to note that the Rome Convention is not in force in India<a href="#fn20" name="fr20">[20]</a>, and that India is not a party to either the WCT<a href="#fn21" name="fr21">[21]</a> or the WPPT<a href="#fn22" name="fr22">[22]</a>, and therefore, this provision would have the effect of substantially surpassing all obligations that India has at the moment under multilateral international agreements.</p>
<h4>Technical Protection Measures (TPMs) and Digital Rights Management (DRM)</h4>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">A TPM, understood simply, is a lock in a digital format, placed on digital material to prevent access to or copying of the material in question. The problem with such measures is that they can prevent even those forms of copying which are legal (for instance, the copying of a movie on which copyright has expired could be prevented), creating a potentially infinite monopoly over the product in question. India, in its negotiations with the EU, has agreed to sweeping language under this provision, where TPMs and DRM measures are broadly defined. The Agreement further provides for limitations on TPM protections only to persons who have “legal access to the protected work or subject matter”.<a href="#fn23" name="fr23">[23]</a></p>
<h4>Copyright Expansion</h4>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">There are various provisions under the proposed FTA that have the effect of copyright expansion. To begin with, the duration of protection for photographic works is not expressly mentioned in the proposed agreement.<a href="#fn24" name="fr24">[24]</a> Snehashish Ghosh concludes that the term of photographic works is unclear in the proposed FTA. He writes that the proposed FTA makes it mandatory for the parties to comply with the Berne Convention, and all literary and artistic work under the proposed FTA is to be construed as the same as the Berne Convention<a href="#fn25" name="fr25">[25]</a>. Photographic works are included under literary and artistic works under the Berne Convention, and the rights of an author in case of photographic works are protected for a minimum period of 25 years. However, the proposed FTA extends the period of protection to beyond that prescribed by the Berne Convention and states that protection is given to literary and artistic works (as defined in the Berne Convention) for a period of the duration of the life of the author plus fifty years after this death. It further states that works for which the period of protection is not calculated from the death of the author, and which have not been lawfully made available to the public within at least 50 years from their creation, the protection shall terminate.<a href="#fn26" name="fr26">[26]</a></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Article 7.6 (proposed by the EU), limits the resale rights of a downstream purchaser. It has been noted by Knowledge Ecology International<a href="#fn27" name="fr27">[27]</a> that this seems to give the author of an original work of art a right in perpetuity, to receive a royalty for the resale of the piece of art, where such right cannot be waived or transferred by the author of the work. Therefore, a situation would arise where each time a person who has purchased the work wants to resell the same, he would have to pay royalties to the original author.<a href="#fn28" name="fr28">[28]</a> The observations further go on to note that royalties are not limited, and the amount has to be determined by national legislation. Further complicating the situation is the fact that the provision does not cease to apply after a given number of re-sales, and continues to the death of the author (but might not into the 50 year protection post the death of the author).<a href="#fn29" name="fr29">[29]</a></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Exceptions and limitations for copyright have been covered under Article 7.9(1) of the proposed FTA, and they may be created “only” in accordance with the three step test, which is essentially that (a) the exceptions and limitations must apply in certain special cases; (b) must not be in conflict with the normal course of exploitation of the subject matter in question and (c) must not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the right holders.<a href="#fn30" name="fr30">[30]</a> It has been observed that this test is more restrictive than TRIPS, Berne Convention, Rome Convention or the WCT.<a href="#fn31" name="fr31">[31]</a></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">On the plus side, temporary copies have been excluded from copyright protection, as per Article 7.9(2) of the proposed FTA, which would ensure the proper functioning of technology.</p>
<h4>Persons with Disabilities</h4>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">There is nothing that deals with the import/export or cross border exchange of files/documents/books etc. for persons with disabilities.</p>
<h4>Cross Border Measures</h4>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Cross Border Measures have been dealt with under Article 30 of the proposed FTA. It is interesting to note that under this Article the EU has proposed the application of border measures to exports as well. This is contrary to the position laid down in the TRIPS Agreement, which has this requirement only for importing infringing goods.<a href="#fn32" name="fr32">[32]</a> Further, the EU also seeks to expand the applicability of such measures to include those goods which also infringe designs or geographical indications. Additionally, Article 30 also leaves out certain TRIPS safeguards, for instance, one that requires the right holder to provide adequate evidence for a prima facie case of infringement.<a href="#fn33" name="fr33">[33]</a></p>
