Centre for Internet and Society

WikiConference India 2016 Submission: We, Men, Women: Collective Learning in Bridging Indic Wikipedia Gender Gaps

Elisachang — 2016-08-17T02:37:01Z

There is no denying that non-English Wikipedias are disproportionally underrepresented in scholarly focus despite the significant role of an open knowledge society can play in smaller linguistic groups – local collaboration and communication, knowledge dissemination, as well as preservation of local language resources.

A presentation was made at the WikiIndia Conference 2016.

Likewise, for the issue of the Wikipedia gender gap, missing the discourse and context of the Indian language Wikipedias’ gender imbalance will be a great loss considering the potential it possesses in gender empowerment and the recognition of female’s accomplishment in the local communities.

In this action research, we approach the issue with localized lens to investigate the gender gaps in five Indian language Wikipedias (Kannada, Konkani, Telugu, Odia, and Marathi) and to recode female participants' experiences in editing, negotiating, and communicating. However, this is not an ordinary gender gap bridging plan, we are not only promoting the idea of female-inclusive open knowledge society, but also actively searching for effective incentives, tangible outcomes, and sustainable strategies to cope with the challenges in respective contexts. Most importantly, we hope to create an example for the establishment of “community feedback loops” for reflective learning. Combining practical approach with theories in Feminism and Social Network, we ask.

How do female and women’s organizations perceive Wikipedia and its use on knowledge production?
How do we incentivize females and various female organization and make them feel empowered through online contribution?
What type(s) of network are ideal for female newcomers? How can we improve cross-community/gender communication?
How can we build a more welcoming platform for collaboration?

Indian language Wikipedias may be small, but they are in the phase of much flexibility and opportunities to shape and reshape the cultures and dynamics. Through the cyclical process of an action reaction, narrowing gender gaps in our local Wikipedias is no longer discrete events of individual efforts – but a collective action, a mutual learning, as what Wikipedias were built for.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/wikiconference-india-2016-submission-we-men-women-collective-learning-in-bridging-indic-wikipedia-gender-gaps

WikiConference India 2016 Submission: How to better tell your Wikimedia Community Story using Media as a Tool

subha — 2016-08-17T02:24:19Z

The Wikimedia community has constantly struggled to a) reach out to masses and tell them about their contribution, and motivate people to contribute to the Wikimedia projects. Media plays a very important role in spreading the word about Wikimedia projects and the contributor community, and at times, encouraging the audience to contribute.

A presentation was made at the WikiConference India 2016. This was one of the submissions which was accepted.

This has not been a very successful trend in the movement so far that a large number of people have engaged on Wikimedia projects because of a media shoutout. But there is no doubt about media being a great tool to engage with a large number of people. Apart from the mainstream media, social media has also been a gamechanger in mobilizing masses. The audience in both these kinds of media demand a certain kind of content and storytelling. And it is not easy to create relevant content for an audience that is hungry for new stories. Also, dealing with mainstream media has a lot to do with interpersonal skills.

This workshop would cover a few best practices from lessons learned from several media-related exercises in the recent years. Some of these exercises come with success and some with failures with some specific learning. And these important takeaways will hopefully lead a path in creating some kind open education resources (OER) for the Wikimedia community. However, none of the methodologies that are going to be discussed here are going to be ready solutions to change the awareness about the Wikimedia movement overnight. But these will certainly help the participants map their own community stories. The interactive workshop will help the participants to make some roadmap for a regular and sustained engagement on media.

Those who are keen on learning about using different media tools and take their Wikimedia stories to a wider world should consider participating this. It would be beneficial if they come prepared with a list of challenges that they are facing in media outreach.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/wikiconference-india-2016-submission-how-to-better-tell-your-wikimedia-community-story-using-media-as-a-tool

WikiConference India 2016 Starts Friday in Chandigarh

praskrishna — 2016-08-05T01:48:32Z

India, a key growth area for Wikipedia, is gearing up for a national conference "for Wikimedians in India to meet and share their views, discuss challenges and exchange useful tips, best practices and other information".

First published by Indo Asian News Service was mirrored on NDTV website on August 4, 2016. Sunil Abraham will be participating.

While the conference is open to "Wikipedians" from across the globe, organisers announced here that it would have a "very distinct Indian flavour and will deal primarily with issues relating to India on Wikipedia and its sister projects".

Wikipedia, founded in 2001, is the world's sixth-most popular website in terms of overall visitor traffic. Its worldwide monthly readership totals almost 500 million.

Since 2011, the Wikipedia has been working to expand its growth in India, and it held its first Indian conference in Mumbai in November that year, which was attended by 700 persons and addressed by website founder Jimmy Wales.

This year, the meet takes place from August 5-8 in Chandigarh, the city and a Union territory of a million population that serves as the capital of the states of Punjab and Haryana.

"The main objective is to reduce the gap between different communities and get help from other community members on technical issues and other things like best practices in decision making and how we resolve the disputes in the community," the organisers said.

Those attending including Wikimedia Foundation executive director Katherine Maher, board member Nataliia Tymkiv, senior programme officer for emerging Wikimedia communities Asaf Bartov, language engineering team international manager Runa Bhattacharjee, Punjabi poet Dr Surjit Patar, and Wikipedia education programme senior manager Tighe Flanagan.

From India, participants will include The Centre for Internet and Society executive director Sunil Abraham, and Wikimedia India president Yohann Varun Thomas.

This event includes "hackathons" and "edit-a-thons" - collective workings towards improving the content available online. It will also see sessions on the Wikimedia movement in India, examples of its use in education, innovative tech solutions from India, content translation, a "gentle introduction" to Wikidata, gender gaps, and case studies from various Indian languages.

Participants are coming from the Wikipedias in languages including Punjabi, Kannada, Odia, Tamil, English, Bengali, Telugu, Malayalam, Urdu, Sindhi, Hindi and Chinese.

Because of its widespread popularity - and contrary to fears that a website "anyone" can edit will not have quality - the Wikipedia notches often among the highest results when information is searched for on the world wide web.

It is a project supported by the Wikimedia Foundation and based on a model of "openly editable content". As the site explains: "The name Wikipedia is a portmanteau of the words wiki (a technology for creating collaborative websites, from the Hawaiian word wiki, meaning quick) and encyclopedia."

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/a2k/news/indo-asian-news-service-ndtv-august-4-2016-wiki-conference-india-2016-starts-friday-in-chandigarh

WikiConference India 2016

praskrishna — 2016-08-07T01:35:50Z

WikiConference India 2016 is an event to provide a common platform for all Wikimedians in India to meet and share their views, discuss challenges and exchange useful tips, best practices and other information. The Conference is open for participation of Wikimedians from all nations, and will be taking place on the 5th, 6th, and 7th of August 2016 at Chandigarh.

The Conference has a very distinct Indian flavor and deals primarily with issues relating to India on Wikipedia and its sister projects.

The main objective is to reduce the gap between different communities and get help from other community members on technical issues and other things like best practices in decision making and how we resolve the disputes in the community.

Guests

Katherine Maher, Executive Director, Wikimedia Foundation
Nataliia Tymkiv, Board Member, Wikimedia Foundation
Asaf Bartov, Senior Program Officer, Emerging Wikimedia Communities, Wikimedia Foundation
Runa Bhattacharjee, Manager, Language Engineering Team (International), Wikimedia Foundation
Dr. Surjit Patar, Punjabi poet and writer
Tighe Flanagan, Senior Manager, Wikipedia Education Program, Wikimedia Foundation
Sunil Abraham, Executive Director, The Centre for Internet and Society
Yohann Varun Thomas, President, Wikimedia India
María Kreuz, Communications and Outreach Coordinator, Wikimedia Foundation

Social Media Campaign

Facebook event page - https://www.facebook.com/events/146258892472025/ (More suited for conference participants only)
Facebook Page - https://www.facebook.com/WikiConferenceIndia2016
Facebook group - https://www.facebook.com/groups/WikiConferenceIndia2016/
Official Twitter Handler - https://twitter.com/WikiConIndia
IRC Channel - #wikiconferenceindia

More Info, click here

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/a2k/news/wikiconference-india-2016

Wiki's worth, on a different turf

sunil — 2012-10-23T08:33:56Z

An Indian duo–a programmer and a mathematician–have developed a tool to expose anonymous writers and cleanse Wikipedia of rogue editors

Bangalore-based Kiran Jonnalagadda, a Web programming guru, and Hans Varghese Mathews, a mathematician, are the new entrants to the emerging field of Wikipedia research. The duo is credited with building Wiki Analysis, a tool that helps researchers understand the growing phenomenon of astroturfing, the practice of faking grass-roots support on Wikipedia and other websites. Wikipedia is the first Google result for most searches and this has made it a popular destination for those trying to manipulate public opinion on the Internet. Corporations, governments and even pop artists have been caught astroturfing in the past.

Jonnalagadda and Mathews are among 34 researchers from 17 countries attending a two-day conference in Bangalore, WikiWars, which is concluding today. WikiWars is taking a fresh look at many different aspects of the world’s biggest encyclopaedia, the sixth most popular website on the Internet.

The first generation of astroturfing on Wikipedia has been, thus far, largely unsophisticated, with little attention paid to covering up digital evidence. Remember the campaign Avril Lavigne’s fans launched last year that turned her music video Girlfriend into the most viewed clip on YouTube? Wal-Mart Stores Inc. contracted its public relations firm Edelman to maintain a fake website called “Working Families for Wal-Mart”. They pretended to be ordinary citizens who opposed the views of the firm’s labour union.

