Centre for Internet and Society

January 2013 Bulletin

praskrishna — 2013-06-11T11:56:35Z

We at the Centre for Internet & Society (CIS) wish you all a great year ahead and welcome you to the first issue of our newsletter for the year 2013. This issue brings you an overview of our research programs, events organised and participated, news and media coverage, and videos of recent events.

Jobs

CIS is seeking applications for the posts of Programme Officer (Access to Knowledge — Indic Language Initiatives), Developer (NVDA Project), Programme Officer (Access to Knowledge and Openness), and Programme Officer (Internet Governance). To apply send your resume to sunil@cis-india.org and pranesh@cis-india.org. For our Privacy project, we are seeking applications for the post of Researcher, Technology/Security Expert, Graphic Designer as well as for internships. To apply for these posts, please send in your resume to Elonnai Hickok (elonnai@cis-india.org).

Accessibility

CIS is carrying out two projects in partnership with the Hans Foundation. The first one is to create a national resource kit of state-wise laws, policies and programmes on issues relating to persons with disabilities in India and the second one is for developing a screen reader and text to speech synthesizer for Indian languages. We are also working with the World Blind Union to develop the Treaty for Improved Access for Blind, Visually Impaired and other Reading Disabled Persons, and assisting in the negotiations at WIPO:

National Resource Kit for Persons with Disabilities

Anandhi Viswanathan from CIS and Manojna Yeluri from the Centre for Law and Policy Research are working in this project. Shruti Ramakrishnan has left the project. Draft chapters have been published. Feedback and comments are invited from readers for the chapter on Haryana:

The Haryana Chapter (by Anandi Viswanathan, January 31, 2012): The state implements the provisions under the central laws, particularly the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act 1995 and the National Trust for Welfare of Persons with Autism, Cerebral Palsy, Mental Retardation and Multiple Disabilities Act 1999.

Submission / Notification

Making Public Libraries Accessible to People with Disabilities (by Rahul Cherian, January 23, 2013): CIS was one of the 20 disability rights groups that wrote to the Ministry of Culture.
Government of Madhya Pradesh initiates ICT Accessibility in Public Communication (by Nirmita Narasimhan, January 31, 2013): CIS with Daisy Forum of India member Arushi in Bhopal submitted a request for a notification mandating that all communication by the Government of Madhya Pradesh should be accessible to persons with disabilities.

Report

Accessible Broadcasting in India (by Srividya Vaidyanathan, January 11, 2013): The abridged version of ITU’s report "Making Television Accessible" which was initially put up for comments last year has been updated once again.

Blog Entry

Linking Commercial Availability and Exceptions in the Treaty for Visually Impaired/Persons with Disabilities (by Rahul Cherian, January 23, 2013).

Access to Knowledge

In partnership with the International Development Research Centre we are doing a project on Pervasive Technologies examining the relationship between production of pervasive technologies and intellectual property. The Wikimedia Foundation’s India Program to support and develop free knowledge in India is now being executed by us. We are also supporting the Iraq government in developing an eGovernment Interoperability Framework:

Wikipedia

Beginning from September 1, 2012, Wikimedia Foundation has awarded CIS a two-year grant of INR 26,000,000 to support and develop free knowledge in India. The A2K team consists of four members based in Delhi: T. Vishnu Vardhan, Nitika Tandon, Subhashish Panigrahi and Noopur Raval.

New Project Director

T. Vishnu Vardhan is the new Programme Director-Access to Knowledge at CIS. Vishnu has over the last 11 years worked in various capacities as researcher, grant manager, teacher, project consultant, information architect and translator. Vishnu managed the Art, Crafts and Culture portfolio of Sir Ratan Tata Trust and also worked as Research Coordinator at the Centre for the Study of Culture and Society.

New Distinguished Fellow at CIS

Tejaswini Niranjana, a Senior Fellow at the Centre for the Study of Culture and Society (CSCS), Bangalore, and Visiting Professor at the Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS), Mumbai is joining our team as an Adviser to the 'Access to Knowledge' project. She will guide the A2K team in expanding the Indian language Wikipedias and in increasing the number of active editors through strategic partnerships with Higher Education institutions across India.

Reports

Access to Knowledge Report — September to December 2012 (by Noopur Raval, January 31, 2013): The report covers an overview of the activities done by the Access to Knowledge team under the grant provided by the Wikimedia Foundation from September 2012 to December 2012.
Indic Language Wikipedias — Statistical Report — 2012 (by Shiju Alex, January 21, 2013): A statistical update of the Indic language Wikipedias for the year 2012 providing perspectives on the health of various Indic language communities as well as the state of various Indic language wikipedias.

Wiki Event Reports
CIS organised a series of Wiki workshops in Goa in the month of December 2012, we bring you the reports from those events.

Note: The workshops were held in the month of December 2012 but the reports were published only in the month of January.

Two-day Wiki Workshop in Goa University: An Introduction (by Nitika Tandon, January 15, 2013).
Wikipedia in St. Xavier's College, Mapusa, Goa (by Nitika Tandon, January 19, 2013).
Bringing Konkani Encyclopedia in Public Domain (by Nitika Tandon, January 22, 2013).
Promoting GLAM in Goa (by Nitika Tandon, January 24, 2013).
Konkani in Wikipedia Incubator — Taking it to the Next Level (by Nitika Tandon, January 25, 2013).

CIS also organised a Wiki workshop in Ghaziabad:

A Wiki Workshop at Raj Kumar Goel Institute of Technology, Ghaziabad (RKGIT, Ghaziabad, January 17, 2013).

Wiki Event Participated

Celebrating the success of Wikipedia in Wikipedia Summit Pune 2013 (organized by Wikipedia Club, Pune, January 12 – 13, 2013). Subhashish Panigrahi participated in the event.

Wikipedia News Coverage

First Odia Wikipedia Education Program concludes at IIMC, Dhenkanal (Odisha Diary Bureau, Dhenkanal, January 27, 2013).
Odia Wikipedia's 9th Anniversary and Workshop on Application of Odia in Media (Sambad, January 30, 2013).

Wiki Events Organised

Odia Education Program (Indian Institute of Mass Communication, Dhenkanal, Orissa, January 26, 2013).
Odia Wikipedia 9th Anniversary Celebration (Academy of Media Learning, Samantha Vihar, Bhubaneswar, Orissa, January 29, 2013).

Pervasive Technologies

The Pervasive Technologies project carries out research on the intellectual property implicated in the hardware, software and content available in low-cost mobile devices.The long-term outcome of this project is to create a legitimate, legal space for these technologies to exist on the Indian market.

Events Participated

Pervasive Technologies: Access to Knowledge in the Market Place — A Presentation by Sunil Abraham (FGV Law School, Rio de Janeiro, December 15, 2012).
Fifth International IPR Conference (GIPC 2013) (organised by ITAG Business Solutions, Hotel Lalit Ashok, Bangalore, January 30, 2013): Snehashish Ghosh made a presentation on the Pervasive Technologies Project.

Other Openness Updates

Blog Posts / Columns

The Violence of Knowledge Cartels (by Nishant Shah, Hybrid Publishing Lab, January 17, 2013).
Remembering Aaron Swartz, Taking Up the Fight (by Nishant Shah, DML Central, January 24, 2013).

Interview

Aaron Swartz: The First Martyr of the Free Information Movement: Prabir Purkayastha interviewed Lawrence Liang on Newsclick, January 19, 2013. The video is published.

Media Coverage

Bangalore hackers write code as tribute to Aaron Swartz (by Deepa Kurup, Hindu, January 21, 2013. Sunil Abraham is quoted.

HasGeek
HasGeek creates discussion spaces for geeks and has organised conferences like the Fifth Elephant, Droidcon India 2011, Android Camp, etc. HasGeek is supported by CIS and works out from CIS office in Bengaluru.
Event Organized Aaron Swartz Memorial Hacknight (CIS, Bangalore, January 19 – 20, 2013): Aaron’s collaborators such as Anand Chitipothu and A S L Devi participated in the event.

Internet Governance

With Privacy International, London we signed an agreement to facilitate the implementation of activities related to surveillance and freedom of speech and expression. In this month we have blog posts on data retention, international principles of surveillance and human rights and comparitive analysis of Indian legislation vis-à-vis draft of the International Principles on Surveillance of Communications by Ellonai Hickok, and columns by Sunil Abraham and Nishant Shah:

Privacy Research

Data Retention in India (by Elonnai Hickok, January 30, 2013): The post provides an insight into the data retention mandates from the Government of India and data retention practices by service providers.
Draft International Principles on Communications Surveillance and Human Rights (by Elonnai Hickok, January 16, 2013): These principles were developed by Privacy International and the Electronic Frontier Foundation and seek to define an international standard for the surveillance of communications.
A Comparison of Indian Legislation to Draft International Principles on Surveillance of Communications (by Elonnai Hickok, January 31, 2013): The principles, first drafted in October 2012 and developed subsequently seek to establish an international standard for surveillance of communications in the context of human rights. CIS is contributing feedback to the drafting of the principles.

Columns/Op-eds

Web of Sameness (by Nishant Shah, Indian Express, January 18, 2013).
TV versus Social Media: The Rights and Wrongs (by Sunil Abraham, The Tribune, January 20, 2013).

Statement

Statement of Solidarity on Freedom of Expression and Safety of Internet Users in Bangladesh (by Pranesh Prakash, January 15, 2013): This is a statement on the violent attack on blogger Asif Mohiuddin by the participants to the Third South Asian Meeting on the Internet and Freedom of Expression.

Blog Entries

No Civil Society Members in the Cyber Regulations Advisory Committee (by Pranesh Prakash, January 10, 2013).
Five Frequently Asked Questions about the Amended ITRs (by Chinmayi Arun, January 28, 2013): The author discusses the five major questions that have been the subject of debate after the World Conference on International Telecommunications 2012 (WCIT).

Upcoming Event

DML Conference 2013 (co-organised by CIS and Digital Media & Learning Research Hub Central, Sheraton Chicago Hotel & Towers - Chicago, Illinois, March 14 – 16, 2013).

Event Organized

An Introduction to Bitfilm and Bitcoin – A Discussion by Aaron Koenig (CIS, Bangalore, January 23, 2013): Aaron Koenig, Managing Director, Bitfilm Networks of Hamburg, Germany gave a talk.

Events Participated

Panel Discussion on E-Commerce at NLSIU (organised by National Law School of India University, Bangalore, January 7, 2013). Pranesh Prakash was a panelist.
Mobile Broadband: Leveraging for Business Transformation (Chancery Pavilion, Bangalore, January 9, 2013): Sunil Abraham was a panelist in this event.
Third South Asian Meeting on the Internet and Freedom of Expression (organized by Internet Democracy Project, Voices for Interactive Choice & Empowerment and Global Partners & Associates, Dhaka, January 14 – 15, 2013): Pranesh Prakash moderated the session on "Understanding cyber security and surveillance in South Asia”.
Is Freedom of Expression under Threat in the Digital Age? (organized by Editors Guild of India, Index on Censorship and Sage, India International Centre, New Delhi, January 15, 2013): Sunil Abraham was a panelist at this event.
7th India Digital Summit 2013 (organised by Internet and Mobile Association of India, Lalit Hotel, New Delhi, January 16 – 17, 2013): Sunil Abraham was the moderator for Plenary Session 3: Discussion on Social Media – Freedom, Moderation or Regulation.

Upcoming Event

9th International Asian Conference (organised by ITechLaw, February 14 – 15, 2013): Sunil Abraham will be participating as a panelist in the session on “Censorship of Online Content”.

Media Coverage

2012 in Review: Biometric ID Systems Grew Internationally...and So Did Concerns about Privacy (by Rebecca Bowe, Right Side News, January 1, 2013)
Cool Jobs | Parmesh Shahani, Head, Godrej India Culture Lab (LiveMint, January 4, 2013).
Clash of the cyberworlds (by Latha Jishnu, Dinsa Sachan and Moyna, Down to Earth, January 15, 2013 issue). Pranesh Prakash is quoted.
Is freedom of expression under threat in digital age? (originally published by Indo Asian News Service, January 16, 2013 and also covered in the Business Standard, Vancouver Desi, DNA, and Tech2). Sunil Abraham is quoted.
Is freedom of expression under threat in the digital age? (by Mahima Kaul, Index on Censorship, January 18, 2013).
Internet Freedom in India – Open to Debate (by Kirsty Hughes, Index on Censorship, January 22, 2013). CIS research on censorship is quoted.
Cyber security, surveillance and the right to privacy: country perspectives (by Richa Kaul Padte, Internet Democracy Project).
Surveillance Camp: Privatized State Surveillance (by Katitza Rodriguez, Electronic Frontier Foundation, January 28, 2013). Elonnai Hickok is quoted.
An innovative concept comes to the fore (Deccan Herald, January 29, 2013).

Internet Access – Knowledge Repository
In partnership with Ford Foundation, CIS was tasked to produce and disseminate modules on various aspects of telecommunications including policy, regulations, infrastructure and market. However, as on November 9, 2012 there was a change in the mandate of the project. Currently, we are working on building a knowledge repository on “Internet Access”. This new repository will cover the history of the internet, technologies involved, principle and values of internet access, broadband market and universal access. It will also touch upon various polices and regulations which has an impact on internet access and bodies and mechanism which are responsible for such policy formulation. For this purpose we will be hosting a new website: www.internet-institute.in.
We are also organizing an “Institute on Internet and Society” in collaboration with the Ford Foundation India, which is to be held from June 8, 2013 to June 14, 2013. Call for registrations and relevant details will be soon announced on our website.

Telecom

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

Column by Shyam Ponappa

What's Needed Is User-Centric Design, Not Good Intentions (by Shyam Ponappa, Business Standard, January 3, 2013 and Organizing India Blogpost, January 6, 2013).

Event(s) Participated

21^st Convergence Conference Conference India 2013 (organized by Exhibitions India Group, January 16 – 17, 2013, Pragati Maidan, New Delhi). Snehashish Ghosh participated in the event.

Digital Humanities

From 2012 to 2015, the Researchers At Work series is focusing on building research clusters in the field of Digital Humanities. We organised the first Habits of Living workshops in Bangalore last year. The next workshop is being held in Brown University:

Habits of Living Workshop

Habits of Living: Networked Affects, Glocal Effects (organised by CIS and Brown University, March 21 – 23, 2013, Brown University, Rhode Island). Nishant Shah will be speaking at this event.

