Centre for Internet and Society

Preserving Digital Memories: A Patrimonial Approach

radha — 2011-04-05T04:19:32Z

The Centre for Internet & Society and The Centre for Contemporary Studies, Bangalore cordially invite you to a public lecture and discussion by Dr. Bruno Bachimont, on Preserving Digital Memories: A Patrimonial Approach, on 10th December, 2009 from 4pm to 6pm.

Dr. Bachimont is visiting India as a part of the “Bonjour French Science” framework constructed by the Embassy of France in India. He comes from a well-known technology university in France and has a background in computer science and philosophy. He is a researcher in the fields of Cognitive Science and Knowledge Engineering and has been very active in instrumenting connections between Philosophy, Science and Technology in the French Higher Education environment.

Sponsored by
The Centre for Internet & Society, Bangalore
The Centre for Contemporary Studies, Bangalore

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/events/preserving-digital-memories-a-patrimonial-approach

CC Salon

radha — 2011-04-05T04:21:24Z

Creative Commons Casestudies, Featuring Status.Net - The Centre For Internet and Society and JAAGA are organising a CC Salon on 02nd December, 2009 at 7.30pm.

Creative Commons Casestudies, Featuring Status.Net

CIS and JAAGA are organising a CC Salon (http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Salon) by Jon Phillps on Creative Commons Casestudies, Featuring Status.Net

Venue: JAAGA

Time: 7.30pm

The aim of this get together is to share knowledge and experiences of alternative copyright licensing. Artists, lawyers dealing with copyright licensing and others are encouraged to highlight their own work, experiences and queries about Creative Commons and other alternative licenses.

An abstract of the presentation and the bio of Jon is given below.

ABSTRACT:

Creative Commons Casestudies, Featuring Status.Net

Creative Commons is a well-known nonprofit organization that increases sharing and improves collaboration. Its key tools are six licenses that fit between public domain and complete control, copyright, to give you control over how your work is shared with the world. This presentation explores high level case studies that use Creative Commons licenses to make a successful project. The key featured case study is Status.Net, a new status updating hosted service and open source software that uses Creative Commons licensing for content.

http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Salon

BIO:

Jon Phillips is a community and business developer contributing to society and building meaningful relationships. In 2002 he helped launch the open source drawing tool, Inkscape and founded the Open Clip Art Library. From 2005 until 2008 he built Creative Commons’ community and business development projects and is currently a Creative Commons Fellow. Currently, he is growing the media company Fabricatorz with Cantocore Art Exhibitions, Laoban Open Soundsystems, and is recently assisting with an upcoming re-launch of Status.Net (Identi.ca). He is known for growing successful open communities globally, leading international business development in Asia (particularly China), and developing Open Marketing.

http://rejon.org/bio/#images

VIDEOS

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/events/cc-salon

Shanty home

radha — 2011-04-04T06:53:08Z

A nationwide initiative is imploring that you look closely at the greyed-out areas on your GPS maps, says Jaideep Sen in an article in the Time Out Bengaluru Magazine, November 13-26 2009 [Vol 2 Issue 9]

Call up a map of Bangalore city on Google, key in the letters “HAL”, and hit the return key. When the squiggly lines demarcating the area show up, put down the end of your forefinger at the Marathahalli end of the Old Airport Road stretch, and begin tracing your way all the way up to MG Road. It’s an easy route to follow, if you’re merely looking to head from one end of the city to the other, but that isn’t the purpose of this particular exercise, which could well be tried out along all major roadways in any city across India.

As the two Bangalore-based groups Centre for Internet and Society, and Tactical Technology Collective describe it, the attempt of that lingering fingertip is to ascertain the possibilities of creating “maps from the margins and of margins”. While that wouldn’t make immediate sense to most GPS-impelled drivers, what they’re implying is that you look around that route to try and locate and identify the numerous slums, unauthorised settlements and illegal waterways that remain greyed-out along those delineated main roads and prominent residential areas. As co-hosts of a two-month-long nationwide project titled “Maps for Social Change”, the groups are also wagering that you most likely won’t find such expanses on a map. Although, if you were to explore the neighbourhoods of say, HAL, Indira Nagar and Ulsoor, you’d find at least 30 unmarked shanties along that stretch of Old Airport Road alone.

Official figures peg the city’s slum-dwelling population at roughly 10 per cent of an estimated total 5.3 million people, in a little over 200 slums as declared by the Karnataka Slum Clearance Board. While that figure would appear minor in comparison to that of a city like Mumbai, where 60 per cent of approximately 19 million people are said to live in slums, it’s precisely that kind of disparity that this project aims to pin down against latitudinal and longitudinal positions. The purpose, said a note from the groups, is to use “geographical mapping techniques to support struggles for social justice in India”. The end result, it added, could make maps as “tools to fight injustice in society”. To understand that intention, the activists and technology specialists of the two host groups are urging people, and groups involved in social projects especially, to revisit maps and identify possibilities relevant to local campaigns and movements.

“In other countries, there’s a lot of talk about social movements using technology, even in subversive ways, but in India, this hasn’t really taken off,” said Anja (pronounced Anya) Kovacs, a Belgian who has lived in India for eight years, is a member of various campaigns in New Delhi, and is a CIS member spearheading this project. While there are many reasons for Indians to be desisting from technological means, there are many practical applications where mapping techniques can benefit social causes, she insisted.

“One example is to do with people who face displacement caused due to upcoming Special Economic Zones,” explained Kovacs. “The media, at times, portrays people against such models of development as a minority. But if you count the number of people involved in these movements, you’d come up with a mad number, and there are a mad number of struggles going on.” The project, she added, could help place such information on a map, “so that different classes of people could see what the truth actually is”.

The application inviting proposals from groups, individuals and students, begins with an exhortation for people to rethink the concept of maps. “Most of us think of maps as representations of territory,” it states. “But have you wondered why poor people are rarely given prominence, or at times are absent altogether?”

The graphic representation of a map also presents a handy educational medium, added Kovacs. “People working on concerns of sexual harassment, or state repression, public health, water management issues… the possibilities are immense.” Allan Stanley, another CIS member working on the project’s technical aspects, said the aim was to facilitate training, and extend their expertise. “It’s easily doable even for people with little internet experience,” said Stanley. “Where you create mash-ups, with [online photo and video hosting services] Flickr and You Tube, and some overlaid locative work.” At advanced levels, Stanley said that open-map projects could serve to track things like education, and density of schools in areas. Kovacs also spoke of the recent “pink chaddi” campaign, against instances of violence inflicted upon women, where a simple Google map was used to mark locations that attacks were reported from, to highlight the possibility of indicating potentially unsafe urban regions.

Link to original article

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/news/shanty-home

Asia Source 3 Meeting

radha — 2011-04-02T14:27:11Z

The Asia Source 3 Meeting Reinforces Asian Free and Open Source Software Movement - More than 150 Asian Open Source activists met in the Philippines from 07th November to 12th November to discuss the latest IT-tools for NGOs and SMEs and this time the Main Theme of Asia Source 3 was: Building Capacities and Empowering Humanity through FOSS

Asia Source 3 Meeting Reinforces Asian Free and Open Source Software Movement

More than 150 Asian Open Source activists discuss latest IT-tools for NGOs and SMEs in the Philippines
Gathering ends with knowledge sharing and plans to migrate to Free and Open Source Software (FOSS)
Main Theme of Asia Source 3: Building Capacities and Empowering Humanity through FOSS

Silang, Cavite - While most technology conferences happen as swanky, slick, and well-rehearsed events, the recently concluded Asia Source 3 took the opposite track and ran a camp that was spartan yet spontaneous. From November 7 to 12, 2009, Asia Source 3 gathered 150 representatives in the Yen Center to discuss developments in open source. For those six days, the campers lived in a communal environment that married fun and relaxation with exchange of ideas.
Asia Source 3 campers represented a large cross section of non-governmental organizations, small businesses, youth networks, and technology entrepreneurs from 15 countries (see full list below). While technology issues permeated the discussions, it took place with an emphasis on the economic and social context of cooperation among developing countries.