It is well known that platforms such as Twitter and Facebook, with opaque management procedures, are susceptible to astroturf campaigns. Supporters of open licensing and peer production have always held that Wikipedia and other community-managed platforms are protected thanks to their transparency in policies and practices. But as far as Wikipedia researchers are concerned, the jury is still out.

Microsoft tried to pay technology blogger Rick Jelliffe to work on Wikipedia connected to OOXML (Office Open XML) during the ISO (International Organization for Standardization) approval process in an attempt to influence the global vote. OOXML was the new file format for MS Office documents that urgently needed approval to check the growing popularity of Open Office. A user called “Ril_editor”, active between September 2007 and May 2008, who claimed to be working out of Reliance Industries Ltd’s chief Mukesh Ambani’s offices, tried to expunge pages connected to negative publicity about Reliance. Scientologists were blocked by Wikipedia’s arbitration committee when they were found trying to systematically undermine Wikipedia’s NPOV (neutral point of view) policy. NPOV is Wikipedia’s particular spin on non-partisanship, providing equal space to all opinions. However, some Wikipedia researchers such as Geert Lovink, head of the Institute of Network Cultures, Amsterdam, and co-organizer of the WikiWars conference, believes that the dominance of English and textual citation requirements has meant that NPOV is never translated into practice.

An American team based out of the Santa Fe Institute, US, has developed WikiScanner, a public database of IP addresses that helps reveal the organizations behind anonymous edits on Wikipedia. WikiScanner has been used to expose the US Central Intelligence Agency’s manipulation of pages. WikiScanner doesn’t yet work for edits by authenticated users. The WikiScanner team has also developed another tool called Potential Sock Puppetry, which exposes those who use multiple user accounts from the same IP address. However, both tools could be circumvented by purchasing multiple data cards or getting people to work from public access points such as coffee shops and cyber cafés.

It is this gap the Indian duo’s tool tries to plug. The first version of their Wiki Analysis tool clusters users into potential lobbies based on the pages they edit within a date range. The tool’s next version will cluster users into lobbies based on the words they consistently add and delete across pages. Says Jonnalagadda, “Wikipedia is now close to a decade old and has many articles that have existed since its earliest days and have been edited by thousands of individuals.” It is now the primary encyclopaedic destination for Internet users, and that makes it a ripe target for astroturfing. At no point in the history of human civilization have so many collaborated over so long to produce one canonical document on any article of human knowledge.

“Wikipedia users rarely bother to check how a page was edited, but that information is all there, available to anyone who cares to look. We’re building the tools to help make sense of it,” Jonnalagadda says. Once Wiki Analysis is ready, you will be able to check if, for example, the editors of the climate change page on Wikipedia are more interested in ecology or energy.

Original article on Livemint

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/news/wiki-worth-different-turf

Wiki Meet-up in Bangalore: Talk by Vishnu Vardhan

praskrishna — 2013-02-11T06:22:56Z

Vishnu Vardhan, Director of Access to Knowledge team at CIS has been invited by the Bangalore SIG Chair. Vishnu will speak on the Access to Knowledge (Wikipedia) project. The talk is scheduled for February 25, 2013 at 2.00 p.m. in Bangalore.

Agenda

Wikimedia Projects
Access to Knowledge by Mr.Vishnu Vardhan, Director A2K, CIS
Guest Talk by Mr.Joe Justice, Founder WikiSpeed & Mr.Vibhu Srinivasan, MD, Solutions IQ
Audience address by Chief Guest, Mr.KS Viswanath, Vice President, Industry Initiatives, NASSCOM
Networking

KS Viswanath

Mr. K.S. Viswanathan, Vice President, Industry Initiatives, NASSCOM, has around 32 years of general management and leadership experience in the Indian business context, building key executive relationships and a strong customer capital in diverse business environment. His extensive work experience in the IT industry and social sector comprises of developing and executing operational strategies, managing customer engagement programs, and establishing models for customer acquisition and retention. Over the span of his career, Mr. Viswanathan has held strategic & leadership positions at Wipro, Dell, Azim Premji Foundation and Hilleman Laboratories. As the Head for India geography at Wipro Infotech (2003-2008), he led the positive transformation of and business landscape for Wipro in India. He was the first country manager for Dell in India in 2000 and was instrumental in establishing Dell’s direct business model in India. Mr. Viswanathan is a graduate from Birla Institute of Technology and Science (1979 batch). He holds a MBA in marketing from PSG College of Technology (1981 batch).

Vishnu Vardhan

Vishnu Vardhan is the Programme Director-Access to Knowledge at CIS since February 2013. His experience spans across academics, industry (media) and not-for-profit sectors. Over the last 11 years he has worked in various capacities as researcher, grant manager, teacher, project consultant, information architect and translator. Prior to joining CIS, Vishnu managed the Art, Crafts and Culture portfolio of the Sir Ratan Tata Trust (SRTT); where had spent 5 years in project conceptualization, management and assessment of quality and impact in the not-for-profit sector. Vishnu managed more than 30 projects and funds to the tune of Rs. 160 million. He also anchored SRTT’s automation and knowledge management activities. Vishnu worked as Research Coordinator at Centre for the Study of Culture and Society (CSCS), Bangalore where he a) coordinated the online M.A. in Cultural Studies; b) managed the Library Fellowship programme; c) conceptualized and coordinated national and international workshops and short-term courses in Media and Cultural Studies; and d) helped in building academic institutional partnerships. Vishnu is a superannuated doctoral candidate at the Centre for Media Research, University of Ulster and CSCS, Bangalore.

Joe Justice

Joe Justice (@WIKISPEED) Founder, CEO, WikiSpeed Joe's team tied for 10th place in the mainstream class of the 2010 Progressive Insurance Automotive X Prize, a $10 million challenge for 100+ MPG automobiles. WIKISPEED now uses agile processes to solve problems for social good. Joe has spoken to audiences at TEDx, Denver University, University of California Berkley, Google, The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Rotary International, and others about social web application development, project methodology, and agile best practices. He is CEO of WIKISPEED and works at SolutionsIQ, a leading provider of Agile consulting, certified training, coaching, development, and Agile talent services, where he helps clients leverage Agile project management and team development methods to deliver solutions more reliably.

Vibhu Srinivasan

Vibhu Srinivasan (@vibhu_s) Managing Director, SolutionsIQ India Vibhu Srinivasan is an Entrepreneur, Agile Coach, Technologist and currently heads SolutionsIQ India. Vibhu has an extensive technology, process, and consulting background allowing him to work with a diverse set of clients and teams. Vibhu has been practicing agile practices since 1997 (officially called Agile only in 2001).He brings to his consulting, deep rooted passion and practices gained by working in the trenches with hundreds of developers on real projects. He is very passionate about software development and can code in multiple languages. He has helped many teams in their quest for agility. He is a CTO of a early stage start up in Seattle and has an MBA in strategic management from school of business Madison. He has a very solid understanding of building large scale scalable systems having participated in various roles over the years, most recently chief architect for a game, Lead for virtualization product at Microsoft and CTO of his own start-up. He has worked in financial, gaming, visualization domains to name a few. An entrepreneur by choice he is always busy building a company/product and is currently in India heading Solutions IQ a premier provider of Agile consulting and development services in the US.

Participants

Intended Audience

Anyone interested in Wikipedia (user, contributor or curious about it). Wikipedians from any part of India or the world and anyone who is interested in Wikipedia! Meetup is open to members of all Wikimedia projects and Wikipedians from all languages. All are welcome, and we are especially interested in seeing newcomers to join the experienced Wikipedians/Wikimedians. If you are interested in coming, please add your name below.

The full details can be accessed on the Wikipedia page

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/news/wiki-meet-up-bangalore

Wiki Loves Pride 2014 and Adding Diversity to Wikipedia

dorothy — 2014-07-25T10:56:38Z

Since Wikipedia’s gender gap first came to light in late 2010, Wikipedians have taken the issue to heart, developing projects with a focus on inclusivity in content, editorship and the learning environments relevant to new editors.

Click to read the original published on Wikimedia blog here.

Wiki Loves Pride started from conversations among Wikipedians editing LGBT topics in a variety of fields, including history, popular culture, politics and medicine, and supporters of Wikimedia LGBT - a proposed user group which promotes the development of LGBT-related content on Wikimedia projects in all languages and encourages LGBT organizations to adopt the values of free culture and open access. The group has slowly been building momentum for the past few years, but had not yet executed a major outreach initiative. Wiki Loves Pride helped kickstart the group’s efforts to gather international supporters and expand its language coverage.

Pride Edit-a-Thons and Photo Campaigns Held Internationally

We decided to run a campaign in June (LGBT Pride Month in the United States), culminating with a multi-city edit-a-thon on June 21. We first committed to hosting events in New York City and Portland, Oregon (our cities of residence), hoping others would follow. We also gave individuals the option to contribute remotely, either by improving articles online or by uploading images related to LGBT culture and history. This was of particular importance for users who live in regions of the world less tolerant of LGBT communities, or where it may be dangerous to organize LGBT meetups.

We decided to run a campaign in June (LGBT Pride Month in the United States), culminating with a multi-city edit-a-thon on June 21. We first committed to hosting events in New York City and Portland, Oregon (our cities of residence), hoping others would follow. We also gave individuals the option to contribute remotely, either by improving articles online or by uploading images related to LGBT culture and history. This was of particular importance for users who live in regions of the world less tolerant of LGBT communities, or where it may be dangerous to organize LGBT meetups.