About CIS
CIS was registered as a society in Bangalore in 2008. As an independent, non-profit research organisation, it runs different policy research programmes such as Accessibility, Access to Knowledge, Openness, Internet Governance, and Telecom. The policy research programmes have resulted in outputs such as the e-Accessibility Policy Handbook for Persons with Disabilities with ITU and G3ict, and Digital Alternatives with a Cause?, Thinkathon Position Papers and the Digital Natives with a Cause? Report with Hivos, etc. We have conducted policy research for the Ministry of Communications & Information Technology, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions, Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, etc., on WIPO Treaties, Copyright Bill, NIA Bill, etc.
CIS is accredited as an observer at WIPO. CIS staff participates in the Standing Committee for Copyright and Related Rights (SCCR) meetings regularly held in Geneva, and participate in the discussions and comments on them from a public interest perspective. Our Policy Director, Nirmita Narasimhan won the National Award for Empowerment of Persons with Disabilities from the Government of India and also received the NIVH Excellence Award.

Follow us elsewhere

Get short, timely messages from us on Twitter
Join the CIS group on Facebook
Visit us at http://cis-india.org

Support Us

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

Request for Collaboration

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

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

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/about/newsletters/january-2013-bulletin

Remembering Aaron Swartz, Taking Up the Fight

nishant — 2013-01-28T04:51:58Z

I encountered the Aaron Swartz memorial the other day that helps ‘liberate’ a randomly selected article from JSTOR, as an act of civil disobedience, to commemorate both the legacy that Swartz leaves behind, but also the high-profile witch-hunt case which was a crucial factor in him taking his own life.

Nishant Shah's blog post was published by DML Central on January 24, 2013.

Much has been said about Swartz and much more will have to be said about him, and about his work, to make sure that the good that men do does not get interred with their bones. And there are people more articulate, closer to him in personal and professional capacities who will do a better job at making sure we have an archive of memories to fill up the ‘Aaron sized-hole’ that his untimely death has introduced into our lives.

So instead of attempting to write a eulogy I am ill-equipped for, I want to mark the tragic loss of Aaron Swartz by talking about causes and everyday politics. And I might have to do it through a mode of collective self-flagellation because it is a point that needs to be driven home. I am sure that almost everybody would agree that the ideals that Swartz held were unimpeachable, even though they might not always agree with his tactics. There would be a general consensus that in our rapidly growing information societies free knowledge leads to better, stronger, and more equitable societies. In fact, there is a whole generation of younger users who are so used to having unlimited and unrestricted access to digital information that they often get frustrated and infuriated when they encounter media cartels and Intellectual Property Regimes that insist on locking up knowledge -- especially publicly funded academic resources -- behind paywalls.

We have all grumbled, at different points, about the essay we wanted to teach in class, the book we needed for a research paper, the movie we wanted to remix, or the song we wanted to sample, locked up behind (often) unaffordable access systems. We recognise that in the building of this gated knowledge landscape, we are creating uneven, corrupt and corrupting hierarchies of information control and access. And yet, when it comes to actually responding to these questions of closed intellectual property, restricted information access and media monopolies exerted by information cartels, we generally have a comfortable sense of distance. These are other peoples’ problems. These are battles somebody else will fight.

Even within academia, where we have been the most active in questioning and contesting the notions of power and knowledge, there is also the highest complicity in creating these monstrous behemoths that we feed regularly with research that is more often than not, publicly funded. In our quest for tenures, careers and popularity, we have voluntarily given up our rights to private and closed access journals that in return give us the symbolic capital to gain power in the system. In the 1980s, when the Subaltern school was writing against colonial legacies and cultural imperialism, Homi Bhabha had described this condition of granted agency and borrowed power as mimicry. In his own hyphenated way, he had suggested that the new subaltern, who is often seen as engaged in critically responding to the colonial masters and their legacies, only exists in a structure of mimicry -- where he emptily gestures towards the problems of colonial inheritance, without any power to actually overthrow or challenge it. Within South Asian feminisms, Kumkum Sangari has described this status of granted agency within patriarchy -- a condition that gives us a sense of power and a space of negotiation, as long as we uphold the very structure that oppresses us in the name of our empowerment.

It is time to realise that within academia, and the social sciences and arts based academia in particular, we have now perfected the art of mimicry. Where we pull our pens instead of our swords and talk (often indecipherably) about conditions of power and geographies of inequality and the need to do something about it. We attend conferences where proceedings go into closed access journals, and publish books with publishing houses that charge us and our students exorbitant sums of money to access the knowledge in those books. We publish not to be heard but to be cited, not to create open publics but closed communities of interlocked interests. And we feel smug about being politically committed, separating the conditions of our knowledge production from the content of our knowledge, as if the two have nothing to do with each other.

In other sectors that I dabble with but am not such a rank (and hence equally complicit) insider, I see similar distances. This alienation of our intellectual work from its political content is just one of the separations we make. The other separation is between our discursive communities and everyday practice. So embedded is our description, explanation and analysis of the world, in languages inaccessible to any but the privileged few who are trained to understand it. The advice we give our students -- follow the grandmother rule: write clearly so that your grandmother will be able to understand it -- is a standard we rarely practice in our academic writing.

These are symptoms I see in other sectors that are also committed to political questioning and change, working towards building better worlds and societies. Specialised lawyers fight their battles in closed court-rooms and write in obscure law journals which are not accessible or intelligible to the common public. Activists often get bogged down into appropriating the same language to be taken seriously. Advocates of causes fear over-simplification of the complex issues, keeping the everyday person outside of these battles around information and knowledge. We have built gated politics where the threshold of investment and engagement is so high, that the only response to that is detachment.

This brings me back to talking about Swartz and his dream of liberating information from the clutches of exploitative information houses. Swartz’s crime was not that he broke the law -- I wonder if the public prosecutor has never pirated material online; statistics would suggest otherwise -- but that he didn’t find allies in spaces which profess political commitment but then mimic it in their content rather than in practice. It is not surprising that even when JSTOR, the affected party, refused to push for criminal or civil charges, the University where the ‘crime’ occurred and the federal authorities decided to pursue him as a felon. Many people have wondered about why a well-loved and popular cult figure like Swartz would feel so lonely as to take this drastic step to end his life, and we now have to take responsibility that this separation of what he believed as the central tenet to life is something that his natural allies have separated out from their work.

Swartz is a folk-hero and he shall live as an icon for the groups working around internet freedom and information openness. But maybe it is time to stop waiting for another martyr to the cause. Maybe it is time to recognise that these battles around knowledge and information are not specialised fights to be played out in sombre tones by zealots on opposite sides. These are human wars, and they affect not only our everyday sense of who we are and the societies we live in, but also who we want to become and the worlds we want to create for future generations to inherit. Swartz embodies a whole generation of digital natives who fail to understand why the ethically wrong and morally reprehensible practice of protected intellectual property, that goes against the very grain of building information societies, continues to find silent supporters rather than vocal protestors. The grief and sense of loss we have with Swartz's passing is not easy to remedy. But Swartz will also be a moniker that every digital native will have to wear, as they traverse a treacherous terrain, persecuted by IP watchdogs and punished for what seems to be a natural order of things in their information worlds.

There is a lot of growing commentary with people expressing anger, shock, and sadness for the 26 year old man who died fighting a battle that we did not even become an audience to. And that commentary is necessary because we need to cope with the fact that we live in a world where somebody who believed in the most beautiful idea of a world that has free knowledge was persecuted to an early death. But at some point, we also need to stop talking and realise that we don’t have to come to arms for a moment only once-every-heroic-death. That the last disservice we will do to this everyday battle against intellectual property regime is to wait for the next icon to be trapped in this Greek tragedy structure of being punished for doing what he felt was right. It is time to start thinking of these questions of knowledge and information in our everyday life, negotiate with them beyond the narratives of convenience, and hope that there will be no more need to produce martyrs for a cause that is not just about books and music, but about being human.

Banner image credit: Maria Jesus V http://www.flickr.com/photos/favina/8377387022/

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/openness/blog-old/dml-central-jan-24-2013-nishant-shah-remembering-aaron-swartz-taking-up-the-fight

Bangalore hackers write code as tribute to Aaron Swartz

praskrishna — 2013-01-25T11:41:05Z

A small crowd gathered here on Saturday afternoon in the basement of the Centre for Internet and Society to participate in the Aaron Swartz Memorial Hacknight, organised by HasGeek.

Deepa Kurup's article was published in the Hindu on January 21, 2013. Sunil Abraham is quoted.

Hackers have been coming together the world over to hold memorial services to pay tribute to the work, and the technological and political ideas that are the legacy of Aaron Swartz, who ended his life last Saturday.

A small crowd gathered here on Saturday afternoon in the basement of the Centre for Internet and Society to participate in the Aaron Swartz Memorial Hacknight, organised by HasGeek, a company that hosts technology events in the city.

For the first few hours, before getting down to the technological brass tacks of writing code and contributing to open data projects, they discussed the legacy of the young programming genius; right from co-writing the RSS standard at the age of 14 (which created a standard format for getting feeds of changing web content) to his advocacy against regressive copyright legislations and closed data regimes.

The hacknight, which commenced at 2 p.m., went on till early Sunday morning. It was meant to take forward the legacy of Swartz by coming up with projects that liberate data in the Indian context, as well as working on some of the projects and code that Swartz left unfinished.

“Besides these unfinished projects, there are a lot of ideas on political activism and running campaigns that we need to record and learn from. We also want to maintain some of the tech projects he ran,” says Kiran Jonnalagadda of HasGeek.

This motivated him, and a few others who have collaborated with Swartz on OpenLibrary.org and Internet Archive, to organise this tribute.

Most of the projects that are being worked on at the hacknight have at the core the idea that public data must be accessible and should be used for public good. For instance, one of the groups here proposed to build an interface that can extract data from the electoral rolls so that it becomes easier for citizens to check their names and coordinates on the voter ID list. Another group is working on writing code to extract simple data on passenger reservation and ticket availability to create a database that can then be used to chart simple trends. Yet another team is working on creating a similar web interface that can extract weather data using the weekly updates uploaded by the weather department.

These projects, Mr. Jonnalagadda points out, are all attempts to liberate data, much like what each of the projects Swartz initiated.

Speaking at the event, he said: “Swartz’s death bothered me quite a bit. A guy way ahead of his time, his political activism is an inspiration for many of us here who are working with open data. And we need to preserve this.”

Sunil Abraham, director, CIS, spoke about Swartz and the ethical landmines he stumbled into with the JSTOR case, where he was charged for hacking into and downloading millions of academic papers from the subscription database of JSTOR (short for Journal Storage) in 2011. He put this in the context of American foreign policy rhetoric based on Internet freedom, which restricts itself to freedom of expression and doesn’t include access to knowledge.

“This isn’t the case in India, where the Supreme Court has on various occasions spoken in favour of access to knowledge for example in the Cricket Association Of Bengal decision in 1995 where it was determined that the right to watch cricket cannot be restricted by private broadcasters or channels. This difference was why Swartz, who believed Internet freedom includes access to knowledge, was not defended by Hillary Clinton, who identifies herself as an advocate for Internet freedom.”

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/news/the-hindu-deepa-kurup-january-21-2013-bangalore-hackers-write-code-as-tribute-to-aaron-swartz

Internet Freedom in India – Open to Debate

praskrishna — 2013-01-25T10:45:56Z

In the aftermath of an Index on Censorship debate in New Delhi, Kirsty Hughes says India’s web users are standing at a crossroads

This article by Kirsty Hughes was published in Index on Censorship. CIS's research on censorship is quoted.

If debate is a sign of a positive environment for internet freedom, then India scores highly. From debates in parliament, and panel discussions (including Index’s own recent event) to newspaper editorials, blogs and tweets on the rights and wrongs of internet freedom, controls on the web, and India’s position in the international debate, there is no shortage of voices and views.

India has around 120 million web users — a large number but still only about 10 per cent of the country’s population. As cheaper smart phones enable millions more to access the net on their mobiles, India’s net savvy population is set to soar in the next few years. But what sort of online environment they will find is open to question — and to wide debate.

India has some very broad laws that could apply to a wide range of online speech, comment and criticism. These laws have been so far rather randomly applied. But the cases that have arisen — from individuals criticising politicians by email, Facebook or Twitter to some of the big web companies such as Google and Facebook (both facing numerous takedown requests and court cases in India) — show just why India needs to look at limiting both the range of some of its net laws, and to stop these laws criminalising a range of speech.

In 2012, there was widespread outcry in India when two women were arrested for complaining on Facebook about the disruption caused by the funeral of Bal Thackeray, leader of the right wing Hindu party, Shiv Sena. They were arrested under the infamous section 66A of India’s IT Act (2008) which criminalises “grossly offensive” and “menacing” messages sent by electronic means, but also “false” messages sent to cheat, deceive, mislead or annoy, taking online censorship beyond offline laws.

India’s telecom minister Kapil Sibal spoke out against the arrests. And as part of the fallout, guidelines were announced that in future any such charges could only be brought by senior police. But how effective such a restriction might be was challenged, with aTimes of India editorial suggesting “rampant political interference in law enforcement is itself a burning issue…so to argue that senior police officers will always resist mob pressure or political diktats isn’t persuasive.”

Other parts of the IT Act (2008) are also causing a chilling atmosphere in India’s cyber sphere — with new regulations introduced in 2011 obliging internet service providers to take down content within 36 of a complaint (whether an individual, organisation, government body or anyone else) or face prosecution. The law covers a sweeping range of grounds for complaint, including “grossly harmful”, “harassing, “blasphemous” and more. It also is confused on liability – holding intermediaries large and small responsible for content on websites and platforms.

One of India’s leading policy centres on digital issues, the Centre for Internet and Society, decided to test how this 36-hour takedown rule could result in censorship of innocuous and legal content on web sites. They sent complaints to four main search engines across a range of content — and as a result got thousands of innocuous posts removed; a censor’s dream outcome.

Despite a debate in parliament calling for repeal of the 2011 rules, for now they remain.