This is the third such event in the region, organized by the International Open Source Network (IOSN) and InWEnt - Capacity Building International of Germany ; earlier camps took place in Bangalore, India in 2005 and Sukabumi, Indonesia in 2007. It is based on the source camp template of the Tactical Technology Collective, an NGO that consults for other NGOs on technology. The Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development of Germany (BMZ), the ASEAN Foundation and the Open Society Institute funded Asia Source 3, with the aim to increasing awareness and adoption of free and open source software.

"We believe that the continuous strengthening of the Free Software community through source camps like this contribute to a more open collaborative environment," said Dr. Alvin Marcelo, Director of IOSN for ASEAN+3. "While the rising popularity and relevance of open source software is now unstoppable, the challenge is to harness the many activities into a coherent whole. And we are able to achieve this through community building."

Asia Source 3 also marked the official highlight of five years of regional FOSS support by InWEnt in Southeast Asia. "We are honored to be part of this movement through our training and network program it@foss" said Balthas Seibold, Senior Project Manager of InWEnt. InWEnt has trained and connected more than 1000 experts from Indonesia, Cambodia, Laos, Vietnam and the Philippines in more than 30 training courses under its it@foss program.

In the tradition of previous camps, Asia Source 3 emphasized spontaneity over rigid planning. “We try to create an environment of collaboration and community," said Allen Gunn, the event's head facilitator. "No keynote speakers, no panels, no powerpoint slides. Instead, we set-up mini-discussions."

This approach makes the exchange of knowledge and development of relationships more organic and natural. It creates opportunities to broaden expertise, and forge new ideas and connections. Asia Source 3’s theme dwelt on building capacity among technical experts and organizational practitioners. It dealt with the topics of managing and broadcasting information through free and open source software and migration from proprietary alternatives.

Asia Source 3 was jointly organized by UNDP-International Open Source Network (UNDP-IOSN) through its ASEAN+3 Centre of Excellence (based at the University of the Philippines Manila) and InWEnt - Capacity Building International Germany, together with the Tactical Technology Collective, Aspiration (USA) and the Centre for Internet and Society (India). Funders include the Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development of Germany (BMZ), the ASEAN Foundation and the Open Society Institute.

Asian countries represented in Asia Source III include Bangladesh, Burma, Cambodia, China, India, Indonesia, Kyrgyzstan, Laos, Mongolia, Pakistan, Philippines, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Timor Leste, Vietnam.

PRESS CONFERENCE
Asia Source 3 held a press conference last November 13, 2009, 12:00 pm, at the Yen Center, International Institute for Rural Reconstruction in Silang, Cavite. Press pictures and video footage can be found at http://asiasource3.net/blogs.

MORE INFORMATION
More information on Asia Source 3, and information on all organizers and funders
To join the community
More information on the International Open Source Network (UNDP-IOSN)

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/news/asia-source-3-meeting

Citizen 2.0?

radha — 2011-08-20T22:55:56Z

Exploring Research Questions, Frameworks, and Methods - A presentation was given by Minna Aslama, at CIS, on Nov 23rd @ 4.30pm , Bangalore. The Videos for the talk are given here.

Abstract:

The early and mid 1990s witnessed a surge of academic thinking and public debates around the democratizing power of the Internet. The most hopeful utopias of deliberative online communication and formation of active ‘subaltern counter-publics’ (Fraser 1992/1997) were countered with fears ranging from trivialization, fragmentation, even disappearance of widely and commonly shared issues, to viral distribution of non-democratic, ‘harmful’ content. Now the same debates are re-emerging once again in era that is witnessing the explosion of ‘social production’ in a multitude of digital platforms.

The recent examples of the elections in two very different societies, the United States and Iran, provide just two cases where information production by non-professional individuals and loose associations, distributed via informal networks including social networking sites and microblogging, has played a major role in democratic processes (e.g., Williams & Gulati 2007; Keim & Clark 2009).

A question remains: do social networks facilitate platforms for democratic debate and participation in our ‘post-broadcast’ democracies (Prior 2007) characterized by ‘a networked information economy’ (Benkler 2006)? And further, is or can there exist such a phenomenon as a ‘Citizen 2.0’ who actively participates in democratic processes (issue driven and/or local, regional, national, transnational) via digital media? So far academic scholarship has focused on theorization rather than empirical analyses (e.g., Gripsrud 2009), has tended to emphasize activities of social justice movements that are by default networked and proactive (Aslama & Erickson 2009), and thus have ‘romanticized’ the participatory and democratizing nature of the Internet, web 2.0 and mobile communications (while most quantitative indicators tend to point towards concentrated and elite communication, and while digital divide still clearly exists, Hindman 2009). Needless to say, much of the hopeful theorization is European / Anglo-American, and there seems to be relatively little cultural sensitivity in grand visions of global public spheres (c.f., Castells 2008).

The talk will not claim to provide answers to these paramount questions. Instead, Minna wished to raise more questions about (1) what should be researched about mediated democracy and citizenry in our time; what should we know? (2) How could we frame that research theoretically and conceptually? And (3) what kinds of methodological solutions might be useful in this context. Rather than presenting a comprehensive research agenda, Minna suggested some ideas that would broadly connect to macro, meso and micro-level view of media, power and citizenship (c.f. Clegg 1989), and would illustrate those ideas with some empirical examples of her current pilot work for a planned multi-country study on the theme.

References:

Aslama M. & Erickson I. (2009). Public Spheres, Networked Publics, Networked Public Spheres? Tracking the Habermasian Public Sphere in Recent Discourse. Fordham University, McGannon Center Working Papers.Retrieved at: http://www.fordham.edu/images/undergraduate/communications/public%20spheres,%20networked%20publics,%20networked%20public%20spheres.pdf

Benkler, Y. (2006). The Wealth of Networks. How Social Production Transforms Markets and Freedom. New Haven & London: Yale University Press.

Castells, M. (2008). The New Public Sphere: Global Civil Society, Communication Networks, and Global Governance. The Annals Of The American Academy Of Political And Social Science, vol. 616, no. 1, pp. 78-93.
Clegg, S. (1989). Frameworks of Power. London: Sage.

Fraser N. (1997(1992)). Rethinking the Public Sphere: A Contribution to the Critique of an Actually Existing Democracy. In Calhoun C (ed.). Habermas and the Public Sphere. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Pp., 109-142.

Gripsrud, J. (2009, March). Digitising the Public Sphere: Two Key Issues. Javnost-The Public, 16(1), 5-16.

Hindman, M. (2009). The Myth of Digital Democracy. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.

Keim N & Clark J (2009) Public Media 2.0 Field Report: Building Social Media Infrastructure to Engage Publics. Twitter Vote Report and Inauguration Report ’09. American University, center for Social Media.
http://www.centerforsocialmedia.org/resources/publications/public_media_20_field_report_building_social_media_infrastructure_to_engage/ (accessed 30 August 2009).

Prior, M. (2007) Post-Broadcast Democracy. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Williams, C. B., & Gulati, G. J. (2007). Social Networks in Political Campaigns: Facebook and the 2006 Midterm Elections. Paper presented at the 2007 Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association.

Minna Aslama’s Bio:

Minna Aslama is a researcher and a lecturer at Fordham University, New York, and the University of Helsinki. She holds a Ph.D. from the University of Helsinki and has taken part in several international research activities including The Media Between Culture and Commerce Project by the European Science Foundation, and the research-advocacy project on Global Media Monitoring of news media (GMMP, 1995, 2000, 2005, 2009). From 2008-2009, she served as the Program Officer for the Necessary Knowledge for a Democratic Public Sphere program at the Social Science Research Council.
Prior to her academic career, she worked at the Division of Advancement for Women of the UN Secretariat and at the Finnish Broadcasting Company in the research, training and development unit. She has also served as a consultant for various national and international organizations on research and training, especially with regard to issues of media and gender.
Her recent/ongoing research work includes new conceptualizations of media audiences and the concept of ‘participation’, public service media and content diversity in the digital era, and media policy flows in the globalizing media environment. In addition, she is especially interested in new forms of collaboration emerging in relation to the media justice and reform movements. Together with Phil Napoli, she is currently editing a book “Communication Research in Action” that depicts scholar-practitioner collaborations in the field.
Contact: minna.aslama@helsinki.fi

Videos

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/advocacy/other-advocacy/citizen-2.0

Improving Collective Intelligence

radha — 2011-04-05T04:19:02Z

CIS in collaboration with iMorph, Inc. and Program For the Future, is organizing a Tweetup on Dec 20th, 2009 at TERI from 4pm to 7pm.