In addition to New York City and Portland, offline events were held in Philadelphia and Washington, D.C., with online activities in Houston, Seattle, Seoul, South Africa, Vancouver, Vienna and Warsaw. Events will be held in Bangalore and New Delhi later this month as part of the Centre for Internet and Society’s (CIS) Access to Knowledge (A2K) program. Other Wikimedia chapters have expressed interest in hosting LGBT edit-a-thons in the future.

Campaign Results

The campaign’s “Results” page lists 90 LGBT-related articles which were created on English Wikipedia and links to more than 750 images uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. Also listed are new categories, templates and article drafts, along with “Did you know” (DYK) hooks that appeared on the Main Page and policy proposals which may be of interest to the global LGBT community.

The campaign also attracted participation from Wikimedia projects other than Wikipedia. Wikimedia Commons hosted an LGBT photo challenge, which received more than 50 entries and an LGBT task force was created at Wikidata. So far the group, which also seeks to improve LGBT-related content, has gathered 10 supporters and has adopted a rainbow-colored variation of the Wikidata logo as its symbol.

	Continuing Efforts Our hope is that the campaign will continue to grow and evolve, galvanizing participation in more locations and in different languages. Wiki Loves Pride organizers will continue to provide logistical support to those interested in hosting events and collaborating with cultural institutions. Contiguous with the events of Wiki Loves Pride, Wikimedia LGBT has an open application to achieve user group status from the Wikimedia Affiliations Committee and looks forward to expanding its members and efforts on all fronts.

Continuing Efforts

Our hope is that the campaign will continue to grow and evolve, galvanizing participation in more locations and in different languages. Wiki Loves Pride organizers will continue to provide logistical support to those interested in hosting events and collaborating with cultural institutions.

Contiguous with the events of Wiki Loves Pride, Wikimedia LGBT has an open application to achieve user group status from the Wikimedia Affiliations Committee and looks forward to expanding its members and efforts on all fronts.

Jason Moore, Wikipedian

Dorothy Howard, Wikipedian

Copyright notes: "SF Pride 2014 - Stierch 6.jpg" by SarahStierch , under CC-BY-SA 3.0 Unported, from Wikimedia Commons, "Portland Pride 2014 - 036.JPG" by Another Believer , under CC-BY-SA 3.0 Unported, from Wikimedia Commons

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/openness/blog-old/wikimedia-blog-dorothy-howard-wiki-loves-pride-2014-and-adding-diversity-to-wikipedia

Wiki changes the world

praskrishna — 2012-01-03T10:23:38Z

A fortnightly column on ‘Digital Natives’ authored by Nishant Shah is featured in the Sunday Eye, the national edition of Indian Express, Delhi, from September 2010 onwards. This article was published in the Indian Express on January 23, 2011. In this Nishant Shah explains how Wiki changes the world by making the ordinary person the expert and knowledge free.

If you have a question, where do you go? To books? To encyclopaedias? To knowledgeable friends? To experts in that field? The quest for knowledge is not easy. Often, we encounter false leads and reach dead ends. We often find ourselves dependent on vanguards and bearers of knowledge. The knowledge industry, which includes academia, schools, universities, libraries, archives, etc. have created labels that define consumers, producers and mediators of knowledge.

What do you do with the answer of a question? You generally store it in your memory. If it is an answer that you are searching for collaboratively, you share it with the concerned people. If you are meticulous and like to archive information, you probably write it down in a big brown book. But for many of us, we see our relationship with knowledge as one of consumption. Books, and indeed columns like this one, are written by “experts”.

If you have an answer, but nobody is asking you the question, what do you do with it? This was the question that Jimmy Wales, asked a decade ago. He then thought of starting a web-based, collaborative platform for knowledge production — now known as Wikipedia. Working on an open structure, Wikipedia invites anybody with internet access to start contributing and consolidating their knowledge through a process of discussion, consensus-building and collaboration. Unlike a regular encyclopaedia with its army of knowledge warriors, Wikipedia depends on everyday users who harness the power of information to bring together the “sum total of human knowledge”. In 10 years, Wikipedia has become the de facto global reference point for dynamic knowledge and boasts of more than 17 million articles with more than 365 million readers in 263 language editions.

For digital natives, the growth of Wikipedia illustrates the changing ways in which digital natives are learning and engaging with knowledge, both inside and outside of formal education.

Knowledge is a process

Digital natives, who contribute to Wikipedia and learn from it, know that there is more to knowledge than what is on the surface. While the entries on Wikipedia serve as a fount of information, it is layered by discussions, edit-wars, and processes of mediation that produce objective content. For young users of Wikipedia, the ability to question the content, the protocols of producing neutral evidence, and the often intense discussions, establish an intimate relationship with knowledge.

They look at knowledge as fluid, as open to contention and produced through multiple perspectives. In the world of user-generated content, knowledge is seen as a process of engagement rather than as an object to be mechanically consumed. Hence, it is not uncommon to see digital natives encountering information online — on platforms like Wikipedia, but also on blogs and discussion forums — expressing opinions and challenging the content when it does not fit their experience of that information.

Your experiences are also knowledge

One of the most important lessons that Wikipedia teaches a digital native, is that knowledge is not authored only by people with the backing of institutions. While there are some systems of knowledge which require formal training, there is a huge value in everyday and lived experiences. Encyclopaedias discriminate between different kinds of knowledge — Shakespeare’s work might find an entry in almost all of these, but the 16-year-old writer who has a larger readership than Shakespeare might easily be excluded. However, on Wikipedia, any realm of the cultural, political or social that is relevant and significantly affects our everyday life finds space and detailed research. This translation of lived experience into knowledge is new and opens up ways of producing alternative and plural knowledge systems around objects, people, events and ideas that shape the world.

It is open to all

Digital natives who have grown up in the Wikified world have also experienced information as something that belongs to a larger community. They don’t even espouse it as an ideology, but often think of knowledge as open and residing within digital public commons. In their multiple roles as bearers, producers, and consumers of knowledge, they are used to remixing, sharing and disseminating knowledge into a wider ecology. The analogue regimes of intellectual property and copyright do not make sense to them in a medium that is intuitively made for copying, sharing and owning knowledge collaboratively.

In the largely Wikifying world that we live in, the notions of what constitutes knowledge, how one accesses knowledge and how people interact with it is undergoing radical change. And the digital natives are silently but significantly shaping new ways of imagining knowledge processes, proving to us that the pen might be mightier than the sword, but the click trumps them both.

Original article was published by the Indian Express

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/blog/wiki-world

Why your Facebook Stalker is Not the Real Problem

nishant — 2012-03-21T05:02:16Z

We live in networked conditions. This is a statement that can now be taken at face-value, and immediately explains our highly connected, inter-meshed environments finds Nishant Shah in this article published in FirstPost on March 20, 2012.

Especially within the digital world, the World Wide Web has become synonymous with social networking systems, where increasingly all our access, communication and interaction is located within a series of interconnected networks.

From the imagination of the web as a complex network, we have evolved to looking at the web as facilitating networks where different relationships, transactions and connections can be mapped and managed. This is why we often have romantic imaginations of networks as free, open, collaborative, shared spaces of interaction and expression.

However, we have reached a stage where this idea of a network as a liberatory space is under threat. Even as I write this, Internet Service Providers are now planning to set up sophisticated, automated systems that will do a deep-spy on your data transfer to see if you are sharing files (sometimes also called piracy) using the Internet.

These systems will now keep track of all your digital transactions and will monitor what you consume, who you talk to and determine whether you are a good ethical subject who is only using the Internet in ways that the powers to be want you to.

For me, this particular networked condition of being constantly monitored and watched is scary. And it surprises me that this invasive process is less in public attention than Google’s recently changed privacy policies or the TOS-in-progress nature of privacy on Facebook.

This is because the ubiquitous presences of networks in our lives have made them transparent to us – we do not think of the networks themselves as entities but as spaces where interactions with other objects is possible. Hence, if I ask you, right now, to name the top 5 entities that you interact with the most on Facebook, I am sure you will be able to name them. More probably than not, these top 5 entities with people that you have formed strong Facebook Friendships with.

In fact there are platforms designed to let you know who you are talking with most on your networks. Network influence measurement indices by services like Klout are able to tell you not only who you talk to but also what are your key areas of influence. This is a way by which the network becomes invisible to us. It hides the fact that the thing that talks to you the most on Facebook is Facebook itself.

The marketing of Facebook might tell you that you are talking to other human beings, but reality is that the network is more than the sum total of all human beings on the system. Just look at the amount of information Facebook produces on your behalf and to you. Notifications for adding friends, for liking people, for people writing to you, for people commenting on your walls and posts, form more than 50% of the information traffic on Facebook or social networking systems.

This information is produces and shared by scripts, coded bots, algorithmic applications, and non-human entities that not only support and sustain the network but are also significant members of the networks.

This is the actual networked condition – where the processes and entities that make the networks possible, produce an illusion of seamless communication and interaction, while performing and extraordinary amount of information and for you.

This blindness to our own ‘networkedness’ has crucial ramifications for our online activities because it makes us oblivious to questions of privacy, control, safety and trust. We have privacy settings to protect us from human entities on Facebook. There is very little concern about the non-human entities who store, distribute and use the data that we produce. If we don’t even know what these watchers are, how do we protect ourselves from being watched? What happens when between you and your ‘friend’, is a series of silent interceptors who are recording and using your data without your knowledge?