Some observers suggest the Indian government is catch-up mode, not fully understanding the reach or nature of social media or how to deal with the international range and speed of the web today — something plenty of other governments around the world are showing some confusion about. Some think the lively debate on net freedom in India reflects the voice and demands of the growing Indian middle class. But whether those demands remain pro-freedom is yet to be seen as internet penetration grows apace.

There are some other encouraging signs. While many in India are not keen at US dominance of key parts of internet regulation, there was concern from business and civil society ahead of the International Telecommunications Union summit in December 2012, when the Indian government looked like it might advocate some form of top down control of the web as an alternative. In the event, India, like the EU and US, did not go along with Russia, China and others keen to include net governance into the ITU’s remit.

India is going to be an increasingly influential voice in global internet debates — with its rapidly growing number of netizens and its increasing clout more widely in a multipolar world.

Its healthy and lively debate about digital freedom stands as a beacon of hope in the face of some of its more disturbing laws. But the laws will need to change, if India is to be a country that stands for internet freedom.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/news/index-on-censorship-kirsty-hughes-january-22-2013-internet-freedom-in-india

Aaron Swartz: The First Martyr of the Free Information Movement

lawrence — 2013-01-24T12:26:02Z

Well known American computer programmer, writer, political organizer and Internet activist died on January 11, 2013. Lawrence Liang from the Alternative Law Forum discusses with Newsclick the tragic loss. The interview was conducted by Prabir Purkayastha.

This interview was originally published by NewsClick on January 19, 2013.

Discussing on the immediate background in which this tragic event happened, Lawrence says that all of us are collectively mourning the death of an extremely talented individual. He adds that Aaron was facing a very difficult trial ahead. A couple of years ago he had plugged his computer on to the MIT network and had downloaded approximately four million articles from JSTOR (primary database for social science and other science journals) and he had intended to make freely available. This act of his in many ways marks Aaaron's short life but one which is marked by a certain commitment and activism around the idea of free knowledge.

Lawrence further says that his anger at databases like JSTOR was the fact that they were charging extraordinary amounts of money to provide access (which meant that they were not available to most people in the world) without paying any royalty to the authors contributing to the article or to the people who do the peer review of the articles. Here is a scenario which is rent control of the worst kind essentially of knowledge which is completely privatised and enclosed (public knowledge which is enclosed in this particular way).

Most researchers and academics who work and contribute towards making of journals do not get compensated for it but are paid for by public money because they happen to be employed by universities or research centres. And then all this material goes behind pay walls. And that is the context in which we need to understand Aaron's life. Click below to watch the full interview:

Video

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/openness/blog-old/aaron-swartz-the-first-martyr-of-free-information-movement

Making Public Libraries Accessible to People with Disabilities

Rahul Cherian — 2013-01-24T11:10:18Z

The Centre for Internet & Society was one of the 20 disability rights groups that wrote to the Ministry of Culture on January 23, 2013 seeking remedial action on the barriers faced by persons with disabilities in accessing public libraries in India.

To,
Hon’ble Ministers of Culture, HRD, Social Welfare
Secretaries of the above Ministries/Departments
January 23, 2013

Dear Sir/Madam

Sub: Making Public Libraries Accessible for Persons with Disabilities

We, the organizations representing persons with disabilities listed at the end of this document would like to bring to your attention for your urgent remedial action on the barriers faced by persons with disabilities in accessing public libraries in the country.

As you are aware, India has approximately 150 million persons with disabilities[1]who have the inalienable fundamental right to life as enshrined in the Constitution including the right to seek knowledge and education. Public libraries play a critical role in creating an enabling environment for citizens to gain knowledge, information and education. This is particularly true in the case of persons with disabilities who have limited access to purchase books through mainstream shops due to various barriers including lack of physical access to shops, lack of availability of books in accessible formats like Braille, etc. India has signed and ratified the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, and therefore India is required to "to take all appropriate measures, including legislation, to modify or abolish existing laws, regulations, customs and practices that constitute discrimination against persons with disabilities[2], "to develop, promulgate and monitor the implementation of minimum standards and guidelines for the accessibility of facilities and services open or provided to the public[3]” and take all appropriate measures to ensure that persons with disabilities enjoy access to libraries[4]

The recent copyright amendments enabling libraries to convert their collections into accessible formats free of cost for the benefit of persons with disabilities coupled with technological developments in the form of cost effective screen reading software have created an unprecedented opportunity to make libraries accessible to persons with visual impairment and dyslexia. Additionally increased clarity on standards for physical access also now enables libraries to be made physically accessible without expensive modifications to enable wheelchair users and those with limited mobility access the libraries.

We understand that the Ministry of Culture has constituted a high powered committee as part of the National Mission on Libraries to look into revamping the library system in the country. We urge that the issue relating to making public libraries accessible to persons with disabilities is taken up by the government on a fast track basis, a separate budget is allocated for this exercise and libraries are made accessible on a priority basis. Please find attached a brief note on the steps to be taken to make libraries accessible to persons with disabilities.

We recommend that regional consultations are conducted through which additional data can be gathered on regional/language/types of communication/availability of power and related issues. We also urge you take steps to extend library services to rural areas across the country. We are happy to assist the government in this initiative. Do let us know how we can contribute to this effort.

Thank you and best regards,

Inclusive Planet Centre for Disability Law and Policy (www.inclusiveplanet.org.in)
Rahul Cherian
+91 98403 57991
rahul.cherian@inclusiveplanet.org.in
AccessAbility (www.accessability.co.in)
Shivani Gupta+91 93102 45743
shewany@gmail.com
Xavier’s Resource Centre for the Visually Challenged (www.xrcvc.org)
Sam Taraporevala
+91 99670 28769
sam@xrcvc.org
Saksham Charitable Trust (www.saksham.org)
Dipendra Manocha
+91 98180 94781
dipendra.manocha@gmail.com
National Platform for the Rights of the Disabled
Murali Alathur
+91 98687 68543
nprd.in@gmail.com
National Institute of Speech and Hearing (www.nish.ac.in)
Samuel Mathew
+91 99615 68443
snm@nish.ac.in
Centre for Internet and Society (www.cis-india.org)
Nirmita Narasimhan
+91 98458 68078
nirmita@cis-india.org
Indian Institute of Cerebral Palsy (www.iicpindia.org)
Jeeja Ghosh
+91 94330 45340
jeeja.ankur@gmail.com
National Centre for Autism (www.autism-india.org)
Merry Barua
+91 98102 25923
merry.barua@gmail.com
Ability Foundation (www.abilityfoundation.org)
Janaki Pillai
ability@abilityfoundation.org
Nilesh Singit, Disability Rights Activist
+9199205 58867
contact@nileshsingit.org
Andhjan Kalyan Trust (www.aktrust.org)
Praful Vyas
+9194282 61878
aktrust.drj@gmail.com
AccessIndia
Harish Kotian
hpkotian@rbi.org.in
Blind Graduates Forum of India
Harish Kotian
hpkotian@rbi.org.in
Tamilnadu Handicapped Federation Charitable Trust
T.M.N Deepak
+91 98406 46953
deepaknathan@gmail.com
Human Rights Law Network AP Unit
M.A. Shakeel
mashakeel2000@gmail.com
Global Ability in Disability
Sai Padma
+91 9052627070
saipadma@gmail.com
Mitra Jyothi
Madhu Singhal
mj.tblibrary@gmail.com
Vaishnavi Jayakumar, Human Rights Activist
jayakumar.vaishnavi@gmail.com
Swadhikaar
Pavan Muntha
pavanmuntha@gmail.com
Samarthyam (www.samarthyam.org)
Anjlee Agarwal
+91 98105 58321
samarthyaindia@yahoo.com

With inputs from:

Stephen M. Shore, Ed.D.
Assistant Professor of Special Education, Adelphi University
International consultant, presenter, and author
Person on the autism spectrum
USA
Tania Meinyczuk
Director, Autistic Strategies Network
Autistic Consultant
South Africa
Shellique Carby
Self-Advocate
South Africa
Fazli Azeem
South Asian Self-Advocate for the Autism Spectrum
Fulbright Scholar @ MassArt Boston, USA
www.fazliazeem.com
Pakistan
Michael Vestergaard Drejer
IT Consultant
Denmark

Making Public Libraries Inclusive For Persons With Disabilities – An Overview

Problem Statement

It is estimated that India has approximately 150 million persons with disabilities[5] (“PWDs”). Depending on their disability, PWDs have varying degrees of problems in accessing libraries and the material available at libraries. PWDs cannot access the premises of libraries since the buildings themselves are not accessible. People who are blind or have low vision cannot access reading material in libraries since the reading materials are not in formats that are accessible. It is estimated that less than 0.5% of books are available in formats that are accessible by people who are blind or have low vision. It is therefore critical that libraries in India are made inclusive so as to become accessible by PWDs.

Suggestions For Improvement

Given below are suggestions to make the public library system inclusive to PWDs based on internationally recognized best practices:

Accessibility
Structural modifications must be made to the library to ensure that PWDs can use the library building easily and safely, without any barriers or obstructions. Some of the modifications required include accessible parking, clear paths of travel to and throughout the facility, entrances with adequate, clear openings or automatic doors, handrails, ramps and elevators, accessible tables and public service desks, and accessible public conveniences such as toilets, and drinking fountains. Other reasonable modifications may include visible alarms in toilets and general usage areas and signs that have Braille and easily visible character size, font, contrast and finish.
For further information see Annexure 1 and http://socialjustice.nic.in/glinecpwd.php
Accessible Formats and Library as a Distribution Centre
People, who are blind, have low vision, dyslexia and other print disabilities cannot access reading materials in printed formats. They require reading material in “accessible formats” such as Braille, large print, audio recordings and electronic formats including digital talking books. In addition, people with some disabilities may find it difficult to come to the library. Under the recently amended Copyright Act libraries can convert books into the accessible formats specified above free of cost and without requiring permission from publishers and can distribute them in physical form and in electronic form including over the Internet to persons with disabilities.

Libraries now have the unprecedented opportunity to create an extensive collection of reading material in the accessible formats mentioned above in English and all Indian languages and make them available at the library in the form of physical copies, on CDs and other media, as well as over the Internet. The catalog of the collection must be in accessible formats. For digitization of books State Level Focal Points to be created for this purpose possibly at State level libraries. For further information on the standards to be adhered to when the library undertakes digitization see Annexure 2. State Level Focal Points will get production done through outsourcing or with some inhouse facilities for production of digital content. A National Level Focal point with full time staff will be required for standardization and networking between the State Level Focal Points and maintaining the central server as mentioned below. The central server will have a database containing digital copies of works in accessible formats created by the State Focal Points and other organizations that undertake the conversion of material into accessible formats such as the National Federation of the Blind[6], All India Confederation of the Blind[7], Daisy Forum of India[8] and the Indian Institute of Cerebral Palsy.[9] Requests for books in accessible formats can be sent to these organizations as well. The central server will also be connected to the Braille presses. Each public library at the district level will act as a distribution point for accessible formats and will be connected to the central server so that requests for books at each of the libraries can be sourced from the database on the central server. This is advantageous as the list of books available at each library will be constantly updated once they are added to the database. In addition, persons with disabilities must be able to download books in accessible formats from the database without coming to the library.

The website of each library must contain the catalog of material available in accessible formats and the services provided for persons with disabilities. The website of the libraries and the centralized database must adhere to the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0 as outlined by the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) so that persons with print disabilities can access the websites and the database. Each library must take orders for accessible books from library users over the internet and over the telephone and source the books from other libraries. Libraries must work together to enable interlibrary exchange of books in accessible formats including hard copy Braille books.

All existing books published in India must be digitized over a period 7 years and all new books must be digitized within 60 days of their first publication in India. Special efforts must be made to provide accessible formats in Indian languages as these are extremely limited. An advisory committee consisting of specialist representatives from disability organizations, among others, may be constituted to oversee the implementation of this project. The expert committee will be associated with both the National Level Focal Points and the State Level Focal Points.
Assistive Aids and Equipment
PWDs require certain assistive aids and equipment to be able to fully utilize the services of the library and the information available therein. Some forms of accessible formats specified above can only be accessed using assistive aids. Libraries must provide the assistive aids/equipment specified in Annexure 3.
Training and sensitization
Adequate training and sensitization must be given to library staff to ensure that they are able to interact with PWDs. This training can be in the nature of a short refresher course and the training and sensitization programs must be evolved in consultation with the disability sector and must be conducted with the assistance of experts in the disability space.
Specialized personnel and services
The library should have a dedicated person to interact with persons with disabilities. This person should have a background in disability, highly motivated, familiar with sign language and also be responsible for providing specific assistance required by persons with disabilities such as guiding them to print out books in Braille, procuring books from the online database etc. The library should offer specialized services to PWDs including a telephonic help line and home delivery of books ordered online or over the phone and reading service at designated times at the library. It is pertinent to note that literature for the blind has no postal fees. Each library must have a specific section on disability related reading material. It is also essential to cooperate with other libraries around the world to share learning.

