Centre for Internet and Society

June 2014 Bulletin

praskrishna — 2014-07-14T10:05:11Z

Our newsletter for month of June is below:

Highlights

Nehaa Chaudhari participated in a Stakeholders Consultation organized by the Planning Commission and the Ministry of Human Resource Development in New Delhi, February 21, 2014, on Mapping Institutions of Intellectual Property. She blogged about the outcome in a two-part series. The first part discusses establishment of a National Institute of Intellectual Property Rights and the second part deals with the documents introduced at the Stakeholders’ Consultation for India’s National Programme on Intellectual Property.
For the first time in the history of Indian books, 10 Telugu books by a single author were released under Creative Commons license (CC-BY-SA 3.0). These books will be uploaded on Telugu Wikisource and converted into Unicode (searchable) text. This will ensure that these books are freely read, both online and offline in various formats like PDF, epub, mobi, text, etc. This is a major milestone initiative by CIS-A2K to make the sum of all knowledge in Telugu freely available to all Telugus over the internet.
ICANN published a call for public comments on "Enhancing ICANN Accountability" in the wake of the IANA stewardship transition spearheaded by ICANN and related concerns of ICANN's external and internal accountability mechanisms. CIS submitted its comments.
ICANN sought comments on the existing barriers to Registrar Accreditation and operation and suggestions on how these challenges might be mitigated. CIS sent its comments.
Vodafone, the world’s second largest mobile carrier released a report disclosing to what extent governments can request their customers’ data. Joe Sheehan analyses the report to tell us that if more companies were transparent about the level of government surveillance their customers were being subjected to then the public would press the government for stronger privacy safeguards and protections.

Accessibility and Inclusion

Under a grant from the Hans Foundation we are doing two projects. The first project is on creating a national resource kit of state-wise laws, policies and programmes on issues relating to persons with disabilities in India. We compiled the National Compendium of Policies, Programmes and Schemes for Persons with Disabilities (29 states and 6 union territories). We will be publishing this soon. The draft chapters along with the quarterly reports can be accessed on the project page. The second project is on developing text-to-speech software for 15 Indian languages. The progress made so far in the project can be accessed here.

NVDA and eSpeak

►Monthly Update

Work Report for June (by Suman Dogra, June 30, 2014).

►Other

Blog Entry

For a Truly Inclusive Consultative Process (by Amba Salelkar, June 25, 2014).

Media Coverage

NISH Website to Help the Disabled (The New Indian Express, June 26, 2014).

Access to Knowledge

As part of the Access to Knowledge programme we are doing two projects. The first one (Pervasive Technologies) under a grant from the International Development Research Centre (IDRC) is for research on the complex interplay between pervasive technologies and intellectual property to support intellectual property norms that encourage the proliferation and development of such technologies as a social good. The second one (Wikipedia) under a grant from the Wikimedia Foundation is for the growth of Indic language communities and projects by designing community collaborations and partnerships that recruit and cultivate new editors and explore innovative approaches to building projects.

►Analysis

Mapping Institutions of Intellectual Property (Part A): India's National Programme on Intellectual Property Management (by Nehaa Chaudhari, June 10, 2014). This discusses establishment of a National Institute of Intellectual Property Rights.
Mapping Institutions of Intellectual Property: Part B — India's National Program on Intellectual Property Management (by Nehaa Chaudhari, June 26, 2014). This deals with the documents introduced at the Stakeholders’ Consultation for India’s National Program on Intellectual Property

►Participation in Event

Yogyakarta Meeting on Open Culture and Critical Making (organized by organized by HONF Foundation, Catec, and r0g, June 12 – 15, 2014). Sharath Chandra Ram was a panelist.

Wikipedia

As part of the project grant from the Wikimedia Foundation we have reached out to more than 3500 people across India by organizing more than 100 outreach events and catalysed the release of encyclopaedic and other content under the Creative Commons (CC-BY-3.0) license in four Indian languages (21 books in Telugu, 13 in Odia, 4 volumes of encyclopaedia in Konkani and 6 volumes in Kannada, and 1 book on Odia language history in English).

The following were done this month:

►Articles / Blog Entries

Twitter weekly Curation WeAreWikipedia brings one Wikipedian Every Week (by Diptiman Panigrahi, June 16, 2014).
This Twitter Account Puts a Face to the Unsung Volunteer Editors Behind Wikipedia (by Subhashish Panigrahi, Global Voices, June 18, 2014).
Odia Language gets a new Unicode Font Converter (by Subhashish Panigrahi, June 20, 2014).
Ten Telugu Books Re-released Under CC-BY-SA 3.0 License (by Rahmanuddin Shaik, June 22, 2014).

►Events Organized

Kannada Wikipedia Workshop for Kannada Book Lovers (co-organized by Navakarnataka Publications, Bangalore, June 4, 2014). Dr. U.B.Pavanaja conducted the workshop.
Knowledge and Openness in the Digital Era (co-organized by Andhra Loyola College and CIS, Vijaywada, June 24-25, 2014).

►News and Media Coverage
CIS gave its inputs to the following media coverage:

Knowledge and Openness in the Digital Era: Coverage in Sakshi (Sakshi, June 25, 2014).
Knowledge and Openness in the Digital Era: Coverage in Enadu (Enadu, June 25, 2014).
Loyola Faculty Enlightened About Open Edn Resources (The New Indian Express, June 25, 2014).

Internet Governance

Freedom of Expression

As part of our project on Freedom of Expression (funded through a grant from the MacArthur Foundation) to study the restrictions placed on freedom of expression online by the Indian government and contribute to the debates around Internet governance and freedom of expression at forums like ICANN, ITU, IGF, WSIS, etc., we bring you the following outputs:

►Submissions

CIS Comments: Enhancing ICANN Accountability (by Geetha Hariharan, June 10, 2014).
Comments to ICANN Supporting the DNS Industry in Underserved Regions (by Jyoti Panday, June 13, 2014).

►Blog Entries

Free Speech and Contempt of Court: Overview (by Gautam Bhatia, June 8, 2014).
Multi-stakeholder Models of Internet Governance within States: Why, Who & How? (by Geetha Hariharan, June 16, 2014).
UN Human Rights Council Urged to Protect Human Rights Online (by Geetha Hariharan, June 19, 2014).
Free Speech and Source Protection for Journalists (by Gautam Bhatia, June 19, 2014).
WSIS+10 High Level Event: A Bird's Eye Report (by Geetha Hariharan, June 20, 2014).
Understanding IANA Stewardship Transition (by Smarika Kumar, June 22, 2014).
IANA Transition: Suggestions for Process Design (by Smarika Kumar, June 22, 2014).
Free Speech and Civil Defamation (by Gautam Bhatia, June 25, 2014).
CIS Policy Brief: IANA Transition Fundamentals & Suggestions for Process Design (by Geetha Hariharan and Smarika Kumar, June 22, 2014).
An Evidence based Intermediary Liability Policy Framework: Workshop at IGF (by Jyoti Panday, June 30, 2014).

►FOEX Live
We are also posting a selection of news from across India implicating online freedom of expression and use of digital technology: June 8 – 15, 2014 and June 16 – 23, 2014.

Privacy

As part of our Surveillance and Freedom: Global Understandings and Rights Development (SAFEGUARD) project with Privacy International we are engaged in enhancing respect for the right to privacy in developing countries. We have produced the following outputs during the month:

►Blog Entries

A Review of the Functioning of the Cyber Appellate Tribunal and Adjudicatory Officers under the IT Act (by Divij Joshi, June 16, 2014).
Content Removal on Facebook — A Case of Privatised Censorship? (by Jessamine Mathew, June 16, 2014).
Vodafone Report Explains Government Access to Customer Data (by Joe Sheehan, June 16, 2014).

►Event Organized

Privacy and Surveillance Roundtable (co-organized with the Cellular Operators Association of India and the Council for Fair Business Practices, June 28, 2014, IMC Building, Churchgate, Mumbai).

►Participation in Events

Commonwealth Domain Name System Forum 2014 (organized by the CTO, hosted by ICANN, and supported by Nominet and the Public Interest Registry, London, June 19, 2014). Pranesh Prakash was a panelist. Jyoti Panday participated in the event.
Research Advisory Network Meeting (organized by the Global Commission on Internet Governance’s Research Advisory Network, OECD Headquarters, Paris, June 26-27, 2014). Sunil Abraham was a panelist.

►News & Media Coverage

CIS gave its inputs to the following media coverage:

Right to be forgotten poses a legal dilemma in India (by Leslie D' Monte, Livemint, June 5, 2014).
Stay connected even when you go underground (by Sunita Sekhar, The Hindu, June 12, 2014).

Digital Humanities

CIS is building research clusters in the field of Digital Humanities. The Digital will be used as a way of unpacking the debates in humanities and social sciences and look at the new frameworks, concepts and ideas that emerge in our engagement with the digital. The clusters aim to produce and document new conversations and debates that shape the contours of Digital Humanities in Asia:

►Blog Entries

Not a Goodbye; More a ‘Come Again’: Thoughts on being Research Director at a moment of transition (by Nishant Shah, June 15, 2014).
Living in the Archival Moment (by P.P. Sneha, June 19, 2014).

Telecom

CIS is involved in promoting access and accessibility to telecommunications services and resources and has provided inputs to ongoing policy discussions and consultation papers published by TRAI. It has prepared reports on unlicensed spectrum and accessibility of mobile phones for persons with disabilities and also works with the USOF to include funding projects for persons with disabilities in its mandate:

►Newspaper Column

A Great Start (for the Modi government) (by Shyam Ponappa, Business Standard and Organizing India Blogspot, June 5, 2014).

About CIS

The Centre for Internet and Society is a non-profit research organization that works on policy issues relating to freedom of expression, privacy, accessibility for persons with disabilities, access to knowledge and IPR reform, and openness (including open government, FOSS, open standards, etc.), and engages in academic research on digital natives and digital humanities.

► Follow us elsewhere

Twitter: https://twitter.com/CISA2K
Facebook group: https://www.facebook.com/cisa2k
Visit us at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/India_Access_To_Knowledge
E-mail: a2k@cis-india.org

► Support Us

Please help us defend consumer / citizen rights on the Internet! Write a cheque in favour of ‘The Centre for Internet and Society’ and mail it to us at No. 194, 2nd ‘C’ Cross, Domlur, 2nd Stage, Bengaluru – 5600 71

► Request for Collaboration:

We invite researchers, practitioners, and theoreticians, both organisationally and as individuals, to collaboratively engage with Internet and society and improve our understanding of this new field. To discuss the research collaborations, write to Sunil Abraham, Executive Director, at sunil@cis-india.org or Nishant Shah, Director – Research, at nishant@cis-india.org. To discuss collaborations on Indic language Wikipedia, write to T. Vishnu Vardhan, Programme Director, A2K, at vishnu@cis-india.org.

CIS is grateful to its primary donor the Kusuma Trust founded by Anurag Dikshit and Soma Pujari, philanthropists of Indian origin for its core funding and support for most of its projects. CIS is also grateful to its other donors, Wikimedia Foundation, Ford Foundation, Privacy International, UK, Hans Foundation, MacArthur Foundation, and IDRC for funding its various projects.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/about/newsletters/june-2014-bulletin

Access to Knowledge Bulletin — June 2014

praskrishna — 2014-10-04T15:31:04Z

The Access to Knowledge (Wikipedia) newsletter for the month of June 2014:

Telugu Books Re-release Under Creative Commons License

Ten Telugu Books Re-released Under CC-BY-SA 3.0 License (by Rahmanuddin Shaik, June 22, 2014). For the first time in the history of Indian books, 10 Telugu books by a single author were released under Creative Commons license (CC-BY-SA 3.0) on June 22, 2014 at 10 a.m. at Golden Threshold, Abids, Hyderabad.
CIS-A2K has collaborated with Telugu Wikipedians in convincing Indu Gnaana Vedika to re-release 10 of their books under CC-BY-SA 3.0 license which is compatible with Wikipedia and other Wikimedia projects. Unlike the predominant digitization efforts (which only makes scanned images available), these books will be uploaded on Telugu Wikisource and converted into Unicode (searchable) text. This will ensure that these books are freely read, both online and offline in various formats like PDF, epub, mobi, text, etc. This is a major milestone initiative by CIS-A2K to make the sum of all knowledge in Telugu freely available to all Telugus over the internet and is part of its Telugu language area plan.

Article

This Twitter Account Puts a Face to the Unsung Volunteer Editors Behind Wikipedia (by Subhashish Panigrahi, Global Voices, June 18, 2014).

Blog Entries

Twitter weekly Curation WeAreWikipedia brings one Wikipedian Every Week (by Diptiman Panigrahi, June 16, 2014).
Odia Language gets a new Unicode Font Converter (by Subhashish Panigrahi, June 20, 2014).

Events Organized

Kannada Wikipedia Workshop for Kannada Book Lovers (co-organized by Navakarnataka Publications, Bangalore, June 4, 2014). Dr. U.B.Pavanaja conducted the workshop.
Knowledge and Openness in the Digital Era (co-organized by Andhra Loyola College and CIS, Vijaywada, June 24-25, 2014).

News and Media Coverage

CIS gave its inputs to the following media coverage:

Knowledge and Openness in the Digital Era: Coverage in Sakshi (June 25, 2014).
Knowledge and Openness in the Digital Era: Coverage in Enadu (June 25, 2014).
Loyola Faculty Enlightened About Open Edn Resources (The New Indian Express, June 25, 2014).

Wikimedia Foundation has funded A2K to anchor the growth of Wikimedia movement in India. The A2K team consists of six members, four based in Bangalore: T. Vishnu Vardhan, Dr. U.B. Pavanaja, Subhashish Panigrahi and Rahmanuddin Shaikh. One team member Nitika Tandon is based in Delhi. We also have one Advisor Dr. Tejaswini Niranjana working with us. Archives of our newsletters can be accessed here. Wikipedians from various communities can request for outreach programs, technical bugs, logistics-merchandize and media, public relations and communications here.

About CIS

Follow us elsewhere

Twitter: https://twitter.com/CISA2K
CIS group on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/groups/cis.india
Visit us at: https://cis-india.org

Request for Collaboration:

We invite researchers, practitioners, and theoreticians, both organisationally and as individuals, to collaboratively engage with Internet and society and improve our understanding of this new field. To discuss the research collaborations, write to Sunil Abraham, Executive Director, at sunil@cis-india.org or Nishant Shah, Director – Research, at nishant@cis-india.org. To discuss collaborations on Indic language wikipedia, write to T. Vishnu Vardhan, Programme Director, A2K, at vishnu@cis-india.org.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/about/newsletters/access-to-knowledge-bulletin-june-2014

PMA Policy and COAI Recommendations

dipankar — 2014-07-02T06:45:22Z

Introduction

The Ministry of Communications and Information Technology on the 10th of February, 2012 released a notification [1] in the Official Gazette outlining the Preferential Market Access [2] Policy for Domestically Manufactured Electronic Goods 2012. The Policy is applicable to procurement of telecom products by Government Ministries/Departments and to such electronics that had been deemed to having security concerns, thus making the policy applicable to private bodies in the latter half. The Notification reasoned that preferential access was to be given to domestically manufactured electronic goods predominantly for security reasons. Each Ministry or Department was to notify the products that had security implications, with reasons, after which the notified agencies would be required to procure the same from domestic manufacturers. This policy was also meant to be applicable to even procurement of electronic goods by Government Ministries/Agencies for Governmental purposes except Defence. Each Ministry would be required to notify its own percentage of such procurement, though it could not be less than 30%, and also had to specify the Value Addition that had to be made to a particular product to qualify it as a domestically manufactured product, with the policy again specifying the minimum standards. The policy was also meant for procurement of electronic hardware as a service from Managed Service Providers (MSPs).

The procurement was to be done as according to the policies of the each procuring agency. The tender was to be apportioned according to the procurement percentage notified and the preference part was to be allotted to the domestic manufacturer at the lowest bid price. If there were no bidders who were domestic manufacturers or if the tender was not severable, then it was to be awarded to the Foreign Manufacturer and the percentage adjusted as against other electronic procurement for that period.

