Centre for Internet and Society

Open Letter to Prime Minister Modi

rohini — 2016-02-14T04:39:01Z

After the government introduced the "Make in India" and "Digital India" programmes, the air is thick with the promise of reduced imports, new jobs, and goods for the domestic market. In light of the patent wars in India, the government can ill-afford to overlook the patent implications in indigenously manufactured mobile phones. CIS proposes that the Government of India initiate the formation of a patent pool of critical mobile technologies and a five percent compulsory license.

The blog post was re-published by Medianama on March 24, 2015.

Honourable Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi,

We at the Centre for Internet and Society support the "Make in India" and "Digital India" initiatives of the Indian government and share your vision of a digitally empowered India where “1.2 billion connected Indians drive innovation”, where “access to information knows no barriers”, and where knowledge is the citizens’ power. The government’s plan of incentivising the manufacturing of electronics hardware, including that of mobile phones in the 2015 Union Budget is equally encouraging. Towards this important goal of nation building, the Centre for Internet and Society is researching the patent and copyright implications of Internet-enabled mobile devices that are sold in the Indian market for Rs 6,000 or less.

Bolstered by Make in India, several mobile phone manufacturers have started or ramped up their manufacturing facilities in India. Homegrown brands — such as Spice, Maxx Mobile and Lava — and foreign manufacturers alike are making humongous investments in mobile phone plants. Chip manufacturer Mediatek; one of the newest entrants in the Indian smartphone market, Xiaomi; and telecom company Huawei, all different links in the mobile phone manufacturing chain, are setting up research and development units in India having recognised its potential as a significant market. These developments promise to cut or substitute imports, cater to the domestic market, create millions of jobs, and stem the outflow of money from India.

However, mobile phone manufacturers, big and small, have also been embroiled in litigation in India for the past few years over patents pertaining to crucial technologies. Micromax, one of the several Indian mobile phone manufacturers with original equipment manufacturers in China was ordered by the Delhi High Court late last year to pay a substantial 1.25 to 2 per cent of the selling price of its devices to Ericsson, which has claimed infringement of eight of its standard essential patents. Intex and Lava, two members of Micromax’s ilk, have been similarly sued and claim to have received the short end of the stick in the form of unreasonable and exorbitant compensations and royalty rates. Chinese budget phone manufacturers operating in India — Xiaomi, OnePlus, and Gionee — also have come under the sledgehammer of sudden suspension of the sale of their devices. The bigger companies such as Asus, Samsung and ZTE have faced the heat of patent litigation as well.

The fear of litigation over patent infringement could thwart local innovation. Additionally, the expenses incurred due to litigation and compensation could lead to the smaller manufacturers shutting shop or passing on their losses to their consumers, and in turn, driving the price points of Internet-enabled mobile devices out of the reach of many. It could also become a stumbling block to the success of ambitious plans of the government, such as the one to provide free WiFi in 2,500 cities and towns across India.

We propose that the Government of India initiate the formation of a patent pool of critical mobile technologies and mandate a five percent compulsory license. Such a pool would possibly avert patent disputes by ensuring that the owners' rights are not infringed on, that budget manufacturers are not put out of business owing to patent feuds, and that consumers continue to get access to inexpensive mobile devices. Several countries including the United States regularly issue compulsory licenses on patents in the pharmaceutical, medical, defence, software, and engineering domains for reasons of public policy, or to thwart or correct anti-competitive practices.[1] [2] Unfortunately, we did not receive a response from the previous government to our suggestion of establishing such a patent pool. We believe that our proposal falls in line with your ambitious programmes designed to work towards your vision of India, and we hope that you would consider it.

Yours truly,
Rohini Lakshané,
Programme Officer,
The Centre for Internet and Society

Copies to:

Shri Arun Jaitley, Minister for Finance
Shri Rajiv Mehrishi, Secretary to Ministry of Finance
Smt. Smriti Zubin Irani, Minister for Human Resource Development
Shri Satyanarayan Mohanty, Secretary to Ministry of Human Resources Development
Smt. Nirmala Sitharaman, Minister for Commerce and Industry
Shri Amitabh Kant, Secretary to Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion
Shri Ravi Shankar Prasad, Minister for Communication and Information Technology
Shri Rakesh Garg, Secretary to Department of Telecommunications
Shri R. S. Sharma, Secretary for Department of Electronics and Information Technology

Also read: FAQ: CIS' Proposal for Compulsory Licensing of Critical Mobile Technologies

[1]. James Love, Knowledge Ecology International (KEI) written comments and notice of intent to testify at the Special 301 Public Hearing, Page 6, "US use of compulsory licensing",http://keionline.org/sites/default/files/KEI_2014_Special301_7Feb20014_FRComments.pdf, February 7, 2014, Last accessed February 10, 2015.

[2]. Colleen Chien, Cheap Drugs at What Price to Innovation, Does the Compulsory Licensing of Pharmaceuticals Hurt Innovation, Berkeley Technology Law Journal, Volume 18, Issue 3, Article 3, Page 862, "Compulsory licensing in the United States", http://scholarship.law.berkeley.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1429&context=btlj, June 2003, Last accessed February 10, 2015.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/open-letter-to-prime-minister-modi

National IPR Policy Series : RTI Requests to DIPP seeking Details on the IPR Think Tank and the National IPR Policy

nehaa — 2015-04-12T12:48:00Z

In an earlier blog post titled " National IPR Policy Series : The Development of the National IPR Policy", we discussed the formation of an IPR Think Tank to draft the first National IPR Policy. Since many details about the constitution and working of this Think Tank were unavailable, we decided to send out RTI requests to find out more.

According to the press release by the Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion (DIPP) which can be found here, an IPR Think Tank was constituted in order to draft the National Intellectual Property Policy. The Think Tank, chaired by retired Justice Prabha Sridevan, submitted a confidential first draft of the National IPR policy to the DIPP on 19th December, 2014. This document was made publicly available by the DIPP and all stakeholders were requested to provide comments and suggestions to the first draft of the National IPR Policy.

Though the IPR Think Tank has expediently released their first draft of the National IPR policy, there is a lack of information available on the constitution of this IPR Think Tank. There is no data on how the members of this Think Tank were shortlisted and selected or how the Chairperson and Convener of the Think Tank were elected. Further, the suggestions and comments received by the IPR Think Tank before and after publishing the first draft of the policy have not been made publicly available.