Annexure 1[10]

Accessibility

a. Outside the library

The main gate of the entrance of the library must be made accessible in accordance with applicable accessibility standards. If the main entrance cannot be made accessible, a secondary accessible entrance should be provided.
At least covered three parking spaces marked with the international symbol of Accessibility (wheelchair symbol) close to the library entrance must be provided.
Clear and easy to read signposting must be provided.
Unobstructed and well lit access paths from the main gate to the entrance of the library must be provided. All steps must be replaced/complimented with ramps having less than 5% gradient, with railings on both sides.
Smooth and non-slip surface must be used throughout.

b. Getting into the library

A person using any kinds of support such as wheelchair, crutches or walker, cane, or guide dog, should be able to enter through the door and pass through security check points, if any, without encountering obstacles.
All mobility aids and assistive devices including wheelchairs, walkers, communicators among others must be able to pass through security checkpoints, if any.
Applicable accessibility standards must be adhered to.
Sufficient space must be provided in front of the door to allow a wheelchair to turn around.
Entrance door should be wide enough to allow a wheelchair to enter.
Non-automatic doors should be operable using one hand.
Glass doors, if any, must be highlighted with contrast colour band at eye level to prevent persons with low vision banging into these.
Stairs and steps edges must be marked with a contrasting color band.
Pictogram signs must be provided for services and amenities such as toilets, elevators, stairways.
Elevators, if any, must be well lit with buttons and signs in Braille and synthetic speech.
Elevator buttons reachable from a wheelchair.
At least 5 wheelchairs (preferably motorized) or mobility scooters must be made available for use by persons with physical disabilities

c. Inside the library

All parts of the library should be accessible.
The catalogs must be available in accessible formats.
Clear and easy-to-read signs with pictograms must be provided.
Service desks should be located close to the entrance.
A certain number of tables and computer workstations should be adapted for persons in wheelchairs.
Shelves must ideally be reachable from a wheelchair
Chairs with sturdy armrests must be provided
Unobstructed aisles between bookcases must be provided and wide enough to accommodate wheelchairs and one person not on a wheelchair.
Visible and audible fire alarms must be provided.
Non-fluorescent lighting. In case fluorescent lighting is used there must be an area free of visual clutter and sharp light contrasts, with plain walls and cubicles.
Printers must be kept in areas away from reading areas to reduce sound in the reading areas.
Suitable sound insulation to be used to minimize sound in the reading areas.
Stack area should have clear aisle space for wheelchair and bi-lateral crutch users (3ft. min.). Where book stacking is in shelves and areas beyond reach of persons with disabilities using mobility aids, human assistance should be available to access books.
Plants inside the space can help with air filtering, which can make a huge difference to the level of comfort.

d. Toilets

The library should have at least one toilet for PWDs, equipped with the following:

Clear signs with pictogram indicating the location of the toilets
Door wide enough for a wheelchair to enter and sufficient space for a wheelchair to turn around
Room enough for a wheelchair to pull up next to the toilet seat
Toilet with handles and flushing lever reachable for persons in wheelchairs
Alarm button reachable for persons in a wheelchairs
Washbasin, mirror at the appropriate height

e. Information Desk and Circulation desk

The desks must be of adjustable height to enable persons in wheelchair to be able access the desk
Chairs must be provided at the desk
Induction loop system for hearing impaired persons

Annexure 2

Standards for material converted into digital formats by libraries

Master Digital Documents of converted material must be maintained in DAISY XML format.
All Master Digital Documents in Indic Languages must be encoded in Unicode [UTF8/16] and formatted using a royalty-free Open Type Font.
All Master Digital Documents must be tagged according to DAISY standards to capture semantic information for parts, units, chapter headings, subsections, pagination, ordered and un-ordered list, tables, images along with their alternative text, math equations, title, author, footnote, end-note, text box, abbreviation, acronym, etc.
Metadata information about the publication as prescribed in the DAISY Standards must be added to all Master Digital Documents.
Distribution of digital copies of the Master Digital Documents through web sites or otherwise must be done in epub format.
If other standards are used for different target populations those standards must be compliant with the National Open Standards Policy and the Interoperability Framework for E-Governance in India.
DAISY audio format for Indic languages.

Annexure 3

Assistance Aids/Equipment

For assisting persons with Visual Impairment or blindness or autism spectrum disorders:

Persons with vision impairments or blindness or autism spectrum disorders would benefit from software and hardware for enlarging displays on the monitor or reading material through a speech synthesizer.

Some of the most common assistive aids/equipment are:

For magnification

Screen-magnification software. This program allows people with low vision to access computer information by enlarging the screen display or tailoring the display to accommodate their disability.

Large magnification devices such as closed-circuit television magnifiers (CCTV). This system employs a video camera lens to enlarge text from three to thirty times normal text size

Handheld magnifiers

For Screen reading

Screen reader software programs enables individuals who are blind or visually impaired to access the information on a computer screen through voice output. Some examples are NVDA (an open source software) or Dolphin or Jaws (proprietary software). Screen reading software with Indian language support must be provided. Scanning and reading software helps those with low or no vision. Scans printed text and verbalizes the text via synthetic speech using optical character recognition technology.

At least one computer must face outward and not against the wall since people with autism spectrum disorders find it disturbing to have people walking behind them.

For Braille support -

Braille Translating Software - To produce correctly formatted and coded Braille one needs a Braille Translation Software. A document prepared by a word processing program is loaded into the translation software. The final document may be printed in Braille by a Braille embosser.
Braille Embosser - Braille embossers print Braille output from a computer by punching dots onto paper and enable users to make hard copies of documents.
Refreshable Braille displays and DAISY players.

All multimedia content to have audio descriptions

For Assisting people with Hearing Impairment or Deafness

Users with deafness or have hearing impairments do not have problems using the computer except problems will arise from programs and websites that have audio cues.

Sound Sentry This option directs the operating system to display a visual signal when a sound is generated by a Windows application. Sound sentry in built into Windows and Apple operating systems.
All multimedia content to have captions

For Assisting people with Learning Disabilities

Specialized software programs and hardware for people who have learning differences will display print as well as provide auditory reading of the text simultaneously.

For Assisting people with Physical Disabilities

Persons with physical disabilities may need assistance in using the computer apart from having physical accessibility. The following items increase computer usability and safety:

Special input devices such as trackballs, joysticks, switches, touch pads, and augmented keyboards (micro keyboards or oversize keyboards with enlarged keys)
A computer camera/tracker allows users to manipulate the cursor through head movement.
Software utilities that replaces the functionality of a standard keyboard with a full-featured, onscreen keyboard.
Speech to text software such as Dragon Naturally Speaking
Motorized wheelchairs to be used by physically impaired users especially motorized chairs whose seat can raise so that users can reach books on higher shelves on the rack.
Availability of reachers to access books that may be placed too low or too high on the book rack.
Page turners

Useful Links

American Library Association: http://www.ala.org/ascla/asclaissues/libraryservices
International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions: http://archive.ifla.org/VII/s9/nd1/iflapr-89e.pdf
World Wide Web Consortium: http://www.w3.org/WAI/

[1]. The World Health Organization estimates that 15% of the population is disabled. http://www.who.int/disabilities/world_report/2011/factsheet.pdf
[2]. Article 4.1 (b) of the UNCRPD
[3]. Article 9.2 (a) of the UNCRPD
[4]. Article 30. 1 (c) of the UNCRPD
[5]. The World Health Organization estimates that 15% of every population is disabled. http://www.who.int/disabilities/world_report/2011/factsheet.pdf
[6]. For more information see www.nabindia.org
[7]. For more information see www.aicb.org.in
[8]. For more information see www.daisyindia.org
[9]. For more information see www.iicpindia.org
[10]. Based on checklist prepared by the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions available at http://archive.ifla.org/VII/s9/nd1/iflapr-89e.pdf. These should be over above the guidelines prescribed here http://socialjustice.nic.in/glinecpwd.php

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/accessibility/blog/making-public-libraries-accessible-to-people-with-disabilities

Celebrating the success of Wikipedia in Wikipedia Summit Pune 2013

subha — 2013-04-16T12:48:40Z

Wikipedia Club Pune, a local community based outreach user group in Pune has recently organized Wikipedia Summit Pune 2013 to spread words about “Spoken Wikipedia”, a project to add recorded audio for Indic language Wikipedia articles which will help the disabled to access Wikipedia and “Bridging Editor Gender Gap.”

On January 12 and 13, 2013, I was in Pune to participate in the Wikipedia Summit Pune 2013, a two day event organized by Wikipedia Club Pune to promote Wikipedia as an effective means of education, to empower and reach out to India, to bring the country under a spotlight through Spoken Wikipedia, and to bridge the gender gap of Wikipedia editors. Here is a summary of the activities.

Day 1

On the first day, January 12, more than 100 people including students from almost 10 different schools, housewives, working professionals and free and open source activists participated. The opening ceremony began with talks from Abhishek Suryawanshi, founder member of Wikipedia Club Pune, Sudhanwa Jogelkar, President of Wikimedia India Chapter, Rishi Aacharya, Principal, PAI International Learning Solutions, and social activist Ms. Vibha.

Before the formal opening Abhishek spoke for a while about the Spoken Wikipedia project which is one main agenda of the two days event. He explained about the need of spoken wikipedia, especially for people with disabilities and how effective it would be when it spreads in 20 Indic languages. In the past wikipedians in Pune gathered and recorded articles in various Indian and international languages.

Sudhanwa Jogelkar, President, Wikimedia India Chapter introduced the chapter's role for Wikimedia movement to the audience. He spoke about the chapters' in few of the national events/projects like Wiki Loves Monument, GLAM project in Crafts Museum, Delhi and many other outreach events. There were few announcements about the chapter on the MoU to be signed from the chapter with district collector of Kanyakumari, the India Chapter being partner to Springfest, IIT, Kharagpur, Commons day celebration in February and GNUnify 2013, Pune.

Vibha, a social activist based in Delhi spoke about gender discrimination in many aspects of our social and professional life. Access to knowledge for free could bridge this and Wikipedia, being so known universally and accessed by millions of people every day could be the best platform for this.' says Vibha.

Rishi Aacharya, Principal of PAI International brought the vedic saying "Ya vidya sa vimuktaye" to explain the real meaning of knowledge which is free of its existence in an Indian context. He spoke about open source movement and Wikipedia's part in it.

After the formal opening there was a Q&A session for the participants to clarify various questions they had about Wikipedia. Then they were explained about the three parallel sessions: An Open Discussion about Gender Gap, Workshop for Indic Languages, and Spoken Wikipedia. The session on gender gap was attended by many school students. Vibha and some activists coordinated this event. In the Workshop for Indic languages and Spoken Wikipedia, wikipedians helped participants for the workshop with basic editing and the participants edited Marathi and Hindi Wikipedia. Articles from various medical subjects of common interest were chosen. There were three medical professionals to support with the medical terminologies for editors contributing to Marathi and Hindi Wikipedia.

At the end of the day there were separate wrap up tracks to summarize the learning of whole session. All of the participants gathered together to educate each other about the work they have done. Many of the participants spoke about their experience and learnings. Plans for the next day was announced. Wikipedians gathered for a group photo and socialized after the closing talks.

Day 2

The second day, January 13, of the Wikipedia Summit in Pune was a sequel of the activities which happened on the first day. More than 40 students took part in this session. Vibha, Srishti and team were coordinating the gender gap track. Many topics related to Gender Gap, gender based discrimination, Role of gender gap in occupation, Gender gap in Wikipedia, Participation of Woman editors on Wikipedia were discussed.

One of the participating Wikipedians recording his voice for a Marathi article	Spoken Wikipedia is a project to bring out editors who are willing to contribute to Wikipedia by reading the Wikipedia articles, recording them and the uploading them to WikiCommons. These recorded audio could be used for articles on various Indic Wikipedias and would be really useful for users with disabilities. The first workshop was aimed for contribution for articles related to common diseases. "Those who are blind and unable to read can listen to the articles and get information. This will be beneficial to a lot of people", says Atharva, a school student who has contributed to an article about Rabies on Marathi Wikipedia.

Participants of the Spoken Wikipedia session worked on the articles on Hindi and Marathi Wikipedia and moved them from sandboxes to article namespaces. After all of the articles were created they recorded them. They formed groups of 3-4 members and worked together. One of them would search information mainly from the English Wikipedia articles and some of the available Marathi (or Hindi), some others would translate and the other member would record it using a mobile phone. That was a great team effort.

Over 25 voluntary organizers joined hands for making this a success. There were about 120 participants. At the end of the day participants from both the sessions gathered. Many of the participants and organizers shared their experiences and learnings. The program was concluded with socializing, taking group pictures, promises to stay in touch and taking active part in more Wikipedia activities.

This event was co-hosted by Centre for Internet and Society with a financial support of ₹ 21,600 granted by Kusuma Foundation.

Also see:

Wikipedia Summit Pune: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Summit_Pune
Wikipedia Club Pune: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Club_Pune
Pictures: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikipedia_Summit_Pune
Spoken Wikipedia Project: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Spoken_Wikipedia_-_India
Pune Club facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/groups/WikipediaClubPune

Video

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/openness/blog-old/celebrating-the-success-of-wikipedia-in-wikipedia-summit-pune-2013

Global IP Convention 2013

praskrishna — 2013-01-21T09:58:18Z

The convention is being held in Bangalore from January 23 to 30, 2012.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/global-ip-convention

Indic Language Wikipedias — Statistical Report — 2012

shiju — 2013-02-03T02:40:48Z

I have compiled the statistical update of the Indic language Wikipedias for the year 2012. As usual, in this report, my aim is to provide my perspectives on the health of various Indic language communities as well as the state of various Indic language wikipedias.

(The period of analysis is editor contributions between December 1, 2011 to December 31, 2012. December to December data is taken to account for the seasonal variations). Read the 2011 report here and the 2010 report here. The data for this report and analysis is based on the statistical data published at http://stats.wikimedia.org. A special thanks to Erik Zachte for compiling all this information.

Here is my executive summary after analyzing the data for 2012 and my experince with building some wiki communities:

Steady and sustainable growth is available for communities which focus on community building.
Small languages with guidance and support are making huge progress than many big languages.
Lack of support from proper channels at the much needed time had affected the community growth of some communities.
Even though many outreach programs had happened across country, that is not showing up in terms of number of active editors.
Still many language communities (especially big languages) are not open to the idea of reaching out to the speakers of the respective language.
Pageviews of Indic projects continues to increase.

This report is presented in the following sequence. This is done so because I believe that community is central to the Wikimedia movement. Community will give us content which will drive readership.

Community
Content
Readership

Community

As mentioned above, according to me, community is the backbone of Wikimedia movement. But still many communities are not understanding the importance of this. It is important that all language wiki communities give adequate importance to community building to build the free knowledge repository in their language. The following table gives information based on two important parameters about the community. The first parameter shows the highly active editors (more than 100 edits per month) in wiki. The second parameter shows the active editors (more than 5 edits per month).