The tweetup is to increase the awareness for "Improving Collective Intelligence".

Tools like Twitter and other social networks allow global participation of a large number of people in solving some of the World's pressing problems. This Tweetup is aimed at identifying some of these problems, brainstorming about ways to solve them and raise the awareness of the power of Collective Intelligence.

Specially, a Collective Intelligence Challenge organized by "The Program For The Future" will be the first step towards the effort. A description of the project (from the website - http://thetechvirtual.org/projects)

Develop a practical method, tool or technology that connects people so that they collectively act more intelligently. The challenge embraces all areas of human endeavor – not just technical domains like computing or engineering but also the arts, business, economics, education, government, health, law, philanthropy, science and other spheres. Winning entries will be displayed in the participating museums.

Participating museums: Tech Museum of Innovation, MIT Museum , Science Center Singapore, Citilab Barcelona, Global Women's Leadership Network

Indian Organizations - National Institute of Engineering, Mysore, Innovation Cell at KCG College of Technology

More Information

Contacts:
Dorai Thodla - dorait@gmail.com
Hrish Thota - dhempe@gmail.com

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/events/improving-collective-intelligence

DFI and Cambridge University Press join hands for getting print access to the "print impaired"

radha — 2011-08-17T08:45:27Z

Cambridge University Press has given permission for books published in India by them to be converted into other accessible formats such as in DAISY, says Dr. Sam Taraporevala, Director, Xavier’s Resource Centre for the Visually Challenged in this blog.

Print access is a major area that the DAISY Forum of India (DFI) is working towards. Two of the many member organizations of DFI, The Centre for Internet & Society (CIS) and the Xavier’s Resource Centre for the Visually Challenged (XRCVC) approached the India office of Cambridge University Press, one of the major publishers in India. The rationale behind contacting publishers is to explain to them the need to have accessible copies of the printed word for the print disabled and obtain their permission for converting their books into such accessible formats such as in DAISY.

XRCVC interacted with Mr. Anil Kumar Pandey, General Manager for Western India of Cambridge University Press, Nirmita Narasimhan of CIS contacted Mr. Manas Saikia, Managing Director of Cambridge University Press, India. Both of them were very open to this idea of accessibility and thereby began a collaborative effort from both the Cambridge University Press in India and the DFI.

Mr. Saikia strengthened his support to the cause by not only giving permission for books published in India by Cambridge University Press but also offering to obtain for DFI the global permission of Cambridge University Press books. Ms. Anita Parkash, Legal and IP Manager, Asia of the Singapore office of Cambridge University Press also endorsed this stand. She reinforced the positive response given by Mr. Saikia and agreed for collaboration with the XRCVC to work out a system which would be in the best interests of the stakeholders. Having worked out the final draft of this agreement, she offered to get it duly endorsed from the United Kingdom office of the Cambridge University Press.

This brought together Mr. Gordon Johnson, the Deputy Vice Chancellor of Cambridge University Press, Mr. Manas Saikia and Mr. Anil Kumar Pandey to the XRCVC on 23rd November, 2009 to sign the agreement with DFI. Dr. Sam Taraporevala, Director of XRCVC on behalf of DFI signed this agreement in the presence of Mr. Ketan Kothari who represented Sightsavers International, one of XRCVC’s partners in its “print access” quest. This we are sure has marked the beginning of a long and continuing association between DFI and Cambridge University Press for championing the cause of making the printed word accessible to the print disabled across India.

Coverage in The Bookseller

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/accessibility/blog/dfi-and-cambridge-university-press

India Study Tour - Report: The South African Telecommunications Sector: Poised for Change

radha — 2011-08-24T08:02:09Z

CIS in collaboration with the LINK Centre, Graduate School of Public and Development Management, University of the Witwatersrand, South Africa and in association with different institutions across India organized a Lecture Tour by Sagie Chetty from 19th Oct to 30th Oct. A report on this study tour is given by Sagie Chetty.

India Study Tour Report

2009-10-17 to 2009-11-01
Sagie Chetty, Masters of Management ICT Policy & Regulation
Student Number 0617514V
Supervision: LINK Centre
Graduate School of Public and Development Management
University of the Witwatersrand

Sagie Chetty is a Senior Manager at Eskom, South Africa’s largest Electricity Utility and a Masters of Management student in the field of ICT Policy and Regulation at Wits University. My research dissertation is entitled “Analysing processes for regulating interconnection in India and South Africa.” Wits LINK Centre and the Centre for Internet and Society (CIS) in Bangalore arranged for a study/lecture tour to India for the period from 17th October 2009 to 1st November 2009. As part of the tour, I presented a number of talks to students and faculty members at various universities and institutions around the country, on the subject of the Telecommunications Landscape in South Africa. I used the opportunity to inform students on the development of the telecommunications sector in South Africa; to build relationships between the LINK centre and the institutions I visited; and, most importantly, to conduct interviews with academia, economists and regulatory authorities in India to gather essential material for my research paper.

Presentations were held at a number of universities, namely the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT), Chennai and IIT, Mumbai; the International Institute of Information Technology (IIIT), Bangalore; and the Indira Gandhi National Open University (IGNOU), the National Institute of Science, Technology and Development Studies (NISTADS) and the Jamia Millia Islamia University – all based in Delhi. The visit concluded with meetings with officials from the Telecoms Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI).

The presentations were well attended and discussions were robust and thought provoking. The South African telecommunications sector was seen as being non-competitive with unnecessarily high ownership by government in the telecommunications sector. From the information provided, students concluded that the SA telecommunications regulator was weak and lacking in the commensurate skills to manage this highly technical sector.

On the other hand, students gravitated between having admiration for India’s own telecommunications regulator, TRAI and criticism of TRAI’s inability to improve broadband take-up in India. Students commended TRAI’s technical skills, independence and its courage in standing up to powerful mobile companies and incumbent telecommunications companies. However, lack of policy direction with regard to broadband rollout is seen as a major failure. Comments regarding this failure are attributed to TRAI’s driving down of telecommunications prices to levels that do not allow for infrastructure investment.

The future for broadband in India lies in mobile technology and some predict that fixed line will be defunct by 2025. Some academics also believe that there are too many players in the telecommunications sector in India making spectrum allocation highly competitive and therefore, very expensive. These costs will have to be recovered and the end users will pay dearly for this. Therefore, the model that the Department of Telecommunications (DOT) is using for spectrum auctions is being questioned by students and academics.

The innovation that I observed in India relates to CIS’s early work in projects assisting the visually impaired to read; the writing of 4G standards at the IITs and the innovation with regard to interconnection usage charges (IUC) at TRAI. These are some of the lessons that I have taken back to South Africa.

My observation of students in India is that they are highly motivated and eager to learn. Entrance to the universities is highly sought after and universities have high standards and are generally difficult to get into. The IITs certainly are increasing the requirements for students to get into them. The institutions are vibrant and are fertile grounds for thought leadership and innovation. India is producing a veritable number of PhDs and institutions seem to offer funding for capable students. South Africa needs to re-examine the funding model for students here. My impression is that students in South Africa do not have similar support as their counterparts in India.

The talks generally concluded with a re-affirmation of the strong historical and cultural links between South Africa and India. Mahatma Gandhi’s time spent in South Africa developing his notion of non-violent protest is well known in India and will always bind our countries together.

India is a vibrant country with an economic engine that is gathering revolutions. Its future is bright and its institutions are producing bright young minds to take their place in this awakening economic giant. South Africans can do well in learning from this super power in the making.