Telecom equipment that qualifies as domestically manufactured telecom products for preferential market access include: encryption and UTM platforms, Core/Edge/Enterprise routers, Managed leased line network equipment, Ethernet Switches, IP based Soft Switches, Media gateways, Wireless/Wireline PABXs, CPE, 2G/3G Modems, Leased-line Modems, Set Top Boxes, SDH/Carrier Ethernet/Packet Optical Transport Eqiupments, DWDN systems, GPON equipments, Digital Cross connects, small size 2G/3G GSM based Base Station Systems, LTE based broadband wireless access systems, Wi-Fi based broadband wireless access systems, microwave radio systems, software defined radio cognitive radio systems, repeaters, IBS, and distributed antenna system, satellite based systems, copper access systems, network management systems, security and surveillance communication systems (video and sensors based), optical fiber cable.

The Policy also mentioned the creation of a self-certification system to declare domestic value addition to the vendor. The checks would be done by the laboratories accredited by the Department of Information Technology. The policy was to be in force for a period of 10 years and any dispute concerning the nature of product was to be referred to the Department of Information Technology.

International and Domestic Response to the Policy

There was a large scale opposition, usually from international sectors, towards the mooting of this policy. Besides business houses, even organizations like those of the United States Trades Representatives criticized the policy as being harmful to the global market and in violation of the World Trade Organization Guidelines.[3] Criticism also poured in from domestic bodies in terms of recommendations towards modification of the policy largely on three grounds: (i) the high domestic value addition requirement and the method of calculation of the same, (ii) the lack of a link between manufacturing and security and (iii) application of the policy to the private sector.

The Cellular Operations Association of India (COAI) in a letter dated March 15, 2012 to the Secretary of the Department Technology and Chairman of the Telecom Commission expressed its views on the telecom manufacturing in the country.[4]The COAI stated that such a development had to be done realistically and holistically so that the whole eco-system was developed as a comprehensive whole. In that regard it also forwarded a study that had been commissioned by COAI and conducted by M/s. Booz and Company titled “Telecom Manufacturing Policy – Developing an Actionable Roadmap”. The report was a comprehensive study of the telecom industry and outlined the challenges and opportunities that lay on its development trajectory. It also talked about Government involvement in the development process. The Report while citing the market share of Indian Telecom Industry which would be around 3% [5] of the Global Market highlighted the fact that no country could be self-sufficient in technology. It further talked about the development of local clusters in order to cut costs and encourage manufacturing, while ensuring that the PMA Policy was consistent with the WTO Guidelines. It further recommended opening up of foreign investments and making capital available to ensure growth of innovation. Finally it highlighted the lack of a connection between manufacturing and security and instead stressed upon proper certification, checks and development of a comprehensive CIIP framework across all sensitive networks for security purposes.

In a further letter to the Joint Secretary of the Department of Information and Technology dated April 25, 2012 the COAI expressed some reservations concerning the draft guidelines that had been published along with the notification.[6] While stressing upon the fact that a higher value addition would be impossible with the lack of basic manufacturing capabilities for the development of technological units, it also highlighted the need to redefine Bill of Materials which had been left ambiguous and subject to exploitation. It further highlighted the fact that allowing every Ministry to make its own specifications would lead to inconsistent definitions and an administrative challenge and hence such matters should be handled by a Central Body. Furthermore it opined that the calculation of BOMs and the Value Additions should be done using the concept of substantial transformation as has been given in the Booz Study. Furthermore, while discouraging the use of disincentives, it stated that one individual Ministry should be in charge of specifying such incentives to avoid confusion and for the sake of ease of business.

In another letter to a Member of the Department of Telecommunications dated July 12, 2012 the COAI stressed upon the futility of having high value additions as the same was impossible under the present scenario.[7] There was a lack of manufacturing sector which had to be comprehensively developed backed by fiscal incentives and comprehensive policies. In spite of that, it stressed that no country could become self-reliant and that such policies, like the PMA, were reminiscent of the “license and permit raj” era. It further said that such policies should be consistent with WTO Guidelines and should not give undue preference to domestic manufacturers to the detriment of other manufacturers. Countering the security aspect, it said that the same had been addressed by the DoT License Amendment of May 31, 2011 whereby all equipments on the network would have to comply with the “Safe to Connect” standard, and stressed upon the lack of any link between manufacturing and security. Furthermore for calculation of Value Addition it suggested an alternative to the method proposed by the Government as the same would lead to disclosures of sensitive commercial information which were contained in the BOMs. The COAI said that the three stages as laid out in the Substantial Transformation (as mentioned in the Booz Study) should be used for calculating the VA. It made several proposals to develop the telecom manufacturing industry in India including provision of fiscal incentives, development of telecom clusters and comprehensive policies which led to harmonization with laws and creation of SEZs among other such benefits.

In October 2012 the Government released a draft notification notifying products due to security consideration in furtherance of the PMA Policy.[8] The document outlined the minimum PMA and VA specification for a range of products. It also stated several security reasons for pursuing such a policy and stated that India had to be completely self-reliant for its active telecom products. It also contained data on the predicted growth of the telecom market in India. The COAI thereafter released a document commenting upon the draft notification of the Government.[9]

Besides highlighting the fact that the COAI still had not received a response to its former comments, it again stressed upon the lack of a link between security and manufacturing. It reiterated its point on the impossibility of a complete self-reliance on any nation’s part, and stressed upon the need of involving other stakeholders in the promulgation of such policies. It also made changes to the notified list of equipments, reclassifying it according to technology and only listing equipments which had volumes. Furthermore it also suggested changes towards the calculation of value addition to include materials sourced from local suppliers, in-house assemblage to be considered local material and the calculation to be done for complete order and not for each item in the order. It further recommended a study be conducted and the industry be involved while predicting demands as such were dated and needed revision. The Government thereafter released a revised notification[10] on October 5, 2012 but it did not contain much of the commented changes that the COAI had proposed.

Thereafter in April 2013, the DeitY released draft guidelines[11] for providing preference to domestically manufactured electronic products in Government Procurement in further of the second part of the PMA Policy. The guidelines besides containing definitions to several terms such as BOM also prescribed a minimum of 20% domestic procurement while leaving the specifications onto individual Ministries. It recommended the establishment of a technical committee by the concerned Ministry or Department that would recommend value addition to products. It followed a BOM based calculation of Value Addition while leaving the matter of certification to be dealt by DeitY certified laboratories that are notified for such purposes by the concerned Ministry/Department. DeitY was the nodal ministry for monitoring the implementation of the policy while particular monitoring was left to each Ministry or Department concerned. Among the annexures were indicative lists of generic and telecom products and a format for Self Certification regarding Domestic Value Addition in an Electronic Product.

The COAI thereafter released a revised draft containing its own comments on April 15, 2013.[12] The COAI pointed out faults in the definition of BOM. It highlighted the difficulty in splitting R&D according to countries, and also stressed upon the impractical usage of BOM in calculation of value addition as the same was confidential business information. As it had already suggested earlier, it reiterated the usage of the Substantial Transformation process for the calculation of Value Addition. While removing the lists of equipments mentioned, it further pointed out that the disqualification in the format for self-certification would be a very harsh disincentive and would result in driving away manufacturers. It suggested that there should be incentives for compliance instead.

The COAI along with the Association of Unified Telecom Service Providers of India sent a letter dated January 24, 2013 to the Secretary, DoT containing their inputs on Draft List of Security Sensitive Telecom Products for Preferential Market Access (PMA).[13] It again stressed upon the fact that security and manufacturing were not related and that the security aspect had been dealt by the “Safe to Connect” requirement mandated by the DoT License Amendment. It talked of the impossibility of arriving at VA figures until the same is defined to internationally accepted norms. Further it opined that if the Government had security concerns it should consider VA at a network level in the configurations as would be deployed in the network or its segments rather at element or subsystem levels as the latter would leave too many calculations open and the procurement entities will find it very difficult to ensure if they meet the PMA requirement or not. It further stressed upon the need to comply with WTO Guidelines while stressing upon the need to pay heed to certification standards than pursue the unavailable link between manufacturing and security through a PMA Policy. Finally it suggested a grouping of telecom products for the policy based on technology rather than individual products.

Pursuant to a Round Table Conference Organized by the Department of Information and Technology, AUSPI and COAI sent another letter dated April 15, 2013 to the Secretary, Department of Information and Technology.[14] It reiterated several points that both the AUSPI and COAI had been suggesting to the Government on the Telecom Manufacturing Policy. It cited the examples of other manufacturing nations to reiterate the fact that no country could be completely self-reliant in manufacturing electronics and such positions would only lead to creation of an environment that would not be conducive to global business. It further stressed upon the need to change the manner of calculation of VA while highlighting the fact that every Department should notify its list of products having security implications and the list of telecom equipment should be deleted from the draft guidelines being issued by DeitY to ensure better implementation.

A major change came in on July 8, 2013 when the Prime Minister’s Office made a press release withdrawing the PMA policy for review and withholding all the notifications that had been issued in that regard.[15] It said that he revised proposal will incorporate a detailed provision for project / product / sector specific security standards, alternative modes of security certification, and a roadmap for buildup of domestic testing capacity. It further noted that the revised proposal on PMA in the private sector for security related products will not have domestic manufacturing requirements, percentage based or otherwise and that the revised proposal will incorporate a mechanism for a centralised clearing house mechanism for all notifications under the PMA Policy.

The COAI thereafter on November 7, 2013 sent a letter to the DoT containing feedback on the list of items slated for Government procurement.[16] It noted that there were 23 products on which PMA was applicable. It pointed out that there were no local manufacturers for many of the products notified. It also asked the Government to take steps to ensure that fiscal incentives were given to encourage manufacturing sector which was beset by several costs such as landing costs which acted as impediments to its development. It stressed upon the tiered development of the industry needed to ensure that a holistic and comprehensive growth is attained which would result in manufacturing of local products. It requested that the Government "focus on right enablers (incentives, ecosystem, infrastructure, taxation) as the outcome materializes once all of these converge."

The COAI sent a further letter dated November 13, 2013 to the DoT concerning the investment required in the telecom manufacturing industry.[17] It noted the projected required investment of 152bn USD in the telecom sector and that the Government had projected that 92% of the investment would have to come from the Private Sector. COAI, while stressing upon the need of the Government and the Private Industry to work in tandem with each other, suggested that the Government devise methods to attract investments in the telecom sectors from international telecom players and that the Telecom Equipment Manufacturing Council meet to review and revise methods for attracting such investments.

Pursuant to the PMO directive, DeitY released a revised PMA Policy on the 23rd of December, 2014.[18] While there have been a few major changes, not all of recommendations by various bodies have been adhered to.[19] The major changes in the revised policy included the exemption of the private sector from the policy and the removal of PMA Policy to equipments notified for security reasons. The manner of calculation of the domestic value addition has not been changed though there has been a reduction in the percentage of value addition needed to qualify a product as domestic product. Another addition has been of a two-tiered implementation mechanism for the Policy. Tier-I includes a National Planning and Monitoring Council for Electronic Products which would design a 10-year roadmap for the implementation of the policy including notification of the products and subsequent procurement. Under Tier-II, the Ministries and Departments will be issuing notifications specifying products and the technical qualifications of the same, after approval by the Council. The former notifications under the 2012 Policy, including the notification of 23 telecom products by Department of Telecom,[20] are still valid until revised further.[21]

[1]. No. 8(78)/2010-IPHW. Available at http://www.dot.gov.in/sites/default/files/5-10-12.PDF (accessed 03 June, 2014).

[2]. Preferential Market Access

[3]. See The PMA Debate, DataQuest at http://www.dqindia.com/dataquest/feature/191001/the-pma-debate/page/1 (accessed June 2014).

[4]. The letter is available at http://www.coai.com/Uploads/MediaTypes/Documents/letter-to-dit-on-pma-notification.pdf (accessed June, 2014).

[5]. Around $17bn.

[6]. The letter is available at http://www.coai.com/Uploads/MediaTypes/Documents/letter-to-dit-on-pma-notification.pdf (accessed June, 2014).

[7]. The letter is available at http://www.coai.com/Uploads/MediaTypes/Documents/coai-to-dot-on-enhancing-domestic-manufacturing-of-telecom-equipment-bas.pdf (accessed June, 2014).

[8]. The notification no. 18-07/2010-IP can be found at http://www.coai.com/Uploads/MediaTypes/Documents/DoT-draft-notification-on-Policy-for-preference-to-domestically-manufactured-telecom-products-in-procurement-October-2012.pdf (accessed June, 2014).

[9]. The commented COAI draft can be found at http://www.coai.com/Uploads/MediaTypes/Documents/Annexure-1-Comments-on-draft-notification-by-DoT.pdf (accessed June, 2014).

[10]. Available at http://www.coai.com/Uploads/MediaTypes/Documents/dots-notification-on-telecom-equipment-oct-5,-2012.pdf (accessed June, 2014).

[11]. The draft guidelines can be found at http://www.coai.com/Uploads/MediaTypes/Documents/pma_draft-govt-procurement-guidelines-april-2013.pdf (accessed June, 2014).

[12]. The COAI commented draft can be found at http://www.coai.com/Uploads/MediaTypes/Documents/pma-draft-security-guidelines-15-april-2013.pdf (accessed June, 2014).

[13]. The letter can be found at http://www.coai.com/Uploads/MediaTypes/Documents/jac-007-to-dot-on-Januarys-list-of-telecom-products-final.pdf (accessed June, 2014).

[14]. The letter can be found at http://www.coai.com/Uploads/MediaTypes/Documents/jac-to-moc-on-pma.pdf (accessed June, 2014).

[15]. The press release can be found at http://www.coai.com/Uploads/MediaTypes/Documents/pmo-on-pma.pdfhttp://www.coai.com/Uploads/MediaTypes/Documents/pmo-on-pma.pdf (accessed June, 2014).

[16]. The letter can be found at http://www.coai.com/Uploads/MediaTypes/Documents/COAI-letter-to-DoT-on-Feedback-on-List-of-Items-for-Govt-Procurement.pdf (accessed June, 2014).

[17]. The letter can be found at http://www.coai.com/Uploads/MediaTypes/Documents/COAI-letter-to-DoT-on-Investments-Required-(TEMC)-Nov%2013-2013.pdf (accessed June, 2014).

[18]. The Notification No. 33(3)/2013-IPHW can be found at http://deity.gov.in/sites/upload_files/dit/files/Notification_Preference_DMEPs_Govt_%20Proc_23_12_2013.pdf (accessed June, 2014).

[19]. For more information, see http://electronicsb2b.com/policy-corner/revised-preferential-market-access-policy/# (accessed June, 2014).

[20]. The notification has been mentioned and discussed above.

[21]. A list of notifications dealing with electronic products except telecom products can be found on the website of DeitY at http://deity.gov.in/esdm/pma (accessed June, 2014).

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/pma-policy-and-coai-recommendations

For a Truly Inclusive Consultative Process

salelkar — 2014-07-02T04:44:14Z

At Inclusive Planet we attempt to engage as many people with disabilities as possible with the consultative process which precedes the enactment of legislation and policy, and we are very happy with the NDA Government’s positive steps in putting out all proposed amendments to the public at large for feedback.

Some of the areas on which public comment has been sought is the proposed repeal and reenactment of the Juvenile Justice Act, the amendments of three labour laws viz. the Factories Act, the Minimum Wages Act, and the Prevention of Child Labour Act, and the Railways Ministry has asked for comments towards the formulation of the Rail Budget. All of these are extremely key legislations and in fact there is a lot to contribute in terms of suggesting enabling provisions towards accessibility and recognizing potential discrimination against persons with disabilities.

Unfortunately, the disabilities sector is faced with two major problems when it comes to this process. One is that the material which is uploaded onto the respective government websites is inaccessible for screen readers. Many of these are large documents which are essentially scanned copies of the printed notifications – for example, the Factories Act press release is now available in an easier format than the original version which had been uploaded. The websites themselves are not easy to navigate and are not screen reader friendly. Efforts are on by the newly launched India Access Hub to convert these documents into an accessible format for contributors and discussions on their forum, however, the process seems tedious and there is no reason why the Government bodies cannot ensure that the best possible document, screen reader compatibility wise, is not made available to the public. This would ensure that precious time is not consumed in the process of making the document accessible.

Which is closely linked to the second issue – the comments and suggestions which have been called for are required within a short period of time – between 15 days (Juvenile Justice Act) to 30 days (all three labour legislations) and while the advertisement for the Railway Budget appears to have been put out on the weekend of the 21^st of June, since the budget itself is slated to be tabled on the 8^th of July by recent media reports, feedback is realistically required within this week itself. The process becomes exclusionary on account of these narrow deadlines – the presumption being made is that specialized agencies with able-bodied representatives can revert speedily with their feedback. The disability sector is quite keen on responding to all proposed legislation, as the provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities demand compliance in terms of non discrimination and access across all sectors. It is also difficult to respond with such momentum considering that many stakeholders are not online, and for some, processing and expressing viewpoints may take longer than the average person, not to mention the importance of making this information available in a simplified format. Ideally, any person with impairment should be able to express their views and be considered as a stakeholder; however, with the barriers in place which prevent effective access and accommodation to the expression of views, 15% of the population may effectively be disabled to that extent.