Like last year, Malayalam continues to show an upward growth in terms of the number of active users. It has close to 120 active editors now. The graphical summary shows that mean number of editors is around 100. Malayalam is the biggest wiki community among Indic languages even though Malayalam is only the 11th biggest spoken language in India. The sincere efforts put by Malayalam wikipedians to build its community is the only reason for this. The programs like Malayalam Wiki conference, Education program, CD project, wiki workshops, photo events, Wikimeetups, and many other outreach events started showing its result. If the community continues with these type of efforts then I am sure that the community strength in Malayalam Wikipedia will cross 150 in 2013. Apart from Wikipedia, the importance given to Malayalam Wikisource, Wiktionary, and more recently to Wikivoyage (in incubator) will attract more Malayalam speakers to the Malayalam wiki projects.
Tamil comes second with close to 80 active editors. However, the number of active editors has gone down from last year. The graphical summary shows that number of active users was around 70-75 especially during the last two quarters.
Bengali comes third with around 60 active editors. This is a slight increase from the last year’s number of active editors. The involvement of editors from India in Bengali Wikipedia is less. That needs to be changed. Bangladeshi wikipedians are having many outreach programs to build Bengali wiki community. It will be nice if they extend their support to Indian Bengali speakers also as Indian Bengali wikipedians are not growing.
Telugu, Urdu, Gujarati, and Punjabi are the wikipedia languages that show notable increase in the number of active editors. But it will be be a mistake from my part if I am not mentioning that these numbers are not encouraging and the current number of active users is not showing justice to the number of speakers these languages have. This statement is more significant when we consider the fact that some smaller languages are showing a better progress.
We have seen that last year (2011) the success stories were Odia and Assamese wikipedias. In 2012, the shining star is Punjabi. The community has grown from one active editor from last year to almost 15 active editors now. As mentioned in my blog posts (post 1, post 2, post 3, and post 4) about building Punjabi wikipedia community, the task of building community for Punjabi was very challenging. Initiated in 2002 along with Assamese, Punjabi is one of the first Indic language wikipedia. But nothing much had happened in that wiki until deliberate efforts to build community initiated. The news is now we have an active community in Punjabi Wikipedia. From the just one person last year (Guglani – who took lots of pain to travel to multiple locations to introduce Punjabi wikipedia), now Punjabi wikipedia has close to 15 active editors. Unlike Odia and Assamese, I have faced so many issues during Punjabi wikipedia community building (mostly conflicts between editors). But I am happy to see that community is slowly coming out of all that. The technical team has fixed some of the bugs related to typing tool which was very important for Punjabi wikipedia. Punjabi wikipedians require lot support from other wikipedians to sustain the current momentum and grow the community further. My best wishes to Punjabi wikipedians.
Gujarati and Urdu are the two other communities that made considerable progress in community growth. The efforts put by Gujarati wikipedians to reach out to Gujarati speakers started showing the results. I am sure with the significant attention also given to Gujarati Wikisource (which was created last year), more Gujarati speakers will be attracted to Gujarati wiki projects. The involvement of Indians in Urdu Wikipedia is very less. But it is good to notice that Urdu wiki community slowly started growing. May be Wikipedia is one place where Indians and Pakistanis can work together.
The wikipedia languages that haven't shown significant change in number of active editors are Marathi, Odia, Assamese, and Nepali. The respective communities need to start putting efforts to build community by taking lessons from other Indic language wiki communities.
The languages that have considerable reduction in number of editors are Hindi, Kannada, and Sanskrit. Among this, except Sanskrit, all are spoken by at least five crore people. It is not good to see that speakers of these languages are not giving any attention to the wiki projects in their respective language. The case of Hindi is very strange considering the fact that it has support of the central government and many state governments of India.
The dormant language communities are Sindhi, Bhojpuri, Kashmiri, and some other small languages. Considering the fact that Odia, Assamese, and Punjabi were also dormant two years before, I am sure if someone is putting effort to build communities for these now dormant communities, these language wiki communities will also grow like it happened for Odia, Assamese, and Punjabi. Now there are multiple entities to support wikimedia movement in India and I hope that someone will take care of this apart from concentrating on the bigger languages.
In short, the point I want to emphasis is, conscious efforts are required from different stakeholders to grow communities and to sustain that growth for all Indic language wikipedias.

Content

Number of articles is an important parameter, but it has misguided some wiki communities in the past. Fortunately that trend is coming down.

With more than 1,04,000 articles, Hindi continues to be the biggest Indic language wikipedia in terms of the number of articles. Almost 3500 articles were added to Hindi wikipedia in the year 2013.
Tamil and Malayalam had added around 7000 articles which is the "biggest growth" in terms of number of articles. Urdu and Nepali added close to 5000 articles.
If we consider percentage of increase then Assamese language has shown more than 100 per cent increase in the number of articles.
Some of the important milestones are, Tamil and Telugu crossing 50,000 articles, Malayalam crossing 25,000 articles, and Assamese crossing 1,000 article milestones.
The languages that have shown very slow growth in terms of number of articles are Gujarati, Telugu and Kannada. I assume at least for few of these languages the focus went into enhancing the existing articles and building the community rather than creating thousands of stub articles.
As mentioned in the past reports, communities don’t need to worry about the number of articles. Also the examples of Bishnupriya Manipuri and Newari Wikipedias shows the after effect of increasing the article count without focusing on building the community.

Readership (page views)

Unlike the number of editors, the number of page views in wiki is showing an upward trend irrespective of the language.(Please note that the information available in the below table is the total visits (page views) for a language wikipedia for a month from all the platforms combined. It includes visits by readers and editors. This is NOT the list of Number of Unique Visitors to the website).

This is the one parameter where the figures are showing relative justice to the number of speakers.
Hindi with 78 lakh page views is in the top position.
The page views for Tamil had increased by more than 50 per cent.
Assamese has more than 100 per cent growth in page views.
Since the support for Indic languages is increasing for smart phone operating systems, I am sure the page views are going to increase further.

Conclusion

I am concluding this report with the following thoughts:

Being the biggest language (or number of speakers) does not automatically build community for an Indic language wikipedia. Efforts from respective language speakers are necessary to build community.
Most Indians who have access to internet and computer still don’t know their respective language typing. This is the biggest road block to build Indic language wiki community.
Do not get obsessed by article counts or readership. These are natural outcomes of community building.
Focus on community building through community interaction (through meetups, talk pages, village pumps, and mailing lists).
Focus on community building through community collaboration (WikiProjects or planning outreach efforts or advocacy).
Focus on community building through doing more outreach, better outreach, and being supportive of newbies.
Stay away from bots and translation tools for article creation as they do more harm than good. Use bots in such a way that it is not affecting the growth of the community.

Wishing all of you a wonderful wiki year 2013.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/openness/blog-old/indic-language-wikipedias-statistical-report-2012

The Violence of Knowledge Cartels

nishant — 2013-01-18T07:33:53Z

We are all struck with a sense of loss, grief and shock since we heard of the death of Aaron Swartz, by suicide. People who have been his friends have written heart-felt obituaries, saluting his dreams and visions and unwavering commitment to a larger social good.

The blog post was published in the Hybrid Publishing Lab on January 17, 2013.

Colleagues who have worked with him and have been inspired by his achievements have documented the quirky intelligence and the whimsical genius that Swartz was. His fellow crusaders, who have stood by him in his impassioned battle against the piracy centred witch-hunt have helped spell out the legal and political conditions, which might not have directly led to this sorry end, but definitely have to be factored in his own negotiations with depression. All these voices have enshrined Aaron Swartz, the 26 year old boy-wonder who was just trying to make the world a better place where information is free and everybody has unobstructed access to knowledge. They have shown us that there is an ‘Aaron sized hole’ in the world, which is going to be difficult to fill. These are voices that need to be heard, remembered, and revisited beyond the urgency of the current tragedy and it is good to know that this archive of grief and outpouring of emotional support will stay as a living memory to the legend that Swartz had already become in his life-time.

However, I want to take this opportunity to not talk about Aaron Swartz. I am afraid that if I do, I will end up either factualising him – converting him into a string of data sets, adding to the already burgeoning details about his life, his achievements, and of course the gory court case that has already been the centre of so much rage and debate. I am also afraid that if I do talk about Aaron Swartz, I will end up making him into a creature of fictions – talking about his dreams and his visions and his outlook and making him a martyr for a cause, forgetting to make the distinction that Aaron died, not for a cause, but believing in it. I, like many people who were affected, in many degrees of separation and distance, am taking the moment to mourn the death of somebody who should have lived longer. But I want to take the moment of Aaron’s death to talk about heroisms and sacrifices and everyday politics of what he believed in.

Let me talk about Shyam Singh, who is as far removed from Swartz as possible. Shyam Singh is a 74 year-old-man in India, who runs a corner photocopying shop on the Delhi School of Economics campus in New Delhi. Singh is not your young, charismatic, educated, tech-savvy oracle. He spent a large part of his life – 3 decades – working at the University’s Central Research Library and the Ratan Tata Library, operating unwieldy machines that were panting to keep up with new innovations in technologies of digital reproduction. It took him thirty years of work to muster enough savings so that he could buy a couple of photocopying machines and start a small photocopying shop at Ramjas College in New Delhi. After his retirement, the Delhi School of Economics actually invited him to come and set up the Rameshwari Photocopying shop on the campus, for the students at the school. He had an official license from the University, for which he paid a sum of 10,000 Indian Rupees, to work on a profit model that depended on high volume and low costs. The shop was more or less a landmark for students and professors alike, who would come to get their course material photocopied out of books that they could almost never afford to buy and were not easily available in public lending libraries. The shop keeper also compiled course-packs, which allowed students to buy all the texts prescribed for their curricula (but not necessarily available in multiple or digital copies in the library), at affordable rates.

It came as quite a shock to Singh, when one day, he was told that a consortium of publishers – Oxford University Press, Cambridge University Press, and Taylor and Francis Group – had filed a case in the high court of New Delhi against him, claiming damages of 6 million Indian Rupees for wilful copyright infringement for commercial gains. Singh did not have the ideological apparatus that was available to Swartz, nor the competence to talk about the unfairness of the legal claim. He did, in several interviews, talk about India’s avowed policy on universal education and how he had always thought of himself as helping in that process of equal access to students who would otherwise have been unable to afford the education. The case against Singh is already in the courts, and the High Court has issued an injunction restraining him from providing copies of chapters from textbooks published by the three international publishers who have moved the court. And while he has found support from the academic, legal and student community from around the country, there is no denying that he is going to be fighting an expensive battle against a large Intellectual Property protection conglomeration of publishers who are all ready to make a ‘scapegoat’ and an ‘example’ of this small photocopy shop, in their efforts at enforcing paid access to scholarly and academic material in the country.

I desperately hope that Singh shall not find himself as persecuted as Swartz did, by the publishers, by the public prosecutors, and by an indifferent citizenry who is quite happy to benefit from the fruits that might fall out of this case about loosened Intellectual Property and symbolically support the idea that knowledge should be free, but do not think that this is a problem that affects them in particular. True, in both these instances, we have seen people oscillating between rue and rage, expressing their dissatisfaction with these market driven information cartels which refuse to unleash the information and knowledge that we all believe should be made free. But in those expressions of anger and shock, is also a denial of the fact that we have all been complicit in building, supporting and sustaining these worlds because doing otherwise would inconvenience our schedules, lives and careers. Swartz and Singh, in their own way, had to become the poster-children, the martyrs, for us to take notice about a battle that affects us uniformly but doesn’t feature in our everyday practices and conviction.

Intellectual Property and Openness are seen as legal battles for somebody else to fight. Even with academia and research, which is the most complicit in building these exploitative knowledge industries, there is very little discussion or even recognition of the untenable behemoths that we have been feeding in our quest for tenures, publications and popularity. For an everyday person, as you can imagine, this is even more removed from their quotidian life practices. The distancing and alienation gets even more acerbated by the fact that these battles are often fought silently. We have legal stalwarts fighting it out in court rooms. Academic scholars and researchers are drawing their pens and swords in academic journals. Political activists are championing their causes in conferences and summits. And in all of this, we have produced a gated activism, where the threshold of engagement and investment is so high that unless there are these dying and the wounded to hold out for public scrutiny, the world moves on, grumbling slightly at the restriction on torrent downloads or the unavailability of its favourite book in the local markets, but thinking that it has nothing to do with them. They are not even an audience to these battles. And if indeed, they are audiences, they are the kinds that go to a play, eat loudly out of crinkly wrappers, talk on their cellphones in the middle of the denouement and leave before the play ends, because they don’t want to miss their favourite TV show about dancing animals back at home.

I do not want to hyperbolise and so I will not endorse the often suggested idea that knowledge should be as free as air and water – for a lot of us who have been looking at the private-public nexus in developing globalised countries already know that free air and water are a myth and that there are heavy prices to be paid for them. But I do want to suggest that it is time to think of the knowledge wars as human wars, as deeply implicated in our understanding of who we are, what kind of societies we want to live in, and what worlds we want to build for the future generations to inherit. These are fights that are not only about getting things for free – they are about understanding what is sacred and central to our civilization impulse and disallowing a small clutch of private bodies to make their profits by selling it to us.

It is time to maybe look around and see how manipulations of power and the algebra of survival has made us support corrupt and corrupting systems that restrict free information and knowledge. It is time to learn about the issues at stake – from providing cheap drugs to those in underprivileged areas to offering conditions of affordable education for the masses – when we talk about intellectual property regimes. It is time to organize, question, re-evaluate our own everyday practices, and realise that the fights against intellectual property are not battles that are fought once-every-heroic-death. That these are things that we need to strive for on a daily basis, without the need of an external catalyst or a dramatic death of somebody who died believing in a cause that was supposed to make the world a better place for those in the audience.

The next time, let us not wait for shame, guilt, horror, or surprise to catalyse us in taking note of the growing restrictions on information and knowledge in our world. Let us not wait for the emergence of another Swartz or Singh, persecuted by exploitative knowledge cartels that do untold harm to our sense of being human and being free in information societies. And let us keep our fingers crossed, that wherever he is, Swartz has found peace, solace, and the freedom that he was fighting for, and that Singh does not suffer a fate that might denude him of his livelihood and life’s savings.

Nishant Shah (@latelyontime / nishant.shah@inkubator.leuphana.de )is an International Tandem Partner at the Centre for Digital Cultures, Leuphana University, Lueneburg, and Director-Research at the Centre for Internet and Society, Bangalore.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/openness/blog-old/hybridpublishing-nishant-shah-january-17-2013-the-violence-of-knowledge-cartels

Is freedom of expression under threat in the digital age?

praskrishna — 2013-02-03T10:50:52Z

This week Index held a high level panel debate in partnership with the Editors Guild of India and the India International Centre to discuss the question “Is freedom of expression under threat in the digital age?” Mahima Kaul reports

This post by Mahima Kaul was published in Index on Censorship on January 18, 2013.