Report

Videos

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/telecom/blog/india-study-tour-report-by-sagie-chetty

Response to TRAI Consultation paper No. 6/2009

radha — 2011-08-24T08:06:46Z

CIS Distinguished Fellow, Shyam Ponappa, provides a detailed response to the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India's Consultation paper No. 6/2009 "Overall Spectrum Management and review of license terms and conditions". Shyam Ponappa is suggesting that, the TRAI approach the telecom policy in a manner which will facilitate greater user access and, more generally, be designed to serve the public interest in the long-term.

Shyam Ponappa November 12, 2009
Distinguished Fellow
Centre for Internet & Society
Bangalore/New Delhi
cis-india.org

shyamponappa@gmail.com

Telecom Regulatory Authority of India
Attn: Sh. Sudhir Gupta, Advisor (MN)
Mahanagar Doorsanchar Bhawan
Jawahar Lal Nehru Marg, New Delhi-110 002
Tel. No.011-23220018 , Fax No.011-23212014

E-mail : advmn@trai.gov.in

TRAI Consultation paper No. 6/2009- October 16, 2009

"Overall Spectrum Management and review of license terms and conditions"

Sir,

It would help to have a logical framework that defines overall objectives, prioritizes issues, and structures and organizes issues and questions. This would facilitate analysis and response, as we have attempted below.

We begin by responding to Question 57 as a preamble to all the questions:

57. What in your opinion is the desired structure for efficient management of spectrum?
[This question addresses only one of two essential criteria, efficiency. The other criterion is effectiveness; both need equal emphasis.]

Please see separate attachment for answers to Questions 1-56.

Status

Currently, communications services in India comprising Internet, voice and SMS have the following attributes:

Low broadband usage, with relatively high prices: eg, direct satellite TV subscriptions at Rs. 200/month, compared with 512 kbps Internet at Rs. 1,000/month.
Fragmented spectrum allocation for exclusive use by each operator in a service area.
Very high intensity of spectrum use by operators compared with international norms because of constrained availability.
Too many operators per service area (11-14 or more [15-16 with all potential operators with GSM and CDMA counted separately], versus the global average of 4-5).

[For details on (2), (3) and (4), please see: 'An assessment of spectrum management policy in India', David Lewin, Val Jervis, Chris Davis, Ken Pearson, Plum Consulting, December 2008
http://www.plumconsulting.co.uk/pdfs/GSMA%20spectrum%20management%20policy%20in%20India.pdf]

Needs

Our needs are:

good services for Internet, voice and SMS,
at reasonable prices, eg, comparable pricing for TV and broadband,
accessible from/to most households across the country.

The need is especially great in rural areas, as broadband can be the medium for delivery of essential services like education (from basic to advanced to vocational training and Continuing Education at all levels, including high-level professional CE), health (again, from basic diagnostics and monitoring at home, to advanced care at adequately equipped centres), and security and law-and-order services at significantly higher levels than is possible without excellent communications infrastructure.

In view of the above, we suggest that the Government of India consider adopting the following policy goals in the public interest ( and therefore, that where appropriate, the TRAI set these objectives/make appropriate recommendations to the GOI).

Suggested Policy Goals/Objectives [based on needs]

Adopt the criteria of long-term net benefits in the public interest for decisions, eschewing short-term cash collections from auctions and fees.
An approach to policies for telecommunications services (not for broadcasting) that limits the number of operators per service area in line with international experience, because of the economics of networks.
[This implies an explicit reversal of prior policies to maximize competition, and requires allowing for consolidation through mergers and acquisitions.]
Access to broadband (to be defined as at least 512 kbps in keeping with international norms) at all feasible locations in the country for all users.
Develop incentives and penalties favouring good rural service provision, with the emphasis on broadband: an Administered Incentive Pricing mechanism.
Explore ways to structure policies to reduce costs/maximize utility through facilities and resource sharing, so that prices can be reduced while maintaining good scope for investment from growth and profits.

This implies two areas of exploration:
a) Shared use of facilities and equipment/networks;
b) Shared use of spectrum.

(i) This is best done by collaborative consultations between experts (from the GOI, private sector and academia), operators, equipment providers, and government. Without the requisite interdisciplinary skills combined with operating expertise and investment capability, the effort is too complex for an iterative, serial consultation process.
(ii) Even within the GOI, this requires interdisciplinary and cross-jurisdictional convergence, both to develop solutions as well as to implement them.
(iii) This also needs GOI initiatives to invite companies like Ericsson, Nokia, Motorola and Qualcomm as well as Google and Intel, possibly cable companies like Liberty Global, and electricity companies that deliver Internet through their networks.
(iv) The GOI also needs to depute experienced representatives from various ministries and departments including the WPC, the Defence Services, and specialist agencies such as the DRDO/NTRO.
[Please see ‘Managing Spectrum’ in the Business Standard November 5, 2009, and related references: http://organizing-india.blogspot.com/2009/11/managing-spectrum.html]
Monitor operations online and intervene actively where revenues (the totality of rates/tariffs) are far above total costs, i.e., profits are unreasonable. This is a necessary adjunct to accepting a monopolistic/oligopolistic market structures.

Suggested Approach

The use of a decision tree as in the ‘Issue Map for Spectrum & Broadband’ below (please see Exhibit) facilitates a logical sequence and prioritization in exploring alternatives. (Please note that this is for broadband, voice and SMS, and not for broadcasting.) A similar exploration process for networks and facilities (sharing versus exclusive use for delivery) could follow. However, stakeholders should be free to use any analytical process to improve on this in the common interest.

Once decisions are taken on these two issues (spectrum and network/ facilities sharing), other issues like pricing and consolidation can be logically addressed based on these decisions, probably within the scope of existing laws and regulations.

New regulations or laws should be considered only after comprehensive analysis on the lines of Project LARGE (Legal Adjustments and Reforms for Globalising the Economy by Sh. Bibek Debroy).

Exhibit: Issue Map on Spectrum & Broadband

Shyam Ponappa
Centre for Internet & Society
cis-india.org

Attachment – Question 1-57

TRAI Consultation paper No. 6/2009 – October 16, 2009

Overall Spectrum Management and review of license terms and conditions

Chapter 1
Spectrum requirement and availability

Do you agree with the subscriber base projections? If not, please provide the reasons for disagreement and your projection estimates along with their basis?
Do not disagree.
Do you agree with the spectrum requirement projected in ¶ 1.7 to ¶1.12? Please give your assessment (service-area wise).
Agree if exclusive bands of spectrum are used by different operators, and the spectrum requirement is linked to subscribers. Disagree if common use of spectrum is adopted. Please see preamble (reply to Question 57) for details of shared/pooled spectrum approach.
How can the spectrum required for Telecommunication purposes and currently available with the Government agencies be re-farmed?
(a) By rationalizing usage, as advocated in the preamble for commercial operators, by pooling spectrum for common use where possible.
(b) By inducting equipment that allows more efficient usage and usage of other bands.
In view of the policy of technology and service neutrality licences, should any restriction be placed on these bands (800,900 and 1800 MHz) for providing a specific service and secondly, after the expiry of present licences, how will the spectrum in the 800/900 MHz band be assigned to the operators?
(a) Please see suggestions on shared/pooled spectrum as above.
(b) In the event that common use of spectrum is infeasible/not accepted by the Government of India, and exclusive bands of spectrum are assigned to operators as is the practice now, work out ways to consolidate fragmented bands (other than through M&A) for operators, to enable operators to hold contiguous bands for greater efficiency, and explore shared use of pooled spectrum.
How and when should spectrum in 700 MHz band be allocated between competitive services?
Preferred method: for common use (can be pooled or shared even if assigned for exclusive use, immediately).
What is the impact of digital dividend on 3G and BWA?
Should extend its reach and access because of lower costs.