Being in a network is like being in a glass-house. We cannot see the walls and hence, we presume that we need our privacy from the other inhabitants of the same house. However, in that, we forget that the walls are watching, and that there are invisible watchers beyond the walls, who are in control.

It is time to make our networks visible again. It is time to realise that what we really need to be afraid of, on social networking systems, is the social network itself, and not the mythical stranger who wants to stalk us or that unwanted friend you want to exclude from your information sharing.

Privacy and safety are not merely compromised at the interface, where information might leak and travel into zones outside of your knowledge and control. The real questions of being safe are actually in the protocols and designs of the network itself.

We need to start looking at larger invasive policies exercises by the different invisible actors like the ISP, ICT ministries, corporate policies, design choices and architecture of interception that sustain the networks we so gladly embrace.

Nishant Shah is Director-Research at the Bangalore based Centre for Internet and Society and recently edited a 4 volume book on youth, technology and change, titled ‘Digital AlterNatives with a Cause?’

Read this in FirstPost

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/facebook-stalker-is-not-real-problem

Why you should keep a close eye on the net neutrality debate in the US

Admin — 2018-01-18T14:50:52Z

As the United State's FCC Chairman Ajit Pai gears up to repeal the net neutrality laws put in place in 2015, India should sit up and take note.

The blog post by Subhrojit Mallick was published by Digital.in on November 24, 2017.

Back in 2014, a group of Redditors started debating net neutrality in India after Airtel announced it would charge extra for Voice Over IP (VoIP) services like Skype. Soon, that snowballed into a nation-wide campaign with over a million internet users participating. Things didn’t help when Facebook too wanted to provide a bunch of internet services for free in India through its Internet.org or Free Basics initiative. However, a year-long discussion and public outrage against the two, led the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) to rule in favour of net neutrality and stop both Airtel and Facebook in their tracks of violating a free and open internet.

Fast forward three years down the line and America, the birthplace of the internet, is struggling with the problem of internet freedom. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) under the Donald Trump Administration led by Chairman Ajit Pai submitted a final draft proposal yesterday to repeal the existing net neutrality laws put in force by the Obama administration in 2015. The draft proposal will be voted upon by FCC by the end of the year and considering the FCC has a Republican majority under Ajit Pai, the proposal is likely to pass.

What is FCC chairman Ajit Pai doing?

The draft removes almost every net neutrality rule from 2015, making ISPs the gatekeepers of the internet. It states internet providers will have the freedom to implement fast and slow speed lanes, prioritise traffic and block apps and services. The only rule they have to follow -- publicly disclose when they are doing any of the things stated above.

Executive director of the Centre for Internet and Society, Sunil Abraham elaborated on what's on Pai's mind.

"Ajit Pai's ideology is pro-market. He believes the market will sort all problems out. According to Pai, the magic of competition will eliminate all the harms emerging from net neutrality violation," he said.

"Pai has said, you do what you want to do, but you have to disclose that to the public. You can block, throttle, have fast lanes, prioritise traffic, have discriminatory pricing, but you disclose them. If the customer doesn't like it, he can swith to another network. Pai believes the transparency requirements will allow the magic of the market to diminish and eliminate harm. His regulation of net neutrality is transparency," Abraham further added.

However, such a move will have drastic effects on the free flow of internet traffic. Telecom companies and ISPs can handpick services by charging customers to access some sites or by slowing down the speeds of others. For instance, ISPs can make consumers pay more to watch high-quality content on Netflix.

With net neutrality rules repealed, the internet will become a pay-to-play service. It will essentially divide the internet into fast and slow lanes. One will be a speedy service that could be priced higher and another, much slower and cheaper. While big players like Amazon, Facebook, Google, Netflix and the likes can easily pay the higher fees and stay unfettered, newcomers and smaller players will have it tough. Although, the move will lead to cuts in profits for everyone. A higher price to consumers will eat into the user base of these companies, while startups and new voices in the media will find entry and success prohibitive.

Although it’s true that no single ISP in the US has the entire market to itself and the market is indeed divided into a handful of players, they do operate in a de facto monopolised way. How? ISPs in the US have sliced up the entire country into areas such that users in a particular area have only one choice of service provider. That essentially leaves users at the mercy of whatever Comcast or Spectrum is offering (or not offering).

By putting the net neutrality rules in place in 2015, the US had ensured these ISPs won’t do anything grossly uncompetitive. The current rules make broadband in the country a public utility, same as electricity. And now, Ajit Pai-led FCC is about to repeal those very rules that kept them grounded.

Will the FCC ruling make apps and services expensive in other countries?

While Pai’s jurisdiction does not extend beyond the United States, his tirades against a free internet will most definitely have rippling effects across the world. More importantly, it will raise the cost of operations of companies like Netflix and Amazon who will have to hire legal experts and lobbyists to negotiate deals with service providers. That extra cost will be burdened on the US consumers of course, but since they have a large international presence, it is likely that the extra cost will trickle down to users outside the US as well.

And that’s not just the streaming companies. All the tech giants hail from the US and it is only logical that a rise in their costs of operation will have an impact on their global operations.

Although, if the level playing field in the US is disrupted, companies will look for greener pastures and if that means moving out of the US to other countries, it could happen.

How will FCC’s decision impact India?

While US is grappling with such a reality, Indians fought against it and won. Or did they? Last year, after Airtel and Facebook were asked to drop their plans for differential pricing, TRAI released a paper on net neutrality and differential pricingto finalise its views on the matter. The regulatory body released a 14-question long consultation paper seeking comments on internet traffic management from the public.

“Increasingly, concerns have been raised globally relating to discriminatory treatment of Internet traffic by access providers. These concerns relating to nondiscriminatory access have become the centre of a global policy debate. The purpose of this second stage of consultation is to proceed towards the formulation of final views on policy or regulatory interventions, where required, on the subject of NN,” the paper read.

“Net Neutrality being repealed in the US will hurt innovation in that country, and will lead to a consolidation of power with those Internet companies which have the money to partner with US carriers. This hurts Indian product startups, because it means that their apps may not be as easily available to users in the US. The Internet is one world, and we need the same Internet to be available everywhere, across the world: one Internet for the entire world,” Nikhil Pahwa, Co-Founder of Internet Freedom Foundation told Digit.

That means, essentially, the debate on net neutrality is not over in India. In fact, both RS Sharma, the Chairman of TRAI and FCC’s Ajit Pai agree on the need to bridge the digital divide. Both are exploring ways to keep the internet open while providing access to the unconnected. Thankfully, both differs on the approach to meet that goal.

Pai believes the internet should be left unregulated despite the “hypothetical harms” to the consumer. He thinks the current rules were put in place to avoid theoretical harms which were not based on hard evidence. Pai claims there should be evidence-based regulation of the internet.

Sharma, in contrast, disagrees on an evidence-based approach.

“The TRAI's view of Net Neutrality has so far been diametrically opposite to Ajit Pai's FCC, and with good reason. Net Neutrality ensures that all ISPs and telecom operators act as exchanges of data between users, and do not discriminate on the basis of the type or source of that data. This allows for permission-less innovation on the Internet, which has given us the Internet that we have today,” Pahwa added.

Will India’s stance on net neutrality change after the FCC’s decision?

Rajan Mathews, Director General of Cellular Operators Association of India believes the FCC’s decision will no doubt have some impact on the path India takes.

“I think the policymakers will look at the decision the US makes. They had taken their decision as a point of reference before and the FCC’s ruling is too large an issue to not look at it. Both the DoT (Department of Telecom) and TRAI will have to reevaluate their approach in the context of the what happens in the US,” he said.

“Net neutrality approach in both countries is still in flux and India is going to tread lightly on net neutrality issues,” he added. As per Mathews, in India, the situation is different from the US where a handful of telecom companies and ISPs wield control of the entire country. In India, there is a licensed environment which provides a minimal standard of net neutrality, which is applied across the board and everybody who is providing a similar service is made to follow similar guidelines.

However, Mathews did attribute India’s efforts to enforce net neutrality to the United States’ efforts to place the rules in the first place in 2015 under the Obama administration, when internet was deemed as a public utility, same as electricity or telephone.

“Net neutrality in India emerged from the US definition. Now that they are going to repeal it, people in India who were looking at the US as a model will evaluate the implications of the move,” Mathews elaborated.

The US is looking to implement an ex-post approach to regulating the internet wherein the ISPs and telcos will adopt a free market approach and will only be investigated if they violate a rule. India, Mathews says, is adopting an ex-ante approach where there will be some commonly accepted criteria of net neutrality, but operators will have the ability to manage their traffic to ensure quality of service.

Minister of Information and Broadcasting, Ravi Shankar Prasad also helped alleviate fears of India following suit. During the Global Summit for Cyberspace Security held yesterday, he said, "The citizens' right of accessing the internet is "non-negotiable" and the government will not allow any company to restrict people's entry to the worldwide web."

Prime Minister Narendra Modi also came in support of net neutrality in India. He tweeted, "The internet, by nature, is inclusive and not exclusive. It offers equity of access and equality of opportunity."

Pahwa, who fought hard against Airtel and Facebook to ensure the internet remains neutral, was confident the decision won’t affect India’s stance on net neutrality. However, he is apprehensive that Indian telecom companies might borrow a leaf from their US counterparts and lobby hard to repeal the rules.

“I don't think the FCC decision affects the Indian regulation in any way, because the Indian regulator TRAI has already established strong and well rooted principles for Net Neutrality regulations in India. The only thing that worries me is that Indian telecom operators will use the developments in the US to push back against Net Neutrality with renewed vigour,” he said.