Index on Censorship, in partnership with The Editors Guild of India, hosted a debate in New Delhi on Tuesday (15 January) asking, “Is freedom of expression under threat in the digital age?” Discussing the topic were Ajit Balakrishnan (founder and Chief Executive of rediff.com), Index on Censorship CEO Kirsty Hughes, Sunil Abraham (Executive Director of the centre for Internet and Society), and Professor Timothy Garton Ash, Director of the Free Speech Debate project.

Sunil Abraham questioned the idea of technology specific “internet freedom” that has been advocated by many not least the US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. He said there was for instance much greater freedom and diversity on Indian TV than in the US. He also argued that that this freedom does not seem to extend to a right of access to knowledge, as demonstrated by the charges brought against open access activist and developer Aaron Swartz, who committed suicide earlier this month. Swartz was facing charges for allegedly downloading 4.8 million academic articles from subscription-only digital library JSTOR.

Abraham said one unintentional effect of censorship by governments is that it teaches citizens how to protect themselves online. Finally, he questioned the Indian government’s draconian laws and arbitrary actions in the digital realm, wondering whether this is the authorities’ way of warning future netizens about “acceptable online behaviour”, to condition the public not to criticise the government and to create a chilling effect.

Digital

Is freedom of expression under threat in the digital age?

18 Jan 2013

This week Index held a high level panel debate in partnership with the Editors Guild of India and the India International Centre to discuss the question “Is freedom of expression under threat in the digital age?” Mahima Kaul reports

Freedom of expression is always under threat and in need of defending, argued Timothy Garton Ash. However, he didn’t think the threat was particularly high today in the digital realm — rather the threats to privacy were what were particularly concerning online. With 76.8 per cent of India’s 1.2 billion population connected by mobile phone, there is an extraordinary opportunity for the prevalence of freedom of expression brought about by new technologies. But he said there are also a lot of challenges to free expression in India — and that “swing states” such as Brazil and India will be very important in determining where the global conversation goes on freedom of expression

Ajit Balakrishnan, founder of web portal Rediff.com, explained that many of the problems that have occurred in the digital realm in India have to do with poor drafting of legislation. He was particularly concerned about intermediary liability and explained why and how intermediaries roles needed protecting. He also explained that government officials have genuine problems with phrasing, and that when it comes to the application of these laws, understanding them and when they should be applied will take another 25 years. He added that the country is challenged by a legal system ill-equipped for coping with new technologies.

Kirsty Hughes said that freedom of expression is a universal right, meant to be applied across borders not just within countries. She said that while the digital domain allowed a big expansion in freedom of expression there were risks we are heading towards a more controlled net, a partially censored net, and a fragmented net (for instance with Iran attempting to build its own internet disconnected from the rest of the world). She said that some of the negative reactions by government to social media in India were seen to in the UK where there had been a trend towards criminalising supposedly offensive comment — although the new interim guidelines on social media prosecutions were a step in the right direction. Hughes emphasised three main concerns — state censorship, privatisation of censorship and the role of big companies, and mass surveillance. She pointed out that the British government had pushed for extensive surveillance with the Communications Data Bill, but this has now been shelved after a critical report from MPs.

Ramanjit Singh Chima, policy adviser for Google, said that the question is not about absolute freedom, but about what is appropriate and lawful. He emphasised that in the US, judges had strongly defended free expression online as they saw the digital world as a powerful space for free exprssion. He pointed out how effective social media tools, including Google’s own products, have become in helping during emergency situations like natural disasters and terrorist attacks. He also pointed out that the internet is not only about free expression but business as well. The internet contributes to 1.6 per cent of India’s GDP. Singh Chima said positive judgements by US and EU courts protect the users, adding that regulation for the net should be appropriate for its engineering.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/news/index-on-censorship-mahima-kaul-january-18-2013-is-freedom-of-expression-under-threat-in-the-digital-age

Draft International Principles on Communications Surveillance and Human Rights

elonnai — 2013-07-12T15:55:45Z

These principles were developed by Privacy International and the Electronic Frontier Foundation and seek to define an international standard for the surveillance of communications. The Centre for Internet and Society has been contributing feedback to the principles.

The principles are still in draft form. The most recent version can be accessed here. This research was undertaken as part of the 'SAFEGUARDS' project that CIS is undertaking with Privacy International and IDRC.

Our goal is that these principles will provide civil society groups, industry, and governments with a framework against which we can evaluate whether current or proposed surveillance laws and practices are consistent with human rights. We are concerned that governments are failing to develop legal frameworks to adhere to international human rights and adequately protect communications privacy, particularly in light of innovations in surveillance laws and techniques.

These principles are the outcome of a consultation with experts from civil society groups and industry across the world. It began with a meeting in Brussels in October 2012 to address shared concerns relating to the global expansion of government access to communications. Since the Brussels meeting we have conducted further consultations with international experts in communications surveillance law, policy and technology.[1]

We are now launching a global consultation on these principles. Please send us comments and suggestions by January 3rd 2013, by emailing rights (at) eff (dot) org.

Preamble
Privacy is a fundamental human right, and is central to the maintenance of democratic societies. It is essential to human dignity and it reinforces other rights, such as freedom of expression and association, and is recognised under international human rights law.[2] Activities that infringe on the right to privacy, including the surveillance of personal communications by public authorities, can only be justified where they are necessary for a legitimate aim, strictly proportionate, and prescribed by law.[3]

Before public adoption of the Internet, well-established legal principles and logistical burdens inherent in monitoring communications generally limited access to personal communications by public authorities. In recent decades, those logistical barriers to mass surveillance have decreased significantly. The explosion of digital communications content and information about communications, or “communications metadata”, the falling cost of storing and mining large sets of data, and the commitment of personal content to third party service providers make surveillance possible at an unprecedented scale.[4]

While it is universally accepted that access to communications content must only occur in exceptional situations, the frequency with which public authorities are seeking access to information about an individual’s communications or use of electronic devices is rising dramatically—without adequate scrutiny. [5] When accessed and analysed, communications metadata may create a profile of an individual's private life, including medical conditions, political and religious viewpoints, interactions and interests, disclosing even greater detail than would be discernible from the content of a communication alone. [6] Despite this, legislative and policy instruments often afford communications metadata a lower level of protection and do not place sufficient restrictions on how they can be subsequently used by agencies, including how they are data-mined, shared, and retained.

It is therefore necessary that governments, international organisations, civil society and private service providers articulate principles establishing the minimum necessary level of protection for digital communications and communications metadata (collectively "information") to match the goals articulated in international instruments on human rights— including a democratic society governed by the rule of law. The purpose of these principles is to:

Provide guidance for legislative changes and advancements related to communications and communications metadata to ensure that pervasive use of modern communications technology does not result in an erosion of privacy.
Establish appropriate safeguards to regulate access by public authorities (government agencies, departments, intelligence services or law enforcement agencies) to communications and communications metadata about an individual’s use of an electronic service or communication media.

We call on governments to establish stronger protections as required by their constitutions and human rights obligations, or as they recognize that technological changes or other factors require increased protection.

These principles focus primarily on rights to be asserted against state surveillance activities. We note that governments are required not only to respect human rights in their own conduct, but to protect and promote the human rights of individuals in general.[7] Companies are required to follow data protection rules and yet are also compelled to respond to lawful requests. Like other initiatives,[8] we hope to provide some clarity by providing the below principles on how state surveillance laws must protect human rights.

The Principles

Legality: Any limitation to the right to privacy must be prescribed by law. Neither the Executive nor the Judiciary may adopt or implement a measure that interferes with the right to privacy without a previous act by the Legislature that results from a comprehensive and participatory process. Given the rate of technological change, laws enabling limitations on the right to privacy should be subject to periodic review by means of a participatory legislative or regulatory process

Legitimate Purpose: Laws should only allow access to communications or communications metadata by authorised public authorities for investigative purposes and in pursuit of a legitimate purpose, consistent with a free and democratic society.

Necessity: Laws allowing access to communications or communications metadata by authorised public authorities should limit such access to that which is strictly and demonstrably necessary, in the sense that an overwhelmingly positive justification exists, and justifiable in a democratic society in order for the authority to pursue its legitimate purposes, and which the authority would otherwise be unable to pursue. The onus of establishing this justification, in judicial as well as in legislative processes, is on the government.

Adequacy: Public authorities should restrain themselves from adopting or implementing any measure of intrusion allowing access to communications or communications metadata that is not appropriate for fulfillment of the legitimate purpose that justified establishing that measure.

Competent Authority: Authorities capable of making determinations relating to communications or communications metadata must be competent and must act with independence and have adequate resources in exercising the functions assigned to them.

Proportionality: Public authorities should only order the preservation and access to specifically identified, targeted communications or communications metadata on a case-by-case basis, under a specified legal basis. Competent authorities must ensure that all formal requirements are fulfilled and must determine the validity of each specific attempt to access or receive communications or communications metadata, and that each attempt is proportionate in relation to the specific purposes of the case at hand. Communications and communications metadata are inherently sensitive and their acquisition should be regarded as highly intrusive. As such, requests should at a minimum establish a) that there is a very high degree of probability that a serious crime has been or will be committed; b) and that evidence of such a crime would be found by accessing the communications or communications metadata sought; c) other less invasive investigative techniques have been exhausted; and d) that a plan to ensure that the information collected will be only that information reasonably related to the crime and that any excess information collected will be promptly destroyed or returned. Neither the scope of information types, the number or type of persons whose information is sought, the amount of data sought, the retention of that data held by the authorities, nor the level of secrecy afforded to the request should go beyond what is demonstrably necessary to achieve a specific investigation.

Due process: Due process requires that governments must respect and guarantee an individual’s human rights, that any interference with such rights must be authorised in law, and that the lawful procedure that governs how the government can interfere with those rights is properly enumerated and available to the general public.[9]While criminal investigations and other considerations of public security and safety may warrant limited access to information by public authorities, the granting of such access must be subject to guarantees of procedural fairness. Every request for access should be subject to prior authorisation by a competent authority, except when there is imminent risk of danger to human life. [10]

User notification: Notwithstanding the notification and transparency requirements that governments should bear, service providers should notify a user that a public authority has requested his or her communications or communications metadata with enough time and information about the request so that a user may challenge the request. In specific cases where the public authority wishes to delay the notification of the affected user or in an emergency situation where sufficient time may not be reasonable, the authority should be obliged to demonstrate that such notification would jeopardize the course of investigation to the competent judicial authority reviewing the request. In such cases, it is the responsibility of the public authority to notify the individual affected and the service provider as soon as the risk is lifted or after the conclusion of the investigation, whichever is sooner.

Transparency about use of government surveillance: The access capabilities of public authorities and the process for access should be prescribed by law and should be transparent to the public. The government and service providers should provide the maximum possible transparency about the access by public authorities without imperiling ongoing investigations, and with enough information so that individuals have sufficient knowledge to fully comprehend the scope and nature of the law, and when relevant, challenge it. Service providers must also publish the procedure they apply to deal with data requests from public authorities.

Oversight: An independent oversight mechanism should be established to ensure transparency of lawful access requests. This mechanism should have the authority to access information about public authorities' actions, including, where appropriate, access to secret or classified information, to assess whether public authorities are making legitimate use of their lawful capabilities, and to publish regular reports and data relevant to lawful access. This is in addition to any oversight already provided through another branch of government such as parliament or a judicial authority. This mechanism must provide – at a minimum – aggregate information on the number of requests, the number of requests that were rejected, and a specification of the number of requests per service provider and per type of crime. [11]

Integrity of communications and systems: It is the responsibility of service providers to transmit and store communications and communications metadata securely and to a degree that is minimally necessary for operation. It is essential that new communications technologies incorporate security and privacy in the design phases. In order, in part, to ensure the integrity of the service providers’ systems, and in recognition of the fact that compromising security for government purposes almost always compromises security more generally, governments shall not compel service providers to build surveillance or monitoring capability into their systems. Nor shall governments require that these systems be designed to collect or retain particular information purely for law enforcement or surveillance purposes. Moreover, a priori data retention or collection should never be required of service providers and orders for communications and communications metadata preservation must be decided on a case-by-case basis. Finally, present capabilities should be subject to audit by an independent public oversight body.

Safeguards for international cooperation: In response to changes in the flows of information and the technologies and services that are now used to communicate, governments may have to work across borders to fight crime. Mutual legal assistance treaties (MLATs) should ensure that, where the laws of more than one state could apply to communications and communications metadata, the higher/highest of the available standards should be applied to the data. Mutual legal assistance processes and how they are used should also be clearly documented and open to the public. The processes should distinguish between when law enforcement agencies can collaborate for purposes of intelligence as opposed to sharing actual evidence. Moreover, governments cannot use international cooperation as a means to surveil people in ways that would be unlawful under their own laws. States must verify that the data collected or supplied, and the mode of analysis under MLAT, is in fact limited to what is permitted. In the absence of an MLAT, service providers should not respond to requests of the government of a particular country requesting information of users if the requests do not include the same safeguards as providers would require from domestic authorities, and the safeguards do not match these principles.

Safeguards against illegitimate access: To protect individuals against unwarranted attempts to access communications and communications metadata, governments should ensure that those authorities and organisations who initiate, or are complicit in, unnecessary, disproportionate or extra-legal interception or access are subject to sufficient and significant dissuasive penalties, including protection and rewards for whistleblowers, and that individuals affected by such activities are able to access avenues for redress. Any information obtained in a manner that is inconsistent with these principles is inadmissible as evidence in any proceeding, as is any evidence derivative of such information.

Cost of surveillance: The financial cost of providing access to user data should be borne by the public authority undertaking the investigation. Financial constraints place an institutional check on the overuse of orders, but the payments should not exceed the service provider’s actual costs for reviewing and responding to orders, as such would provide a perverse financial incentive in opposition to user’s rights.