In an attempt to obtain more data on the process of the constitution of the Think Tank and it’s working, CIS filed three RTI requests to the Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion date February 2, 2015. A copy of the RTI requests is included below:

RTI Request 1: Information on Constitution of IPR Think Tank

Dear Sir/Ma’am,

Subject: Request for Information under Right to Information Act 2005.

Information Sought:

Please provide the following information:

Please indicate in detail the process followed by the Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion for the constitution for an IPR Think Tank to draft the National Intellectual Property Rights Policy under Public Notice No. 10/22/2013-IPR-III dated November 13, 2014.
If there was a meeting held to decide on the same, please include all necessary documents including the minutes of the meeting, records, documents, memos, emails, opinions, advices, press releases, circulars, orders, etc. in which the constitution of the aforementioned IPR Think Tank was decided.
If there were multiple meetings held for the same, please provide all necessary documents including the minutes of all such meetings, records, documents, memos, emails, opinions, advices, press releases, circulars, orders etc. for all such meetings held.
If a directive or directives were received by Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion from any other government body to constitute such a think tank, please provide a copy of such a directive received by the Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion from any Government authority, to constitute such a Think Tank.
Please indicate in detail the process of shortlisting the members of the IPR Think Tank by the Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion or any other body that was responsible for the same.

In case the information is held by or related to another public authority, the application or such part of it as may be appropriate may be transferred to that other public authority under intimation to the undersigned as per Section 6(3) of RTI Act.

Proof of payment of application fee:

An Indian Postal Order for the amount of Rs.10 dated 2/2/2015 favouring the Public Information Officer, Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion is enclosed as proof of payment of application fee.

I hereby declare that I am a citizen of India. I request you to ensure that the information is furnished before the expiry of the 30 day period after you have received the application.

Details of Applicant:

Ms. Nehaa Chaudhari
Centre for Internet and Society
G-15, Hauz Khas
New Delhi – 110016

Date: 2/2/2015

RTI Request 2: Working of IPR Think Tank while drafting National IPR policy

To,
Ms. Chandni Raina
Central Public Information Officer
Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion (IPR I, II, III, IV, V and VI Sections)
Room No.260
Udyog Bhawan, New Delhi

Dear Sir/Ma’am,

Subject: Request for Information under Right to Information Act 2005.

Information Sought:

Please provide the following information:

Please indicate in detail the process followed by the IPR Think Tank constituted by the Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion via Public Notice No. 10/22/2013-IPR-III dated November 13, 2014 while framing the first draft of the National IPR Policy dated December 19, 2014.
If there was a meeting held to decide on the same, please include all necessary documents including the minutes of the meeting, records, documents, memos, e-mails, opinions, advices, press releases, circulars, orders, suggestions etc. related to the drafting of such National IPR Policy by the IPR Think Tank chaired by Justice Prabha Sridevan.
If there were multiple meetings held for the same, please provide all necessary documents including the minutes of all such meetings, records, documents, memos, e-mails, opinions, advices, press releases, circulars, orders suggestions etc. for all such meetings held.
Please provide all the suggestions and comments received by the IPR Think Tank from stakeholders after the Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion issued Public Notice No. 10/22/2013-IPR-III dated November 13, 2014 asking for suggestions and comments on or before November 30, 2014.

Proof of payment of application fee:

I hereby declare that I am a citizen of India. I request you to ensure that the information is furnished before the expiry of the 30 day period after you have received the application.

Details of Applicant:

Ms. Nehaa Chaudhari
Centre for Internet and Society
G-15, Hauz Khas
New Delhi – 110016

Date: 2/2/2015

RTI Request 3: Request for suggestions and feedback received by DIPP on the first draft of the National IPR Policy

To,
Ms. Chandni Raina
Central Public Information Officer
Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion (IPR I, II, III, IV, V and VI Sections)
Room No.260
Udyog Bhawan, New Delhi

Dear Sir/Ma’am,

Subject: Request for Information under Right to Information Act 2005.

Please provide the following information:

Please indicate all the suggestions and comments received by the IPR Think Tank by different stakeholders on or before January 30, 2015 on its first draft of the National Intellectual Property Policy submitted by the IPR Think Tank on December 19, 2014.

Proof of payment of application fee:

I hereby declare that I am a citizen of India. I request you to ensure that the information is furnished before the expiry of the 30 day period after you have received the application.

Details of Applicant:

Ms. Nehaa Chaudhari
Centre for Internet and Society
G-15, Hauz Khas
New Delhi – 110016

Date: 2/2/2015

(Many thanks to CIS intern Protyush Choudhury for his assistance with this.)

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/rti-requests-dipp-details-on-constitution-and-working-of-ipr-think-tank

A Wikipedia Presentation at BITS, Goa

Radhakrishna Arvapally — 2015-03-09T01:21:43Z

Quark is one of India's largest science, technology and management festivals, held every February at BITS Pilani - K.K. Birla Goa Campus. This year in 2015, the event was held from February 6 to 8, 2015. This blog post captures the key moments. About 12 delegates attended the event.

How it Started?

For celebrating this annual event, "Quark 2015", BITS Pilani invited speakers from all over India. Many parallel tracks happen during this event. I got an Invite to speak about Wikimedia projects.The Centre for Internet and Society (CIS) supported my event participation.

Dr. Sunil Kumar, a BITS physics professor who could not join the presentation due to conflicting meetings met me in the morning that day. He was curious to understand how Wikimedia projects work, how people collaborate to write the same article, how the conflicting views gets resolved among editors and how one can trust the content. He was excited to know the mechanics behind. We discussed about organizing a quiz for their students. He responded very positive and said that he will discuss this internally and get back to me later.

CIS team also helped me to establish contact with Luis Gomes, a local Konkani Wikipedian. We met at the event and shared our thoughts. It was a good learning for me to understand how Konkani Wikipedia is progressing.

I gave my speech in the afternoon. The participants showed great enthusiasm to learn about Wikipedia projects. The session was very interactive. The participants tried answering open ended questions like — As on today, what are the possible ways to preserve unique knowledge and skill? The participants also asked questions on the source of knowledge contribution to Wikipedia and how it survives?

My presentation showcased how anyone could contribute to Wikipedia and also explore greater possibilities of exploring existing frame work with examples like QRpedia, WikiWand, and many more.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/openness/blog-old/a-wikipedia-presentation-at-goa

An International Conclave of Odia Language

praskrishna — 2015-03-08T05:06:14Z

Subhashish Panigrahi is participating in this event.

See the invitation letter and the concept letter.