<h4>Intermediary Liability</h4>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">It has been suggested that the EU, under the garb of protecting intermediate service providers from liability for infringement by users, is purporting to place a greater burden on the providers in question, of policing user activity.<a href="#fn34" name="fr34">[34]</a> For instance under Article 35.1.1 of the proposed FTA, while service providers are not under any general obligation to seek facts or circumstances that could indicate illegal activity, they may be obligated to promptly inform competent authorities of these alleged illegal activities undertaken/information provided by recipients of their service. <a href="#fn35" name="fr35">[35]</a> Otherwise, the providers may also be required to communicate to the authorities, on their request, information that would enable the identification of their service with whom they have storage agreements, as per Article 35.1.2.<a href="#fn36" name="fr36">[36]</a> It has been rightly identified by Glover Wright, that such provisions would only serve to increase tensions between the users and their service providers, with relations dictated by concerns about liability, and barriers in the sending, receiving and storing of information freely. It would be a tricky question for intermediate service providers to check what would constitute ‘knowledge’ and how they were to best safeguard themselves from liability.<a href="#fn37" name="fr37">[37]</a> Therefore, the author is inclined to agree with Wright’s submission that India needs to reject all provisions of liability of intermediate service providers as discussed above.</p>
<h4>IP Enforcement</h4>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">There exist, as regards the enforcement of rights, many problematic provisions in the proposed FTA. For starters, the EU has proposed that interlocutory injunctions may also be issued under the same conditions against an intermediary whose services are being used by a third party to infringe intellectual property rights.<a href="#fn38" name="fr38">[38]</a> This may be found under Article 22.1 of the proposed FTA, and is inherently problematic for being a provision far beyond the mandate as laid down by TRIPS.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The EU is also pushing for the use of very explicit language as regards seizing movable and immovable property of the alleged infringer as a precautionary measure. This also extends to the blocking of the bank accounts and other assets of the said infringer, and to this end, competent authorities may even order the communication of bank, financial or commercial documents, or access to the said information.<a href="#fn39" name="fr39">[39]</a> It is critical to note that such a provision is greatly problematic as being rather vague in its approach, and very readily compromising privacy for ‘alleged’ acts of infringement.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">It is further critical to note that while Article 20 states that courts should have the power to grant ex parte order to collect evidence that is allegedly infringing, there are no safeguards provided for protection of a bona fide defendant whose premises might have been raided wrongly. It is submitted that provisions that safeguard the interests of defendants are of prime importance, especially in the Indian set up, where courts are as it is rather generous in their granting of ex parte orders.</p>
<h2>Concluding Observations</h2>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">While India may stand to benefit from the proposed FTA with the EU, there remain significant IP related issues that need to be ironed out before India comes to any consensus about the agreement and ratifies the same. On the basis of the discussion over the course of this paper, it may be seen that the provisions on intellectual property rights are problematic on various levels, particularly in the areas of expansion of copyright, the inclusion of TRIPS plus provisions, cross border measures, TPMs, liability of service providers and enforcement mechanisms.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Discussions in the first half of this paper have demonstrated that increased IP protections do not necessarily translate into increased FDI and may in fact stifle innovation. Further, the warning to developing countries against adopting IPR standards fixed by developed nations has been sounded many times over, and is one that needs to be heeded to very closely for developing nations to achieve their developmental objectives.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">India has over a period of time established an IP regime that is consumer friendly. In adopting the proposed FTA in its current form, she risks endangering this regime that has thus far been instrumental in proliferating emerging technologies in the county.<a href="#fn40" name="fr40">[40]</a> Given that India has already acceded to international standards for IPRs as a result of being a member of the WTO and being TRIPS compliant, there is no cogent reason to be made out that warrants the accession to an FTA with TRIPS plus provisions. India ought to continue to push back strongly on these fronts, bearing in mind that its stance could very well set the tone for other such agreements in South Asia. From the way things stand at the moment, it is indeed a matter of some relief that the ratification of this proposed FTA still appears to be at a considerable distance.</p>