So, on the face of it, while India is well insulated from the catastrophe the United States has embarked upon, it is important to watch what the US is doing closely and make sure we don’t repeat their mistakes here.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/digit-in-subhrojit-mallick-november-24-2017-why-you-should-keep-a-close-eye-on-the-net-neutrality-debate-in-the-us

Why should you keep a close eye on the net neutrality debate in the US

Admin — 2017-11-25T15:33:32Z

As the United State's FCC Chairman Ajit Pai gears up to repeal the net neutrality laws put in place in 2015, India should sit up and take note.

The blog post by Subhrojit Mallick was published by Digit on November 24, 2017.

Executive director of the Centre for Internet and Society, Sunil Abraham elaborated on what's on Pai's mind.

Will the FCC ruling make apps and services expensive in other countries?

And that’s not just the streaming companies. All the tech giants hail from the US and it is only logical that a rise in their costs of operation will have an impact on their global operations.

Although, if the level playing field in the US is disrupted, companies will look for greener pastures and if that means moving out of the US to other countries, it could happen.

How will FCC’s decision impact India?

While US is grappling with such a reality, Indians fought against it and won. Or did they? Last year, after Airtel and Facebook were asked to drop their plans for differential pricing, TRAI released a paper on net neutrality and differential pricing to finalise its views on the matter. The regulatory body released a 14-question long consultation paper seeking comments on internet traffic management from the public.

Sharma, in contrast, disagrees on an evidence-based approach.

Will India’s stance on net neutrality change after the FCC’s decision?

Rajan Mathews, Director General of Cellular Operators Association of India believes the FCC’s decision will no doubt have some impact on the path India takes.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/digit-subhrojit-mallick-november-24-2017-why-should-you-keep-a-close-eye-on-net-neutrality-debate-in-us

Why Parallel Importation of Books Should Be Allowed

pranesh — 2019-02-01T17:41:26Z

There has been much controversy lately with some publishers trying to stop the government from amending s.2(m) of the Indian Copyright Act, clarifying that a parallel import will not be seen as an "infringing copy". This blog post argues that the government should, keeping in mind the larger picture, still go ahead and legalise parallel imports.

[Updated Wednesday, February 2, 2011, to respond to Thomas Abraham's extensive and thoughtful rebuttal of the earlier version this post.]

First off, here is the controversial clause, with the proposed amendment (the insertion of a "proviso", in legalese) being emphasised in bold font-face:

The amendment

2(m) "infringing copy" means,—

    (i) in relation to a literary, dramatic, musical or artistic work, a reproduction thereof otherwise than in the form of a cinematographic film;

    (ii) in relation to a cinematographic film, a copy of the film made on any medium by any means;

    (iii) in relation to a sound recording, any other recording embodying the same sound recording, made by any means;

    (iv) in relation to a programme or performance in which such a broadcast reproduction right or a performer's right subsists under the provisions of this Act, the sound recording or a cinematographic film of such programme or performance, if such reproduction, copy or sound recording is made or imported in contravention of the provisions of this Act;

Provided that a copy of a work published in any country outside India with the permission of the author of the work and imported from that country shall not be deemed to be an infringing copy.

Some claim that this amendment to s.2(m) ("provided that... copy") has the potential to destroy the publishing industry. The most lucid explanation of this was in a recent op-ed by Thomas Abraham in the Hindustan Times, very ominously titled The Death of Books. However it seems to us that the publishing industry—especially foreign publishers with distributorships in India—don't want to open themselves up to competition in the distribution market, and are opposing this most commendable move.

What is parallel importation?

Before getting into explanations of why allowing for parallel importation is good, and how the arguments otherwise fall short, we should examine what parallel importation is.

"Parallel import, insofar as copyright is concerned, involves an “original” copyright product (i.e. produced by or with the permission of the copyright owner in the manufacturing country) placed on the market of one country, which is subsequently imported into a second country without the permission of the copyright owner in the second country. For instance, the copyright owner of a book produced in India places the book on the market in India. A trader buys 100 copies of the book from India and imports them to China without the permission of the copyright owner of the book in China. This act of the trader bringing the books into China is called parallel import, the legality of which depends on the copyright law of the importing country (namely China in this example)." (Consumers International, Copyright and Access to Knowledge: Policy Recommendations on Flexibilities in Copyright Laws 23 (2006).)

Some fear-mongers try to equate parallel importation with 'anarchy' in markets, and some confusedly claim that this amendment would allow infringing copies of books would be permitted. That is simply not true. For parallel importation to be said to happen, the sale must itself be legal. If it is an an illegally sold copy (a pirated copy of a book, for instance) that is imported, then it will count as a black market import—not as a parallel import. Allowing for parallel imports will only dismantle monopoly rights over importation, and the amendment makes that amply clear.

Harms on existing books of not allowing parallel importation

Libraries/second-hand bookshops/consumers have no way of knowing if a book was originally imported legally or not, since there is no easy way of telling a parallel-ly imported copy apart from a exclusively imported copy. If one of them, even unknowingly buys/sells a foreign edition about which they am not sure and it turns out it was not legally imported (and there are literally thousands of such books, and I personally own at least a couple dozen foreign editions bought from various second-hand bookshops) then they are committing copyright infringement.

This precisely was argued by the library associations and others in amici briefs to the US Supreme Court in the Costco v. Omega case. For instance, the brief for the the American Library Association, the Association of College and Research Libaries, and the Association of Research Libraries in Support of Petitioner argues that:

By restricting the application of [the first sale doctrine] to copies manufactured in the United States, the Ninth Circuit’s decision threatens the ability of libraries to continue to lend materials in their collections. Over 200 million books in U.S. libraries have foreign publishers. Moreover, many books published by U.S. publishers were actually manufactured by printers in other countries. Although some books indicate on their copyright page where they were printed, many do not. Libraries, therefore, have no way of knowing whether these books comply with the Ninth Circuit’s rule. Without the certainty of the protection of the first sale doctrine, librarians will have to confront the difficult policy decision of whether to continue to circulate these materials in their collections in the face of potential copyright infringement liability. For future acquisitions, libraries would be able to adjust to the Ninth Circuit’s narrowing of [the first sale doctrine] only by bearing the significant cost of obtaining a “lending license” whenever they acquired a copy that was not clearly manufactured in the United States.

and, the brief for the Public Knowledge, American Association of Law Libraries, American Free Trade Association, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, Medical Library Association, and the Special Libraries Association in Support of Petitioner states:

The uncertainty created by the Ninth Circuit’s holding [against parallel importation] will harm used bookstores, libraries, yard sales, out-of-print book markets, movie and video game rental markets, and innumerable other secondary markets. Owners of copyright works or goods containing copyrighted elements manufactured abroad will be unable to dispose of these products without authorization at the risk of liability under copyright law’s extensive damages provisions. Furthermore, the chilling effects of the Ninth Circuit’s holding will extend beyond works manufactured abroad. Owners of copies of works will be unable to determine whether they are protected by [the first sale doctrine], as they will not always know where their goods were manufactured. Copyright holders will have little incentive to make clear the location of manufacturing of their copyrighted works,3 as greater uncertainty means a greater ability to sell the right to distribute the goods within the United States. Secondary market sellers who cannot afford to purchase this right will be unable to do business unless they are prepared to engage in lengthy and expensive litigation with an uncertain result. A wide variety of important secondary markets in copyrighted works and goods with copyrighted elements will suffer without the protection of the first sale doctrine.

Benefits of parallel importation

Dismantling distribution monopoly rights

The benefits that will accrue from allowing for parallel importations are huge. Currently a large percentage of educational books in India are imported, but with different companies having monopoly rights in importation of different books. If this was opened up to competition, the prices of books would drop, since one would not need to get an authorization to import books—the licence raj that currently exists would be dismantled—and Indian students will benefit. This is especially important for students and for libraries because even when low-priced editions are available, they are often of older editions.

Allowing people to import goods without permissions (with appropriate duties) is taken for granted in all other areas, so why not copyrighted works? After all, it is not the act of publication that gets affected, but the right of exclusive distribution. And if that goes away after first sale internationally, that's not a bad thing at all.

Generally, there are two main benefits of allowing for parallel importation: faster introduction of the latest international releases into the domestic country, and lowered prices by decreasing the costs imposed by a monopoly right over distribution.

All the foreign books that an online bookseller like Flipkart delivers in India are procured from international sources. Without parallel importation, Flipkart will have to ask for permission from the book publishers for each foreign book each time it makes a sale. This would cripple Flipkart's business model.

Helping book publishers

Book publishers will be benefited by parallel importation, just as they are benefited by the existence of libraries and second-hand book stores. Libraries and second-hand book stores help with market segmentation, providing access to people who can't afford expensive books at much lower rates, often free. However, the existence of second-hand book stores in almost every city in India—I have personally bought second-hand books everywhere from Jhansi (Leo Tolstoy's War and Peace) to Delhi's Darya Ganj market (Edmund Wilson's Letters on Literature and Politics)—does not prevent me from buying books first hand. Indeed, Wilson's Letters is out of print, and cannot be bought in a store like Crosswords or Gangaram's.

Why do I emphasise second-hand books and libraries? They are artefacts of something variously known as the "first sale doctrine" or the "doctrine of exhaustion" in copyright law: After the first sale of a book, subsequent sales, rentals, etc., cannot be controlled by the copyright owner. Parallel importation is simply a matter of applying this doctrine to the first sale of the book internationally rather than its first sale in India.