The Odia language traces its roots back to 4th Century BC. Odisha was the first state to be carved out as a separate state on the basis of the language. The dawn of 20th February 2014 was a proud moment for all Odias as Odia language was accorded the ‘Classical language’ status of our country and occupied the 6th position. This achievement was due to the relentless effort of many scholars and activists. Now it becomes the responsibility of all the Odias to preserve, propagate and carry forward the legacy of the Odia language which is spoken by around 40 million people in India and around 45 million people globally. We will see that a day will come when it will be used as the first language in all government offices for official communications.

THE INTELLECTS, a forum of progressive individuals and intellectuals in Delhi, believes it as an utmost duty and responsibility to promote Odia identity in India and abroad. In its bid to impart our language to Pravasi Odias living in and around Delhi, THE INTELLECTS is on a missionary zeal. It has started its mission called “ASA SIKHIBA AMARI BHASHA” in National Capital region.

And now, the forum in association with SHRI JAGANNATH MANDIR, TYAGRAJNAGAR is organizing a two days conclave, on 20th & 21st February 2015, to celebrate the 1st anniversary of Classical status to Odia language & the World Mother tongue Day with a special focus on our mother tongue Odia.

The Event

International Conclave of Odia Language:
The event will be a two days festival showcasing the Odia identity in the national Capital and bringing some best minds of the country to discuss on various issues of immense need on language and culture of Odisha. Around 200 eminent people from across the world including many renowned experts from various walks of life are the invited speakers.

It will be our proud privilege to have you with us for the occasion.
With Kind Regards

Debendra Rout
Convener of the conclave & Chairman of The Intellects
Email: cm.intellects@gmail.com
Mob: +91-9350127370

Programme

Celebration of 1st Anniversary of Classical status of Odia language
Date: 20th February, Friday, Time: 6 p.m. to 9 p.m.

Venue: Constitution Club, Rafi Marg, New Delhi

Welcome
Inauguration of Conclave
Inauguration of Special Report on the Conclave
Felicitation of prominent personalities for their contribution to
Odia language
Addresses
Vote of Thanks
Cultural Programme
Dinner

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/openness/news/international-conclave-odia-language

National IPR Policy Series : CIS Comments to the First Draft of the National IP Policy

nehaa — 2015-02-09T00:59:10Z

The Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion, Government of India invited comments on the First Draft of India's National IPR Policy. The Centre for Internet & Society (CIS) made this submission. The comments were prepared by Nehaa Chaudhari, Pranesh Prakash and Anubha Sinha. We also thank our intern, Varnika Chawla for her assistance.

The press release from the Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion in which it invited comments is here. The First Draft of India's National IPR Policy is here. Click to view the PDF. Note: In some places there might be references to paragraph/page numbers (of the document) and for that readers should refer to the PDF since the formatting in HTML is slightly different.

Preliminary

This submission presents comments from the Centre for Internet and Society, India ("CIS")¹ on the proposed National Intellectual Property Rights Policy ("the Policy") to the Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion, Ministry of Commerce and Industry, Government of India.("DIPP").
This submission is made in response to the requests and suggestions from stakeholders sought by the DIPP in its Press Release. ²
CIS commends the DIPP for this initiative, and appreciates the opportunity to provide comments on the National IPR Policy. CIS' comments are as stated hereafter.

About CIS

CIS³ is a non-profit research organization that works on among others, issues of intellectual property law reform,⁴ openness,⁵ privacy, freedom of speech and expression and internet governance,⁶ accessibility for persons with disabilities,⁷ and engages in academic research on digital humanities⁸ and digital natives. ⁹
CIS is an accredited Observer¹⁰ at the World Intellectual Property Organization ("WIPO"), enabling us to attend formal meetings of member states and participate in debates and consultations on various issues. CIS has been attending meetings of the WIPO Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights since 2010. At these sessions, CIS has actively participated through various interventions, emphasizing the adoption of an approach balancing the rights holders' perspective with public interest. CIS has also attended sessions of some other committees at WIPO, made interventions wherever applicable, produced reports of these meetings, and profiled the work of other non-governmental organizations engaging in similar work on intellectual property law and policy reform. ¹¹
CIS undertakes research in other fields of intellectual property, in addition to WIPO-related work. Over the past five years since our inception, some of our key research has included analyses of intellectual property issues of the proposed Indo-EU Free Trade Agreement¹² and other free trade agreements,¹³ the US Special 301 Report,¹⁴ the (2010) amendment to the Copyright Act, 1957,¹⁵ the (draft) Science, Technology and Innovation Policy,¹⁶ parallel importation, ¹⁷ the (draft) Patent Manual and the subsequent Guidelines for Computer Related Inventions,¹⁸ royalty caps,¹⁹ copyright exceptions and limitations for education, ²⁰ and the preparation of the India Report for the Consumers International IP Watch List.²¹

Structure of this Submission

This submission is divided into 4 parts. The first part gives a preliminary overview of the suggestions submitted by CIS. The second part highlights the principles that should be followed in the formulation of a National IPR Policy, the third part provides detailed comments and recommendations for the National IPR Policy and the last part provides certain concluding remarks.

Principles

The characterization of intellectual property rights may be two-fold - first, at their core, intellectual property rights, are temporary monopolies granted to inter alia, authors and inventors; and second, they are a tool to ensure innovation, social, scientific and cultural progress and further access to knowledge. This dual nature and purpose of intellectual property protection is particularly critical in developing economies such as India. Excessive intellectual property protection could result in stunted innovation and negatively impact various stakeholders.²² It is therefore our submission that the development of the IPR Policy be informed by broader principles of fairness and equity, balancing intellectual property protections with limitations and exceptions/user rights such as those that promote freedom of expression, research, education and access to medicines, cultural rights, data mining, use of governmental works, etc.

Detailed Comments

This section will detail CIS' submissions on various aspects of the National IPR Policy. Submissions have been categorised thematically.