Chapter 2
Licensing Issues
Should the spectrum be delinked from the UAS Licence? Please provide the reasons for your response.
If spectrum is treated as a common resource, the logical requirement is for a linkage that is not dependent on ownership, but to access for service delivery, i.e., common access.
In case it is decided not to delink spectrum from UAS license, then should there be a limit on minimum and maximum number of access service providers in a service area? If yes, what should be the number of operators?
Follow global practice: do not exceed five operators in any service area unless there are compelling reasons to do so.
What should be the considerations to determine maximum spectrum per entity?
Minimum contiguous band for effective rollout and efficient delivery, i.e., inexpensive capital outlay for equipment and towers/network while maintaining Quality of Service.
Is there a need to put a limit on the maximum spectrum one licensee can hold? If yes, then what should be the limit? Should operators having more than the maximum limit, if determined, be assigned any more spectrum?
This depends on the overall approach to spectrum management, i.e., common use, or exclusive use. The logic for a limit is effective delivery capability at ‘normal’ cost. There is no logic for assigning more than this. However, if spectrum is for common/shared use, the only criterion is throughput/capacity.
If an existing licensee has more spectrum than the specified limit, then how should this spectrum be treated? Should such spectrum be taken back or should it be subjected to higher charging regime?
As in No. 10. If common/shared spectrum use is adopted, there needs to be a transition worked out, as in the transition to revenue sharing.
In the event fresh licences are to be granted, what should be the Entry fee for the license?
The principles followed should be:
(a) Low license fees to minimize access costs.
(b) Provided licenses are delinked from spectrum and few in number, there need to be strict rollout requirements.
(c) Incentives for broadband and rural coverage in the form of a structured Administrative Incentive Pricing mechanism.
(d) Penalties for failure.
In case it is decided that the spectrum is to be delinked from the license then what should be the entry fee for such a Licence and should there be any roll out condition?
As in No. 12.
Is there a need to do spectrum audit? If it is found in the audit that an operator is not using the spectrum efficiently what is the suggested course of action? Can penalties be imposed?
(a) Operating attributes should be monitored online on a continuous basis.
(b) Spectrum use probably needs to be monitored as an operating attribute.
(c) Penalties and incentives are needed, including forfeiture for continued transgression.
Can spectrum be assigned based on metro, urban and rural areas separately? If yes, what issues do you foresee in this method?
This needs to be considered only if common/pooled usage is decided against. With common use or sufficiently large blocks/bands of spectrum, no problems are likely to arise.
Since the amount of spectrum and the investment required for its utilisation in metro and large cities is higher than in rural areas, can asymmetric pricing of telecom services be a feasible proposition?
Yes.

M&A issues
If the common/shared use approach is adopted, M&A can be under existing laws and regulations.
Whether the existing licence conditions and guidelines related to M&A restrict consolidation in the telecom sector? If yes, what should be the alternative framework for M&A in the telecom sector?
Whether lock-in clause in UASL agreement is a barrier to consolidation in telecom sector? If yes, what modifications may be considered in the clause to facilitate consolidation?
Whether market share in terms of subscriber base/AGR should continue to regulate M&A activity in addition to the restriction on spectrum holding?
Whether there should be a transfer charge on spectrum upon merger and acquisition? If yes, whether such charges should be same in case of M&A/transfer/sharing of spectrum?
Whether the transfer charges should be one-time only for first such M&A or should they be levied each time an M&A takes place?
Whether transfer charges should be levied on the lesser or higher of the 2G spectrum holdings of the merging entities?
Whether the spectrum held consequent upon M&A be subjected to a maximum limit?

Spectrum Trading
Is spectrum trading required to encourage spectrum consolidation and improve spectrum utilization efficiency?

At present, trading is required to allow consolidation. However, if a comprehensive approach is taken to spectrum use, and especially if common use through common access is established, this set of problems will no longer exist after a transition period. Nor will there be any shortage of spectrum.
Who all should be permitted to trade the spectrum ?
As in No. 24.
Should the original allottee who has failed to fulfill “Roll out obligations” be allowed to do spectrum trading?
There should be penalties and forfeiture for failure to meet rollout obligations, and clawbacks as an interim measure during the transition.
Should transfer charges be levied in case of spectrum trading?
What should be the parameters and methodology to determine first time spectrum transfer charges payable to Government for trading of the spectrum? How should these charges be determined year after year?
Should such capping be limited to 2G spectrum only or consider other bands of spectrum also? Give your suggestions with justification.

This question assumes there is a difference in “2G spectrum” and other spectrum, which is incorrect. The difference is in equipment that has evolved in different phases along different bands. Spectrum should be treated as technology-neutral for the purposes of service delivery. Any service should be deliverable on any band, subject to interference limitations.
Should size of minimum tradable block of spectrum be defined or left to the market forces?
Should the cost of spectrum trading be more than the spectrum assignment cost?

Spectrum sharing

These questions are addressed in the preamble in the cover note.
Should Spectrum sharing be allowed? If yes, what should be the regulatory framework for allowing spectrum sharing among the service providers?
What should be criteria to permit spectrum sharing?
Should spectrum sharing charges be regulated? If yes then what parameters should be considered to derive spectrum sharing charges? Should such charges be prescribed per MHz or for total allocated spectrum to the entity in LSA?
Should there be any preconditions that rollout obligation be fulfilled by one or both service provider before allowing the sharing of spectrum?
In case of spectrum sharing, who will have the rollout obligations? Giver or receiver?

Perpetuity of licences
Should there be a time limit on licence or should it be perpetual?
What should be the validity period of assigned spectrum in case it is delinked from the licence? 20 years, as it exists, or any other period
What should be the validity period of spectrum if spectrum is allocated for a different technology under the same license midway during the life of the license?
If the spectrum assignment is for a defined period, then for what period and at what price should the extension of assigned spectrum be done?
If the spectrum assignment is for a defined period, then after the expiry of the period should the same holder/licensee be given the first priority?

Uniform License Fee
What are the advantages and disadvantages of a uniform license fee?
Whether there should be a uniform License Fee across all telecom licenses and service areas including services covered under registrations?
If introduced, what should be the rate of uniform License Fee?

License fees should be treated as part of the overall scheme of Administered Incentive Pricing.

Chapter 3
Spectrum assignment
If the initial spectrum is de-linked from the licence, then what should be the method for subsequent assignment?
Please see comments on common/shared use in the preamble in the cover note.
If the initial spectrum continues to be linked with licence then is there any need to change from SLC based assignment?
The SLC basis for spectrum assignment gives rise to many distortions and is not in line with international practices.
In case a two-tier mechanism is adopted, then what should be the alternate method and the threshold beyond which it will be implemented?
Should the spectrum be assigned in tranches of 1 MHz for GSM technology? What is the optimum tranche for assignment?
In case a market based mechanism (i.e. auction) is decided to be adopted, would there be the issue of level playing field amongst licensees who have different amount of spectrum holding? How should this be addressed?
In case continuation of SLC criteria is considered appropriate then, what should be the subscriber numbers for assignment of additional spectrum?
In your opinion, what should be the method of assigning spectrum in bands other than 800, 900 and 1800 MHz for use other than commercial?

Spectrum pricing
Should the service providers having spectrum above the committed threshold be charged a one time charge for the additional spectrum?
In case it is decided to levy one time charge beyond a certain amount then what in your opinion should be the date from which the charge should be calculated and why?
On what basis, this upfront charge be decided? Should it be benchmarked to the auction price of 3G spectrum or some other benchmark?
Should the annual spectrum charges be uniform irrespective of quantum of spectrum and technology?
Should there be regular review of spectrum charges? If so, at what interval and what should be the methodology?

Structure for spectrum management
What in your opinion is the desired structure for efficient management of spectrum?

Please see the preamble in the cover note.

Shyam Ponappa
Centre for Internet & Society
cis-india.org

November 12, 2009

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/telecom/blog/response-to-trai-consultation-paper

Right to Read Campaign - Kolkata

radha — 2011-11-08T15:39:13Z

A report on the nationwide Right to Read campaign which had its second road show at the West Bengal National University of Juridical Sciences, Kolkata on 7th November, 2009 from 11.00 a.m. to 2.00 p.m.