This is by no means a new complaint – the lack of accessibility of government documentation has been rampant and raised before previous Governments as well – however, the hope is that with the NDA Government’s manifesto focus on using information technology to alleviate the concerns of persons with disabilities, that the mandate for all Government Websites to be compliant with the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0 will be implemented with immediate effect, and in the meantime that Government Officials be instructed to upload fully accessible documents to their websites. It would also not be out of place to institute a common information portal for all documents open for public consultation to make such access easier for all.

There should never be any bar on access to information: particularly that which affords an opportunity to the public to be heard and considered. It is sincerely hoped that the new Government takes a much needed positive step in this direction.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/accessibility/blog/for-a-truly-inclusive-consultative-process

Loyola Faculty Enlightened About Open Edn Resources

praskrishna — 2014-07-02T04:50:48Z

“The tremendous changes in the digital technology have introduced the newage faculty to certain open and collaborative tools like Wiki, termed as open educational resources (OER),” Centre for Internet and Society (CIS) progarmme director T Vishnu Vardhan has said.

The article published in the New Indian Express on June 25, 2014 can be read here. T. Vishnu Vardhan gave his inputs.

Adressing a two-day national workshop on ‘“Openness of Knowledge in Digital Era’ at Andhra Loyola College here Tuesday, Vishnu Vardhan stressed that within this context of digital era, openness and transparency gained newer significance, which creates a pre-condition for the transformation of society into knowledge society.

Pointing out that many of the websites were offering opportunity to access the information in almost all Indian languages and with everyone making use of Wikipedia as an OER tool, he explained the changes in the digital technology and also introduced the faculty to certain open and collaborative tools like Wikipedia.

Besides to giving a historical overview of the free and open source software movement, mass collaboration on the internet, details about Wikipedia authors and users, the participants were educated about using the simple technological tools like QR code to create increased and seamless access to knowledge using pervasive technologies like mobile phones.

Graduate and postgraduate teaching faculty from various streams partcipated in the workshop meant to discuss and learn new development in the fields of knowledge sharing and access in digital era.

CIS programme officer Rahimanuddin Shaik, jounalist Malladi Kameswara Rao, ALC principal Fr Kishore, college vice-principal Fr Anil kumaralso participated.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/news/the-new-indian-express-june-25-2014-loyola-faculty-enlightened-about-open-edn-resources

Ten Telugu Books Re-released Under CC-BY-SA 3.0 License

rahim — 2014-07-08T05:29:39Z

For the first time in the history of Indian books, 10 Telugu books by a single author were released under Creative Commons license (CC-BY-SA 3.0) on June 22, 2014 at 10 a.m. at Golden Threshold, Abids, Hyderabad.

The event was organised by the Centre for Internet and Society's Access to Knowledge (CIS-A2K) team.

CIS-A2K has collaborated with Telugu Wikipedians in convincing Indu Gnaana Vedika to re-release 10 of their books under CC-BY-SA 3.0 license which is compatible with Wikipedia and other Wikimedia projects. Unlike the predominant digitization efforts (which only makes scanned images available), these books will be uploaded on Telugu Wikisource (www .te .wikisource .org) and converted into Unicode (searchable) text. This will ensure that these books are freely read, both online and offline in various formats like PDF, epub, mobi, text, etc. This is a major milestone initiative by CIS-A2K to make the sum of all knowledge in Telugu freely available to all Telugus over the internet and is part of its Telugu language area plan.

Telugu Wikipedia has been in existence for 10 years and has 57000 articles on various topics. Telugu Wikisource is one of the sister projects of Wikipedia which has more than 9600 pages and 100 books, it is the largest online Unicode book library available today at the service of Telugu people.

The Programme

The event started with invocation by Indu Gnaana Vedika followed by introduction of Chief Guest and Guest of Honour.

The patron of Indu Gnaana Vedika, Sri Sri Sri Prabodhananda Yogeeswarulu presided over as the chief guest and N Rahamthulla, long time wikipedian and Special collector, Srisailam project, Kurnool was the guest of honour.

Addressing the gathering, Prabodhananda emphasised on the importance of availability of knowledge in ones own mother language, and also why knowledge should not be confined to books alone, but should be brought onto various platforms, internet being one among them. This would not only ensure wider reach for the books, but also enable the language to survive in the fast changing era.

Then, a video interview of guest of honour, Rahamthulla was played, where he spoke about creation of new technical jargon in ones own mother language and how Telugu was being used as administrative language in his office among his subordinates.

Rahamthulla also spoke on the practices he brought into in his own office to adopt mother language at work and gave out suggestions that would effectively help all in adoption of mother language at work places with Telugu as an example.

This was followed by Veeven’s talk on “End-User’s perspective of free licenses”, where he spoke about importance of open content, free software and free licenses.

Then, program director of CIS-A2K, T. Vishnu Vardhan spoke about the importance of creative commons licenses in the context of Indian languages in Internet. In his speech, Vishnu informed that there is enormous literature and content available in Indian languages which is unusable because of ignorance of licenses. He listed out guidelines that would help writers to have their work reach millions through releasing it under a free license.

Then, in a formal manner, the copyright holder of the books signed on the documents, specifying that the books are released under CC-BY-SA 3.0 license. In the tea break that followed, participants enquired experts on free licenses.


Above: Prabodhananda handing over the signed agreement to Vishnu Vardhan (by Rahmanuddin Shaik, CC-BY-SA 3.0 License)

A Wikisource demonstration by Rahmanuddin Shaik was shown followed by Q & A session.

Then there was a panel discussion on “CC licenses” which saw participation from one each of a free license expert, writer and end user. This brought in awareness and more deeper thought into bringing in more literature in Telugu into CC licenses.

An outcome of the event was:

N Rahamthulla promised to re-release his books under CC license.
Mandali Buddhaprasad, Deputy Speaker, Andhra Pradesh legislative assembly, gave permission to release 4 of his books under CC license.
Several other writers have come forward to re-release their books under free licenses.

Given below is the certificate signed by Sri Sri Sri Acharya Yogeeshwarulu giving permission to publish his works under CC-BY-SA 3.0 License:

For additional details of the event, click here.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/openness/blog-old/ten-telugu-books-re-released-under-cc-by-sa-license

Odia Language gets a new Unicode Font Converter

subha — 2014-07-02T09:59:31Z

Recently, I worked on designing a font encoding converter with a fellow Wikimedian Manoj Sahukar. We worked by taking the code of a converter that was made three years back and made it work for two fonts AkrutiOriSarala99 and AkrutiOriSarala that are used by the media industry for printing and publishing.

This converter can now convert text typed using a modified ISCII based encoding and help generating Unicode text. Based on this learning from this I created another such converter for one such popular font Shreelipi that is used by Government of Odisha's official documentation including a magazine. The following is a summary of the usability of the converters:

It’s been over a decade since Unicode standard was made available for Odia script. Odia is a language spoken by roughly 33 million people in Eastern India, and is one of the many official languages of India. Since its release, it has been challenging to get more content on Unicode, the reason being many who are used to other non-Unicode standards are not willing to make the move to Unicode. This created the need for a simple converter that could convert text once typed in various non-Unicode fonts to Unicode. This could enrich Wikipedia and other Wikimedia projects by converting previously typed content and making it more widely available on the internet. The Odia language recently got such a converter, making it possible to convert two of the most popular fonts among media professionals (AkrutiOriSarala99 and AkrutiOriSarala) into Unicode.

All of the non-Latin scripts came under one umbrella after the rollout of Unicode. Since then, many Unicode compliant fonts have been designed and the open source community has put forth effort to produce good quality fonts. Though contribution to Unicode compliant portals like Wikipedia increased, the publication and printing industries in India were still stuck with the pre-existing ASCII and ISCII standards (Indian font encoding standard based on ASCII). Modified ASCII fonts that were used as typesets for newspapers, books, magazines and other printed documents still exist in these industries. This created a massive amount of content that is not searchable or reproducible because it is not Unicode compliant. The difference in Unicode font is the existence of separate glyphs for the Indic script characters along with the Latin glyphs that are actually replaced by the Indic characters. So, when someone does not have a particular ASCII standard font installed, the typed text looks absurd (see Mojibake), however text typed using one Unicode font could be read using another Unicode font in a different operating system. Most of the ASCII fonts that are used for typing Indic languages are proprietary and many individuals/organizations even use pirated software and fonts. Having massive amounts of content available in multiple standards and little content in Unicode created a large gap for many languages including Odia. Until all of this content gets converted to Unicode to make it searchable, sharable and reusable, then the knowledge base created will remain inaccessible. Some of the Indic languages fortunately have more and more contributors creating Unicode content. There is a need to work on technological development to convert non-Unicode content to Unicode and open it up for people to use.

There are a few different kinds of fonts used by media and publication houses, the most popular one is Akruti. Two other popular standards are LeapOffice and Shreelipi. Akruti software comes bundled with a variety of typefaces and an encoding engine that works well in Adobe Acrobat Creator, the most popular DTP software package. Industry professionals are comfortable using it for its reputation and seamless printing. The problem of migrating content from other standards to Unicode arose when the Odia Wikimedia community started reaching out to these industry professionals. Apparently authors, government employees and other professional were more comfortable using one of the standards mentioned above. All of these people type using either a generic popular standard, Modular, or a universal standard, Inscript. Fortunately, the former is now incorporated into Mediawiki‘s Universal Language Selector (ULS) and the latter is in the process of getting added to ULS. Once this is done, many folks could start contributing to Wikipedia easily. Content that has been typed in various modified ASCII fonts include encyclopedias that could help grow content on Wikisource and Wikiquote. All of these need to be converted to Unicode. The non-profit group Srujanika first initiated a project to build a converter for conversion of two different Akruti fonts: AkrutiOriSarala99 and OR-TT Sarala. The former being outdated and the other being less popular. The Rebati 1 converter which was built by the Srujanika team was not being maintained and was more of an orphan project.
Above: Akruti Sarala - Unicode Odia converter user manual. Image credit: Subhashish Panigrahi, CC-BY-3.0

There are a few different kinds of fonts used by media and publication houses, the most popular one is Akruti. Two other popular standards are LeapOffice and Shreelipi. Akruti software comes bundled with a variety of typefaces and an encoding engine that works well in Adobe Acrobat Creator, the most popular DTP software package. Industry professionals are comfortable using it for its reputation and seamless printing. The problem of migrating content from other standards to Unicode arose when the Odia Wikimedia community started reaching out to these industry professionals. Apparently authors, government employees and other professional were more comfortable using one of the standards mentioned above. All of these people type using either a generic popular standard, Modular, or a universal standard, Inscript. Fortunately, the former is now incorporated into Mediawiki‘s Universal Language Selector (ULS) and the latter is in the process of getting added to ULS. Once this is done, many folks could start contributing to Wikipedia easily.

Content that has been typed in various modified ASCII fonts include encyclopedias that could help grow content on Wikisource and Wikiquote. All of these need to be converted to Unicode. The non-profit group Srujanika first initiated a project to build a converter for conversion of two different Akruti fonts: AkrutiOriSarala99 and OR-TT Sarala. The former being outdated and the other being less popular. The Rebati 1 converter which was built by the Srujanika team was not being maintained and was more of an orphan project.

Above: Akruti Sarala - Unicode Odia converter user manual. Image credit: Subhashish Panigrahi, CC-BY-3.0

Fellow Wikimedian Manoj Sahukar and myself used parts of the “Rebati 1 converter” code and worked on building another converter. The new “Akruti Sarala – Unicode Odia converter” can convert the more popular AkrutiOriSarala font and its predecessor AkrutiOriSarala99, which is still used by some. Odia Wikimedian Mrutyunjaya Kar and journalist Subhransu Panda have helped by reporting broken conjuncts which helps in fixing all problems before publishing. Odia authors and journalists have already started using the font and many of them have regular posts in Odia. We are waiting for more authors to contribute to Wikipedia by converting their work and wikifying it.

Recently a beta version of another Unicode font converter for Shreelipi fonts based on Odia Wikipedian Shitikantha Dash‘s initial code is released. It works with at least 85 % accuracy.

"Even after getting the classical status, Odia language is not being used actively on the internet like some other Indian languages. The main reason behind this is our writing system has not been web-friendly. Most of those in Odisha having typing skills, use modular keyboard and Akruti fonts. Akruti is not web-compatible as we know. There are thousands of articles, literary works, news stories typed in Akruti fonts lying unused (on the internet). Thanks to Subhashish Panigrahi and his associates, they have developed this new font converter that can convert your Akruti text into Unicode. I have checked it. It’s error-free. Now it’s easy for us to write articles online (for Wikipedia and other sites). Yes, we are late entrants as far as use of vernacular languages on the internet is concerned. But this converter will help us to go godspeed. Lets make Odia our language of communication and expression."

The above was originally posted on Wikimedia blog.

Quick Links

Copyright notes: "Akruti Sarala - Unicode converter screenshot mock-up.svg", "Akruti converter user manual (white).svg" by Subhashish Panigrahi , under CC-BY-SA 3.0 Unported, from Wikimedia Commons

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/openness/blog-old/odia-language-gets-new-unicode-font-converter

WSIS+10 High Level Event: A Bird's Eye Report

geetha — 2014-06-20T15:57:32Z

The WSIS+10 High Level was organised by the ITU and collaborative UN entities on June 9-13, 2014. It aimed to evaluate the progress on implementation of WSIS Outcomes from Geneva 2003 and Tunis 2005, and to envision a post-2015 Development Agenda. Geetha Hariharan attended the event on CIS' behalf.

The World Summit on Information Society (WSIS) +10 High Level Event (HLE) was hosted at the ITU Headquarters in Geneva, from June 9-13, 2014. The HLE aimed to review the implementation and progress made on information and communication technology (ICT) across the globe, in light of WSIS outcomes (Geneva 2003 and Tunis 2005). Organised in three parallel tracks, the HLE sought to take stock of progress in ICTs in the last decade (High Level track), initiate High Level Dialogues to formulate the post-2015 development agenda, as well as host thematic workshops for participants (Forum track).

The High Level Track:

Opening Ceremony, WSIS+10 High Level Event (Source)

The High Level track opened officially on June 10, 2014, and culminated with the endorsement by acclamation (as is ITU tradition) of two Outcome Documents. These were: (1) WSIS+10 Statement on the Implementation of WSIS Outcomes, taking stock of ICT developments since the WSIS summits, (2) WSIS+10 Vision for WSIS Beyond 2015, aiming to develop a vision for the post-2015 global information society. These documents were the result of the WSIS+10 Multi-stakeholder Preparatory Platform (MPP), which involved WSIS stakeholders (governments, private sector, civil society, international organizations and relevant regional organizations).

The MPP met in six phases, convened as an open, inclusive consultation among WSIS stakeholders. It was not without its misadventures. While ITU Secretary General Dr. Hamadoun I. Touré consistently lauded the multi-stakeholder process, and Ambassador Janis Karklins urged all parties, especially governments, to “let the UN General Assembly know that the multi-stakeholder model works for Internet governance at all levels”, participants in the process shared stories of discomfort, disagreement and discord amongst stakeholders on various IG issues, not least human rights on the Internet, surveillance and privacy, and multi-stakeholderism. Richard Hill of the Association for Proper Internet Governance (APIG) and the Just Net Coalition writes that like NETmundial, the MPP was rich in a diversity of views and knowledge exchange, but stakeholders failed to reach consensus on crucial issues. Indeed, Prof. Vlamidir Minkin, Chairman of the MPP, expressed his dismay at the lack of consensus over action line C9. A compromise was agreed upon in relation to C9 later.

Some members of civil society expressed their satisfaction with the extensive references to human rights and rights-centred development in the Outcome Documents. While governmental opposition was seen as frustrating, they felt that the MPP had sought and achieved a common understanding, a sentiment echoed by the ITU Secretary General. Indeed, even Iran, a state that had expressed major reservations during the MPP and felt itself unable to agree with the text, agreed that the MPP had worked hard to draft a document beneficial to all.