On the Vision

It is submitted that the Vision of the National IPR Policy ("Vision") in encouraging growth for the 'benefit of all' and in accepting the philosophy that knowledge owned 'is transformed into knowledge shared' ²³ is commendable.However, the vision is at odds with the methods proposed in the document. True advancement in science and technology, arts and culture, protection of traditional knowledge as well as bio-diverse resources and the true sharing of knowledge would be impaired by a system centred only around the development and maximization of intellectual property.
An attractive social culture would be one where citizens had access to a cornucopia of ideas and information, thereby fostering an environment of cultural diversity, which would enable individuals to shape themselves. Indeed, this is not just an ideal, but is a right recognized under Article 27(1) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and Article 15 of the .²⁴ However, an IP maximization approach, which the draft stategy seems to embrace, hinders the growth of such a culture, creating a protectionist environment while preventing access to various resources which may be of use for further innovations.
The question of whether IP rights given to innovators are the most effective tools to promote innovation in society has been widely discussed in economics, politics and law, especially in the last four decades.²⁵ Traditional arguments in favour of temporary monopolies incentivising innovation have been effectively questioned as creating monopolies on innovation, contributing to increasing prices and a distorted allocation of resources, inefficiency and a net loss of welfare. ²⁶ It has also been effectively established that most innovation is incremental and cumulative, necessitating the access to pre-existing data and works.²⁷ It would be welcome if the huge amount of academic literature on these matter were taken into consideration by the expert group. While intellectual property rights are not per se antithetical to innovation, creativity, and cultural development, an IP-maximalist policy and law has been shown to harm those very objectives.
CIS therefore submits that the vision of the policy also reflect the commitment to the creation of a holistic and balanced framework of intellectual property rights in the nation with the recognition that an intellectual property-centric system would not necessarily be the best means of promoting creativity, innovation and access, the promotion of which are part of the stated desire of the policy.
Further, we believe that the principles of freedom of expression and of due process of law, both of which are constitutionally-recognized rights in India, should be recognized in the vision as principles that any intellectual property rights regime should respectively seek to promote and respect.

On the Mission

CIS appreciates the commitment to establish a balanced, dynamic and vibrant intellectual property system in India.²⁸ We recommend that the mission of the policy also include a commitment tofoster access to knowledge as well as the commitment to creating asystem of intellectual property rights which serve the public interest by strengthening limitations and exceptions to IP regimes, which are aimed to provide a public interest oriented counterbalance to the monopoly rights granted under IPR laws.
We believe that preventing unreasonable and disproportionate remedies to IPR law violations are an important part of ensuring that these laws serve the public interest rather than subvert them for purely private interests. This important principle ought to find reflection in the policy's mission statement.
It is suggested that in addition to public health, food security and the environment²⁹, other areas of socio-economic and cultural importance, including inter alia,foundational scientific research, education, disability rights, and access to knowledge, be added as additional areas that warrant special protection , in the mission statement.
It is submitted that these commitments are essential to the creation and working of a balanced intellectual property framework that the Policy seeks to achieve.

On Objective 1: IP Awareness and Promotion

The first objective of the Policy lays out a detailed action plan for creating awareness about intellectual property as well as for the promotion of intellectual property. The underlying rationale for this endeavour has been identified on various levels - that there are economic, social and cultural benefits of intellectual property;³⁰ that intellectual property protection accelerates development, promotes entrepreneurship as well as increases competitiveness; ³¹ and that the global regime is one of strongly protected intellectual property rights.³²
It is submitted that the identification of this underlying rationale is not backed by sufficient evidence. These justifications, in their pursuit of a favourable intellectual property regime do not present a balanced picture of all the facts.
Current existing empirical research does not show an unambiguous nexus between the granting of IP rights and an increase in innovation and productivity, as innovation and productivity cannot not identified with the number of patents awarded. ³³ This can be seen in the US economy, where despite an enormous increase in the number of patents, there has been no dramatic acceleration in technological progress. ³⁴ In fact, studies prove the contrary to be true. In the United States, patenting increased drastically over the last few decades, quadrupling from 59,715 patents being issued in 1983, to 244,341 in 2010. However, according to the Bureau of Labour Statistics, annual growth in the total factor productivity reduced from 1.2% in 1970-79 to below 1% in 2000-09, ³⁵ whereas the annual expenditure on research and development saw hardly any change, oscillating in a band of 2.5% of the GDP for over three decades.³⁶ In relatively new industries such as software and biotechnology, still in their nascent stages of development, patenting has been introduced without any positive contributions to innovation. In fact, in their empirical work described in Patent Failure (2008), ³⁷ Bessen and Meurer have argued that increased patenting has resulted in decreased social welfare.
Further, no unambiguous connections have been found between innovation and intellectual property rights in academic studies. In a meta-study conducted in 2006,³⁸ Boldrin and Levine observed that there was weak or no evidence which suggested that strengthening the patent regime led to an increase in innovation. Similarly, it was observed by Jaffe that "despite the significance of policy changes and the wide availability of detailed data relating to patenting, robust conclusions regarding the empirical consequences for technological innovations of changes in patent policy are few. There is widespread unease that the costs of stronger patent protection may exceed the benefits. Both theoretical and, to a lesser extent, empirical research suggest this possibility." ³⁹
In his study of 60 nations over the past 150 years, Josh Lerner concluded that "the impact of patent protection-enhancing on innovation was in fact negative, thereby running counter to assumptions made by economists that incentives affect behavior and that stronger property rights encourage economic growth.⁴⁰
Even in those studies, where support is found for a positive correlation between patents and innovation, it is made clear that this correlation is not applicable to developing and least-developed countries. This, for instance, is the conclusion of the United Nations Industrial Development Organization's meta-study titled "The Role of Intellectual Property Rights in Technology Transfer and Economic Growth: Theory and Evidence". ⁴¹
It is crucial that all policy be based on evidence, and not ideology.
Thus, it is submitted that any program that seeks to create awareness about intellectual property must necessarily be one that presents a balanced view, clearly stating all facts and as many diverse opinions as possible; avoiding the current situation where public interest groups and academics are sidelined in favour of rights-holders groups.
CIS submits that the nation-wide program of promotion on the benefits of intellectual property ⁴² must be based on evidence. Crucially, the importance of the public domain, for which a great deal of evidence exists,⁴³ must highlighted in any such also equally promote the importance the role of limitations and exceptions and clearly identify the issues with the intellectual property system, including the fact that it has not been proven that there is a nexus between intellectual property and innovation. The nation wide program should convey the role of different stakeholders, including libraries and archives, organizations working with persons with disabilities and educational institutions and the negative effects of a rights centric intellectual property system on such important institutions.
It is important that public-funded research organizations should be engaged in neutral - non-industry funded -research, and not campaigns (as identified in the policy).⁴⁴ This will help identify the issues of the present intellectual property system as well as the potential for reform, tailored to the Indian context. We have to ensure that campaigns - as with policymaking and pedagogic material - are based on research rather than faith or ideology. It is further submitted that course materials to be created for educational institutions at all levels as well as for online and distance learning programs ⁴⁵ should include a discussion on the drawbacks of a maximalist intellectual property system, a discussion on limitations and exceptions, alternatives to intellectual property, as well as case studies from different parts of the world highlighting the use of intellectual property as well as alternatives in a socio-economic and culture specific environment. Particularly in the case of education institutions as well as online and distance learning mechanisms, which are often faced with great challenges as a result of rights-holders centric intellectual property laws, the irony in promoting a system that only acts to their detriment would be great.