The Problem

Millions of Indians are unable to read printed material due to disabilities. Technologies are in place which can help them read printed matter if the material gets converted into alternate formats such as large print, audio, Braille or other electronic formats. Whereas the Constitution of India declares “right to read” a fundamental right, the provisions of the Indian Copyright Act, 1957 does not permit conversion of books into accessible formats for the benefit of persons with print impairment, as a result of which a “book famine” is created. International conventions to which India is a signatory to specifically requires it to amend its copyright laws for the benefit of persons with disabilities and make available information and materials to persons with disabilities on an equal basis as others.

Publishers too do not make books available in accessible formats as a result of which less than 0.5 per cent of books are available in accessible formats in India. As a result, persons with print impairments get excluded from the education system and this has a big impact on their career choices.

The Campaign

To solve this problem, the Indian Copyright Act, 1957 should be amended to permit the conversion and distribution of materials in all formats for making it accessible for persons with print impairment. Hence, the Daisy Forum of India, The Centre for Internet & Society and Bookbole have taken the initiative to be part of the global “Right to Read” campaign launched by the World Blind Union.

The ‘Right to Read’ campaign seeks to:

Accelerate change in the copyright law;
Raise public awareness on the issue of access to reading for the print-impaired; and
Gather Indian support for the Treaty for the Blind proposed by the World Blind Union at the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO).

In West Bengal, this campaign was initiated by Campaigners for Inclusion (a volunteer initiative by CRY and Sruti Disability Rights Centre) and hosted by the West Bengal National University of Juridical Sciences (NUJS).

The Programme

A meeting was held at the National University of Juridical Sciences on 7th November from 11.00 a.m. to 2.00 p.m. The Chief Guest of the meeting was Dr. Suranjan Das, Vice Chancellor of the University of Calcutta. Other dignitaries present at the meeting were Nirmita Narasimhan, Programme Manager, The Centre for Internet & Society and Rahul Cherian, Co-Founder, Inclusive Planet and Book Bole.

A lively panel discussion followed. The speakers included Ms. Chandrima Bhattacharya, Senior Assistant Editor, The Telegraph, Mr. S.B. Pattnayak, Principal, Ramakrishna Mission, Narendrapur, Dr. S.S. Roy, Chairman, National Children’s Computer Society and Dr. Rukmini Sen, Assistant Professor, (Social Sciences), WBNUJS.

A skit on this issue was presented by the Campaigners for Inclusion and a musical programme by Sayoni Palit, a visually impaired student of the Bachelor of Music, enthralled the audience.

The meeting was attended by 120 people including members of Blind Persons Association, National Association for Blind, Welfare Society for the Blind, Behala Blind School, Lighthouse for the Blind, Society for Visually Handicapped, National Institute for the Blind, Louis Braille Memorial School, Noble Mission of Calcutta and Mentaid along with several college students and teachers.

A signature campaign on the petition to amend the Copyright Act started in Kolkata on that day. Sruti Disability Rights Centre has taken the initiative to organize more awareness meetings, particularly in different colleges as well as at the Kolkata Book Fair in the coming months.

Media Coverage

Radio channels like Gyan Bharati organized a talk show on this issue besides announcing about the programme on its channel for one week. Red FM was the official radio partner and gave ample coverage to this event. One English newspaper and one Urdu newspaper covered this news.

Times of India - 7th Nov 2009

KOLKATA: For the 12 lakh-odd visually-challenged and dyslexic persons in the state, access to good Indian literature in Braille or audio format is a challenge. Obtaining copyright to convert books into special format is the biggest hindrance, say activists working for disability rights.

"Even the National Library does not have any Braille or audio books. Authorities argue that the number of such special books is too less to create full-fledged sections," said Shampa Sengupta of Sruti. When it comes to audio-version, the scenario is worse, says Lina Bardhan from Noble Mission that works with the mentally challenged.

City Braille publishers say legal formalities prove to be an obstacle."We believe that as a humanitarian gesture, the Copyright Act of 1957 should be relaxed for books meant for the differently-abled," said Amiyo Biswas of Blind Persons' Association, one of the three Braille publishers in the city.

In April 2008, UK-based Sight Savers International urged the UN to sign a treaty so that persons with disabilities can access books and documents easily.

Now, Center for Internet Society (CIS) has carried out campaigns in Mumbai, Bangalore and Chennai. On Saturday, a seminar will be held in Kolkata. "We want to organize a pan-India movement and amend the Copyright Act to establish the right to read," said CIS programme manager Nirmita Narasimhan.

Click here for the original article

Coverage in the November Issue of: CBR Forum - E- News Bulletin

Photos

VIDOES

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/accessibility/blog/right-to-read-campaign-kolkata

Copyright Access for the Disabled and Collaborative IP Policy

radha — 2011-04-02T14:27:01Z

A blog post on SPICY IP by Shamnad Basheer, November 18, 2009

In previous p osts, we covered the Right to Read Campaign, a campaign aimed at increasing access to copyrighted works for the print impaired. As many of you know, most works of literature, science and the arts are practically out of bounds for the disabled, unless converted to readable formats such as Braille or digitized and accessed via expensive screen reader software such as JAWS.

Recently, this campaign, the brainchild of CIS and Inclusive Planet, came home to us at NUJS, Kolkata and I was amazed to see the bonding between these children of a lesser god and their struggle to transform society into a more inclusive one. NUJS was particularly fortunate to host this campaign that day, as we have a student (Moiz Tundawalla, who ranks in the top 5 of his class) as well as a faculty member, Dr TV Sudhakar, who are visually impaired.

As part of the campaign, a group of us including Rahul Cherian of Inclusive Planet (and the brain behind Bookbole, one of the most innovative solutions yet catering to the needs of the visually impaired), Sunil Abraham and Nirmita Narasimhan of CIS and Lawrence Liang of ALF began working on a copyright defence that would enable the conversion of copyrighted works to more accessible formats for the disabled..formats that would enable them to enjoy such works as comfortably as the others.

Such a provision is critical, given that hardly 0.5% of all published books are accessible by the print impaired. Further, given the constitutional mandate that each one of us shall have the right to life under Article 21 (which includes the right to education and the right to read) and the right not to be discriminated against (under Article 14), the State is under a positive obligation to provide accessible works to the disabled and thereby help them lead better lives.

The Government Copyright Proposal

This is not to suggest that the Indian government lacks sensitivity on this count. Indeed, it is commendable that as far as back as 2006, the government proposed the introduction of Section 52 (1) (za) to the Copyright Act, 1957 to resolve the issue.

The proposed Section 52 (1) (za) states that the following act shall not constitute an infringement of copyright: “reproduction, issue of copies or communication to the public of any work in a format, including sign language, specially designed (emphasis added) only for the use of persons suffering from a visual, aural or other disability that prevents their enjoyment of such works in their normal format.”

While this is a great start, this draft suffers from some serious limitations:

Firstly, it restricts permissible formats to those “specially designed” for persons with disabilities. In practical terms, this means that only Braille and sign language is permitted. As many of you may know, Braille is extremely expensive to print and distribute and is not portable. Moreover persons with low vision, dyslexics, people with paralysis, cerebral palsy etc. cannot use Braille and require alternate formats.
Given recent technological developments and the burgeoning of audio formats and electronic formats that are now used by a large number of visually impaired persons, the exception ought to cover such formats as well... formats that do not strictly constitute "formats specially designed for the disabled". Indeed, any creation of a digitized version of a copyrighted work would enable access by the visually impaired (provided they have tools such as screen reading software on their respective computers).
We understand that the Indian government wishes to ensure that the defence is availed of only by the disabled and not by others, who may free ride on such an exception. While limiting the exception to “formats specially designed for the disabled” may help achieve this objective, it seriously limits the scope of access by the disabled in this technological day and age, as explained above. Rather than limit the kinds of formats that could be created, we propose that the government restrict access of works created under the aegis of this exception to only people with disabilities. One way to do this is by insisting on reliable certificates that confirm one's status as "differently-abled".
Secondly, the proposed amendment fails to ensure that software and other intellectual property protected tools required to create accessible formats and enable persons with disabilities to access such formats are available at a reasonable cost. Illustratively, the most widely used screen reading software, JAWS, is licensed at a whooping Rs 50,000!
Thirdly, the proposed amendment must provide wording to the effect that if content owners apply any technology circumvention measures or DRM locks to digital content, they must make available such content to persons with disabilities. Without such provision, the production of talking books or the use of screen reading software for the benefit of the visually impaired will be restricted if the owner of a digital work has prohibited such use of his work.