Concerns around the MPP did not affect the review of ICT developments over the last decade. High Level Panels with Ministers of ICT from states such as Uganda, Bangladesh, Sweden, Nigeria, Saudi Arabia and others, heads of the UN Development Programme, UNCTAD, Food and Agriculture Organisation, UN-WOMEN and others spoke at length of rapid advances in ICTs. The focus was largely on ICT access and affordability in developing states. John E. Davies of Intel repeatedly drew attention to innovative uses of ICTs in Africa and Asia, which have helped bridge divides of affordability, gender, education and capacity-building. Public-private partnerships were the best solution, he said, to affordability and access. At a ceremony evaluating implementation of WSIS action-lines, the Centre for Development of Advanced Computing (C-DAC), India, won an award for its e-health application MOTHER.

The Outcome Documents themselves shall be analysed in a separate post. But in sum, the dialogue around Internet governance at the HLE centred around the success of the MPP. Most participants on panels and in the audience felt this was a crucial achievement within the realm of the UN, where the Tunis Summit had delineated strict roles for stakeholders in paragraph 35 of the Tunis Agenda. Indeed, there was palpable relief in Conference Room 1 at the CICG, Geneva, when on June 11, Dr. Touré announced that the Outcome Documents would be adopted without a vote, in keeping with ITU tradition, even if consensus was achieved by compromise.

The High Level Dialogues:

Prof. Vladimir Minkin delivers a statement. (Source)

The High Level Dialogues on developing a post-2015 Development Agenda, based on WSIS action lines, were active on June 12. Introducing the Dialogue, Dr. Touré lamented the Millennium Development Goals as a “lost opportunity”, emphasizing the need to alert the UN General Assembly and its committees as to the importance of ICTs for development.

As on previous panels, there was intense focus on access, affordability and reach in developing countries, with Rwanda and Bangladesh expounding upon their successes in implementing ICT innovations domestically. The world is more connected than it was in 2005, and the ITU in 2014 is no longer what it was in 2003, said speakers. But we lack data on ICT deployment across the globe, said Minister Knutssen of Sweden, recalling the gathering to the need to engage all stakeholders in this task. Speakers on multiple panels, including the Rwandan Minister for CIT, Marilyn Cade of ICANN and Petra Lantz of the UNDP, emphasized the need for ‘smart engagement’ and capacity-building for ICT development and deployment.

A crucial session on cybersecurity saw Dr. Touré envision a global peace treaty accommodating multiple stakeholders. On the panel were Minister Omobola Johnson of Nigeria, Prof. Udo Helmbrecht of the European Union Agency for Network and Information Security (ENISA), Prof. A.A. Wahab of Cybersecurity Malaysia and Simon Muller of Facebook. The focus was primarily on building laws and regulations for secure communication and business, while child protection was equally considered.

The lack of laws/regulations for cybersecurity (child pornography and jurisdictional issues, for instance), or other legal protections (privacy, data protection, freedom of speech) in rapidly connecting developing states was noted. But the question of cross-border surveillance and wanton violations of privacy went unaddressed except for the customary, unavoidable mention. This was expected. Debates in Internet governance have, in the past year, been silently and invisibly driven by the Snowden revelations. So too, at WSIS+10 Cybersecurity, speakers emphasized open data, information exchange, data ownership and control (the right to be forgotten), but did not openly address surveillance. Indeed, Simon Muller of Facebook called upon governments to publish their own transparency reports: A laudable suggestion, even accounting for Facebook’s own undetailed and truncated reports.

In a nutshell, the post-2015 Development Agenda dialogues repeatedly emphasized the importance of ICTs in global connectivity, and their impact on GDP growth and socio-cultural change and progress. The focus was on taking this message to the UN General Assembly, engaging all stakeholders and creating an achievable set of action lines post-2015.

The Forum Track:

Participants at the UNESCO session on its Comprehensive Study on Internet-related Issues (Source)

The HLE was organized as an extended version of the WSIS Forum, which hosts thematic workshops and networking opportunities, much like any other conference. Running in parallel sessions over 5 days, the WSIS Forum hosted sessions by the ITU, UNESCO, UNDP, ICANN, ISOC, APIG, etc., on issues as diverse as the WSIS Action Lines, the future of Internet governance, the successes and failures of WCIT-2012, UNESCO’s Comprehensive Study on Internet-related Issues, spam and a taxonomy of Internet governance.

Detailed explanation of each session I attended is beyond the scope of this report, so I will limit myself to the interesting issues raised.

At ICANN’s session on its own future (June 9), Ms. Marilyn Cade emphasized the importance of national and regional IGFs for both issue-awareness and capacity-building. Mr. Nigel Hickson spoke of engagement at multiple Internet governance fora: “Internet governance is not shaped by individual events”. In light of criticism of ICANN’s apparent monopoly over IANA stewardship transition, this has been ICANN’s continual response (often repeated at the HLE itself). Also widely discussed was the role of stakeholders in Internet governance, given the delineation of roles and responsibilities in the Tunis Agenda, and governments’ preference for policy-monopoly (At WSIS+10, Indian Ambassador Dilip Sinha seemed wistful that multilateralism is a “distant dream”).

This discussion bore greater fruit in a session on Internet governance ‘taxonomy’. The session saw Mr. George Sadowsky, Dr. Jovan Kurbalija, Mr. William Drake and Mr. Eliot Lear (there is surprisingly no official profile-page on Mr. Lear) expound on dense structures of Internet governance, involving multiple methods of classification of Internet infrastructure, CIRs, public policy issues, etc. across a spectrum of ‘baskets’ – socio-cultural, economic, legal, technical. Such studies, though each attempting clarity in Internet governance studies, indicate that the closer you get to IG, the more diverse and interconnected the eco-system gets. David Souter’s diagrams almost capture the flux of dynamic debate in this area (please see pages 9 and 22 of this ISOC study).

There were, for most part, insightful interventions from session participants. Mr. Sadowsky questioned the effectiveness of the Tunis Agenda delineation of stakeholder-roles, while Mr. Lear pleaded that techies be let to do their jobs without interference. Ms. Anja Kovacs raised pertinent concerns about including voiceless minorities in a ‘rough consensus’ model. Across sessions, questions of mass surveillance, privacy and data ownership rose from participants. The protection of human rights on the Internet – especially freedom of expression and privacy – made continual appearance, across issues like spam (Question 22-1/1 of ITU-D Study Group 1) and cybersecurity.

Conclusion:

The HLE was widely attended by participants across WSIS stakeholder-groups. At the event, a great many relevant questions such as the future of ICTs, inclusions in the post-2015 Development Agenda, the value of muti-stakeholder models, and human rights such as free speech and privacy were raised across the board. Not only were these raised, but cognizance was taken of them by Ministers, members of the ITU and other collaborative UN bodies, private sector entities such as ICANN, technical community such as the ISOC and IETF, as well as (obviously) civil society.

Substantively, the HLE did not address mass surveillance and privacy, nor of expanding roles of WSIS stakeholders and beyond. Processually, the MPP failed to reach consensus on several issues comfortably, and a compromise had to be brokered.

But perhaps a big change at the HLE was the positive attitude to multi-stakeholder models from many quarters, not least the ITU Secretary General Dr. Hamadoun Touré. His repeated calls for acceptance of multi-stakeholderism left many members of civil society surprised and tentatively pleased. Going forward, it will be interesting to track the ITU and the rest of UN’s (and of course, member states’) stances on multi-stakeholderism at the ITU Plenipot, the WSIS+10 Review and the UN General Assembly session, at the least.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/wsis-10-high-level-event-a-birds-eye-report

This Twitter Account Puts a Face to the Unsung Volunteer Editors Behind Wikipedia

subha — 2014-07-03T06:17:56Z

The life of a Wikipedia editor is an interesting one. Globally, about 100,000 editors edit the collaborative online encyclopedia's 30 million articles in 287 languages, including over 4.5 million in the English Wikipedia.

Click to read the post published on Global Voices here.

They dedicate a tremendous amount of their time to contribute and edit articles, but for no pay (editors work as volunteers) and for little public recognition – their work is credited via their usernames tucked away in the entry's edit history.

Now, one initiative is trying to shine the spotlight on these hard-working “Wikipedians.” WeAreWikipedia is an unofficial project that brings on a different editor each week to curate information regarding their favorite Wikipedia pages and tweet them using the handle @WeAreWikipedia. So far, 19 people representing 17 different language Wikipedias have curated the account.

WeAreWikipedia explains on its blog that it was inspired by a weekly rotation curation handle @WeAreBangalore created by social media strategists from the Indian city of Bangalore in October 2013 to create a space for Bangaloreans to tell their stories, give their opinions or simple connect with other active social media users in the area.

Admin: Most of u r not aware that, one of our previous curators @psubhashish was inspired by us and started global #RoCur @WeAreWikipedia :)
— Bangalore/Rajeev (@WeAreBangalore) June 17, 2014

@WeAreBangalore in turn took its cue from the highly successful @sweden, which turns over the Twitter handle to a different Swede every week as a sort of citizen ambassador program.

The WeAreWikipedia curators also tell personal stories and explain the technicalities of publishing and editing Wikipedia to any readers who ask.

Wherever I go, local Wikipedians are so welcoming and so open to collaboration. I have made friends all around the globe.
— WeAreWikipedia (@WeAreWikipedia) junio 17, 2014

Curators often focus tweets on their Wikipedia language community and country. Two women editors from India, Noopur Raval and Netha Hussain, dedicated many of their publications to facts about women’s rights, issues and development in India while curating the handle during Women’s History Month in March. They also drew attention to an edit-a-thon held in Bangalore that brought 90 women to write about 77 articles related to women in India.

Mariona Aragay, an editor for the Catalan Wikipedia, made a related call for more women editors while she was at the helm of @WeAreWikipedia:

As a wikipedian, it concernes me the low ratio of #woman editors: if you’re a wiki-girl, let us know your experience! #gendergap @wikiwomen

— WeAreWikipedia (@WeAreWikipedia) June 4, 2014

Curators also highlight community events, such as Odisha Dibasa 2014, a gathering at the end of March 2014 of the Odia-language Wikipedia community in the capital of the Indian state of Odisha, where the language is predominantly spoken.

Diptiman Panigrahi, an Odia editor who curated @WeAreWikipedia during the event, talked about his week in a blog post for The Centre for Internet and Society in India:

It was a wonderful experience curating WeAreWikipedia without even much time. Meeting the entire Wikimedia global community was even more fun when I was telling happenings of my own community. I hope to take part in more of such collaborative global issues like this.

You can follow WeAreWikipedia on Twitter, Facebook and on their blog.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/openness/blog-old/global-voices-online-june-18-2014-subhashish-panigrahi-twitter-account-puts-a-face-to-unsung-volunteer-editors-behind-wikipedia

Research Advisory Network Meeting

praskrishna — 2014-07-03T06:39:38Z

All sessions will take place at the OECD Headquarters, located at 2 Rue André Pascal, 75016, Paris, France. Sunil Abraham is participating in the event.

For agenda and other details, click here.

Hosting of the Event

The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) has agreed to host this meeting of the Global Commission on Internet Governance’s Research Advisory Network (RAN). The OECD will provide meeting space and logistical support, and is committed to engaging the project in the development of evidence-based policy recommendations for the future of Internet governance.

Meeting Participant List

Special Guests

James Kaplan
Bill Woodcock

OECD Staff

Aaron Martin
Anne Carblanc
Sam Paltridge
Alexia Gonzalez Fanfalone
Lorrayne Porciuncula

Commission Secretariat

Caroline Baylon
Eric Jardine
Mark Raymond
Aaron Shull
Brenda Woods

Research Advisory Network Biographies

Sunil Abraham / @sunil_abraham

Sunil Abraham is the executive director of the Centre for Internet and Society (CIS). CIS is a five year old policy and academic research organization focusing on accessibility, access to knowledge, Internet governance, telecom, digital natives and digital humanities. He founded Mahiti in 1998, a social enterprise that provides technology to civil society for which he was elected an Ashoka fellow in 1999. Between June 2004 and June 2007, Sunil also managed the International Open Source Network, a project of UNDP serving 42 countries in the Asia-Pacific region.

Subimal Bhattacharjee / @subimal

Subimal Bhattacharjee is an independent consultant on defence and cyber issues, working primarily with government and private sector advisory panels in India. He is the former India country director for General Dynamics International Corporation. Subimal is a columnist and internationally respected speaker on issues of Internet governance and cyber security.

Bertrand de La Chapelle / @bdelachapelle

Bertrand de La Chapelle is the Director of the Internet & Jurisdiction Project, a global multistakeholder dialogue process developing a due process framework to handle the diversity of national laws in cross-border online spaces. He served as a Director on the ICANN Board from 2010 to 2013. From 2006 to 2010, he was France’s Thematic Ambassador and Special Envoy for the Information Society, participating in all WSIS follow-up activities and Internet governance processes, including in particular the Internet Governance Forum (IGF), and was a Vice-Chair of ICANN’s Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC). Bertrand is a graduate of Ecole Polytechnique, Sciences Po Paris and Ecole Nationale d’Administration.

Laura DeNardis / @LauraDeNardis

A scholar of Internet architecture and governance, Dr. Laura DeNardis is a CIGI senior fellow and professor at American University. She is an affiliated fellow at Yale Law School’s Information Society Project and previously served as its Executive Director. She is the Director of Research for the Global Commission on Internet Governance and is the author of The Global War for Internet Governance (Yale University Press 2014).

Patrik Fältström / @patrikhson

Patrik Fältström is head of research and development at Netnod. Previously, he was a distinguished engineer at Cisco, technical specialist at Tele2, systems manager at the Royal Institute of Technology, researcher at Bunyip Information Systems and a programmer in the Royal Swedish Navy. He has been a member of numerous advisory groups and investigations related to the Internet, both public and private sector. Patrik holds an M.Sc. in mathematics from the University of Stockholm.

Paul Fehlinger / @PaulFehlinger

Paul Fehlinger is the co-founder and manager of the Internet & Jurisdiction Project, a global multi-stakeholder dialogue process developing a due process framework to enable the coexistence of diverse national laws in cross-border online spaces. He started working on Internet governance at Sciences Po Paris and the Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies. He is since actively engaged in the UN Internet Governance Forum, EuroDIG and other global Internet fora.

Fen Hampson

Fen Osler Hampson is a distinguished fellow and director of the Global Security & Politics Program at the Centre for International Governance Innovation (CIGI). He has served as director of the Norman Paterson School of International Affairs and is concurrently chancellor’s professor at Carleton University. He is the recipient of various awards and honours and is a frequent commentator and contributor to international media.

Clem Herman / @clemherman

Clem Herman is a senior lecturer in the Department of Computing and Communications at the UK Open University, and was previously director of the Manchester Women’s Electronic Village Hall (WEVH) pioneering the use of ICTs to empower women. She has published widely on gender issues in technology and is the founder and editor-in-chief of the International Journal of Gender Science and Technology.

Konstantinos Komaitis / @kkomaitis

Konstantinos Komaitis is a policy advisor at the Internet Society, focusing primarily on the field of digital content and intellectual property. Before joining the Internet Society in July 2012, he was a senior lecturer at the University of Strathclyde in Glasgow. Konstantinos holds a Ph.D. in law and his thesis focused on issues of intellectual property and the Internet, with particular focus on the intersection of trademarks and domain names. He is the author of The Current State of Domain Name Regulation.

Young-eum Lee

Young-eum Lee is a professor in the Department of Media Arts and Sciences at Korea National Open University. She has been involved in various Internet governance policy making processes of the Korean domain name .kr at KISA (KRNIC), and has also been involved in global Internet governance activities at ICANN. Since 2003, she has been a council member of the ccNSO representing .kr in the Asia-Pacific region. Young-eum received her M.A. in Communication Science at Northwestern University and her doctorate in Communication from the University of Michigan.

Tim Maurer

Tim Maurer is a research fellow at the New America Foundation’s Open Technology Institute. He focuses on cyberspace and international affairs, namely Internet governance, cyber-security, and human rights online. In October 2013 and February 2014, he spoke about cyber-warfare at the United Nations. Tim’s research has been published and featured by national and international print, radio and television media, including Harvard University, Foreign Policy, CNN and Slate among others. He conducts academic research as a non-resident research fellow at the University of Toronto’s Citizen Lab.

Emily Taylor / @etaylaw

Emily Taylor is a renowned expert in the field of Internet law and governance, and provides research services in areas including security, IPv6 deployment, internationalised domain names, the domain name industry, and global policy development. Her roles in the Internet sphere include chair of the WhoIs Review Committee for ICANN 2012, member of the Multistakeholder Advisory Group to the IGF (2006-2012), director of Synetergy (providing Sunrise Dispute resolution services to the largest gTLD applicant, Donuts), and several ongoing non-executive directorships.