Thus we see that the existence of second-hand books, libraries, and parallel imports, are all dependent on the same rule of copyright law: the first sale doctrine. This doctrine is enshrined in s.14(b)(iv) of the Indian Copyright Act, and has been interpreted by the Delhi High Court to mean first sale in India. The present amendment changes that to mean first sale internationally.

The introduction of the modern "public library" in the mid-19th century led to a surge in literacy, readership, and book sales, and not a decline. Similarly, there is no reason to suppose that allowing parallel importations will lead to a decline in book sales.

Helping libraries and the print-disabled

Even currently, many people buy books directly from abroad and have them shipped to India. This is especially necessary for libraries whose patrons—scholars and students—very often need access to the latest books. Currently, libraries often buy books from abroad from Amazon, Flipkart, Alibris, etc. Such acts, within a strict reading of the law, are not legal, since they fall afoul of s.51(b)(iv), since the import is not for the "private and domestic use" of the libraries. This is also of especial concern for organizations working with print-disabled individuals, since the number of books legally available domestically in formats accessible by the print-disabled is very small, and often need to be imported.

Helping all consumers

An excellent report was prepared in 2006 by Consumers International, in which they studied the costs of textbooks in eleven countries, including India, by average purchasing power of each country's citizens, instead of absolute cost. Based on that study, and a detailed investigation of international treaties on copyright and the flexibilities allowed in them, Consumers International recommended that India should amend our law to make it clear that parallel importation of copyrighted works is legal (on page 51 of the report).

Rebutting objections

I will address a few specific objections raised by Mr. Abraham, Nandita Saikia, and others.

1. Authors' won't lose out on royalties

Authors do not lose out on royalties because of parallel importation, just as they do not lose out on royalties because of libraries, nor because of second-hand book stores. For parallel importation to take place, the books have to be purchased legally, and that first sale itself ensures that authors are paid royalties.

Of course, publishing contracts often have a clause that remaindered books will not garner royalties. But in that case, the problem is not parallel importation, but the overstocking and subsequent remaindering of books. The authors wouldn't be paid (or would be paid very little) for remaindered books even if the books weren't imported into India. Parallel importation does not in any way change that.

Indian authors

There is a worry that an Indian author would be hit if remaindered copies of his/her books started entering the Indian market. That would mean that foreign publishers had overstocked that Indian author's book, i.e., that the expectation from the book was much higher than the actual demand. If this happens infrequently, then the author hasn't much to worry about (since remainders aren't a big problem). If it happens frequently, then firstly the publisher should re-adjust to the market and realize that demand is low. Secondly, the author needs to worry more about quality of the book (and whether it caters to foreign audiences) than the possible effects that the availability of cheaper copies of that book would have.

2. Remaindered books are in publishers' control

India has amongst the cheapest book prices in the world. Then why would book publishers be wary of even cheaper books overrunning the Indian market? The reason, Mr. Abraham tells us, is remaindered books. He believes that remaindered books have the potential to destroy the Indian book market. Remaindering of books has been happening for decades. If remaindered books haven't already destroyed all book markets worldwide, then it is unlikely that they will do so suddenly just because parallel importation of books is permitted in India.

Remainders happen because of a miscalculation by the publisher: expecting more demand than was actually present. What happens with that excess stock is controlled by the publishers. They can choose to pulp them, burn them, or even push them into other channels of commerce that Mr. Abraham points out exist in the mature, frontline markets where remaindering happens:

And the reason why they have not destroyed book markets worldwide is because the mature markets exist with multiple strands (chains and high street stores, independents, direct sellers, online sellers, and supermarkets)—so a direct seller will sell the same book a high street store is selling at a much reduced price without it affecting the business of each strand. Each strand is discrete and price sensitivity does not matter the same way.

Since those multiple strands of commerce exist, each of which would enable the seller to get a better profit (being in a developed country) than in India, there is no reason to fear overrunning of the market with remainders.

3. Dumping of books should be tackled separately

An extension of the remaindered books concern is that of India becoming a land where all books will be dumped. This hasn't happened in case of countries like New Zealand, Mexico, Chile, Egypt, Cameroon, Pakistan, Argentina, Israel, Vietnam, South Korea, Japan, and a host of other countries, all of which allow for parallel importation of books. In a 1998 judgment, the United States Supreme Court, some parallel imports of copyrighted goods were legal. That ruling did not cause the downfall of the US book market, despite cheaper books being available outside the US. Australia has allowed for parallel importation of books in one form or another since 1991 (when the law was changed to allow for all parallel of all books that weren't introduced in the Australian market within 30 days of it being released elsewhere in the world). New Zealand did a study after removing the ban on parallel importation, and declared that cheaper books were available on a more timely basis than previously. None of these countries have been overrun by grey market books.

Customs laws are better suited

Even assuming that this fear is well-founded, copyright law is not the best way to deal with the problem. Dumping of books should be regulated by customs laws (anti-dumping and countervailing duties). Using copyright law to regulate apprehended book dumping practices (which might not even happen) is like using a trawler hoping to catch only shrimp: it is naive to think that there won't be unintended bycatch, and the consequences can be disastrous for the knowledge environment in case of books.

Customs laws are more flexible because they are imposed by the executive, and unlike copyright law, can be more easily changed as per requirements. So even if copyright law allows for parallel importation of copyrighted works, a special case can be made out by publishers in case of trade publishing, for instance, and that can be targetted specifically by imposing duties. However, the inverse cannot happen, since we are not aware of any mechanism whereby libraries, consumers and others can get to 'override' the provision in the Copyright Act.

Additionally, these duties can be made to operate only if the book is already being sold in India; these duties can be made to operate only on new books. A ban on parallel importation, on the other hand will apply equally to books that are out of print, to books that the original copyright owner has not even granted an exclusive Indian distributorship and are not even being sold in India. It goes right to the heart of freedom of speech, which the Supreme Court has held includes the right to receive information.

4. Non-printing of low-priced editions for India because of "unsecure" market won't happen

Parallel importation, which is what the amendment to s.2(m) allows for, affects only importation. It does not in any way affect publication in India or exports. Exporting low-priced Indian editions to countries which allow for parallel importation of books, is currently of doubtful legality. [Update: Earlier an incorrect claim was made in this post that such export was legal. The legal status is not that clear. While there is a Delhi High Court case that makes exports of low-priced editions illegal in the context of sale to the United States, it specifically states that the decision does not depend on whether India allows for parallel importation or not.] The amendment does not change that position, for reasons explained at greater length in a separate post. The incentives to print low-priced editions hence does not decrease. If anything it will increase because currently books that are not available as low-priced editions cannot be imported without exclusive licensing, and with a change in this position, the incentive to compete in the form of low-priced editions will increase.

Indeed, even before that 2009 Delhi High Court judgment prohibiting exports to the United States, many low-priced editions were being printed in India. And even before the 2005 Bombay High Court judgment prohibiting parallel imports, many low-priced editions were being printed in India. This won't change, regardless of the law, because India is an increasingly profitable and expanding market, and low-priced editions are a necessity in this market due to lower average income.

5. Rhetoric flourish and the law: Open and closed markets

Mr. Abraham asks how many authors one can name from open markets like Malaysia, Singapore, and Hong Kong, as a sign of the 'history of creativity' in each of these countries and territories. It might be just as well to ask how many authors he can name from closed markets like Bhutan, Kazakhstan, Cambodia, Papua New Guinea, Indonesia, Jordan, and Ukraine. One's ability to name authors from a country has less to do with the open/closed nature of its market and more to do with one's general knowledge.

Additionally, the 'mature' markets which he wishes India to emulate—United States, the United Kingdom, and Australia—are more ambiguous on parallel importation than he would have us believe. In the United States, the legality of a segment of parallel importation of copyrighted goods reached the United States Supreme Court in Quality King v. L'anza in 1998, in which the court held in favour of the importer.

The question reached the US Supreme Court again last year in Costco v. Omega, but the court split on it 4-4, and did not deliver a binding precedent on parallel importation. Thus, for all intents and purposes, under copyright law, the United States is an open market.

In the United Kingdom, as per European Union law, parallel importation is permitted from anywhere within the EU. And in Australia, parallel importation of parallel goods is largely allowed, with some conditions to encourage faster publishing in Australia of foreign books.

Most importantly, none of the markets held up as role models are developing countries. India is. This makes all the difference, as the Consumers International report underscores.

Standing Committee consultations

Lack of wide consultation

On one point we are in complete agreement with Mr. Abraham, which is his point regarding lack of adequate consultation. While there was a good amount of consultation during the drafting stage, when a wide-ranging public consultation was held in 2006, this was not repeated in 2010 by the Standing Committee. Further, the Standing Committee only gave fifteen days for responses to its call for comments.

Publishers were represented

While Mr. Abraham states that only the Authors Guild was represented before the Standing Committee, by going through the report prepared by it, we see that the Federation of Indian Publishers and the Association of Publishers in India were also called to testify before the Standing Committee.

Libraries, students, consumers were not represented

However, while the authors supported it, and the publishers opposed it, no one got to hear the voice of the readers, the students, the libraries, the book buyers. For instance, not a single consumer rights organization or library association was called before the Standing Committee. Internationally, organizations like Consumers International, the International Federation of Library Associations, and EIFL (an international library organization) are invited to meetings of the World Intellectual Property Organization and their views are taken with seriousness as they are a very important part of the copyright environment.

Department's and Standing Committee's reasoning

We reproduce below four paragraphs from the Standing Committee's report, which elucidate many of the reasons for going in for this particular amendment.