On Objective 2: Creation of IP

The second objective of the Policy seeks to stimulate the creation and growth of intellectual property through measures that encourage IP generation.⁴⁶ This objective seeks to encourage IP generation and creation across various sectors, including the introduction of the system of 'utility models' in India. There are several problems with this objective, primarily that it assumes IP generation is necessarily a means to innovation, whereas it is submitted that the emphasis should be on innovation holistically, including by incentive mechanisms other than IP.

On the IP-Innovation/ Creativity Nexus

It is submitted that similar to the earlier objective relating to the promotion and the creation of awareness about intellectual property, the underlying rationale behind this objective too seems to be the perception that there is a positive correlation between greater amounts of intellectual property and greater innovation, and the belief that intellectual property protection necesarrily promotes innovation. However, there is relatively little research to back this assumption. Illustratively, the following example may be considered. In a study conducted by Heidi L. Williams,⁴⁷ the sequencing of the human genome was used to provide an empirical context to showcase the deterioration in development due to the presence of IP. It was concluded by Williams that the presence of IP rights in the sequencing of the human genome resulted in reductions in subsequent scientific research and product development by up to 20-30%. ⁴⁸ Williams further observed that "if more socially valuable technologies are more likely to be held with IP, then the welfare costs for the same could be substantial." The presence of intellectual property rights, it is argued, stifles subsequent product development by restricting access to the data or technology required for further development. ⁴⁹
Prof. Petra Moser of Stanford has conducted a large volume of research on economic evidence on the linkages between patents and innovation. Her research, which shows that in the 19th century the majority of inventions happened outside the patent system ⁵⁰ indicates that alternative explanations might explain inventions better, including "the importance of a culture of entrepreneurship,⁵¹ experimentation,⁵² the free exchange of knowledge, ⁵³ and science.⁵⁴ In a paper titled, "How do Patent Laws Influence Innovation", she concludes that "I find no evidence that patent laws increased levels of innovative activity but strong evidence that patent systems influenced the distribution of innovative activity across industries."
Prof. Bryan Mercurio, in a paper written for the World Economic Forum and the International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development, concludes, "The empirical evidence suggests that increasing levels of patent protection have not resulted in increased innovation. Instead, it has limited competition, and increased the cost of business, to the detriment of the world economy. Innovation has also suffered, as increasing protection has inhibited the ability of many firms to innovate." He further recommends that we "conduct further research on the correlation or causal relationship between patents and innovation, including the indirect benefits for innovation that patent protection may provide". Petra Moser notes, "Patent laws that existed in the mid-nineteenth century had been adopted in a relatively ad-hoc manner, dependent more on legal traditions than economic considerations".⁵⁵
The empirical data collected by scholars, as provided above is goes to show that innovation is not necessarily benefitted by stronger patent regimes. Further, even the literature that asserts a positive correlation between the two acknowledge that this doesn't apply to developing countries. In addition, whilepatents may provide revenue to patent owners, it also makes further innovation more costly, thereby discouraging competitors from entering the arena due to high prices, and due to the large number of pre-existing patents. This effect, known as the
The Supreme Court of Canada, has for instance, has on multiple occasions recognized the importance of the public domain. In "2002, Justice Binne, writing for the majority in Théberge v. Galerie d'Art du Petit Champlain inc., stated: 'Excessive control by holders of copyrights and other forms of intellectual property may unduly limit the ability of the public domain to incorporate and embellish creative innovation in the long-term interests of society as a whole (para.32).' Two years later, in CCH Canadian Ltd. v. Law Society of Upper Canada, Chief Justice McLachlin spoke of the importance that there be 'room for the public domain to flourish as others are able to produce new works by building on the ideas and information contained in the works of others (para. 23).'"⁵⁶
Lastly, there is even evidence that in multiple sectors - including fashion, finance, font design, and software - lesser IP protection in the form of patents, trademarks, and copyright, actual encourages increased innovation.⁵⁷

On Utility Models

On the question of introduction of a new on utility models⁵⁸ CIS observes that DIPP has previously considered developing a framework for granting Utility Models for 'innovations' and invited suggestions on a discussion paper on the subject.⁵⁹ Reports ⁶⁰ suggest that Small, Medium and Micro Enterprises are in favour of the Utility Model Protection system in India because developing countries such as China and Korea have demonstrated a corresponding economic growth attributable to the introduction of the system. However, there is no evidentiary data to support this hypothesis. Studies suggest that there exist only correlations and not causal links between heightened innovative activity and implementation of utility model protection. ⁶¹ Empirical evidence on the role of intellectual property protection in promoting innovation and growth in general remains limited and inconclusive.⁶² Reports also suggest that in China, the abundance of Utility Model has led to lowering of quality of innovation. ⁶³ In Australia, an "innovation patent" - the Australian version of utility model protection - was awarded for a "circular transportation facilitation device", i.e., a wheel. ⁶⁴
It is this submitted that whether the ushering of a 2nd tier of protection model for lower and incremental innovations would have a positive impact on innovation in India is extremely debatable. There have been several criticisms of utility models, inter alia, explosion in litigation of poor quality patents and legal uncertainty - which impact small business the maximum in terms of costs ⁶⁵; the system may be more utilised by foreign companies rather than local firms, in which case there is a possibility that this will lead to an increase in a flow of royalties and licensing fees to overseas producers. Utility model rights can be, and have been, used by companies to cordon off entire areas of research. ⁶⁶
CIS submits that as the policy 'intends to harness the full benefits of creation and innovation in the larger interest of society and citizens' ⁶⁷ the introduction of a law on utility models would be antithetical to this objective.