Rolf H. Weber

Rolf H. Weber is professor for civil, commercial and European law at the University of Zurich Law School. Since 2008, he is the director of the Information and Communication Law Center at the University of Zurich, a member (now Vice-Chairman) of the Steering Committee of the Global Internet Governance Academic Network (GigaNet) as well as a member of the European Dialogue on Internet Governance (EuroDIG). Since 2009, he has been a member of the High-level Panel of Advisers of the Global Alliance for Information and Communication Technologies and Development (GAID) and author of frequent publications on Internet Governance.

Andrew Wyckoff

Andrew W. Wyckoff is the director of the OECD’s Directorate for Science, Technology and Industry. Prior to the OECD, he was a program manager of the Information, Telecommunications and Commerce program of the US Congressional Office of Technology Assessment, an economist at the US National Science Foundation and a programmer at the Brookings Institution. Andrew holds a Master of Public Policy from the JFK School of Government, Harvard University.

Special Guest Biographies

James M. Kaplan

James M. Kaplan is a partner at McKinsey & Company in New York. He convenes McKinsey's global practices in IT infrastructure and cyber-security. He has assisted leading institutions in implementing cyber-security strategies, conducting cyber-war games, optimizing enterprise infrastructure environments and exploiting cloud technologies. James led McKinsey's collaboration with the World Economic Forum on "Risk & Responsibility in a Hyper-Connected World," which was presented at the Forum's recent Annual Meeting in Davos. He published on a variety of technology topics in the McKinsey Quarterly, the Financial Times, the Wall Street Journal and the Harvard Business Review Blog Network.

Bill Woodcock

Bill Woodcock is the executive director of Packet Clearing House, the international non-governmental organization that builds and supports critical Internet infrastructure, including Internet exchange points and the core of the domain name system. Since entering the Internet industry in 1985, Bill has helped establish more than one hundred and fifty Internet exchange points. In the early 1990s, Bill developed the anycast routing technique that now protects the domain name system. In 2002 he co-founded INOC-DBA, the security-coordination hotline system that interconnects the network operations centers of more than three thousand ISPs around the world. And in 2007, Bill was one of the two international liaisons deployed by NSP-Sec to the Estonian CERT during the Russian cyber-attack.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/news/research-advisory-network-meeting

Vodafone Report Explains Government Access to Customer Data

joe — 2014-06-19T10:38:01Z

Vodafone Group PLC, the world’s second largest mobile carrier, released a report on Friday, June 6 2014 disclosing to what extent governments can request their customers’ data.

The Law Enforcement Disclosure Report, a section of a larger annual Sustainability Report began by asserting that Vodafone "customers have a right to privacy which is enshrined in international human rights law and standards and enacted through national laws."

However, the report continues, Vodafone is incapable of fully protecting its customers right to privacy, because it is bound by the laws in the various countries in which it operates. "If we do not comply with a lawful demand for assistance, governments can remove our license to operate, preventing us from providing services to our customers," The report goes into detail about the laws in each of the 29 nations where the company operates.

Vodafone’s report is one of the first published by a multinational service provider. Compiling such a report was especially difficult, according to the report, for a few reasons. Because no comparable report had been published before, Vodafone had to figure out for themselves, the “complex task” of what information they could legally publish in each country. This difficulty was compounded by the fact that Vodafone operates physical infrastructure and thus sets up a business in each of the countries where it provides services. This means that Vodafone is subject to the laws and operating licenses of each nation where it operates, unlike as a search engine such as Google, which can provide services across international borders but still be subject to United States law – where it is incorporated.

The report is an important step forward for consumer privacy. First, the Report shows that the company is aware of the conflict of interest between government authorities and its customers, and the pivotal position that the company can play in honoring the privacy of its users by providing information regarding the same in all cases where it legally can. Additionally, providing the user insight into challenges that the company faces when addressing and responding to law enforcement requests, the Report provides a brief overview of the legal qualifications that must be met in each country to access customer data. Also, Vodafone’s report has encouraged other telecom companies to disclose similar information to the public. For instance, Deutsche Telekom AG, a large European and American telecommunications company, said Vodafone’s report had led it consider releasing a report of it’s own.

Direct Government Access

The report revealed that six countries had constructed secret wires or “pipes” which allowed them access to customers’ private data. This means that the governments of these six countries have immediate access to Vodafone’s network without any due process, oversight, or accountability for these opaque practices. Essentially, the report reveals, in order to operate in one of these jurisdictions, a communications company must ensure that authorities have, real time and direct access to all personal customer data at any time, without any specific justification. The report does not name these six nations for legal reasons.

"These pipes exist, the direct access model exists,” Vodafone's group privacy officer, Stephen Deadman, told the Guardian. “We are making a call to end direct access as a means of government agencies obtaining people's communication data. Without an official warrant, there is no external visibility. If we receive a demand we can push back against the agency. The fact that a government has to issue a piece of paper is an important constraint on how powers are used."

Data Organization

Vodafone’s Report lists the aggregate number of content requests they received in each country where it operates, and groups these requests into two major categories. The first is Lawful Interceptions, which is when the government directly listens in or reads the content of a communication. In the past, this type of action has been called wiretapping, but now includes reading the content of text messages, emails, and other communications.

The second data point Vodafone provides for each country is the number of Communications Data requests they receive from each country. These are requests for the metadata associated with customer communications, such as the numbers they have been texting and the time stamps on all of their texts and calls.

It is worth noting that all of the numbers Vodafone reports are warrant statistics rather than target statistics. Vodafone, according to the report, has chosen to include the number of times a government sent a request to Vodafone to "intrude into the private affairs of its citizens, not the extent to which those warranted activities then range across an ever-expanding multiplicity of devices, accounts and apps."

Data Construction

However, in many cases, laws in the various companies in which Vodafone operates prohibit Vodafone from publishing all or part of the aforementioned data. In fact, this is the rule rather than the exception. The majority of countries, including India, prohibit Vodafone from releasing the number of data requests they receive. Other countries publish the numbers themselves, so Vodafone has chosen not to reprint their statistics either. This is because Vodafone wants to encourage governments to take responsibility for informing their citizens of the statistics themselves.

The report also makes note of the process Vodafone went through to determine the legality of publishing these statistics. It was not always straightforward. For example, in Germany, when Vodafone’s legal team went to examine the legislation governing whether or not they could publish statistics on government data requests, they concluded that the laws were unclear, and asked German authorities for advice on how to proceed. They were informed that publishing any such statistics would be illegal, so they did not include any German numbers in their report. However, since that time, other local carriers have released similar statistics, and thus the situation remains unresolved.

Other companies have also recently released reports. Twitter, a microblogging website, Facebook, a social networking website, and Google a search engine with social network capabilities have all released comparable reports, but their reports differ from Vodafone’s in a number of ways. While Twitter, Google, and Facebook all specified the percent of requests granted, Vodafone released no similar statistics. However, Vodafone prepared discussions of the various legal constraints that each country imposed on telecom companies, giving readers an understanding of what was required in each country for authorities to access their data, a component that was left out of other recent reports. Once again, Vodafone’s report differed from those of Google Facebook and Twitter because while Vodafone opens businesses in each of the countries where it operates and is subject to their laws, Google, Facebook, and Twitter are all Internet companies and so are only governed by United States law.

Google disclosed that it received 27,427 requests over a six-month period ending in December, 2013, and also noted that the number of requests has increased consistently each six-month period since data began being compiled in 2009, when fewer than half as many requests were being made. On the other hand Google said that the percentage of requests it complied with (64% over the most recent period) had declined significantly since 2010, when it complied with 76% of requests.

Google went into less detail when explaining the process non-American authorities had to go through to access data, but did note that a Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty was the primary way governments outside of the United States could force the release of user data. Such a treaty is an agreement between the United States and another government to help each other with legal proceedings. However, the report indicated that Google might disclose user information in situations when they were not legally compelled to, and did not go into detail about how or when it did that. Thus, given the difficulty of obtaining a Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty in addition to local warrants or subpoenas, it seems likely that Google complies with many more non-American data requests than it was legally forced to.

Facebook has only released two such reports so far, for the two six month periods in 2013, but they too indicated an increasing number of requests, from roughly 26,000 to 28,147. Facebook plans to continue issuing reports every six months.

Twitter has also seen an increase of 22% in government requests between this and the previous reporting period, six months ago. Twitter attributes this increase in requests to an increase in users internationally, and it does seem that the website has a similarly growing user base, according to charts released by Twitter. It is worth noting that while large nations such as the United States and India are responsible for the majority of government requests, smaller nations such as Bulgaria and Ecuador also order telecom and Internet companies to turn over data.

Vodaphone’s Statistics

Though Vodafone’s report didn’t print statistics for the majority of the countries the report covered, looking at the few numbers they did publish can shed some light on the behavior of governments in countries where publishing such statistics is illegal. For the countries where Vodafone does release data, the numbers of government requests for Vodafone data were much higher than for Google data. For instance, Italy requested Vodafone data 605,601 times, while requesting Google data only 896 times. This suggests that other countries such as India could be looking at many more customers’ data through telecom companies like Vodafone than Internet companies like Google.

Vodafone stressed that they were not the only telecom company that was being forced to share customers’ data, sometimes without warrants. In fact, such access was the norm in countries where authorities demanded it.

India and the Reports

India is one of the most proliferate requesters of data, second only to the United States in number of requests for data from Facebook and fourth after the United States, France and Germany in number of requests for data from Google. In the most recent six-month period, India requested data from Google 2,513 times, Facebook 3,598 times, and Twitter 19 times. The percentage of requests granted varies widely from country. For example, while Facebook complies with 79% of United States authorities’ requests, it only grants 50% of India’s requests. Google responds to 83% of US requests but only 66% of India’s.

Facebook also provides data on the number of content restrictions each country requests. A content restriction request is where an authority asks Facebook to take down a particular status, photo, video, or other web content and no longer display it on their site. India, with 4,765 requests, is the country that most often asks Facebook to remove content.

While Vodafone’s report publishes no statistics on Indian data requests, because such disclosure would be illegal, it does discuss the legal considerations they are faced with. In India, the report explains, several laws govern Internet communications. The Information Technology Act (ITA) of 2000 is the parent legislation governing information technology in India. The ITA allows certain members of Indian national or state governments order an interception of a phone call or other communication in real time, for a number of reasons. According to the report, an interception can be ordered “if the official in question believes that it is necessary to do so in the: (a) interest of sovereignty and integrity of India; (b) the security of the State; (c) friendly relations with foreign states; (d) public order; or (e) the prevention of incitement of offences.” In short, it is fairly easy for a high-ranking official to order a wiretapping in India.

The report goes on to detail Indian authorities’ abilities to request other customer data beyond a lawful interception. The Code of Criminal Procedure allows a court or police officer to ask Vodafone and other telecom companies to produce “any document or other thing” that the officer believes is necessary for any investigation. The ITA extends this ability to any information stored in any computer, and requires service providers to extend their full assistance to the government. Thus, it is not only legally simple to order a wiretapping in India; it is also very easy for authorities to obtain customer web or communication data at any time.

It is clear that Indian laws governing communication have very little protections in place for consumer privacy. However, many in India hope to change this reality. The Group of Experts chaired by Justice AP Shah, the Department of Personnel and Training, along with other concerned groups have been working towards the drafting of a privacy legislation for India. According to the Report of the Group of Experts on Privacy, the legislation would fix the 50 or so privacy laws in India that are outdated and unable to protect citizen’s privacy when they use modern technology.

On the other hand, the Indian government is moving forward with a number of plans to further infringe the privacy of civilians. For example, the Central Monitoring System, a clandestine electronic surveillance program, gives India’s security agencies and income tax officials direct access to communications data in the country. The program began in 2007 and was announced publicly in 2009 to little fanfare and muted public debate. The system became operational in 2013.

Conclusion

Vodafone’s report indicates that it is concerned about protecting its customer’s privacy, and Vodafone’s disclosure report is an important step forward for consumer web and communication privacy. The report stresses that company practice and government policy need to come together to protect citizen’s privacy and –businesses cannot do it alone. However, the report reveals what companies can do to effect privacy reform. By challenging authorities abilities to access customer data, as well as publishing information about these powers, they bring the issue to the government’s attention and open it up to public debate. Through Vodafone’s report, the public can see why their governments are making surveillance decisions. Yet, in India, there is still little adoption of transparent business practices such as these. Perhaps if more companies were transparent about the level of government surveillance their customers were being subjected to, their practices and policies for responding to requests from law enforcement, and the laws and regulations that they are subject to - the public would press the government for stronger privacy safeguards and protections.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/vodafone-report-explains-govt-access-to-customer-data

May 2014 Bulletin

praskrishna — 2014-07-04T04:59:03Z

Our newsletter for the month of May is below:

We at the Centre for Internet & Society (CIS) welcome you to the fifth issue of the newsletter (May) for the year 2014. Archives of our newsletters can be accessed at: http://cis-india.org/about/newsletters

Highlights

We have published a summary of the various landmark judgments given by the Supreme Court and some of the high courts in a blog post as part of our National Resource Kit project.
CIS submitted its comments on the Open Licensing Policy Guidelines to the National Mission on Education through Information and Communication Technology (NMEICT), Ministry of Human Resource Development, Government of India.
The Access to Knowledge team from CIS has signed a memorandum of understanding with Shri Dharmasthala Manjunatheshwara (SDM) College to introduce “Indian Language Wikipedias in the Indian Under Graduate and Post Graduate Classroom”.
Sunil Abraham wrote an article “Net Freedom Campaign Loses its Way” in the Hindu Businessline which analyses the recently concluded NETMundial.
Divij Joshi gives a comparative analysis of the United States of America and India with regards to search and seizure and the right to privacy in digital age.
Anirudh Sridhar has produced an essay “Binary Code Invades the Universal Problematic” looks at language as an archive and posits, through a reading of Foucault, Derrida, Saussure and Jakobson that the means of perceiving language in the digital has changed.
As part of its Making Change project CIS is holding a public exhibition of stories of change from all over Asia, where the first of its Production Sprints will take place. The exhibition will be held at CIS office in Bangalore on June 7, 2014.
Earlier this year (February 11 – 17) we organized the second Institute on Internet in Pune. A draft of the Knowledge Repository on Internet Access was presented at the event. We are uploading digital versions of the repository for archival purposes. Three units (The Body in Cyberspace, Access to Knowledge and Openness) have been published.

Accessibility and Inclusion

Under a grant from the Hans Foundation we are doing two projects. The first project is on creating a national resource kit of state-wise laws, policies and programmes on issues relating to persons with disabilities in India. We compiled the first draft of the kit (29 states and 6 union territories). The chapters along with the quarterly reports can be accessed on the project page. The second project is on developing text-to-speech software for 15 Indian languages. The progress made so far in the project can be accessed here.

NVDA and eSpeak

Monthly Update

Work Report for May (by Suman Dogra, May 31, 2014).

National Resource Kit

Blog Entry

Summary of Judgements on Disability Rights (by CLPR, May 15, 2014).

Other

Blog Entries

The Road to Financial Inclusion (by Amba Salelkar, May 12, 2014).
Open House with George Abraham: Mainstreaming Persons with Disabilities (by Anandhi Viswanathan, May 22, 2014).

Event Organized

An Open House Session with George Abraham (co-organized by Ashoka India and CIS, Ashoka-Innovators for the Public, Bangalore, May 21, 2014).

Access to Knowledge

Submission

Comments on the Open Licensing Policy Guidelines of the National Mission on Education through Information and Communication Technology (by Sunil Abraham and Nehaa Chaudhari, May 28, 2014). The comments were submitted to the NMEICT, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Government of India.

Blog Entry

France, Greece, India and the European Union Sign the Marrakesh Treaty (by Nehaa Chaudhari, May 2, 2014).

Participation in Event

OGP Asia Pacific Regional Conference (co-organized by Web Foundation, World Bank, and UKP-PPP, Bali, May 6 – 7, 2014). Sunil Abraham was a speaker in the session on “Open Data in Asia-Pacific: a Cross-Country Learning Discussion”.

Media Coverage

WIPO: Scope and rights of potential broadcasting treaty clarified (by Alexandra Bhattacharya, SUNS – South-North Development Monitor, May 5, 2014 and cross-posted in Third World Network, May 6, 2014).
At WIPO, Authors, Civil Society Watchful of Rights for Broadcasters (by Catherin Saez, IP Watch, May 1, 2014).
Pushing the Boundaries in Open Governance: Insights from OGP Asia Pacific Regional Conference in Bali, Indonesia (Day 1) (by Michael Canares, Open Government Partnership, May 6, 2014 and cross-posted in Open Data Research Network, May 27, 2014).