7.10
All the reservations/objections raised by the various stakeholders [including the Federation of Indian Publishers and the Association of Publishers in India, whose objections are quoted in an earlier paragraph of the report -ed.] were taken up by the Committee with the Department with the intent of having full understanding of the background necessitating the proposed amendment and its exact impact on the various stakeholders. As clarified by the Department, the main purpose of this amendment was to allow for imports of copyright materials (e.g. books) from other countries. It was in accordance with Article 6 of the TRIPS Agreement relating to exhaustion of rights whereunder developing countries could facilitate access to copyright works at affordable cost. Exhaustion of rights (popularly called as parallel import) was a legal mechanism used to regulate prices of IPR protected materials. This was viable only if the price of the same works in the Indian market was very high when compared to the price in other countries from where it was imported to India.

7.11
Committee's attention was drawn to the fact that majority of educational books used in India were imported from other countries particularly from US and EU. There was an increasing tendency by publishers to give territorial licence to publish the books at very high rates. The low price editions were invariably the old editions than the latest ones. This provision would compel the Indian publishers to price the works reasonably so that it would not be viable for a distributor to import same works to India from other countries. This would also save India foreign exchange on the payment of royalties (licence fee) by the Indian publishers to foreigners.

7.12
Committee was also given to understand by the representatives of the publishing industry that Scheme of the Copyright Law was entirely different from the Trade Marks Act, 1999 and the Patent Act, 1970. The application of the standards and principles of these two laws through the proposed amendment of section 2(m) would completely dismantle the business model currently employed, rendering several industries unviable. On a specific query in this regard the Department informed that the concept of international exhaustion provided in section 107 A of the Patent Act, 1971 and in section 30 (3) of the Trademarks Act, 1999 and in section 2 (m) of the copyright law were similar. This provision was in tune with the national policy on exhaustion of rights.

7.13
After analysing the viewpoints of all the stakeholders along with the clarifications given thereupon by the Department, the Committee is of the view that proposed inclusion of the proviso in the definition of the term 'infringing copy' seems to be a step in the right direction, specially in the prevailing situation at the ground level. The present practice of publishers publishing books under a territorial license, resulting in sale of books at very high rates cannot be considered a healthy practice. [Emphasis added.] The Committee also notes that availability of low priced books under the present regime is invariably confined to old editions. It has been clearly specified that only those works published outside India with the permission of the author and imported into India will not be considered an infringed copy. Nobody can deny the fact that the interests of students will be best protected if they have access to latest editions of the books. Thus, apprehensions about the flooding of the primary market with low priced editions, may be mis-founded as such a situation would be tackled by that country's law. [emphasis added.] The Committee would, however, like to put a note of caution to Government to ensure that the purpose for which the amendment is proposed, i.e., to protect the interest of the students is not lost sight of.

Conclusion

It is clear that allowing for parallel imports is not likely to hurt publishers, but will result in an expansion of the reading market. It is mainly foreign publishers' monopoly rights over distribution which will be harmed by this amendment, while Indian publishers, Indian authors, and Indian readers, especially students, will stand to gain. Furthermore, in the long run, even foreign publishers will stand to gain due to market expansion. Any legitimate worries that publishers may have are better dealt with under other laws (such as the Customs Act) and not the Copyright Act.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/parallel-importation-of-books

Why Open Access Has To Look Up For Academic Publishing To Look Up

sinha — 2016-10-12T16:22:10Z

In an important development, the US Federal Trade Commission has filed a complaint against the India-based OMICS group for harassing authors to publish in its journals.

The article was published in the Wire on October 12, 2016.

“…if you are a member of the knowledge elite, then there is free access, but for the rest of the world, not so much … Publisher restrictions do not achieve the objective of enlightenment, but rather the reality of ‘elite-nment.” Lawrence Lessig

In 2011, speaking impassionately to an audience at CERN – one of the world’s largest institutions for nuclear physics research, headquartered in Geneva – Lessig, a professor of law at Harvard Law School and a political activist, highlighted the crisis of access to scientific scholarship. Indeed, over the last six decades, public access to scholarly works has diminished. Works that can be freely searched and read represent only a sliver of the entire wealth of human knowledge.

With the emergence of academic journals in the seventeenth century, the practice of exchanging manuscripts for review and comments became popular, leading to the establishment of the peer-review system. In fact, until the eighteenth century, there existed a strong belief in the intellectual commons and traditions of sharing knowledge between scholars. These traditions dated back to scholarship flourishing in ancient Greece. Open access was the default, and not the exception to the norm.

However, by the nineteenth century, there occurred a game-changing shift in the approach to knowledge production. It was theorised that the commons approach was inefficient and that knowledge needed to be exclusively owned to spur further production. This was in line with the incentive theory of copyright law, which was an added justification to the commoditisation of knowledge. In such circumstances, all scholarly works increasingly came to be fortified within the expensive walls of academic journals. Journals left no stone unturned to capitalise on scholars vying to get published in prestigious titles (Nature, Lancet, Cell, etc.).

The business model rarely rewarded authors or peer reviewers. On the contrary, some journals required authors to pay a considerable fee to publish their work. Subscription charges to such research, a large part of which was funded by the government (i.e. taxpayers), hit the roof and could be afforded only by elite institutions. And with the advent of the digital age, the fortresses moved online.

However, before the internet arrived, there had been efforts to counter the entrenchment of scholarly works. They were mostly in the nature of social movements, located broadly within the philosophical umbrella of openness. The nineties marked a significant increase in the modes of access, through devices connected to the internet. Previously a fringe movement, openness was now entering the realms of publishing, software, standards development, education and data. It manifested in Linux, Wikipedia, open web standards, open educational resources, open government data, Creative Commons and, particularly, open access publishing. Just last month, a UN report called for open access to research to improve public health.

Open access publishing was a breakaway from the traditional scholarly publishing model. It offered a different model of online research publication informed by the principles of transparency, free access and unrestricted access. Three key definitions exist, and the Budapest Open Access Initiative (2002) provides a good overview of it:

There are many degrees and kinds of wider and easier access to this literature. By ‘open access’ to this literature, we mean its free availability on the public internet, permitting any users to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of these articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without financial, legal, or technical barriers other than those inseparable from gaining access to the internet itself. The only constraint on reproduction and distribution, and the only role for copyright in this domain, should be to give authors control over the integrity of their work and the right to be properly acknowledged and cited.

Further, open access is compatible with copyright, peer review, revenue (even profit), print, preservation, prestige, quality, career-advancement, indexing, and other features and supportive services associated with conventional scholarly literature (as Peter Suber wrote in 2004). The model broadly offers two routes: gold and green. Gold open access involves publication in an open access journal. The journal provides for peer-review, retention of copyright by the author and in most cases requires author-side fees. Green open access involves publishing a work in an online repository, with/without peer-review. The models have several variations, and adoption often depends on their suitability for a particular discipline. Many institutions now have an Open Access Mandate policy.

Latest challenges to open access publishing

For a 15-year-old movement (formally), open access publishing is making a serious dent in the market for scholarly publications. It has emerged as a formidable competitor to the traditional model. How else do you explain the unfortunate acquisition of SSRN – one of the largest online open access repositories – by the largest publisher of academic journals, Elsevier, earlier this year? Where, within a few days of Elsevier gaining control, users began to notice problematic takedowns of articles on SSRN.

The acquisition was a severe blow to open access publishing. To be fair, there remain certain issues intrinsic to open access publishing models that need urgent resolution. For instance, while some open access journals provide high quality services at levels comparable to that of paywalled journals, a large majority has been unable to reach reasonable standards of publication.

Further, as it has emerged lately, many are yet to crack the business model while a few are driven by malicious attempts to con authors. Most commercial open access publishers have resorted to a system of levying from the authors an article-processing charge (APC). These publishers include large players such as the Public Library of Science journals and BioMed Central. APCs are justified as necessary costs for publication. Thus, sometimes they are reasonably applied only to peer-reviewed submissions. However, sometimes they are blatantly misused by publishers who quote exorbitant APCs. As a result, APCs have become a serious concern for the academic community, with the reentry of an undesirable price barrier which has shifted the burden from the reader to the author.

In one noteworthy development, the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has filed a complaint against the OMICS group for deceiving authors and misrepresenting its editorial quality. The OMICS group has its roots in Hyderabad and runs a multitude of open access journals. It carried a notorious reputation for soliciting articles profusely, and then holding the articles hostage unless the authors paid hefty fees for their publication. It apparently charged the fees for conducting peer-review, which as this harrowing account of an author reveals, was an utter sham. It also seems that the group targeted unsuspecting scholars from developing countries, where there was a higher concentration of early-career researchers eager to get their works published.

Holding articles hostage and releasing unchecked versions must have already caused irreparable damage to several researchers’ reputations. In this day of web-caching and -indexing facilities, one wonders if the researchers will ever be able to obliterate linkages to their unchecked manuscripts. Further, in the long run, this phenomenon will ruin or suppress promising careers – especially from developing countries. As a result, the present lack of diversity in top-rung academia may not be eliminated for a long time.

Such harmful, predatory practices have not escaped the FTC’s notice, and it has stated that it will pursue cases of similar nature to protect authors and consumers. This is the first time in the world when a governmental authority has taken cognisance of predatory practices in OA publishing. This will hopefully lead to an appropriate cleansing effect of the players in this field, and enhance the credibility of open access journals.