On Improving IP Output of National Research Laboratories, Universities et al

The Policy seeks to improve the output of national research laboratories, universities and technical institutions, among others.⁶⁸ It is submitted that these institutions are public funded institutions, ⁶⁹ and in effect, this recommendation of the Policy seeks to therefore promote intellectual property creation in public funded institutions.
A significant chunk of research and development occurs at public funded academic and research institutions and, excessive use of IPR as a tool to creating private ownership rights over inventions may preclude use of such innovation by the public. This may also create a barrier to access the best technologies and research- which were funded by taxpayers' money to begin with. CIS supports the principle that IPRs resulting from of publicly funded research should automatically belong to the funder.⁷⁰
Further, it is submitted that there exists a danger of public funded research institutions re-orienting their objectives focus only on areas of commercial value. This may lead to neglect of certain research areas. A stringent policy will create an unfavourable conflict between revenue generation and sharing of public good. The policy must ensure that it is flexible and compensates the inventors whilst permitting public access to research.
CIS submits that there should be no encumbrances over public funded research and inventions. The Policy must also ensure that such proposed IP creation does not prevent or interfere with dissemination of public funded research. ⁷¹
CIS strongly supports the recent steps by government agencies (including the Department of Science and Technology and the Department of Biotechnology⁷² as well as other institutions including the Council of Scientific and Industrial Research⁷³, Indian Council of Agricultural Research⁷⁴ and Institute of Mathematical Sciences ⁷⁵) in making scholarly research openly accessible. The benefits of implementing an open access policy with regard to scientific and scholarly works are manifold. Providing open access to scholarly research will ensure percolation of cutting edge research into the society.
It is thus submitted that the Policy should adopt a more nuanced, cautious and balanced take on the creation of intellectual property, particularly taking into consideration India's economic status as an emerging economy and our international position. The Policy must recognise that there is no inherent societal merit in the mere creation of intellectual property and that innovation flourishes even in the absence of intellectual property protections.

On Objective 3: Legal and Legislative Framework

According to the Policy, the objective sought to be achieved is the creation of strong and effective laws on intellectual property, consistent with national priorities as well as our international obligations, balancing the interest of the rights holders with public interest. ⁷⁶
CIS fully supports the view that the legislative framework on intellectual property must balance the rights of all stakeholders and be in public interest. CIS is also appreciates the importance of national priorities in the framing of India's legislative framework. CIS also notes with appreciation that the discussion in the Policy reiterates that India's laws are in compliance with the TRIPS Agreement ⁷⁷ as well as the stance that India will continue to utilize the flexibilities available in international treaties as well as the TRIPS Agreement⁷⁸ while creating its legal framework.
CIS also supports the acknowledgement of the fact that India's laws need to be updated periodically, depending on various factors.⁷⁹ CIS fully supports the process proposed for amendments to the law, including,inter alia, the conduction of objective and analytical studies and inputs from various stakeholders. ⁸⁰ It is submitted however, that equal weightage must be given to the inputs from all stakeholders and measures must be taken to ensure that the interests and demands of rights-holders do not outweigh the interests and demands of other stakeholders, particularly those at the other end of the spectrum, who greatly rely on the existence and guarantee of flexibilities, limitations and exceptions to intellectual property.

On Utility Models and Intellectual Property in Public Funded Research

The Policy envisages significant changes to India's intellectual property system, including the creation of a law for the protection of utility models as well as introduction of intellectual property in public funded research.
CIS recommends that it would not be advisable to introduce intellectual property in public funded research as well as cautions against the introduction of a law on utility patents. A detailed submission on these issues has been made earlier in this document, in Section 3.4.3. at page 7 for intellectual property in public funded research as well as in Section 3.4.2. at page 6 on utility models.

On the Negotiation of International Treaties and Agreements

CIS commends the recommendation of the Policy that the negotiation of international treaties and agreements will be in consultation with various stakeholders. However, CIS cautions against entering into bilateral or plurilateral international agreements which increase India's IPR obligations beyond our current obligations under multilateral agreements. It was only in 2006 that
It is submitted that FTAs often levy standards which are beyond those found in the TRIPS Agreement, and have thus been criticized. ⁸¹ A central aspect of this criticism is that TRIPS-plus-FTAs reduce policy space for the implementation of TRIPS flexibilities. This also creates the impression that TRIPS only imposes a "minimum level" of protection, which must be available in all national laws of its Member States, without any apparent limitation to a further extension of such protection or intervention which one country may impose on another. The World Health Organization enunciated that "bilateral trade agreements should not seek to incorporate TRIPS-plus protection in ways that may reduce access to medicines in developing countries.⁸² Further, WHO members were urged in the Fifty-Seventh World Health Assembly "to take into account in bilateral trade agreements the flexibilities contained in the Agreement on Trade-related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights and recognized by the Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health adopted by the WTO Ministerial Conference."⁸³
Furthermore, TRIPS-plus initiatives consequent in the dilution into a bilateral forum, as opposed to the plurality provided in multilateral fora, provided by the TRIPS. The imposition of standards by FTAs may ultimately disturb the balance of rights and obligations which are enshrined in the TRIPS Agreement,⁸⁴ and also have the potential to constrain the flexibilities provided to Member States in the TRIPS, particularly in areas which are of extreme significance to developing countries, such as transfer of technology, socio-economic development, promotion of innovation, public health and access to knowledge. Furthermore, they also tend to negate decisions which were taken multilaterally such as the Doha Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health.
It is therefore submitted that the Policy must caution against entering into any international agreement that seeks to enforce TRIPS-plus standards, contrary to India's stance (as noted by the Policy itself) that its laws were compliant with international obligations.

On Limitations and Exceptions

It is observed that the Policy recommends that laws be enacted to address national needs, ⁸⁵ but the only mentions limitations and exceptions as an area of study for future policy development.⁸⁶It is submitted that while it is indeed necessary for further research to be undertaken in the area of limitations and exceptions, it is also critical to enact new laws and amend existing ones to foster a rich environment for limitations and exceptions, in order to achieve a holistic and balanced intellectual property framework. It is further submitted that this would also be in consonance with the objective of the negotiation of international treaties and agreements in consultation with stakeholders.
While the granting of exclusive rights over intellectual property is considered to be an incentive for further investments into innovative activities and the production of knowledge, allowing the exercise of the full scope of this exclusion in all circumstances may not meet the end goal of the enhancement of public welfare, using the intellectual property system. Therefore, it is essential that an intellectual property system be flexible allowing for certain limitations and exceptions in order to strike a balance between right holders, the public and third parties. The need for such flexibility in the intellectual property system of a country has also been highlighted by the World Intellectual Property Organization.
It is therefore suggested that the Policy include an additional recommendation for the inclusion, adoption and periodic renewal of limitations and exceptions in India's intellectual property laws, either be enacting new legislations or by amending existing legislations wherever applicable. It is further suggested that this recommendation also inform India's negotiations at the international level, where any agreement that India might potentially sign, not invalidate or narrow in any form any limitations and exceptions and provide for their continued exercise in the broadest possible scope and manner.