Wikipedia

The following has been done under grant from the Wikimedia Foundation:

Announcement

CIS Signs MoU with Shri Dharmasthala Manjunatheshwara College (by Dr. U.B.Pavanaja, May 27, 2014): to introduce “Indian Language Wikipedias in the Indian Under Graduate and Post Graduate Classroom”. Dr. U.B. Pavanaja on behalf of the CIS-A2K team signed the MoU. The signing event took place earlier on April 21, 2014.

Articles

Books and More are Relicensed to Creative Commons (by Subhashish Panigrahi, Opensource.com, May 2, 2014).
GLAM in India: 10 tips for successful GLAM projects (by Subhashish Panigrahi, OpenGLAM, May 27, 2014).
Indic Language Wikipedias as Open Educational Resources (by Subhashish Panigrahi, Open Education Working Group, May 27, 2014).

Event Organized

Tulu Wikipedia Workshop (co-organized by CIS-A2K and the Regional Research Centre, MGM College, Udupi, May 25, 2014). Dr. U.B.Pavanaja conducted the workshop.

News and Media Coverage

Wikipedia in UG Education program at Christ University (Prajavani, May 15, 2014).
Subhashish Panigrahi joins Open GLAM Working Group: Subhashish recently joined the OpenGLAM Working Group (a global network of people who work to open up cultural data and content.) as a member and OpenGLAM Local (a local affiliate of OKFN's OpenGLAM project) as an ambassador for India. Both the positions will be voluntary.

Internet Governance

As part of its research on privacy and free speech, CIS is engaged with two different projects. The first one (under a grant from Privacy International and International Development Research Centre (IDRC)) is on surveillance and freedom of expression (SAFEGUARDS). The second one (under a grant from MacArthur Foundation) is on studying the restrictions placed on freedom of expression online by the Indian government.

FOEX Live

As part of our MacArthur project on free speech and expression we are posting a selection of news from across India implicating online freedom of expression and use of digital technology:

News Compilation

May 26-27, 2014; May 28-29, 2014

Articles

Net Freedom Campaign Loses its Way (by Sunil Abraham, Hindu Businessline, May 10, 2014).
Networks: What You Don’t See is What You (for)Get (by Nishant Shah, DML Central, April 17, 2014 and cross-posted in Hybrid Publishing Lab, May 13, 2014).

Blog Entries

European Court of Justice rules Internet Search Engine Operator responsible for Processing Personal Data Published by Third Parties (by Jyoti Panday, May 14, 2014).
Net Neutrality, Free Speech and the Indian Constitution – III: Conceptions of Free Speech and Democracy (by Gautam Bhatia, May 18, 2014).

Participation in Events

Freedom of Expression Scholars Conference 2 (organized by Yale Law School, May 2-4, 2014). Pranesh Prakash participated as a discussant in the session “Speech and Safety Laboratories”.
Re:publica 2014: Looking for Freedom (organized by Re:publica in partnership with DAIMLER, Global Innovation Gathering, Microsoft and Science: Lab, Berlin, May 6 – 8, 2014). Pranesh Prakash was a speaker at the session “The Architecture of Invisible Censorship: How Digital and Meatspace Censorship Differ”.
Does Size Matter? A Tale of Performing Welfare, Producing Bodies and Faking Identity (organized by the Berkman Center for Internet and Society, Harvard University, May 13, 2014). Malavika Jayaram gave a talk on “Does Size Matter? A Tale of Performing Welfare, Producing Bodies and Faking Identity”.
The Future of Cyber Governance (organized by Hague Institute for Global Justice in association with the Observer Research Foundation, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Netherlands, and the Netherlands Institute for International Relations – Clingendael, The Hague, May 13 – 15, 2014). Sunil Abraham was a speaker in the session “Do users of major social media platforms have adequate protection of their rights to privacy and freedom of expression?” and “Expert Panel on the Future of Cyber Governance”.
WSIS+10 High-Level Event: Open Consultation Process (organized by ITU, UNESCO, United Nations and UNDP, WIPO Conference Room, Geneva, May 28 – 31, 2014). Jyoti Panday participated in this event.

Event Organized

National Elections 2014: How Technology Powered Campaigns (organized by HasGeek and CIS, Bangalore, May 23, 2014). Vijay Grover, founder of Bangalore Media Foundation, Viral Shah, part of Nandan Nilekani's campaign management team, and BG Mahesh, founder and managing director at Oneindia.in, made presentations.

Privacy

Articles

Filtering content on the internet (by Chinmayi Arun, The Hindu, May 6, 2014).
Legislating for Privacy - Part II (by Bhairav Acharya, The Hoot, May 20, 2014).

Blog Entry

Search and Seizure and the Right to Privacy in the Digital Age: A Comparison of US and India (by Divij Joshi, May 31, 2014).

News & Media Coverage

CIS gave its inputs to the following media coverage:

Civil Society Pushes for Privacy Panel (by Laxmi Ajai Prasanna, The Times of India, May 6, 2014).
Students lead the way with apps for ideas (by Sruthy Susan Ullas, The Times of India, May 21, 2014).
India needs better cyber police (by Surabhi Agarwal, Business Standard, May 23, 2014).
Digital death: Log off in peace (by Purnima Sharma, The Times of India, May 25, 2014).

Digital Humanities

Blog Entry

Binary Code Invades the Universal Problematic (by Anirudh Sridhar, May 26, 2014).

Telecom

Newspaper Column

An Infrastructure Road Map (by Shyam Ponappa, Business Standard, April 30, 2014 and Organizing India Blogspot, May 1, 2014).

Knowledge Repository on Internet Access

As part of our research (with Ford Foundation) on the origins of the Internet in India, its impact on the Indian GDP and topics and debates surrounding the Internet in today's world we published the following units:

The Body in Cyberspace (by Nishant Shah, May 13, 2014).
Access to Knowledge (by Anirudh Sridhar, May 22, 2014).
Openness (by Prof. Subbiah Arunachalam and Anirudh Sridhar, May 30, 2014).

About CIS

► Follow us elsewhere

Twitter: https://twitter.com/CISA2K
Facebook group: https://www.facebook.com/cisa2k
Visit us at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/India_Access_To_Knowledge
E-mail: a2k@cis-india.org

► Support Us

► Request for Collaboration

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/about/newsletters/may-2014-bulletin

Yogyakarta Meeting on Open Culture and Critical Making

praskrishna — 2014-07-03T08:57:07Z

Sharath Chandra Ram will be part of the ASIA LABS theme panel and will also be doing community FOSS/FOSH workshops at the Maker events at the event organized by HONF Foundation, Catec, and r0g from June 12 to 15, 2014.

Venues : Langgeng Art Foundation (LAF) , Ndalem Mangkubumen, Widya Mataram University

side event:
03.00pm – 05.30pm (FABLAB_OD24h):
Opening Workshop at HONFablab (Fablab Yogyakarta)
DrawDio Workshop by Helmi Hardian (WAFT, SBY)

OPENING | 12 June 2014
07.00 PM at Langgeng Art Foundation (LAF) Yogyakarta

07.00pm – 07.15pm :
Opening Performance, by Dream Orchestra

07.15pm – 07.45pm: Welcome Speech and Outline:
- Ilham Habibie (The Habibie Center, CATEC)
- Stephen Kovats (r0g_)
- Venzha Christ (HONF Foundation) and presents:
- Bapak Muchsan. (Rector of Widya Mataram Univ.)
- Bapak. J. Eka Prijatma (Rector of Sanata Dharma Univ.)
- Gregorius Subanar (Sanata Dharma University)

08.00pm – 08.30pm:
Screening Movie “DO TIMI MAKE SINDI”
Speech: Gentur Suria (Movie Director)

Opening Exhibition “DO! MAKE!”
Speech: Irene Agrivina (Exhibition Curator)

08.30pm – 10.00pm:
Collaborative Visual and Sound Performance by:
- Felix Deufel and Friends (DE)
- DJ Wok The Rock (YK)
- DJ Haman & DJ Ones (YK)

Welcoming Dinner

10.00pm – 12.00pm:
Critical Cocktail Session 1.0
Introduction-get together

———————–
Side Event:
(FABLAB_OD24h):
12 June 2014 | 11.00pm – 12.00pm
Midnight Workshop at HONFablab (Fablab Yogyakarta)
Intelligent Furniture Workshop by DORXLab
———————–

CONFERENCE DAY#01 | 13 June 2014
at Ndalem Mangkubumen, Widya Mataram University

Side Event:
(FABLAB_OD24h):
13 June 2014 | 09.00am – 11.00am
Morning Workshop at HONFablab (Fablab Yogyakarta)
Edible Book Workshop by Saad Chinoy
———————–

09.00am – 09.15am:
15 mins Body and Mind Excercise
short meditation by Craig Warren Smith

09.30am – 10.00am:
[proto:type] A
Opening Speech
Introduction to [proto:type] Y2014 Yogyakarta Meeting of Open Culture and Critical Making
Technology and Society
by Ilham Habibie (The Habibie Center, CATEC)

10.00am – 11.30:
[proto:type] B Session I
“Open System and Critical ICT4D”
Moderator: Gregorius Subanar
Panelist:
- Craig Warren Smith
- Etiene Turpin
- Eku Wand
- Sanata Dharma ICT4D
- Yantisa Akhadi

11.45am – 12.30pm:
Break | Friday Prayer

12.30pm – 01.15pm:
Open Cultures/P2P Intro & Lunch

side event:
10.00am – 01.30pm:
Open Workshop at Makers Booth, Limasan Ndalem Mangkubumen, Widya Mataram University
Sticthing on Plywood session I by Maken Living Indonesia

01.30pm – 03.00pm:
[proto:type] B Session II
“Open Design and Critical Making”
Moderator: Bertha Bintari
Panelist:
- Deanna Herst
- Steve McCoy
- Jean Nöel Montagne
- Stefania Druga
- Yoyok Wahyudi Subroto
- Enda Nasution
- Matt Rato (live stream)

side event:
02.00pm – 04.00pm:
Open Workshop at Makers Booth, Limasan Ndalem Mangkubumen, Widya Mataram University
Fun with Arduino Workshop by Yudianto Asmoro 03.00pm – 05.30pm:
(FABLAB_OD24h):
Afternoon Workshop at HONFablab (Fablab Yogyakarta)
Noise2Noise Workshop by Felix Deufel

03.00pm – 03.30pm:
Critical Cocktail Break

04.00pm – 05.00pm:
[proto:type] C Session III
“Asia Labs”
Moderator: Argha Mahendra
Panelist:
- Tommy Surya (Fablab Asia Network)
- Jay Fajardo (Launch Garage – SEA Labs)
- Irene Agrivina (HONF)

———————–
side event:
04.00pm – 05.30pm:
Open Workshop at Makers Booth, Limasan Ndalem Mangkubumen, Widya Mataram University
Make! with 3D Printer workshop by Weissa Adhiprasetya
———————–

05.00pm – 05.30pm:
[proto:type] D Session IV
“Community Development Forum”
05.00pm – 05.30pm: Session 4.1 “Open Ecology and Sustainable”
10 mins presentation for each presenter:
- Performance Klub
- Rumah Kardus
- DORXLab

05.30pm: Break | Maghrib | Dawn Pray

06.00pm – 06.30pm: Session 4.2 “(H)acktivism as an open solution
10 mins presentation for each presenter:
- XXLab
- WAFT
- LPTI Pelataran Mataram

06.30pm – 07.00pm: Session 4.3: Citizen participation for social change
10 mins presentation for each presenter:
- Hysteria
- C2O
- Explainer Maker

07.00pm – 07.45pm: Session 4.4: Development at the Entrepreneurial & Grassroots Level
10 mins presentation for each presenter:
- House The House
- Klub Makan Siang
- Jalan Emas
- Technonatura

07.45pm: Jalan Emas Documentation

08.00pm – 09.30pm:
[proto:type] DINNER: MEET & GREET
Venue: Ndalem Kaneman, Widya Mataram University
Gamelan and performance by Among Bekso Dance

———————–
09.00pm – 11.30pm:
(FABLAB_OD24h):
Midnight Workshop at HONFablab (Fablab Yogyakarta)
Fun with Electronics Workshop by Satya Anindita
———————–

10.00pm – 12.00pm:
FAB BAR
venue: HONFablab (Fablab Yogyakarta)

CONFERENCE DAY#02 | 14 June 2014
at Ndalem Mangkubumen, Widya Mataram University

09.00am – 09.15am:
15 mins Body and Mind Excercise
short meditation by Craig Warren Smith

———————–
side event:
09.00am – 10.30am:
(FABLAB_OD24h):
Morning Workshop at HONFablab (Fablab Yogyakarta)
Explainer Maker by Andre Takdare
10.00am – 01.30pm:
Open Workshop at Makers Booth, Limasan Ndalem Mangkubumen, Widya Mataram University
Sticthing on Plywood session II by Maken Living Indonesia
———————–

09.30am – 10.30am:
[proto:type] E Session V
“Y2014 to Y2015 Summit of Critical Making 2015″
Introduction to [proto:type] Y2014 and toward Y2015 by Stephen Kovats

09.30am – 10.30am:
[proto:type] F Session VI
“Open Knowledge as a Platform of Sharing”
Moderator: Wan Zaleha Radzi
Panelist:
- Elisa Anggraeni
- Yuka Narendra
- Saad Chinoy
- Edin Khoo
- Tia Pamungkas
- Inasanti Susanto

12.00pm – 01.00pm:
Lunch

———————–
side event:
12.00pm – 02.30:
(FABLAB_OD24h):
Closing FABLAB_OD24h Workshop at HONFablab (Fablab Yogyakarta)
Introduction to Raspberry Pi by Tommy Surya
————————

01.30pm – 03.00pm
[proto:type] F Session VII
”Maker Culture: Of Fields and Labs”
Moderator: Venzha Christ
Panelist:
- Jeong ok Jeon
- Amrin Hakim
- Marton Kocsev
- Gustaff Hariman Iskandar
- Diyanto Imam

———————–

side event:
02.00pm – 03.30pm:
Open Workshop at Makers Booth, Limasan Ndalem Mangkubumen, Widya Mataram University
DIY BioPlastic Workshop by Irene Agrivina

———————–

03.30pm:
[proto:type] G Session VIII
Closing speech by Venzha Christ

–move to Makers Camp–

MAKERS CAMP DAY#01
Venue: Tembi Village Yogyakarta
02.00pm – 03.30pm:
Workshop#01
Hackidemia Workshop by Stefania Druga

04.00pm – 05.00pm:
Break
Traditional Music Performance
by Tembi Village

06.00pm – 08.00pm:
Workshop#02
DIY Organic Subs Workshop by Blah!

08.00pm – 10.00pm:
Workshop#03
How to Make Ceramics Workshop by Tembi Village

———————–
side event:
03.00pm – 01.00am +1
cellsDISCO!
DJ Session
DJ Line-up:
DJ Hamam (JKT). DJ Ones (YK). DJ Navis (YK). DJ Latex (YK). DJ Noor (YK). DJ TIM (YK). DJ Metzdub (YK). DJ Lintang Egha (YK). DJ Felix (DE). DJ Adit (YK). DJ NDA (YK).
———————–

09.00pm – 10.00pm:
Makers Dinner
Dinner is served in traditional way of Tembi Village

MAKERS CAMP DAY#02
Venue: Tembi Village Yogyakarta

07.00am – 09.00am:
Breakfast
Breakfast is served in traditional way of Tembi

11.00am – 01.00pm:
Workshops:
Workshop#03: DIY Batik by Tembi Village

Workshop#04: Open Source Hardware by Yudianto Asmoro

Workshop#05: Body Hacking by Iwan Wijono

*workshops are happening on the same time in different spot/space. Participants registration are required

01.00pm – 02.00pm:
Lunch Break

02.00pm – 04.00pm:
Workshops:
Workshop#06: OS Wash Workshop by Jean Nöel Montagne

Workshop#07: DIY Greenhouse with Automatic Light by Irene Agrivina

Workshop#08: DIY Holographic Microscope by Irene Agrivina

*workshops are happening on the same time in different spot/space. Participants registration are required

07.00pm – 08.00pm:
Makers Dinner
Dinner is served in traditional way of Tembi Village

———————–
side event:
02.00pm – 02.00am +1
cellSONIC!
Bands Performance & DJ Session
Bands Line-up:
- - Seek Six Sick – Belkastrelka – Cangkang Serigala – Skandal – Talking Coasty – Summer in Vienna – Luise Najib - Chika and The Pistol Air – Distorsi Liar – AHAA – Dinosaur Youth – Fashion Statement (YK)
DJ Line-up:
DJ Hamam (JKT). DJ Ones (YK). DJ Navis (YK). DJ Latex (YK). DJ Noor (YK). DJ TIM (YK). DJ Metzdub (YK). DJ Lintang Egha (YK). DJ Felix (DE). DJ Adit (YK). DJ NDA (YK).
———————–

02.00am – the next morning:
please, have a rest!