Thus, self-regulation and standard-setting remains an area for improvisation in the open access publishing community. At the cusp of the movement, proposed structures were mired in legal and economic arguments. It is yet to overcome the challenge of economic sustainability and mature into a stable as well as replicable business model. The movement will be celebrating the Open Access Week for the ninth year later this month. It has gifted scholars immeasurably and lent itself to the progress of science and arts. Here’s hoping the community will iron out the remaining challenges to further strengthen the movement soon.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/openness/the-wire-anubha-sinha-october-12-2016-why-open-access-has-to-look-up-for-academic-publishing-to-look-up

Why NPCI and Facebook need urgent regulatory attention

sunil — 2018-06-12T02:07:42Z

The world’s oldest networked infrastructure, money, is increasingly dematerialising and fusing with the world’s latest networked infrastructure, the Internet.

The article was published in the Economic Times on June 10, 2018.

As the network effects compound, disruptive acceleration hurtle us towards financial utopia, or dystopia. Our fate depends on what we get right and what we get wrong with the law, code and architecture, and the market.

The Internet, unfortunately, has completely transformed from how it was first architected. From a federated, generative network based on free software and open standards, into a centralised, environment with an increasing dependency on proprietary technologies.

In countries like Myanmar, some citizens misconstrue a single social media website, Facebook, for the internet, according to LirneAsia research. India is another market where Facebook could still get its brand mistaken for access itself by some users coming online. This is Facebook put so many resources into the battle over Basics, in the run-up to India’s network neutrality regulation. an odd corporation.

On hand, its business model is what some term surveillance capitalism. On the other hand, by acquiring WhatsApp and by keeping end-toend (E2E) encryption “on”, it has ensured that one and a half billion users can concretely exercise their right to privacy. At the time of the acquisition, WhatsApp founders believed Facebook’s promise that it would never compromise on their high standards of privacy and security. But 18 months later, Facebook started harvesting data and diluting E2E.

In April this year, my colleague Ayush Rathi and I wrote in Asia Times that WhatsApp no longer deletes multimedia on download but continues to store it on its servers. Theoretically, using the very same mechanism, Facebook could also be retaining encrypted text messages and comprehensive metadata from WhatsApp users indefinitely without making this obvious.

My friend, Srikanth Lakshmanan, founder of the CashlessConsumer collective, is a keen observer of this space. He says in India, “we are seeing an increasing push towards a bank-led model, thanks to National Payments Corporation of India (NPCI) and its control over Unified Payments Interface (UPI), which is also known as the cashless layer of the India Stack.”

NPCI is best understood as a shape shifter. Arundhati Ramanathan puts it best when she says “depending on the time and context, NPCI is a competitor. It is a platform. It is a regulator. It is an industry association. It is a profitable non-profit. It is a rule maker. It is a judge. It is a bystander.”

This results in UPI becoming, what Lakshmanan calls, a NPCI-club-good rather than a new generation digital public good. He also points out that NPCI has an additional challenge of opacity — “it doesn’t provide any metrics on transaction failures, and being a private body, is not subject to proactive or reactive disclosure requirements under the RTI.”

Technically, he says, UPI increases fragility in our financial ecosystem since it “is a centralised data maximisation network where NPCI will always have the superset of data.” Given that NPCI has opted for a bank-led model in India, it is very unlikely that Facebook able to leverage its monopoly the social media market duopoly it shares with in the digital advertising market to become a digital payments monopoly.

However, NCPI and Facebook both share the following traits — one, an insatiable appetite for personal information; two, a fetish for hypercentralisation; three, a marginal commitment to transparency, and four, poor track record as a custodian of consumer trust. The marriage between these like-minded entities has already had a dubious beginning.

Previously, every financial technology wanting direct access to the NPCI infrastructure had to have a tie-up with a bank. But for Facebook and Google, as they are large players, it was decided to introduce a multi-bank model. This was definitely the right thing to do from a competition perspective. But, unfortunately, the marriage between the banks and the internet giant was arranged by NPCI in an opaque process and WhatsApp was exempted from the full NPCI certification process for its beta launch.

Both NPCI and Facebook need urgent regulatory attention. A modern data protection law and a more proactive competition regulator is required for Facebook. The NPCI will hopefully also be subjected to the upcoming data protection law. But it also requires a range of design, policy and governance fixes to ensure greater privacy and security via data minimisation and decentralisation; greater accountability and transparency to the public; separation of powers for better governance and open access policies to prevent anti-competitive behaviour.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/economic-times-june-10-2018-sunil-abraham-why-npci-and-facebook-need-urgent-regulatory-attention

Why It's Essential To Grow Indian-Language Wikipedias

subha — 2016-05-28T06:52:53Z

On 15 January, Wikipedia, the free online encyclopaedia celebrated its 15th birthday, meeting this milestone with 36 million articles in more than 290 languages (the English-language Wikipedia alone has crossed the 5-million article mark). But here I want to address some major questions that we need to ask as Indians.

This was published by Huffington Post on January 25, 2016. Also mirrored on Global Voices on February 26, 2016. The post was translated into Greek by Maria Souli. It was translated into Spanish by Daniela Diaz and into Russian by GV Russian

First, what is the state of Indian-language Wikipedia projects? What does India have to take from and give to Wikipedia?

With the growth of free and open source software in India, people are equipped with more freedom than ever. Especially with the recent federal policy-level changes, the nation is enjoying better collaboration with people of different cultures speaking different languages.

According to UNESCO, 197 of the total of 1652 Indian languages are dying despite having a long literary and linguistic heritage.

However, there is a huge gap in the access to knowledge on the internet domain. Of a population of about 1.26 billion only about 15-18% people are connected online, largely from mobile devices. A tiny fraction of this population comprises the technical community. It would be useful to have a metric on the percentage of this community's contribution to grow the languages of this country and its cultural heritage.

Wikipedia as a family

Wikipedia is not just an encyclopaedia. It is also a "family" of several other Open Knowledge members. Wikipedia itself is available in over 290 languages, but it also has other multilingual sister projects such as Wikisource (an online library of many public domain and other important texts), Wikimedia Commons (the world's largest repository of media files and documents), Wikibooks (a free library of educational textbooks), Wikivoyage (a free and open travel guide) and Wiktionary (a database of various languages).

These projects don't just house millions of images, videos, documents and texts, but allow anyone to contribute their knowledge to this ever deepening pool of information. Four Indian languages made an early entry to the Wiki-world back in 2002 -- Assamese, Malayalam, Odia and Punjabi.

Language neutrality

According to UNESCO, 197 of the total of 1652 Indian languages are dying despite having a long literary and linguistic heritage. It's quite shocking. In a blog post on content localisation, social entrepreneur Rajesh Ranjan asks if free and open source software can help save these dying languages. In the context of Wikipedia, there are already 23 South Asian-language projects. Out of these 20 are languages listed in the 8th schedule of the Constitution of India. Many might not have noticed that the "en" in the URL of Wikipedia that denotes the language code of English could be altered with "or" for Odia Wikipedia or "pa" for Punjabi Wikipedia.

Most Wikipedia projects in Indian language projects are relatively small compared to their counterparts. But the Wikimedia communities are thriving.

There are a fairly large number of native speakers waiting out there to access knowledge in their own languages.

When only parts of government websites are available in Hindi, the Hindi Wikipedia has crossed 10 million articles already. The Tamil and Malayalam Wikipedia communities have played a central part in implementing Wikipedia basics learning in the state-run school syllabus. Needless to say that these communities have played a significant role in implementing several free and open source software by pushing for policy-level change. Many Indian languages are in the pipeline to become active Wikipedia projects under the scope of the Wikimedia Incubator.

Maithili Wikipedia and Goan Konkani Wikipedia are the two Indian-language Wikipedias that have gone live in recent years. The world has seen how digital activism has brought a new life to the Hebrew language. There are a fairly large number of native speakers waiting out there to access knowledge in their own languages. Wikipedia could be a great tool for digital activism with openness and sharing.

Addressing gender bias in Wikipedia: Implications for India

India tops South Asia in the gender inequality index in the entire South Asia. The female literacy rate is an alarmingly low 65.46% as compared to 82.14% for men. This disparity is evident in many other sectors as well as in politics.

Digital India aims at digital literacy and availability of digital resources/services in Indian languages. This is closely aligned with the Wikimedia movement's goal....

But gender bias is not just a problem in India. The global free and open source software (FOSS) community has always been worried about the low presence of women contributors -- in the range of 2-5% range. Wikimedia Foundation's former executive director admitted that Wikipedia, like many other collaborative and open projects, does not have a conducive environment for women. But the Wikimedia community and Wikimedia Foundation are both working on improving this state of affairs. Indian-language Wikipedia projects are directly impacted by this global drive, be it the Women's History Month edit-a-thon where Wikipedia content largely related to women are improved every year or the Lilavati's Daughters project where biographies of Indian women scientists were created and enriched in Wikipedia projects.

Complementing Digital India

With a population of over 354 million netizens India still has a long way to go in increasing Indian language content on the web. The Government of India's new campaign Digital India aims at digital literacy and availability of digital resources/services in Indian languages. This is closely aligned with the Wikimedia movement's goal to provide free access to the sum of all human knowledge. In addition to Wikipedia, many other open educational resources and free knowledge projects that are not already a part of the Digital India campaign signal the need for the federal-run campaign to be more collaborative and open. Community-government collaborations like the NROER project to make NCERT books under Creative Commons licenses and IT@School project in the state of Kerala to provide education using free and open tools have gained massive traction and helped more Indian language content come online.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/huffington-post-subhashish-panigrahi-january-25-2016-why-its-essential-to-grow-indian-language-wikipedias