On Standard Setting

CIS commends the Policy's focus on standards in technology and standard setting organisations. CIS strongly supports the adoption of open standards as a measure that helps stimulate active competition amongst implementors of various standards, and thereby encourages innovation. The Department of IT finalized its Policy on Open Standards for e-Governance in 2010,⁸⁷ and CIS strongly supports this policy, and would encourage it be adopted by all state governments as well.
CIS strongly recommends developing and supporting the evolution of open standards. The Policy must not encourage use of IPR to limit access to standards, because these are the foundational rules any technology must adhere to enter the market or ensure quality. ⁸⁸ CIS submits that access to these standards must not be limited by making them proprietary through IPR protection. Further, the Policy must support transparent standard setting processes and procedures in national and at international for a for all participants.
CIS further appreciates the endeavor to encourage the development of global standards influenced by technologies developed in India.
CIS submits that it is also important to ensure that India emerges as a global player in the technology sector, not just in the development of indigenous standards, but also in the equally important space of manufacturing using existing standards, particularly in light of the Government's recent "Make In India" and "Digital India" initiatives. It is further submitted however, that in most instances, these standards are protected by patents; where patents essential to a standard would be standard essential patents. CIS suggests that the Policy recommend measures that might be adopted to ensure access to standards essential patents, including, for instance, the establishment of a government aided patent pool. It is submitted that addressing the question of access to standards and not just their development would be a holistic approach that the Policy should adopt.

On Objective 5: Commercialization of IP

CIS appreciates that the Policy seeks to promote licensing and technology transfer for intellectual property, and notes that the Policy also seeks to promote reasonable and non-discriminatory patent pooling to maximise the ability of smaller companies to commercialise IP and bring innovative solutions based on standards to the market.
CIS believes that the government establishing patent pools for digital technologies will promote access to knowledge and stimulate manufacturing in the information technology and electronics sectors in India, in line with the government's "Make In India" and "Digital India" initiatives. CIS has earlier urged the government to enable access to low cost access devices by establishing a government-aided patent pool of essential technologies, without which there is a high likelihood of such devices getting caught up in the 'patent wars' that have happened elsewhere around the world over smartphones.⁸⁹ CIS submits that the creation of government-aided patent pools and facilitation of cross-licensing will also be helpful in resolving issues created by patent thickets and gridlocks by reducing transaction costs for licensees and solving an economic cooperation problem.

Concluding Remarks

Debabrata Saha, the Deputy Permanent Representative of India to the United Nations, while speaking on the introduction of the Development Agenda at the World Intellectual Property Organization, with admirable clarity noted, "Let me start on a positive note by asking: with all the damage that TRIPS has wrought on developing countries could it possibly have a silver lining? Maybe - if we want to be generous. TRIPS, one might argue, did bring intellectual property to the forefront of consciousness of people everywhere, and, over time made them aware of the dangers inherent in a protective regime that takes little account of either public policy, or the state of development of a member country." It is thus imperative that when we fashion our public policy, we take account of the dangers he mentioned. He went on to note, "Intellectual property rights have to be viewed not as a self contained and distinct domain, but rather as an effective policy instrument for wide ranging socio-economic and technological development. The primary objective of this instrument is to maximize public welfare." We wholeheartedly support this position of the Indian government, and would encourage the IPR Think Tank to seek to maximize public welfare and creativity and innovation rather than maximizing IPR alone. Importantly, as Mr. Saha, speaking on behalf of the Indian government noted, IP is not an end in itself, contrary to what the current draft of the National IPR Policy seems to promote.
Flexibility is considered to be an essential characteristic in defining and shaping the intellectual property system of countries around the world. Such flexibility allows scope for further innovations and creations, thereby subserving the common good. As per Article 39 of the Constitution of India, "the State shall in particular, direct its policy towards securing that the ownership and control of the material resources of the community are so distributed as best to subserve the common good." It is therefore submitted that the National IPR Policy of India should be contoured in such a manner that it encourages greater use of exceptions and limitations to the otherwise exclusionary use of intellectual property, encourages the expansion of the public domain, secures proportionality in enforcement of IP rights, promotes alternatives to IP - including open access to scholarly literature, open educational resources, free/open source software, open standards, open data, and aims to create a regime of intellectual property that aims to serve the public interest and not just the narrow interest of private right holders. Such an approach should not be merely rights-based, but look at interests of the general public, especially the poor, as well, in order to further the aim of the nation to create a more egalitarian society, and adopt the Directive Principles in the Constitution.

1 www.cis-india.org (last accessed 30 November, 2014).

2 http://www.dipp.nic.in/English/acts_rules/Press_Release/pressRelease_IPR_Policy_30December2014.pdf.

3 See http://cis-india.org/ (last accessed 18 January, 2015).

4 See http://cis-india.org/a2k (last accessed 18 January, 2015).

5 See http://cis-india.org/openness (last accessed 18 January, 2015).

6 See http://cis-india.org/internet-governance (last accessed 18 January, 2015).

7 See http://cis-india.org/accessibility (last accessed 18 January, 2015).

8 See http://cis-india.org/digital-natives (last accessed 18 January, 2015).

9 See http://cis-india.org/raw (last accessed 18 January, 2015).

10 See http://www.wipo.int/members/en/admission/observers.html (last accessed 18 January, 2015).

11 See http://cis-india.org/a2k/blog/ngo-profile-knowledge-ecology-international (last accessed 18 January, 2015); http://cis-india.org/a2k/blog/ngo-profile-third-world-network (last accessed 18 January, 2015).

12 See illustratively http://cis-india.org/a2k/blog/analysis-copyright-expansion-india-eu-fta (last accessed 18 January, 2015); http://cis-india.org/a2k/blog/india-eu-fta-copyright-issues (last accessed 18 January, 2015); http://cis-india.org/a2k/blog/a-guide-to-the-proposed-india-european-union-free-trade-agreement (last accessed 18 January, 2015).

13 See illustratively http://cis-india.org/news/inet-bangkok-june-8-2013-governance-in-the-age-of-internet-and-fta (last accessed 18 January, 2015).

14 See illustratively http://cis-india.org/a2k/blog/2010-special-301 (last accessed 18 January, 2015).

15 See illustratively http://cis-india.org/a2k/blog/analysis-copyright-amendment-bill-2012 (last accessed 18 January, 2015); http://cis-india.org/a2k/blog/sc-report-on-amendments (last accessed 18 January, 2015); http://cis-india.org/a2k/blog/copyright-bill-parliament (last accessed 18 January, 2015); http://cis-india.org/a2k/blog/tpm-copyright-amendment (last accessed 16 January, 2015); http://cis-india.org/a2k/blog/copyright-privacy (last accessed 16 January, 2015); http://cis-india.org/a2k/blog/copyright-bill-analysis (last accessed 18 January, 2015).