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/news/yogyakarta-meeting-on-open-culture-and-critical-making

Open Data in Cultural Heritage – OpenGLAM in Germany

praskrishna — 2014-07-28T09:49:50Z

Subhashish Panigrahi took part in this event as a member of the OpenGLAM Working Group.

Read the details on the OpenGLAM website here. Images from the event can be seen at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:OpenGLAM_2014

Are you working in a cultural heritage institution, or interested in opening up cultural heritage data for wider reuse? On the morning prior to the start of the Open Knowledge Festival, the OpenGLAM initiative, DM2E project, Open Knowledge Germany and Wikimedia Deutschland are organising a half day workshop on open cultural data, with a special focus on German cultural heritage institutions.

During the OpenGLAM workshop, we will investigate and discuss the possibilities and obstacles of opening up your cultural data as an institution. After a round of inspiring presentation from initiatives like Europeana, Wikidata, the German Digital Library and Coding da Vinci we will continue the discussion how to overcome the barriers to opening up data in the cultural heritage sector.

Finally, we will hear from the successful local OpenGLAM groups currently active in Switzerland and Finland, and kickstart a local OpenGLAM network for German memory institutions interested in open cultural content and open access. We invite everyone to join and help think about the focus points for such a German OpenGLAM group for the future, and look forward to start up a fruitful collaboration!

Programme

9.30: Welcome & introduction to OpenGLAM – Lieke Ploeger, Open Knowledge

9.40: Lightning talks on the value of open data for cultural heritage institutions

We opened up – now what? An analysis of the open data policy of the Rijksmuseum – Joris Pekel, Europeana
1 year in digital cultural heritage – what were the walls I ran into most often & how to tear them down – Stephan Bartholmei, Deutsche Digitale Bibliothek
Wikidata – Making your data available and useful for everyone – Lydia Pintscher, Wikimedia Deutschland
How to use cultural heritage data: Coding Da Vinci results – Helene Hahn, Open Knowledge Foundation Germany
Experiences from German GLAM projects / GLAM-Wiki-Kollaborationen in der Wissenschaft - Daniel Mietchen, Museum für Naturkunde, Berlin

10.30: Coffee Break

10.45: Debate on the current situation around openness in Germany

11.30: Forming a local German OpenGLAM group

With inspiring presentations of the OpenGLAM local groups from Switzerland & Finland

13.00: End

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/news/open-data-in-cultural-heritage

WSIS +10 High Level Event: Open Consultation Process Multistakeholder Preparatory Platform: Phase Six: Fifth Physical Meeting

jyoti — 2014-10-12T05:31:48Z

The fifth physical meeting of the Multistakeholder Preparatory Platform (MPP-WSIS+10), was held from 28-31 May 2014 in Geneva as part as part of the sixth phase of the WSIS +10 High Level Event Open Consultation process. The meeting was aimed at developing draft agreed texts for the WSIS+10 Statement on Implementation on WSIS Outcomes and the Vision Beyond 2015.

Stakeholders including governments, private sector, civil society and international organizations participated in the meeting, which was chaired by Prof. Dr. V.Minkin (Russian Federation), Chairman of the Council Working Group on WSIS and the Vice Chairs of the meeting were Egypt, Switzerland and Saudi Arabia.

ITU Deputy Secretary General, Mr Houlin Zhao highlighted that WSIS+10 High Level Event as a joint effort of the UN family and re-emphasized on the commitment and hard work from all UN Agencies and the Secretariat that has processed up to 500 contributions till date. He further reiterated that this preparatory process builds upon several inputs including deliberations at WSIS Forums (2012 and 2013), WSIS+10 Visioning Challenge Initiative, 2013 WSIS+10 Multistakeholder Meeting in Paris, as well as outcomes of ITU Regional Development Forums held in six regions and led by BDT. Almost 500 multistakeholder contributions were processed by secretariat up to now.

Mr. C.Wachholz representing UNESCO and Ms. M. Kultamaa representing the CSTD Secretariat underlined the importance of the process being an important effort leading towards the Overall Review of the implementation of the WSIS outcomes by 2015. Ms. Kultamaa informed the meeting on the status of the discussions taking place at the UN General Assembly regarding the modalities of the Overall Review. She underlined that for the time being there is no consensus and discussions on this subject will continue.It is important to note that all UN organizations serve as secretariat to the preparatory process which is being coordinated by the ITU. All the Action Line Facilitators including, ITU, UNESCO, UNCTAD, UNDP, UNDESA, WMO, UNEP, WHO, UPU, ITC, ILO, FAO, and UN Regional Commissions,as well as WIPO, UN Women contributed towards the development of the Action line documents in the Vision, within their respective mandates. The meeting concluded with final agreed drafts for the WSIS+10 Statement and final agreed draft for WSIS+10 Vision Chapter A and B, with some pending issues in C.

Jyoti Panday representing CIS, participated in the meeting and intervened in the negotiations over the final agreed text. CIS made interventions on text related to increasing women's participation, freedom of expression, media rights, data privacy, network security and human rights. CIS also endorsed text on action line 'Media' which reaffirmed commitment to freedom of expression, data privacy and media rights offline and online including protection of sources, publishers and journalists.

WSIS+10 Statement on the Implementation of WSIS Outcomes

Ø Preamble, Chapter A (Agreed)

Ø Overview of the implementation of Action Lines, Chapter B (Agreed)

Ø Challenges-during implementation of Action Lines and new challenges that have emerged, Chapter C (Agreed)

WSIS+10 Vision for WSIS beyond 2015

Ø Preamble, Chapter A (Agreed)

Ø Priority areas to be addressed in the implementation of WSIS Beyond 2015, Chapter B (Agreed)

Ø Action Lines, Chapter C

С1. The role of public governance authorities and all stakeholders in the promotion of ICTs for development (Agreed)

С2. Information and communication infrastructure (Agreed)

C3. Access to information and knowledge (Agreed)

C4. Capacity building (Agreed)

C5. Building confidence and security in the use of ICTs (pending para g)

g) Continue to promote greater cooperation [among the governments and all other stakeholders,] at the United Nations and~~with all stakeholders at~~ all other appropriate ~~fora~~fora, respectively at ~~the~~ national, regional and international levels to enhance user confidence, build trust,and protect both data and network integrity as well as consider existing and potential threats to ICTs ; and address other information security and network security issues.]

Alt 1 : [ Continue to promote cooperation [among the governments [at the United Nations ]and with all other stakeholders at the United Nations and other appropriate ~~fora~~for a] to enhance user confidence, build trust, ~~and~~ protect ~~both~~ data, ~~and~~ network integrity and critical infrastructures; consider existing and potential threats to ICTs; security in the use of ICTs and address other information security and network security issues, while stressing the need to address [cybercrime and]cybersecurity issues. ~~at appropriate forums, together with all stakeholdersncluding cybersecurity, [and cybercrime]~~]

Alt 2 : [Continue to promote cooperation among the governments at the United Nations and other international organizations and with all other stakeholders at all appropriate fora to enhance user confidence, build trust, protect data, network integrity and critical infrastructures; consider existing and potential threats to ICTs; security in the use of ICTs [and address other information security ]and network security issues, while stressing the need to address cybersecurity issues. ]

Alt 3: [Continue to promote cooperation among the[ governments ~~[at the United Nations]]~~ and ~~with~~ all other stakeholders at ~~other~~ the United Nations and other appropriate fora to enhance user confidence, build trust, and protect both data and network integrity and critical infrastructure; consider existing and potential threats to ICTs; security in the use of ICTs and address other [information security] and network security issues, while stressing the need to address ~~cybercrime and~~ cybersecurity issues. ~~[at appropriate forums, together with all stakeholders], including cybersecurity, [and cybercrime]~~]

[including cybercrime] [including cybercrime and cybersecurity .][ including ICT aspects of cybercrime and cybersecurity]

[Cybercrime [and cybersecurity] should continue to be dealt with,[at the United Nations and other appropriate fora] [in appropriate forums , ]

C6. Enabling environment (Agreed)

C7. ICT Applications: (Agreed)

E-government

E-business

E-learning

E-health

E-employment

E-environment

E-agriculture

E-science

C8. Cultural diversity and identity, linguistic diversity and local content (agreed but pending para f)

f) [Reinforce [and [enhance] implement at the national level] the recommendations concerning the promotion and use of multilingualism [and universal access to cyberspace]].

C9. Media (meeting has developed three proposals that were requested to be reflected in the documents in a table format)

Discussion at the MPP Plenary meeting:	UK proposal, discussed with and supported by: Sweden, Australia, Spain, Germany, UNESCO, European Broadcasting Union, Switzerland, APIG, Centre for Internet and Society (India), Austria, Tunisia, IDEA, Cisco Systems, Mexico, United States, Japan, Canada, ICC BASIS, Intel, Internet Society, Health and Environment Program (HEP), Netherlands, and Microsoft. It was later supported by The Center for Democracy & Technology, Hungary, Czech Republic. International Federation of Library Associations, Portugal, Association for Progressive Communications, auDA (the ccTLD manager for Australia), Finland, Internet Democracy Project (India)	Proposal: Rwanda and Russia
Media will benefit from the broader and expanded role of ICTs that can enhance media’s contribution to the development goals of the post-2015 Sustainable Development Agenda. [The principles of freedom of expression and the free flow of information, ideas and knowledge are essential for the information and knowledge societies and beneficial to development with recognizing that the same rights that people have offline must also be protected online, including the right to privacy.]	Media will benefit from the broader and expanded role of ICTs that can enhance media's contribution to the development goals of the post-2015 Sustainable Development Agenda. The right to freedom of expression and the free flow of information, ideas and knowledge, and the protection of privacy, are essential for the information and knowledge societies and beneficial to development. The same rights that people have offline must also be protected online.	We reaffirm the continued relevance of all issues highlighted under action line C9 on Media (Geneva 2003) and the need for continued implementation of this action line.
1. 1. [Develop and update national ICT-Media legislation that guarantees the independence, objectivity, social responsibility, neutrality and plurality of the media according to international standards as well as the domestic needs.]	1. Develop and update national ICT-Media legislation that guarantees the independence, diversity and plurality of the media according to international standards.
2. [Continue to take appropriate measures — consistent with [international law][freedom of expression]— to combat illegal [content and to protect vulnerable groups , in particular children, from harmful content in media content] and harmful media content.]	2. Continue to take appropriate measures, consistent with international human rights law, to combat illegal media content.
3. Ensure that women and men equally access, participate and contribute to the media sector, including to decision-making processes. Alt: Work towards ensuring that women and men equally access, participate and contribute to the media sector, including to decision-making processes. Alt: Encourage that women and men access, participate and contribute on equal basis to the media sector, including to decision-making processes. [Alt: [Encourage][Ensure] [Strive] [ to leverage the potential of ICTs] to provide full and effective [equal ]opportunities to women and men to access, participate and contribute to the media sector, [including to decision-making processes]]	3. Encourage equal opportunities and the active participation of women in the media sector.
4. [Continue to encourage [independent] tradition [neutral, objective, responsible] nal media to bridge the knowledge divide and to facilitate [the freedom of expression] the flow of cultural content, particularly in rural and remote areas.]	4. Continue to encourage traditional media to bridge the knowledge divide and to facilitate the flow of cultural content, particularly in rural areas.
	5. Encourage online and offline mass media to play a more substantial role in capacity building for the information society.
5. Ensure the [safety[ and responsibility] of all journalists and media workers [and their accountability], [taking into account the provisions of article 19 of the International Convention on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR)]. ,[ including [bloggers] social media producers, and their sources and facilitate the implementation of the UN Plan of action on the safety of journalists and the issue of impunity.] [To ensure the safety of journalists and address the issue of impunity in accordance to UNGA Resolution (A/RES/68/163)]	6. Ensure the safety of all journalists and media workers, including social media producers and bloggers, and their sources and facilitate the implementation of the UN Plan of Action on the safety of journalists and address the issue of impunity
6. We reaffirm our commitment to the principles of freedom of the press and freedom of information, as well as those of the independence, pluralism and diversity of media, which are essential to the Information Society. Freedom to seek, receive, impart and use information for the creation, accumulation and dissemination of knowledge is important to the Information Society. We call for the responsible use and treatment of information by the media in accordance with the highest ethical and professional standards. Traditional media in all their forms have an important role in the Information Society and ICTs should play a supportive role in this regard. Diversity of media ownership should be encouraged, in conformity with national law, and taking into account relevant international conventions. We reaffirm the necessity of reducing international imbalances affecting the media, particularly as regards infrastructure, technical resources and the development of human skills.

C10. Ethical dimensions of the Information Society (Agreed)

C11. International and regional cooperation (Agreed)

The Chapter C, Part III: The paras highlighted in yellow below did not receive consensus.

III [Action Lines beyond 2015: Looking to the Future

[We reaffirm that effective cooperation among governments, private sector, civil society and the United Nations and other international organizations, according to their different roles and responsibilities and leveraging on their expertise, is essential, taking into account the multifaceted nature of building the Information Society.]

[We emphasize great importance of continuation of the multistakeholder implementation at the international level, following the themes and action lines in the Geneva Plan of Action, and moderated/facilitated by UN agencies. The coordination of multistakeholder implementation activities would help to avoid duplication of activities. This should include, inter alia, information exchange, creation of knowledge, sharing of best practices, and assistance in developing multi-stakeholder and public-private partnerships.]

[We reaffirm importance of the United Nations Group on the Information Society (UNGIS) created by the UN-Chief Executives Board (CEB) upon guidance by Tunis Agenda (Para 103), as an efficient and effective inter-agency mechanism with the main objective to coordinate substantive and policy issues facing the United Nations’ implementation of the outcomes of the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS).](HEP – delete)

We welcome holding of the annual WSIS Forum, which has become a key forum for multi-stakeholder debate on pertinent issues related to the Geneva Plan of Action and note that the Forum’s inclusiveness, openness, and thematic focus have strengthened responsiveness to stakeholders and contributed to increased physical and remote participation. [agreed]

We encourage all stakeholders to contribute to and closely collaborate with the Partnership on Measuring ICT for Development as an international, multi-stakeholder initiative to improve the availability and quality of ICT data and indicators, particularly in developing countries. [agreed]

[We emphasize/ recognize that the commitments to advance gender equality perspectives and undertake the necessary actions throughout the WSIS outcomes, as called for in Para 3 of Preamble under this document, should also be implemented, reviewed and monitored, consistent with other Action Lines, by UN Women in cooperation with other Action Line Facilitators.](HEP – delete)

We encourage all WSIS stakeholders to continue to contribute information on their activities to the public WSIS stocktaking database maintained by ITU. In this regard, we invite all countries to gather information at the national level with the involvement of all stakeholders, to contribute to the stocktaking. [agreed]

We also welcome continuation of the WSIS Project Prizes initiative that has been launched by ITU with involvement of all Action line facilitators as a competition that recognizes excellence in the implementation of projects and initiatives which further the WSIS goals of improving connectivity to ICTs), particularly within underserved communities, and provide a high-profile, international platform for recognizing and showcasing success stories and models that could be easily replicated. In this regard, the WSIS Stocktaking Database is of utmost importance in sharing best practices amongst WSIS Stakeholders. [agreed]

We emphasize on the importance of 17 May as World Information Society Day to help to raise awareness, on an annual basis, of the importance of this global facility, on the issues dealt with in the WSIS especially the possibilities that the use of ICTs can bring for societies and economies, as well as of ways to bridge the digital divide. [agreed]]

Vision Beyond 2015 Document

1. During the meeting, the participants agreed to replace Chapter E with the following three paragraphs and include them in Chapter B of the Vision:

34. Developing agreed goals and time-based measurable targets data and indicators along with enhanced monitoring and reporting. [agreed]

35. Encourage the ongoing assessment of progress towards the information society, as envisaged in the WSIS Outcomes, including through efforts such as the Partnership on Measuring ICT for Development which has been essential for evaluating the implementation of WSIS Action Lines. [agreed]

36. In this respect, it is necessary to continue to develop appropriate ways and means to make such measurements. [agreed]

2. A long discussion was held on the way forward. Some of the delegates expressed views that if text on WSIS Action Line C9 is not agreed, all Chapter C should not be considered as agreed, and refused to consider other items without reaching agreement on WSIS Action Line C9, while others were open to discuss further with the understanding that Chapter C is essential for the outcomes of the WSIS+10 High Level Event.