Signatories

Organisations

Article 19 (International)
Bits of Freedom (Netherlands)
Center for Internet & Society India (CIS India)
Derechos Digitales (Chile)
Electronic Frontier Foundation (International)
Privacy International (International)
Samuelson-Glushko Canadian Internet Policy and Public Interest Clinic (Canada)
Statewatch (UK)

Individuals

Renata Avila, human rights lawyer (Guatemala)

Footnotes

[1]For more information about the background to these principles and the process undertaken, see https://www.privacyinternational.org/blog/towards-international-principles-on-communications-surveillance
[2]Universal Declaration of Human Rights Article 12, United Nations Convention on Migrant Workers Article 14, UN Convention of the Protection of the Child Article 16, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights Article 17; regional conventions including Article 10 of the African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child, Article 11 of the American Convention on Human Rights, Article 4 of the African Union Principles on Freedom of Expression, Article 5 of the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man, Article 21 of the Arab Charter on Human Rights, and Article 8 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms; Johannesburg Principles on National Security, Free Expression and Access to Information, Camden Principles on Freedom of Expression and Equality.
[3]Martin Scheinin, “Report of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism,” p11, available at http://www2.ohchr.org/english/issues/terrorism/rapporteur/docs/A_HRC_13_37_AEV.pdf. See also General Comments No. 27, Adopted by The Human Rights Committee Under Article 40, Paragraph 4, Of The International Covenant On Civil And Political Rights, CCPR/C/21/Rev.1/Add.9, November 2, 1999, available at http://www.unhchr.ch/tbs/doc.nsf/0/6c76e1b8ee1710e380256824005a10a9?Opendocument.
[4]Communications metadata may include information about our identities (subscriber information, device information), interests, including medical conditions, political and religious viewpoints (websites visited, books and other materials read, watched or listened to, searches conducted, resources used), interactions (origins and destinations of communications, people interacted with, friends, family, acquaintances), location (places and times, proximities to others); in sum, logs of nearly every action in modern life, our mental states, interests, intentions, and our innermost thoughts.
[5]For example, in the United Kingdom alone, there are now approximately 500,000 requests for communications metadata every year, currently under a self-authorising regime for law enforcement agencies, who are able to authorise their own requests for access to information held by service providers. Meanwhile, data provided by Google’s Transparency reports shows that requests for user data from the U.S. alone rose from 8888 in 2010 to 12,271 in 2011.
[6]See as examples, a review of Sandy Petland’s work, ‘Reality Mining’, in MIT’s Technology Review, 2008, available at http://www2.technologyreview.com/article/409598/tr10-reality-mining/ and also see Alberto Escudero-Pascual and Gus Hosein, ‘Questioning lawful access to traffic data’, Communications of the ACM, Volume 47 Issue 3, March 2004, pages 77 - 82.
[7]Report of the UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, Frank La Rue, May 16 2011, available at http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrcouncil/docs/17session/a.hrc.17.27_en.pdf
[8]The Global Network Initiative establishes standards to help the ICT sector protect the privacy and free expression of their users. See http://www.globalnetworkinitiative.org/
[9]As defined by international and regional conventions mentioned above.
[10]Where judicial review is waived in such emergency cases, a warrant must be retroactively sought within 24 hours.
[11]One example of such a report is the US Wiretap report, published by the US Court service. Unfortunately this applies only to interception of communications, and not to access to communications metadata. See http://www.uscourts.gov/Statistics/WiretapReports/WiretapReport2011.aspx. The UK Interception of Communications Commissioner publishes a report that includes some aggregate data but it is does not provide sufficient data to scrutinise the types of requests, the extent of each access request, the purpose of the requests, and the scrutiny applied to them. See http://www.intelligencecommissioners.com/sections.asp?sectionID=2&type=top.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/draft-intl-principles-on-communications-surveillance-and-human-rights

7th India Digital Summit 2013

praskrishna — 2013-01-15T08:53:58Z

This summitt organised by Internet and Mobile Association of India is held in New Delhi, January 16 - 17, 2013.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/7th-india-digital-summit-2013

Third South Asian Meeting on the Internet and Freedom of Expression

praskrishna — 2013-01-17T07:16:58Z

Internet Democracy Project, Voices for Interactive Choice & Empowerment and Global Partners & Associates are organizing this event in Dhaka on January 14 - 15, 2013.

Pranesh Prakash is moderating the session on "Understanding cyber security and surveillance in South Asia today". Chinmayi Arun is speaking in this panel.

The Third South Asian Meeting on the Internet and Freedom of Expression seeks to address the question of how freedom of expression on the Internet is best protected by taking as its starting point two of the biggest challenges for freedom of expression online in South Asia today: hate speech online on the one hand, and cyber security and surveillance on the other.

The meeting seeks to investigate how these challenges affect freedom of expression on the Internet as well as how they can be addressed most effectively while protecting free speech online. It will also touch briefly on the important question of what kind of Internet governance processes are most likely to ensure the desired outcomes materialise.

A very short history of the South Asian Meeting on the Internet and Freedom of Expression
The first South Asian Meeting on the Internet and Freedom of Expression took place in March 2011 in Delhi, and mapped the many challenges for free speech online in our region, as an input into the report on the Internet and freedom of expression of UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression, Mr. Frank La Rue.

The second South Asian Meeting, in Kathmandu in November 2011, assessed the extent to which policy and regulation in the South Asian countries complied with the recommendations Mr. La Rue made in his report.

This third meeting will now build on these earlier efforts by bringing together experts from civil society, business, the research community and other stakeholder groups from across the region to discuss two of the biggest shared challenges for freedom of expression online in South Asia today in detail: the rising visibility of hate speech on the one hand, and the impact of discourses regarding cyber security and surveillance on the other.

Why focus on hate speech and security/surveillance now?
Since UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression, Mr. Frank La Rue, presented his report on the Internet and freedom of expression to the UN Human Rights Council in June 2011, the complexity of this topic has received growing recognition. However, not all trends that La Rue had pointed out as directly affecting freedom of expression online – from access to the Internet to cyber attacks – are equally important in the South Asian region. Detailed analysis in several South Asian countries has shown that, though Internet penetration rates remain fairly low, most countries do possess, for example, the political will crucial to improve these figures. The two trends that seem to be of greatest concern in our region are that of the fight against hate speech, and the impact on freedom of expression of cyber security and surveillance measures. The latter is foregrounded for a variety of reasons ranging from the safety of individual users to national security.

Incidentally, across the region, as in many parts of the world, hate speech and cyber security have also been among the most important reasons governments have quoted to justify greater government control over the Internet. At the national level, this has at times manifested itself through the approval and implementation of legislation that has far-reaching consequences for freedom of speech online, without consulting many of the stakeholders who are affected at any point in time. At the global level, we see a growing number of proposals by governments that would effectively expand their collective powers to regulate the Internet, though with varying levels of involvement of other stakeholders envisioned.

Yet while governments' intentions when imposing censorship or approving surveillance measures may at times be in doubt, it is difficult to deny that the Internet has facilitated a new proliferation of hate speech, as well as that it has thrown up new security challenges that couldn't even be imagined before.

It is therefore our contention that the challenges of hate speech online and of ensuring cyber security in our region are real, and need to be addressed head-on if we are to strengthen and protect the right to freedom of expression online. For this reason, the meeting seeks to investigate both the precise nature of these challenges and what Internet governance mechanisms we need to evolve to ensure that they can be addressed most effectively whilst upholding and strengthening the right to freedom of expression. If we are to take the challenges the threats of hate speech and cyber security policy embody seriously yet also aim to uphold and strengthen the right to freedom of expression online, then what are the solutions we require? And who will need to be responsible for implementing them?

Participants
Taking into account the many parallels in the shape problems of hate speech and cyber security and surveillance take across the South Asian region as a result of shared cultures and historical legacies alike, participants will be invited from Bangladesh, India, Nepal, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Sri Lanka and the Maldives. Moreover, as solutions to these problems will invariably require collaboration among various stakeholders in the Internet governance field in order to be effective, participants will be drawn from a wide variety of stakeholder groups, including civil society, business, government, academia and the media from across the region. In this way, the meeting hopes tofacilitate a South Asia wide, multistakeholder dialogue, to learn, discuss and evolve more detailed thinking on these topics for one and a half days. The meeting will come to an end with a public event at the end of the second day.

The meeting will use a variety of formats, including key note presentations, panel discussions, case studies and small group conversations.

Agenda

January 14, 2013

9.00-09.45	Welcome and introductions to participants
09.45-10.15	Introduction to the meeting: the challenge that hate speech online and cyber security/surveillance pose to freedom of expression on the Internet – Dixie Hawtin Intro: Internet governance and human rights issues in general Why is this event focussed on hate speech and surveillance?
10.15-10.45	Tea/coffee break
10.45-12.15	The challenge of hate speech on the Internet in South Asia Strengthening the right to freedom of expression to curtail hate speech (Anja Kovacs) Three country perspectives, from the Maldives (Mariyath Mohamed), Pakistan (tbc), and Bangladesh (Salim Khan) Moderator: Bishakha Datta
12.15-13:30	Lunch
13.30-14.00	Keynote: Thinking about a rights-based approach to cyber security and surveillance as it relates to speech – KS Park
14.00-15.30	Understanding cyber security and surveillance in South Asia today With Three country perspectives from Bangladesh (Mohammad Rahman), Nepal (Kailash Prasad Neupane) and India (Chinmayi Arun). Moderator: Pranesh Prakash
15.30-16:00	Tea/coffee break
16.00-17.30	Legal and ethical questions and challenges when addressing cyber security and surveillance: two case studies – Rohan Samarajiva

January 15, 2013

9.00-9.15	Introduction to day 2
9.15-9.45	Cybersecurity, surveillance and hate speech online – key issues that need to be addressed in governance in order to protect Internet freedom of expession. This session will discuss particular issues that have relevance for both cyber security debates and hate speech issues in greater depth. Four topics that will be addressed are: The question of anonimity (KS Park) Cross-border cooperation and other jurisdictional issues in context of cloud computing and crossborder data flows and storage (Aditya Rao) Domain Names and registration (Babu Ram Aryal) Intermediaries as law enforcers (Suman Pradhan) Moderator: Shahzad Ahmed
10.45-11.00	Tea/coffee break
11.00-13.00	What kind of solutions could a rights-based approach throw up to the challenges raised so far in the meeting? Open discussion in groups and plenary, following key note speaker, Bulbul Monjurul Ahsan
13.00-13.30	Summing up and thank you
13.30-15.00	Lunch
15:00 – 16:00	Meeting participants move to venue for public meeting, tea/coffee break and arrival of wider public
16.00-18.30	PUBLIC EVENT: The Internet and freedom of expression Confirmed speakers include: Abu Taher, Info Commissioner; Iftekharuzzaman, Executive Director, Transparency International Bangladesh; Sarah Hossain, Lawyer and Honorary Executive Director, BLAST; Shaheen Anam, Executive Director, Manusher Jonno Foundation; Monjurul Ahsan Bulbul, eminent journalist and CEO, Boishakhi Television; and Rohan Samarajiva, Chair and CEO, LIRNEasia.

List of Participants

Aditya Rao, Senior Associate, Amarchand Mangaldas, India
Ahmed Swapan, Executive Director, VOICE, Bangladesh
Amrit Pant, General Secretary, Computer Association of Nepal & President, Information Technology Development Society, Nepal
Anja Kovacs, Project Director, Internet Democracy Project, India
Babu Ram Aryal, President, Internet Society, Nepal Chapter, Nepal
Binaya Guragain, Coordinator of Programs, Equal Access, Nepal
Bishakha Datta, Wikimedia Foundation Board Member & Co-founder, Point of View, India
Chinmayi Arun, Assistant Professor, National Law University Delhi & Fellow, Centre for Internet and Society, India.
Dixie Hawtin, Project Manager for Digital Communications and Freedom of Expression, Global Partners and Associates, UK
Farhana Rumki, Associate Programme Coordinator, VOICE, Bangladesh
Kailash Prasad Neupane, Chief of Legal Section, Spokesperson, Secretary and Registrar, Nepal Telecommunications Authority, Nepal
Khairuzzaman Kamal, Founder Secretary General of Bangladesh Manobadhikar Sangbadik Forum & Senior Reporter at Bangladesh Sangbad Sangstha, Bangladesh
Khawaza Mainuddin, Executive Editor, ICE Business Times Magazine, Bangladesh
K S Park, Executive Director, the PSPD Public Interest Law Center & Professor, Korea University Law School, South Korea
Mariyath Mohamed, Journalist, Minivan News, Maldives
Mohammad Nazmuzzaman Bhuian Emon, Associate Professor, Department of Law, University of Dhaka, Bangladesh
Mohammad Shahriar Rahman, Assistant Professor, Department of Computer Science and Engineering, University of Asia Pacific & Head, Center for IT Security and Privacy, Bangladesh
Moiyen Zalal Chowdhury, Community Manager, Somewhere.In & Norad Fellow,Bangladesh
Monjurul Ahsan Bulbul, Chair, International Press Institute & Editor-in-chief and CEO,Boiskakhi TV, Bangladesh
Pranesh Prakash, Policy Director, Centre for Internet and Society, India
Prasanth Sunganathan, Counsel, Software Freedom Law Centre, India
Rezaur Rahman Lenin, Research Fellow, VOICE, Bangladesh
Richa Kaul Padte, Writer, India
Rohan Samarajiva, Chair and CEO, LIRNEasia, Sri Lanka
Saleem Samad, Columnist & Correspondent at Reporters without Borders, Bangladesh
Salimullah Khan, Writer and Professor, Stamford University, Bangladesh
Sana Saleem, Director, Bolo Bhi, Pakistan
Santosh Sigdel, Advocate and Vice President, Internet Society, Nepal Chapter, Nepal
Shahzad Ahmed, Country Director, Bytes for All, Pakistan
Shehla Rashid Shora, Project Officer, Internet Democracy Project, India
Shehnaz Banu, Media and Communication Officer, Alliance for Social Dialogue, Bangladesh
Soheil Zafar, Editor, Unmochan Blog & TV Producer and Researcher, 71 Television, Bangladesh
Suman Lal Pradhan, CEO, Websurfer, Nepal
Sushma Luthra, Event Coordinator, India
Syeda Fedous Jana, Managing Director and Co-Founder of Somewhere.In, Bangladesh
Tahmina Rahman, Director Bangladesh and South Asia Region, Article 19, Bangladesh
Vasana Wickremasena, Executive Director, Centre for Integrated Communication Research and Advocacy, Sri Lanka

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/news/third-south-asian-meeting-on-internet-and-freedom-of-expression

Response to RTI on Decisions of the Cyber Regulation Advisory Committee

pranesh — 2013-01-09T15:26:26Z

The Department of Electronics & Information Technology, Ministry of Communications & Information Technology responded to a right to information (RTI) application filed by Saket Bisani on behalf of the Centre for Internet & Society on July 13, 2012 through notification No. 14(110)/2012-ESD, dated October 3, 2010.