<hr />
<p style="text-align: justify; ">[<a href="#fr1" name="fn1">1</a>].Hereafter referred to as the FTA.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">[<a href="#fr2" name="fn2">2</a>]. <span>Sanya Reid Smith, Intellectual Property in Free Trade Agreements, for the UNDP Regional Trade Workshop (17-18 December, Penang, Malaysia), available at </span><a class="external-link" href="http://bit.ly/11W8dqy">http://bit.ly/11W8dqy</a> <span>(last accessed 04 June, 2013). </span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">[<a href="#fr3" name="fn3">3</a>]. Id.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">[<a href="#fr4" name="fn4">4</a>]. Id at 5.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">[<a href="#fr5" name="fn5">5</a>]. Supra note 2, citing PJ Heald, Information Economics and Policy 16 (2004) 57-65</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">[<a href="#fr6" name="fn6">6</a>]. <span>Edwin Mansfield, Intellectual Property Protection, Foreign Direct Investment and Technology Transfer, International Finance Corporation: Discussion Paper No. 19, available at </span><a class="external-link" href="http://bit.ly/18V4D5v">http://bit.ly/18V4D5v</a><span><a href="http://www-wds.worldbank.org/servlet/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/1994/02/01/000009265_3970311123634/Rendered/PDF/multi_page.pdf"></a> (last accessed 05 June, 2013)</span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">[<a href="#fr7" name="fn7">7</a>]. See generally- Rod Falvey et. al., The Role of Intellectual Property Rights in Technology Transfer and Economic Growth: Theory and Evidence, United Nations Industrial Development Organization: Discussion Paper (2006), available at <a class="external-link" href="http://bit.ly/11JBR4o">http://bit.ly/11JBR4o</a> <span>(last accessed 05 June, 2013).</span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">[<a href="#fr8" name="fn8">8</a>]. Id.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">[<a href="#fr9" name="fn9">9</a>]. Supra note 2 at 23.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">[<a href="#fr10" name="fn10">10</a>]. Supra note 2 at 23.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">[<a href="#fr11" name="fn11">11</a>]. <span>PTI, India – EU FTA Talks Fail to Bridge Gaps, available at </span>http://bit.ly/19LJaeP <span>(last accessed 05 June, 2013). </span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">[<a href="#fr12" name="fn12">12</a>]. <span>Krista Cox, Quick Reaction to the EU/India (BTIA) Negotiating Text, available at <a href="http://keionline.org/node/1693">http://keionline.org/node/1693</a> (last accessed 04 June, 2013). </span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">[<a href="#fr13" name="fn13">13</a>]. Hereafter referred to as the FTA</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">[<a href="#fr14" name="fn14">14</a>]. <span>KEI Staff, More Notes on the India EU FTA (BTIA), available at <a href="http://keionline.org/node/1692">http://keionline.org/node/1692</a> (last accessed 05 June, 2013).</span><span> </span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">[<a href="#fr15" name="fn15">15</a>]. <span>See </span><a class="external-link" href="http://bit.ly/13XhCfZ">http://bit.ly/13XhCfZ</a> <span> for more details, and for the bare text of the Articles. (last accessed 05 June, 2013).</span><span> </span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">[<a href="#fr16" name="fn16">16</a>]. Supra note 14.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">[<a href="#fr17" name="fn17">17</a>]. Supra note 12.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">[<a href="#fr18" name="fn18">18</a>]. <span>Patralekha Chatterjee, Leaked IP Chapter of India- EU FTA Shows TRIPS-PLUS Pitfalls for India, Expert Says, available at </span><a class="external-link" href="http://bit.ly/Y7w70e">http://bit.ly/Y7w70e</a><span> (last accessed 05 June, 2013).</span><span> </span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">[<a href="#fr19" name="fn19">19</a>]. <span>Snehashish Ghosh, Analysis of Copyright Expansion in the India-EU FTA (July 2010), available at </span><a class="external-link" href="http://bit.ly/ysitEC">http://bit.ly/ysitEC</a><span><a href="https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/blog/analysis-copyright-expansion-india-eu-fta"></a> (last accessed 03 June, 2013).</span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">[<a href="#fr20" name="fn20">20</a>]. <span>For the status of Contracting Parties, see </span><a class="external-link" href="http://bit.ly/UITpsX">http://bit.ly/UITpsX</a><span> (last accessed 05 June, 2013).</span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">[<a href="#fr21" name="fn21">21</a>]. <span>For the status of Contracting Parties, see </span><a class="external-link" href="http://bit.ly/f92xL2">http://bit.ly/f92xL2</a><span> (last accessed 05 June, 2013).</span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">[<a href="#fr22" name="fn22">22</a>]. For the status of Contracting Parties, see <a class="external-link" href="http://bit.ly/fEsUAF">http://bit.ly/fEsUAF</a> (last accessed 05 June, 2013).</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">[<a href="#fr23" name="fn23">23</a>]. Supra note 14.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">[<a href="#fr24" name="fn24">24</a>]. Supra note 19.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">[<a href="#fr25" name="fn25">25</a>]. Supra note 19.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">[<a href="#fr26" name="fn26">26</a>]. Supra note 19.