3. Some of the delegates requested for reflecting their statements in the Chairman’s Report (See Annex).

4. In conclusion the Chairman informed the meeting that the full text with all brackets will be reflected on the website and possibly forwarded to the consideration of the WSIS+10 High Level Event. He offered his availability on 9^th June 2014 for the meeting, if needed, with the aim of finalization of the text. He encouraged all stakeholders to conduct consultations to reach consensus for pending items prior to the Event.

Link to Documentation:

· Results of the pre-agreed Chapters during the Fifth Physical meeting: http://www.itu.int/wsis/review/mpp/pages/consolidated-texts.html

Background Documents: http://www.itu.int/wsis/review/mpp/#background

Annex

Statement by the Association for Proper Internet Governance
Regarding the 28-31 May Multistakeholder Preparatory Platform meeting
3 June 2014

The Association for Proper Internet Governance (APIG)[1] requests that this statement be annexed to the Chairman’s report of the Multistakeholder Preparatory Platform (MPP).

Introduction

APIG has attended all of the preparatory meetings and made numerous written and verbal submissions. Its representative has actively made constructive suggestions in order to help achieve consensus and APIG has withdrawn various proposals that it considered important when they were challenged by other participants, and this in order to find consensus. Some examples of such compromises made by APIG are presented below.

APIG is pleased that full consensus was reached regarding the Statement and parts A and B of the Vision, and that consensus was reached regarding most of part C of the Vision. However, APIG is disappointed that the rigid positions taken by some participants prevented full consensus from being reached regarding Action Lines C5 (Building confidence and security in the use of ICTs) and C9 (Media) in part C.

It must be recalled that the purpose of the discussions regarding part C was to identify action line items that would supplement the agreed action line items of the 2003 Geneva Plan of Action. The world has changed since 2003 and indeed the action lines need to be revisited and supplemented.

Agreement was reached on many supplements to the action lines. Action line C9 is related to the media, which has undergone dramatic changes since 2003. Many supplements to this action line are surely needed, but, given the complexity of the discussions, in particular regarding freedom of speech, it was not possible to reach consensus. Some participants took the view that, absent consensus on C9, none of the other supplements to the action lines could be considered to have been approved by consensus.

This is correct from a procedural point of view: nothing is agreed until everything is agreed. However, APIG is of the view that the supplements to all action lines except C9 and one item in C5 are acceptable as agreed and can be considered independently of C9 and the unresolved item in C5, while recognizing that important issues regarding C5 and C9 remain open and must continue to be discussed.

We present here the following:

1. Considerations on the multi-stakeholder process used during these preparatory meeting

2. Compromises made by APIG

3. Proposals for C5 and C9

3. Considerations on the multi-stakeholder process used during MPP meetings

The Multistakeholder Preparatory Platform (MPP) meetings were conducted on the basis of equal rights for all stakeholder and no restrictions on participation (except for registration). This allowed a wide variety of views to be heard and resulted in many valuable and diverse proposals being presented for consideration.

The leadership team (chairman and vice-chairmen) was very experienced and skilled, as was the secretariat.

Given the volume and diversity of the submitted inputs, it was APIG’s view that the leadership team should have been requested, already after the first MPP meeting, to propose compromise text. APIG regrets that many participants objected to this, and that the leadership team was tasked with proposing compromise text only at a very late state. This is particularly to be regretted because all participants agreed that the compromise text that was presented by the leadership at the end was excellent and formed an appropriate basis for further discussion and refinement. It is likely that progress would have been more rapid, and that full consensus might have been achieved, if the compromise proposals prepared by the leaderhsip had been presented at the earlier meetings of the MPP.

The meeting was conducted on the basis of unanimity. That is, no text was considered to have achieved consensus unless no participant objected to it. While this appears appealing at first sight, it can result in a small minority blocking progress towards a compromise text. And indeed this happened for some portions of the text of part C of the Vision.

If meetings are fully open, and all stakeholders have equal decision-making rights, then any stakeholder can block any proposal that, in its view, threatens its interests. Thus it will be difficult or impossible to reach consensus on delicate issues at such meetings, and this is indeed what happened at the MPP. Allowing private companies (which are stakeholders) to have the same power as other stakeholders with respect to public policy issues is problematic, see the Preamble of our submission[2] to the open consultation conducted by the ITU Council Working Group on International Internet-related Public Policy Issues (CWG-Internet). It is also problematic to allow a small number of participants, even if they are governments, to block progress.

Thus, it should be recognized that multi-stakeholder meetings in which public policy decisions are made by unanimity are not appropriate if the goal is to reach consensus on difficult issues.

An alternative would be to apply “rough consensus” rather than unanimity. But this gives a great deal of power to the leadership team, and thus makes the selection of the leadership team a very delicate matter. Such “rough consensus” cannot be held to be democratic.

APIG is of the view that multi-stakeholder process must be democratic, again, see the Preamble of our cited submission to CWG-Internet.

2. Compromises made by APIG

3. APIG would have preferred that paragaph 2 of the Preambles of both the Statement and the Vision read as follows in order to recognize recent UN Resolutions that highlight the relevance of specific human rights in the context of the evolution of ICTs since 2005, recognizing the well-known legal principle that offline rights apply equally online (our additions are shown as revision marks):

We reaffirm the human rights and fundamental freedoms enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and relevant international human rights treaties, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights; and we also reaffirm paragraphs 3, 4, 5 and 18 of the Geneva Declaration ; and we reaffirm the human rights mentioned in relevant UN Resolutions, including, but not limited to:

A/RES/68/147 . Rights of the child
A/RES/68/163. The safety of journalists and the issue of impunity
A/RES/68/167. The right to privacy in the digital age
A/RES/68/227 . Women in development
A/HRC/20/8. The promotion, protection and enjoyment of human rights on the Internet
A/HRC/RES/21/24. Human rights and indigenous People
A/HRC/RES/22/6 . Protecting human rights defenders
A/HRC/RES/ 23/2 . The role of freedom of opinion and expression in women’s empowerment
A/HRC/RES/23/3. Enhancement of international cooperation in the field of human rights
A/HRC/RES /23/10. Cultural rights and cultural diversity
A/HRC/RES/24/5 . The rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association
A/HRC/RES/25/11. Question of the realization in all countries of economic, social and cultural rights

APIG is disappointed that one participant (representing business) objected to inclusion in Action Line C2 (Information and Communication Infrastructure) of the following item, which is based on text agreed at the G20 St. Petersburg meeting[3]:

e) There is a need to identify the main difficulties that the digital economy poses for the application of existing international tax rules and develop detailed options to address these difficulties.

APIG would have preferred that the WSIS+10 recognize the dysfunctional nature of the current copyright regime for what concerns online issues and that an explicit call be included to reform that unworkable regime[4]. In particular, APIG would have preferred that item (f) of action line C6 (Enabling Environment) read as follows (changes with respect to the agreed version are shown as revision marks):

f) Foster an intellectual property rights framework that balances the interests of creators, implementers and users , by drastically reducing the length of copyright, by legalizing non-commercial downloads of copyright material, and by restricting what can be patented .

APIG would have preferred that the WSIS+10 explicitly call for the globalization of the IANA fundtion, by adding the following:

In section B (Priority areas) of the Vision, adding 37:

37) Accelerating the globalization of ICANN and IANA functions.

In action line C1 of the Vision, adding (f):

(f) Agree a formal framework that provides for all governments to participate, on an equal footing, in the governance and supervision of the ICANN and IANA functions, and that provides for effective supervision and accountability of these functions in accordance with paragraphs 29, 35, 36, 61 and 69 of the Tunis Agenda.

APIG would have preferred that (b) and (d) of C10 (Ethical Dimensions of the Information Society) read as follows (changes with respect to the agreed version are shown as revision marks):

(b) Promote respect of the fundamental ethical values in the use of ICTs and prevent their abusive usage , and in particular prevent mass surveillance.

(d) Continue to enhance the protection of privacy and personal data. Recognize that, i n the absence of the right to privacy, there can be no true freedom of expression and opinion, and therefore no effective democracy. Any violations of privacy and any restrictions on the protection of personal data must be held to be necessary and proportionate by an independent and impartial judge.

See 11 of our submission[5] to the open consultation conducted by the ITU Council Working Group on International Internet-related Public Policy Issues (CWG-Internet) and recall that, as stated by the President of Brazil, DilmaRousseff, in her speech at the UN General Assembly on 24 September 2013:

“In the absence of the right to privacy, there can be no true freedom of expression and opinion, and therefore no effective democracy.”

3. Proposals for C5 and C9

APIG would prefer the following texts for (a) of C5 and for C9.

С5. Building confidence and security in the use of ICTs

a) Continue to promote cooperation among governments at the United Nations and other appropriate intergovernmental forums, and with all stakeholders at other appropriate forums, to enhance user confidence, build trust, and protect both data and network integrity; consider existing and potential threats to ICTs, in particular threats created by weakening or compromising encryption standards; and address other information security (this being understood as defending information from unauthorized access, use, disclosure, disruption, modification, perusal, inspection, recording or destruction) and network security issues, in particular mass surveillance.

a^bis) Address cybersecurity and cybercrime in appropriate forums.

In the interests of compromise, APIG could accept deletion of the parts highlighted in yellow above. It should be noted that the text in parenthesis after “information security” was not present in the 2003 version of this text, found in 12(a) of the Geneva Plan of Action. It has been added in order to make it clear that the term “information security” is used in its ordinary sense[6], and not in other senses.

C9. Media

Media will benefit from the broader and expanded role of ICTs that can enhance media’s contribution to the development goals of the post-2015 Sustainable Development Agenda.

The principles of freedom of expression and the free flow of information, ideas and knowledge, and the protection of privacy, are essential for the information and knowledge societies and beneficial to development, recognizing that the same rights that people have offline must also be protected online.

1. Develop and update national ICT-Media legislation that guarantees the independence, and plurality of the media according to international standards as well as the domestic needs.

2. Continue to take appropriate measures — consistent with freedom of expression— to combat media content that is both illegal and harmful. Any such measures must be held to be necessary and proportionate by an independent and impartial judge.

3. Continue to encourage traditional media to bridge the knowledge divide and to facilitate the flow of cultural content, particularly in rural areas.

4. Ensure the safety of all journalists and media workers, including social media producers and bloggers, and their sources (in particular whistle-blowers) and facilitate the implementation of the UN Plan of action on the safety of journalists and the issue of impunity.

5. Ensure the privacy of all media and the secrecy all communications, including E-Mail. Any violations of privacy or secrecy shall take place only if they are held to be necessary and proportionate by an independent and impartial judge. The privacy of all media and the secrecy of all communications shall be respected in accordance with the national laws of all concerned parties.

In the interests of compromise, APIG could accept deletion of the parts highlighted in yellow above. The first part, “recognizing that the same rights that people have offline must also be protected online”, is not necessary, since it affirms a well-known legal principle and since human rights are individible.

It should be noted that the text proposed for 2 clarifies the text of 24 (c)) of the Geneva Plan of Action. That text could be misunderstood to imply that one could combat content that is harmful but not illegal. But such is not the case, since content can only be restricted if it is illegal, pursuant to article 29(2) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and article 19(3) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. That is, the Geneva Plan of Action already enshrined the principle that there should be fewer restrictions on online freedom of speech than on offline freedom of speech, because the online content can be restricted only if it is “illegal and harmful”. In this respect, see 7.1 of our submission [7] to the open consultation conducted by the ITU Council Working Group on International Internet-related Public Policy Issues (CWG-Internet).

Regarding 4 above, whistle-blowers are sources for journalists, so they are already included and their explicit mention can be omitted.

Regarding 5 above, see 11 of our cited submission to CWG-Internet.

We have omitted an action line regarding gender equality in media because we believe that a strong statement regarding gender equality should apply to all action lines and thus should appear as a chapeau before action line C1. We propose the following for this chapeau (the language is that proposed by UN Women for a potential new action line, slightly modified since it is not proposed here as an action line):

We commit to promote progress in implementing gender commitments enshrined in the WSIS outcome documents and forward-looking recommendations by pursuing practical and joint measures to advance women’s empowerment within the Information Society. The goal is to realize women’s meaningful access to ICTs and full integration of women’s needs and perspectives, and their equal participation as active agents, innovators and decision-makers. Also critical are connecting and heightening understanding of online and offline realities and addressing underlying factors that hinder women’s engagement in the Information society. Finally, we seek to develop more coherent approaches, as well as increase investments, attention and accountability measures.

1. Gender Analysis: Promote the use of “gender analysis” and associated tools and methodologies in the development of national, regional and related global frameworks, strategies and policies and their implementation, as well as better connect with women’s empowerment communities and frameworks.

2. Holistic Approaches and Structural Issues: Address underlying women’s empowerment issues in the information society, such as gender stereotypes, specific or pronounced threats to women, such as online violence, as well as provide analysis and actionable recommendations on gender issues that cut across action lines.

3. Support to Action Lines and Stakeholders: Work with and across Action Lines and specific stakeholder groups (e.g. private sector) to accelerate integration of gender equality within their remits through identification of overarching issues, programmatic opportunities, requisite investments, policy interventions, case studies and learning, and promote participation of women and gender equality stakeholders.

4. Data and Monitoring Progress: Prepare scorecards on Action Line and National level reporting on women’s empowerment. Support and promote the work of the Partnership on the Measurement of the Information Society Working Group on Gender.

[1] http://www.apig.ch

[2] http://www.itu.int/en/Lists/CWGContributionmar2014/Attachments/25//CWG-March.pdf

[3] G20 Leaders, “Tax Annex to the St. Petersburg Declaration”, G20 (6 September 2013), Annex, Action 1 http://www.g20.org/news/20130906/782776427.html

[4] In this context, see 7.3 of http://www.itu.int/en/Lists/CWGContributionmar2014/Attachments/25//CWG-March.pdf and its references.

[5] http://www.itu.int/en/Lists/CWGContributionmar2014/Attachments/25//CWG-March.pdf

[6] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_security

[7] http://www.itu.int/en/Lists/CWGContributionmar2014/Attachments/25//CWG-March.pdf

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/wsis-10-high-level-event-open-consultation-process-multistakeholder-preparatory-platform-phase-six

Centre for Internet and Society

June 2014 Bulletin

Highlights

NVDA and eSpeak

Wikipedia

Freedom of Expression

Privacy

Access to Knowledge Bulletin — June 2014

Telugu Books Re-release Under Creative Commons License

Article

Blog Entries

Events Organized

News and Media Coverage

About CIS

Follow us elsewhere

Request for Collaboration:

PMA Policy and COAI Recommendations

Introduction

International and Domestic Response to the Policy

For a Truly Inclusive Consultative Process

Loyola Faculty Enlightened About Open Edn Resources

Ten Telugu Books Re-released Under CC-BY-SA 3.0 License

The Programme

Odia Language gets a new Unicode Font Converter

WSIS+10 High Level Event: A Bird's Eye Report

The High Level Track:

The High Level Dialogues:

The Forum Track:

Conclusion:

This Twitter Account Puts a Face to the Unsung Volunteer Editors Behind Wikipedia

Research Advisory Network Meeting

Hosting of the Event

Meeting Participant List

Research Advisory Network Committees

Special Guests

OECD Staff

Commission Secretariat

Research Advisory Network Biographies

Vodafone Report Explains Government Access to Customer Data

Direct Government Access

Data Organization

Data Construction

Vodaphone’s Statistics

India and the Reports

Conclusion

May 2014 Bulletin

Highlights

NVDA and eSpeak

National Resource Kit

Other

Wikipedia

FOEX Live

Privacy

Knowledge Repository on Internet Access

Yogyakarta Meeting on Open Culture and Critical Making

Open Data in Cultural Heritage – OpenGLAM in Germany

Programme

WSIS +10 High Level Event: Open Consultation Process Multistakeholder Preparatory Platform: Phase Six: Fifth Physical Meeting

С5. Building confidence and security in the use of ICTs

C9. Media