Thankfully India does not have any specific protection for anti-circumvention measures and DRM as yet. However, we're not sure if the government plans to introduce such a protection via the recent copyright amendment bill that is likely to be introduced in Parliament in December. Unfortunately, the bill is still secret and will be made available for public viewing only after it is introduced in Parliament.

Our Copyright Proposal
We've therefore proposed a more liberal and meaningful exception as below:

Section 52 (1) (za) (i): The doing of any act, the primary objective of which is to enable persons with disabilities to access copyrighted works as comfortably and flexibly as a person without a disability.
Such acts shall include, without limitation, the making of any accessible format of a work, reproducing such work/format, adapting such work/format, making available such work/format, lending such works/formats etc. and the provision of any facility that is primarily designed to enable any of the acts contemplated above.
Provided that if any entity wishes to undertake any of the above activities on a for profit basis, it shall pay such remuneration to copyright owners as may be prescribed by the Copyright Board from time to time. For the purpose of determining remuneration, the Copyright Board shall take into consideration the need to ensure that works are accessible and available at prices that are affordable, taking into account disparities of incomes for persons who are disabled.
Provided that if any software or other tool that is covered by any intellectual property right is necessary to create accessible formats or to enable access to such formats, or to enable disabled persons to access any work in any manner as contemplated above, such intellectual property protected software or tool shall be licensed at an affordable price, to be determined by the Copyright Board.
Provided that if any works are protected by technology circumvention measures or subject to DRM limitations that restrict access to the work in any way, the owner of copyright shall grant access to any person who wishes to secure such access for the primary purpose of doing any act contemplated within any of the provisions above.
Provided that the exemption or other benefits envisaged under this section can be availed of only when reasonable measures have been taken to ensure that the end beneficiary is a person with a disability.
Provided that if any act done in good faith in pursuance of any of the above provisions falls outside the ambit of such provision, such act shall not be enjoined by an injunction, whether temporary or permanent, but shall be made compensable by payment of a reasonable royalty to be determined by the Copyright Board.
This provision shall override any conflicting provision in any other legislation, regulation or rule in force in India, only to the extent of such conflict.
Section 52 (1) (za) (ii): For the purpose of Section 52 (1) (za) (i) "accessible format" means any format or form which gives a disabled person access to the work as flexibly and comfortably as a person without a disability, and shall include, but not be limited to, large print, with different typefaces and sizes all being permitted according to need, Braille, audio recordings, digital copies compatible with screen readers or refreshable Braille and audiovisual works with audio and or text description.

The above section draws from a provision recommended by the World Blind Union and supported by countries such as Brazil and NGO's such as KEI.

Readers will note that the above exception not only caters to the visually impaired, but any differently-abled person who is unable to access copyrighted works as comfortably as others. Illustratively, without the subtitling of audio-visual material, a hearing-impaired persons is unable to enjoy movies, TV programs and other audio-visual material.

CLIPP and Collaborative IP Policy Making

Readers may recollect an initiative called CLIPP (Collaborative Innovation in IP Policy), that we touched upon sometime back, but never really got around to implementing. We are still in the process of designing an appropriate IT architecture to support this endeavour, which will greatly aid transparency and public participation around IP law making in this country.

Till such time as we unleash this specialised architecture, we're trying to see if we can make do with the blogger format. Indeed, if our experiment around the parallel imports provision is anything to go by, where our posts elicited around 50 odd comments that helped suggest ways in which to interpret (and perhaps reword section 107A), there is no reason why the blogger format itself should not suffice.

Leaving comments on posts is fairly easy. You scroll down to the bottom of the post, hit the "post a comment" button and either sign in with your gmail account or click on the "anonymous" tab to post a comment anonymously. You could also chose any other online identity. For those that are averse to using the comments section at the end of this blog post, please free to email me at shamnad[at]gmail.com.

I hope all of you can take some time out to help this worthy cause by inspecting the suggested provision with a fine tooth comb and recommending ways to improve it. I understand that we have many sophisticated copyright experts on our subscriber list ..and I do hope that you will lend your minds and hearts to this cause. Needless to state, a mere copyright provision by itself is not enough--but it will certainly go some way in ensuring that we provide a better and more "inclusive" tomorrow for these children of a lesser god.

ps: Venky Hariharan, a leading open source advocate has referred me to Orca, an open source screen reader software, freely downloadable.

Link to the original blogspot

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/news/copyright-access-for-the-disabled-and-collaborative-ip-policy

ICT, transaction cost and development: The flip side

radha — 2013-02-05T08:56:35Z

A presentation by Prof. Pradoshnath at CIS, Bangalore on Nov 25th, 2009 from 3.30pm to 5pm

Abstract

The main observation is that the connectivity matters if and only if it connects the right way. The danger of being at the flip side looms large, if connected wrong way.

The conclusion is based on a rigorous theoretical understanding of the role of network technology in general and ICT in particular for augmenting the process of social and economic transformation. The theoretical framework also allows us to discover the danger of flip side of the network technology, and tells us that it is not always hunky-dory between ICT (or any network technology for that matter) and social and economic backwardness. Colonial plundering was possible through the adoption of network technologies in colonies.

ICT is believed to contribute to economic development by reducing the transaction and information cost associated with any economic activities. Transaction cost arises when transactions are made away from the market. There are two streams of arguments here; one, that suggests minimisation of transaction cost as means towards economic efficiency, and the other that considers the act of transactions away from the market is actually the process of value creation of a capitalist enterprise. We argue that both the arguments can be synchronised by partitioning the transaction costs in two broad components of production activities, namely, production (the value creation component, where in lies profit) and procurement. It is in the latter component where transaction cost can be minimised for efficiency, whereas in case of former transaction cost is created by a value creating capitalist enterprise. In reality both the processes are concurrent, and one complements the other.

It is this comprehensive perspective that enables us a fresh look at the ongoing programmes, and, therefore a general observation that ICTisation in less developed economies in effect make market operations friendlier for the capitalist ventures or inroads in the marginal economies, and create new varieties of distortions in the system. We call this distortion – the flip side of ICTisation, because in the absence of factors that enable make use of connectivity for economic and social gains, the marginalised population of a marginal economy runs the risk of falling in to a new dynamics of exploitation.

Profile of Prof. Pradosh Nath

An economist working on issues related to applications of science and technology for social and economic development. He is a scientist at National Institute of Science Technology and Development Studies (NISTADS), New Delhi. At present affiliated to the Centre for Culture Media and Governance, Jamia Millia University, New Delhi as Senior Research Fellow, ICSSR, New Delhi. His present research interest is in the area of application of ICT for social and economic development of the marginal economies. He has published widely in both national and international journals. He has co-authored two books and edited another. He has worked as consultant for IDRC, Canada, WAITRO, Copenhagen, Denmark, and ITU, Geneva. He has been the coordinator of the WAITRO sponsored international programme on ‘Knowledge management for R&D organisation’ conducted in different countries in Asia and Africa.

Videos

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/events/ict-transaction-cost-and-development-the-flip-side

Address delivered during the IGF Closing Ceremony

radha — 2011-08-02T07:18:36Z

This address was delivered by Dr. Anja Kovacs, as a representative of civil society, to the IGF during its closing ceremony.

Good evening, Mr Chairperson and all the distinguished participants, ladies and gentlemen. Thank you for this opportunity to address this assembly on behalf of civil society, it is a real honour. And thank you also to the organisers and to the government of Egypt, for the wonderful arrangements and for creating such a excellent environment for us to work in.

I would like to use this opportunity to celebrate, together with you, two very important achievements in particular that we have made collectively during the four days of our intensive deliberations together.