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">[<a href="#fr27" name="fn27">27</a>]. Supra note 12.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">[<a href="#fr28" name="fn28">28</a>]. Supra note 12.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">[<a href="#fr29" name="fn29">29</a>]. Supra note 12.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">[<a href="#fr30" name="fn30">30</a>]. Supra note 12.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">[<a href="#fr31" name="fn31">31</a>]. Supra note 14.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">[<a href="#fr32" name="fn32">32</a>]. Supra note 12.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">[<a href="#fr33" name="fn33">33</a>]. Supra note 12.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">[<a href="#fr34" name="fn34">34</a>]. See Article 35 of the Proposed FTA.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">[<a href="#fr35" name="fn35">35</a>]. <span>Glover Wright, A Guide to the Proposed India-European Union Free Trade Agreement, available at </span><a class="external-link" href="http://bit.ly/16Dfuga">http://bit.ly/16Dfuga</a><span><a href="https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/publications/CIS%20Open%20Data%20Case%20Studies%20Proposal.pdf/view"></a> (last accessed 05 June, 2013) at 12- 14.</span><span> </span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">[<a href="#fr36" name="fn36">36</a>]. Id.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">[<a href="#fr37" name="fn37">37</a>]. Id.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">[<a href="#fr38" name="fn38">38</a>]. <span>Thiru, EU-India FTA: EU Pushes for IP Enforcement- IP Chapter Draft Text Under Negotiation (2013), available at <a href="http://keionline.org/node/1681">http://keionline.org/node/1681</a> (last accessed 05 June, 2013).</span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">[<a href="#fr39" name="fn39">39</a>]. See Article 22.3 of the proposed FTA.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">[<a href="#fr40" name="fn40">40</a>]. Supra note 35.</p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/india-eu-fta-copyright-issues'>https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/india-eu-fta-copyright-issues</a>
</p>
No publishernehaaAccess to KnowledgeCopyrightAccessibilityIntermediary LiabilityTechnological Protection Measures2013-07-03T06:47:08ZBlog EntryIndia's Opening Statement on the Treaty for the Visually Impaired at SCCR 24
https://cis-india.org/a2k/india-opening-statement-sccr24-tvi
<b>This was the opening statement of the Indian delegation, delivered by G.R. Raghavender, on Thursday, July 19, 2012, at the 24th meeting of the SCCR at WIPO in Geneva. The statement called upon all countries to conclude textual work on the treaty and call for a Diplomatic Conference to finalize it.
This statement received applause, which is highly unusual at the SCCR.</b>
<p>Thank you, Mr. Chairman.</p>
<p>The Indian delegation is a little bit disappointed about the way we have started this topic of the Treaty for the Visually Impaired. Forgive me, Mr. Chairman, we have confidence in your abilities, but unfortunately we have already lost one hour in this afternoon session. We have only two hours left, unless and until we decide to work beyond 6:00 P.M.</p>
<p>We have a document, SCCR/23/7, on the table. Everybody has this document. We all decided in the last SCCR that we will work on this document and move towards a meaningful treaty. We said, in this very 24th SCCR, we will be ready for that. We should have started article-by-article discussions by now. And as we are involved in the general statements in our agenda, I can go on reading a statement for another 20 minutes as I have about five pages written out. But given our support for the treaty, I won't.</p>
<p>I'm sorry, I respect all the distinguished delegations: they have their own concerns, but Mr. Chairman, under your leadership we should have started article-by-article discussions by now. Yesterday, in the evening at the Chairman plus group leaders plus 3, we all requested that. Whatever happened during the 14, 15 intersessional meetings, we have no objection to that, but people raise the issue of transparency and availability of the document. Whatever changes have been made to the document must be public. If no one is ready to post that document either during the informal discussions, or here in the plenary, they can always come out with the changes made to particular articles, or para in the preamble, when the
discussion starts.</p>
<p>We should be ready to work towards finalizing this treaty. We are even open to working on Saturday and Sunday, Mr. Chairman.</p>
<p>If we don't finalize in this SCCR, we cannot go to the General Assembly in the first week of the month of October. If we lose that time, we will have to wait until the next General Assembly, because we cannot have a General Assembly in between.</p>
<p>So we will be simply wasting our time in the November SCCR and again next July SCCR, waiting for the next General Assembly.</p>
<p>So kindly guide us to start text-based article-by-article discussions, so that we won't go back empty-handed. The Indian delegation won't go back empty-handed, facing the 15 million blind people in India, which is almost 50 percent of the world blind population, that is 37 million.</p>
<p>Thank you.</p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='https://cis-india.org/a2k/india-opening-statement-sccr24-tvi'>https://cis-india.org/a2k/india-opening-statement-sccr24-tvi</a>
</p>
No publisherpraneshCopyrightIntellectual Property RightsAccessibilityAccess to Knowledge2012-07-23T15:24:26ZBlog Entry