No. 14(110)/2012-ESD
M/o Communiciations & Information Technology
Department of Electronics & Information Technology
Electronics Niketan, 6, CGO Complex
New Delhi-110003

Dated:3.10.2012

Subject: RTI application received from Shri Saket Biswani

With reference to your RTI application dated 13.7.12 requesting for the following information.

Question

a) Please provide me a list of the dates of each meeting of the CRAC held from October 18, 2000 till July 13, 2012?

b) Please provide me copies of the minutes of every meeting held by the Cyber Regulation Advisory Committee from October 18, 2000 till July 13, 2012.

c) Provide me the list of all policy decisions that the CRAC has advised the Central Government on under section 88(3) (a) of the Information Technology.

d) Provide me a list of all policy decisions that the CRAC has advised the Central Government on under section 88(3)(a) of the Information Technology Act, 2000.

The information as received from the custodian of the information is placed below:

Answer

a) The meetings of CRAC were held on 6^th March, 2001 and 17-18 March, 2001.

b) Minutes of these two meetings of CRAC are attached.

c) No such advice was given by CRAC to DeitY under section 88(3)(a).

d) Information is attached.

(A.K. Kaushik)
Additional Director & CPIO
(E-Security & Cyber Laws)

To: Shri Saket Bisani
No. 194, 2^nd 'C' Cross,
Domlur 2^nd Stage
Bangalore-560 071

Minutes of the First Meeting of the Cyber Regulation Advisory Committee (CRAC) held on March 6, 2001, at Electronics Niketan, under the Chairmanship of Hon’ble Minister* (IT) Shri Pramod Mahajan.

(List of Participants enclosed as Annexure-A)

The chairman welcomed the participants to the First Meeting of the Committee. In his opening remarks he hoped that the Committee would play a constructive role in the implementation of the Information Technology Act.
While introducing the Agenda (circulated ahead of the meeting), Controller of Certifying Authorities (CCA) made a short presentation on proposed "Regulation.; under section 89 of the IT Act" consisting of 18 proposed Regulations, Smart Card as token carrying Keys, and various suggested Amendments to the IT ACT 2000.
During the ensuing discussions, participants sought some time to study and collate associated inputs from their respective colleagues/specialists before offering any concrete suggestions/recommendations. Chairman agreed to the suggestions and postponed the meeting to 11:00 AM on the March 17, 2001 at the same venue. Based on the recommendation of Secretary (IT), members were requested to forward their inputs, if any, through e-mail within a weeks time to the following:

For Regulations wider section 89 of IT Act	For amendments to IT Act 2000
Shri K.N. Gupta (CCA) Room No. 4006, Electronics Niketan 6 CGO Complex New Delhi 110003 e-mail:kgupta@mit.gov.in Tele: 436 3073 Fax: 439 5982	Shri A.B. Saha (Member Secretary) Room No. 2055, Electronics Niketan 6 CGO Complex New Delhi 110003 e-mail:saha@mit.gov.in Tele: 436 0958 Fax: 436 2924

Meeting ended with a vote of thanks to the Chair.

Minutes of the Second Meeting of the Cyber Regulation Advisory Committee (CRAC) held on 17-18 March, 2001 at Electronics Niketan, New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Hon'ble Minister (IT), Shri Pramod Mahajan.

(List of Participants enclosed as Annexure-A)

The chairman welcomed the participants to the second meeting of the Committee to consider further the draft regulations proposed by the Controller of Certifying Authority (CCA). ' " ~
During the ensuing discussions, following general recommendations/decisions were arrived at governing the overall formulation of the regulations that are necessary to bring about infrastructure facilitating activities envisaged under the IT Act 2000:

a) Any regulation to be framed by the Controller draws its authority only from Section 89(2) of the Act. Moreover, such regulations should complement the Rules already framed under the Section 87 of the Act.

b) To keep pace with the changing technology and standards, CCA may publicly notify/modify necessary specifications of technology, standards and procedures at regular interval (say, January of every year). Moreover, to adhere to the "principles of minimal governance", if any particular necessity emerges for inclusion of newer manifestations of any existing standard/technology/procedure, Controller should respond within ninety (90) days after receiving any specific request in writing, failing which it will deemed to have obtained his concurrence.

c) The commercial practices/interests may form the essential pedestal for the certification process. Aspects of cross-certification may preferably be left to the purview of the concerned market forces. However, the necessary interoperability will essentially be "market-driven" and not "authority-driven". This will also ensure that formulated rules and regulations stay in tune with market realities.

d) Strict adherence to open standards should be ensured to avoid emergence of monopoly of any kind.

e) Considering cost sensitiveness of the requisite digital signature certificate, families of technologies varying in convenience, reliability, availability, robustness, etc. may be allowed to inter-operate. However, CCA may undertake public awareness campaign to promote desirable best practices from time to time.

f) The minimal regulations facilitating activities envisaged in the Act is desirable. Some of the proposed provisions can also be ensured in the form of "terms & conditions" governing the operations of Certifying Authorities.

g) Emergence of guidelines governing smooth functioning may be better left to publications brought out by industry associations, public-minded professionals etc. Formulating rules and regulations in these regards should be minimal.

3. After framing the draft compilation of the requisite regulations in accordance with the conventional legal form in terms of content as well as structure with the assistance of the Ministry of Law, the regulations may be brought to the Ministry of Information Technology for approval.

4 The Committee considered the 18 regulations proposed in Agenda Item No.1 and the statement reproduced below contains the decision taken against each proposal.

SI	Item	Conclusions
1	Regulation 1 Standardising on two key-pairs for PKI in the country. Key-pair generation for subscribers by CAs.	Regulation not required. Encryption Key pair not part of the IT Act. Already covered under Rule 3, 4 & 5 of notified CA Rules. Subscriber should be at liberty to bring his key pair that CA may verify before acceptance. (Section 40 of the Act)
2	Regulation 2 Encryption key-pair of subscribers to be maintained by CAs in a database and made available to enforcement and law agencies under directions of the Controller.	Regulation not required. IT Act is silent regarding encryption.
3	Regulation 3 Disclosure Record of CA.	Disclosure may be done every six months. Necessary format for disclosure may be notified from time to time. (Para 2(f) above)
4	Regulation 4 Encryption Key Pair of CA to be made available to the Controller.	Regulation not required in accordance to conclusions against 1 & 2 above.
5	Regulation 5 Cross-Certification with foreign CAs.	As per recommendation 2(c) above.
6	Regulation 6 Terms and Conditions subject to which license shall be issued by the Controller to the prospective CAs.	Can be merged with regulation 11. As per the recommendation mentioned in 2(c) above.
7	Regulation 7 Standards that may be considered for different activities associated with the CAs functions including standardization of contents of the Certificates to be issued by CAs and standardization of the Certificate Revocation List.	As per the recommendation 2(b) above.
8	Regulation 8 Information to be made publicly available by a CA on its website. Notice of suspension or revocation of license.	CA must harness all form of networks and other practical media, and not only Internet, for disclosure to its subscriber and other interested parties.
9	Regulation 9 Standardisation of Certificate Practice Statement.	Agreed.
10	Regulation 10 Compromise of subscribers Digital Signature Key-Pair	Agreed.
11	Regulation 11 Description of classes of Certificates.	Shall be merged with regulation 6 above. In addition to 3 classes of certificates as identified by international bodies, the regulation should be open to additional classes of certificates, if required.
12	Regulation 12 Cross-Certification of CAs.	It should be market-driven. (Recommendation 2(c) above).
13	Regulation 13 Incorporation of Controllers Public Key Certificate as the "root” in all web browsers in the country.	Regulation not required. Need for integrating Controller's root key in the browsers may not be feasible.
14	Regulation 14 Minimum key length for CAs and subscribers.	Agreed for the provision of 1024 bits for subscriber/end-user and 2048 bits for CAs key pair.
15	Regulation 15 Audit of applicants to include manpower audit as well. Liability of CAs towards subscribers on account of their negligence.	Regulation not required. Audit provision has already been covered under Rule 31 of CA rules notified by MIT.
16	Regulation 16 Storage of Key-Pairs of CAs. Distribution of Key-Pairs / Certificates of subscribers by CAs.	Not to be regulated. Recommendation 2(e) above shall be followed.
17	Regulation 17 Documents to be submitted to the Controller along with the application for obtaining license to operate as CA.	Already covered under rule 10 of CA rules notified by MIT. Any additional information can be sought through the recourse of public notices from time to time.
18	Regulation 18 Upon acceptance of PKC by a subscriber, the PKC shall be published by the CA as required under the IT Act for access by the subscribers and relying parties. The CA will ensure the transmission of PKC and CRLs to the National Repository to be maintained by the Controller.	Agreed.

Meeting ended with a vote of thanks to the Chair.

Annexure - A

First sitting of the second meeting of the “Cyber Regulation Advisory Committee” held on 17th March 2001 to consider adjourned agenda of the first meeting held on 6ft March 2001

List of Participants

Sh Pramod Mahajan, Minister, Information Technology - Chairman
Sh.S.C Jain , Secretary, Legislative Department
Sh Vinay Kohli, Secretary, Ministry of Information Technology
Sh. N. Parameswaran, DDG(LR), Department of Telecommunications
Dr. Jaimini Bhagwati, Ministry of Finance
Maj.Gen. M. G. Datar, Addl.D.G, IT, Army HQ, Ministry of Defence
Sh Mukesh Mittal, Dy Secy, Ministry of Home Affairs
Sh T A Khan, Sr. Dir, NIC, Ministry of Commerce
Sh. K.R Ganapathy,CGM-IC,RBI

10. Sh.S.R-Mittal,Adviser,DIT, Reserve Bank of India

11. Sh Dewang Mehta, President, NASSCOM

12. Sh Amitabh Singhal, President, Internet Service Providers Association

13. Sh LN Behra, DIG, Director, Central Bureau of Investigation

14. Sh K N Gupta, Controller of Certifying Authority

15. Sh. Qamar Ahmed. Addl.C.P/Crime, DG Police by rotation from the States

16. Prof. R S Sirohi. I1T Delhi, Director, IIT Delhi

17. Sh.Sanjay Dhawan, ExecDirector,KPMG, Representing CII

18. Sh. M.A.J.Jeyaseelan, Secretary, FICCI

19. Sh. Subimal Bhattacharjee, Vice President ARGUS, Representing ASSOCHAM

20. Sh A B Saha, Senior Director, Ministry of IT - Member Convener

First sitting of the second meeting of the “Cyber Regulation Advisory Committee” held on 18th March 2001 to consider adjourned agenda of the first meeting held on 6ft March 2001

List of Participants

Sh Pramod Mahajan, Minister, Information Technology - Chairman
Sh.N.L. Meenu, Jt. Secretary, Legislative Department
Sh Vinay Kohli, Secretary, Ministry of Information Technology
Sh. N. Parameswaran, DDG(LR), Department of Telecommunications
Dr. Jaimoni Bhagwati, Ministry of Finance
Maj.Gen. M G Datar, Ministry of Defence
Sh Mukesh Mittal, Dy Secy, Ministry of Home Affairs
Sh T A Khan, Sr. Dir, NIC, Ministry of Commerce
Sh. K.R Ganapathy,CGM-IC,RBI

10. Sh Dewang Mehta, President, NASSCOM

11. Sh Amitabh Singhal, President, Internet Service Providers Association

12. Sh LN Behra, DIG, Director, Central Bureau of Investigation

13. Sh K N Gupta, Controller of Certifying Authority

14. Sh. Dinesh Bhatt, Dy. Police Commissioner, Delhi

15. Prof. R S Sirohi. I1T Delhi, Director, IIT Delhi

16. Sh.Sanjay Dhawan, ExecDirector,KPMG, Representing CII

17. Sh. M.A.J.Jeyaseelan, Secretary, FICCI

18. Sh. Subimal Bhattacharjee, Vice President ARGUS, Representing ASSOCHAM

19. Sh A B Saha, Senior Director, Ministry of IT - Member Convener

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/resources/deity-response-to-rti-on-decisions-of-crac

Centre for Internet and Society

January 2013 Bulletin

National Resource Kit for Persons with Disabilities

Pervasive Technologies

Other Openness Updates

HasGeek

Internet Access – Knowledge Repository

Follow us elsewhere

Support Us

Request for Collaboration

Remembering Aaron Swartz, Taking Up the Fight

Bangalore hackers write code as tribute to Aaron Swartz

Internet Freedom in India – Open to Debate

Aaron Swartz: The First Martyr of the Free Information Movement

Video

Making Public Libraries Accessible to People with Disabilities

Making Public Libraries Inclusive For Persons With Disabilities – An Overview

Problem Statement

Suggestions For Improvement

Annexure 1[10]

Annexure 2

Annexure 3

Assistance Aids/Equipment

For Assisting people with Hearing Impairment or Deafness

For Assisting people with Learning Disabilities

For Assisting people with Physical Disabilities

Celebrating the success of Wikipedia in Wikipedia Summit Pune 2013

Day 1

Day 2

Also see:

Video

Global IP Convention 2013

Indic Language Wikipedias — Statistical Report — 2012

Community

Content

Readership (page views)

Conclusion

The Violence of Knowledge Cartels

Is freedom of expression under threat in the digital age?

Draft International Principles on Communications Surveillance and Human Rights

7th India Digital Summit 2013

Third South Asian Meeting on the Internet and Freedom of Expression

Agenda

January 14, 2013

January 15, 2013

List of Participants

Response to RTI on Decisions of the Cyber Regulation Advisory Committee