The first one is the progress we are making in terms of recognising the importance of attention for human rights in ensuring a people-centred, development-oriented, non-discriminatory information society. Thus, for example, in the main session on security, openness and privacy, speakers across stakeholder groups couched the debate not any more in terms of security vs. privacy, but in terms of security and privacy. Security or other concerns, it was consistently argued, while obviously deserving our attention, should not be used to justify curtailing longstanding gains made in terms of human rights; rather, it is an improved implementation of already agreed on human rights instruments that we need to reach our goal of an inclusive, people-centred information society. The growing recognition of this fact is an evolution that civil society welcomes with open arms.

Another very hopeful evolution during this IGF was the central attention devoted to the question of where we stand in terms of promoting a people-centred, development-oriented information society more generally. The message that came out of the main session on “Internet governance in the light of the WSIS principles” clearly confirmed the urgent need to pay greater attention to this important issue, and several suggestions were made to address this concern. These include devoting devoting a main session solely to the topic of Internet governance for development in next next year's IGF, and I sincerely hope that these suggestions will be taken up.

While we thus have important reason to celebrate, challenges of course remain. Throughout the existence of the IGF, and perhaps increasingly so, the value of the multistakeholder model has been recognised and stressed by all stakeholder groups. However, at the same time, it has also been acknowledged that we need to continue to work to further strengthen participation from currently underrepresented countries and groups. I would like to note, however, that it is important that we do not restrict our efforts in this regard to capacity building, significant as that may be. Perhaps even more crucial is that the agenda of the IGF consistently talks to the concerns of actors in the developing parts of the world as well.

The reconfirmation of the importance of a development agenda that we have seen in this IGF is thus a very important step forward indeed. At the same time, within this larger development agenda, it is crucial that we also as soon as possible start to discuss some of the specific issues that require our attention on an urgent basis. For example, within the IGF as elsewhere, it is generally acknowledged that access to knowledge is central to development processes; yet the IGF so far has not paid systematic attention to the ways in which the amazing possibilities that the Internet offers in this regard are increasingly threatened by new policies that seem to make intellectual property regimes more stringent day by day. From a developing country perspective, finding a balanced solution that can address these concerns is an urgent priority. Starting the debate on how this can be achieved here, in the IGF, is certain to attract a larger number of developing country participants, including from governments.

Going by the experience of the past years as well as this particular meeting, I have no doubt that if given the opportunity, we will measure up to the challenges before us. Without wanting to preclude the Under-Secretary General's report, the proceedings during this IGF have made clear time and again its crucial significance in Internet governance processes. I hope with all my heart that we will continue to get the opportunity to work together on addressing these important issues and on resolving tensions and contradictions as they emerge, with the support of an independent secretariat that can ensure an environment genuinely inclusive of all stakeholders. Only when such open, inclusive conditions govern our own processes, may we in turn, together be able to create a genuinely inclusive information society which will indeed create opportunities for all.

Thank you.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/address-igf-closing-ceremony

Experimental Economy Camp

radha — 2011-04-05T04:27:19Z

Experimental Economy Camp continued at the Centre for Internet and Society, Bangalore on Nov 22nd, '09 from 10.30am to 5.30pm.

Experimental Economy Camp continued at CIS (http://www.cis-india.org/) which will combine a hackathon, inviting more local people to get
involved, with a 'camp' of presentations, live and via Skype (maybe you?), which discuss and brainstorm the Open Call, former a greater,
more discursive context. (without giving away any answers and not including people's proposals).

Shadow Search

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/events/experimental-economy-camp-1

Open Video Summit

radha — 2009-12-10T06:21:01Z

The Centre for Internet and Society (CIS), iCommons, Open Video Alliance and Magic Lantern are organizing a workshop on December 15, 2009 at TERI, Bangalore

The Centre for Internet and Society (CIS), iCommons, Open Video Alliance and Magic Lantern are organizing a workshop on December 15, 2009.

This workshop in Bangalore—modelled after a similar meeting in October 2008 at Yale University—draws together experts from tech, art, film, NGOs and business to explore the future of online video.

When: December 15th, 2009

Where: The Energy and Resources Institute- Southern Regional Centre

(TERI-SRC)
4th Main, 2nd Cross, Domlur II Stage
Bangalore- 560071

What: The Open Video Summit is a one-day workshop to explore issues of intellectual property and telecom policy for video. By inviting experts from different fields to participate in the workshop, we aim to create a framework for open video in India and to better understand how the online video medium is developing. We also hope to expand the network of researchers who have open video on the radar and to foster international collaborations. We expect between 30-40 participants to attend.

Participants should bring some specialized knowledge or insight about the state of online video to the event. The workshop is highly interactive and its success will depend on the quality and dynamism of our discussions. This workshop will in turn direct iCommons research efforts in the area of online video policy.

Why: We’re now surrounded by cameras in cellphones, laptops, and everywhere else. Software and storage advances have made video remix an emergent art form. For the first time, huge numbers of people are communicating through video. Video is almost like a new language, a new toolkit for self-expression. This has some pretty profound implications.

But while sites like YouTube have enabled millions of people to broadcast themselves, it offers just a glimpse into the future of the online video medium. Heading into this future, the tools for creating, manipulating, and sharing video must be available to everyone. And while having community-developed, open source versions of these tools is a critical charge, it’s only one part of a larger puzzle. Open video requires that networks and technical, legal and business structures support the ability of huge numbers of individuals to use video in ways that go beyond just watching.

The Open Video Alliance was created to support industry coordination toward an open video ecosystem. OVA members develop free and open source software and conduct policy research to support a more participatory video medium. The OVA also coordinates the Open Video Conference, a multi-day summit of thought leaders in business, academia, art, and activism to explore the future of online video. The first OVC was host to over 800 guests, including 150 workshop leaders, panelists and speakers. Over 8,000 viewers tuned in from home to watch the live broadcast.

Meeting Organizers:

The Open Video Alliance is a coalition of organizations devoted to creating and promoting

free and open technologies, policies, and practices in online video. OVA founding members include Mozilla, the Participatory Culture Foundation, Kaltura, iCommons, and the Yale Information Society Project.

iCommons is a project-based incubator organization dedicated to promoting free culture and the global commons.

The Centre for Internet and Society critically engages with concerns of digital pluralism, public accountability and pedagogic practices, in the field of Internet and Society, with particular emphasis on South-South dialogues and exchange.

Magic Lantern Foundation is a non-profit group working with media and human rights.

This meeting made possible with the support of the Ford Foundation.

Working schedule:

Morning:

Keynote talk and brief discussion
Lightning presentations by selected participants
Breakout discussion groups

Afternoon:

Lunch
Breakout discussion groups
Plenary discussion to identify focus areas and summarize

Evening:

Film Screening

Space is limited. Please RSVP to conference@openvideoalliance.org, and feel free to contact us with any questions you may have. We look forward to meeting you in Bangalore.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/events/open-video-summit-1

Centre for Internet and Society

Preserving Digital Memories: A Patrimonial Approach

CC Salon

Shanty home

Asia Source 3 Meeting

Citizen 2.0?

Abstract:

Minna Aslama’s Bio:

Videos

Improving Collective Intelligence

DFI and Cambridge University Press join hands for getting print access to the "print impaired"

India Study Tour - Report: The South African Telecommunications Sector: Poised for Change

India Study Tour Report

Videos

Response to TRAI Consultation paper No. 6/2009

TRAI Consultation paper No. 6/2009- October 16, 2009

"Overall Spectrum Management and review of license terms and conditions"

Status

Needs

Suggested Policy Goals/Objectives [based on needs]

Suggested Approach

Right to Read Campaign - Kolkata

The Problem

The Campaign

The Programme

Media Coverage

Times of India - 7th Nov 2009

Photos

Copyright Access for the Disabled and Collaborative IP Policy

ICT, transaction cost and development: The flip side

Abstract

Profile of Prof. Pradosh Nath

Address delivered during the IGF Closing Ceremony

Experimental Economy Camp

Open Video Summit