16 See http://cis-india.org/a2k/blog/comments-on-science-technology-and-innovation-policy-draft (last accessed 18 January, 2015).

17 See http://cis-india.org/a2k/blog/exhaustion (last accessed 18 January, 2015); http://cis-india.org/a2k/blog/parallel-importation-of-books (last accessed 18 January, 2015).

18 See http://cis-india.org/a2k/blog/cis-submission-draft-patent-manual-2010 (last accessed 18 January, 2015) and http://cis-india.org/a2k/blog/comments-on-draft-guidelines-for-computer-related-inventions (last accessed 18 January, 2015) respectively.

19 See http://cis-india.org/a2k/blog/lid-on-royalty-outflows (last accessed 18 January, 2015).

20 See http://cis-india.org/a2k/blog/exceptions-and-limitations (last accessed 18 January, 2015).

21 See illustratively http://cis-india.org/a2k/consumers-international-ip-watchlist-report-2012 (last accessed 18 January, 2015); http://cis-india.org/a2k/blog/ip-watch-list-2011 (last accessed 18 January, 2015); http://cis-india.org/a2k/blog/consumers-international-ip-watch-list-2009 (last accessed 18 January, 2015).

22 The Washington Declaration on Intellectual Property and Public Interest concluded after the Global Congress on Intellectual property and Public Interest in August 2011 attended by over 180 experts from 32 countries articulate this position perfectly. Available at: http://infojustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Washington-Declaration.pdf (Last Accessed: 29 November, 2014).

23 IPR Think Tank, National IPR Policy (First Draft) at page 5.

24 Article 27(1) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states: "Everyone has the right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community, to enjoy the arts and to share in scientific advancement and its benefits."

25 Julia Brüggemann, Paolo Crosetto et al, Intellectual Property Rights Hinder Sequential Innovation - Experimental Evidence, Center for European, Governance and Economic Development Research, Number 227, January 2015.

26 Joseph E. Stiglitz, Economic Foundations of Intellectual Property Rights, Duke Law Journal, 57(6): 1693-1724.

27 Graham M. Dutfield, Uma Suthersanen, The Innovation Dilemma: Intellectual Property and the Historical Legacy of Cumulative Creativity, Intellectual Property Quarterly, 2004 at 379.

28 IPR Think Tank, National IPR Policy (First Draft) at page 5.

29 IPR Think Tank, National IPR Policy (First Draft) at page 5.

30 IPR Think Tank, National IPR Policy (First Draft) at page 6.

31 Id .

32 Id .

33 Michele Boldrin and David K. Levine, The Case Against Patents, Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 27, No.1 - Winter 2013, 3-22.

34 Id .

35 Id .

36 Id .

37 James Bessen and Michael J. Meurer, Patent Failure: How Judges, Bureaucrats and Lawyers Put Innovation at Risk, March 2008.

38 Michele Boldrin and David K. Levine Supra Note 32.

39 B.J. Jaffe, The US Patent System in Transition: Innovation and the Innovation Process, Research Policy, 29, 531-557, 2000.

40 Josh Lerner, The Empirical Impact of Intellectual Property Rights on Innovation: Puzzles and Clues, Intellectual Property Rights and Economic Growth in the Long-Run: A Discover Model (2009).

41 Rod Falvey & Neil Foster, The Role of Intellectual Property Rights in Technology Transfer and Economic Growth: Theory and Evidence (UNIDO Working Paper,

42 ¶ 1.2 IPR Think Tank, National IPR Policy (First Draft) at page 6.

43 See

44 ¶ 1.3 IPR Think Tank, National IPR Policy (First Draft) at page 7.

45 ¶ 1.5 IPR Think Tank, National IPR Policy (First Draft) at page 8.

46 IPR Think Tank, National IPR Policy (First Draft) at page 8.

47 Heidi L. Williams, Intellectual Property Rights and Innovation: Evidence from the Human Genome, National Bureau of Economic Research. Working Paper 16213, July 2010.

48 Id .

49 Id .

50 Petra Moser, Innovations and Patents in Oxford Handbook of Economic History (Cain et al., eds., forthcoming), http://ssrn.com/abstract=2503503.

51 See generally , David. S. Landes, The Unbound Prometheus: Technological Change and Industrial Development in Western Europe from 1750 to the Present (1969).

52 See generally , Joel Mokyr. The Lever of Riches: Technological Creativity and Economic Progress (1990).

53 See generally , Alessandro Nuvolari Collective Invention during the British Industrial Revolution: the Case of the Cornish Pumping Engine, 28 Cambridge J. Econ. 347 (2004). See also, Robert C. Allen, Collective Invention, 4 J. Econ. Behavior & Org. 1 (1983).

54 A. Arora & N. Rosenberg, Chemicals: A US Success Story in Chemicals and Long-Term Economic Growth 71 (Arora et al., eds., 1998); see also, David C. Mowery & Nathan Rosenberg, Paths of Innovation. Technological Change in 20th-century America (1998).

55 Petra Moser, How Do Patent Laws Influence Innovation? Evidence from Nineteenth-Century World Fairs, NBER Working Paper Series 9909, http://www.nber.org/papers/w9909.

56 Meera Nair, A Short-Lived Celebration, Fair Duty (Jan. 8, 2012), https://fairduty.wordpress.com/2012/01/08/a-short-lived-celebration/

57 See generally, Kal Raustiala & Christopher Sprigman, The Knockoff Economy (2012).

58 ¶ 2.10 IPR Think Tank, National IPR Policy (First Draft) at page 10.

59 See FICCI Suggestions on Discussion Paper on Utility Model available at http://www.ficci.com/Sedocument/20179/UM.pdf (last accessed January 28, 2015).

60 See FICCI Suggestions on Discussion Paper on Utility Model available at http://www.ficci.com/Sedocument/20179/UM.pdf (last accessed January 28, 2015).

61 See Utility Model: A Tool for Economic and Technological Development: A Case Study of Japan available at http://www.ipindia.nic.in/research_studies/finalreport_april2007.pdf (last accessed January 28, 2015).

62 U. Suthersanen, Utility Models and Innovation in Developing Countries, International Center for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD), Issue Paper No. 13 (2006), available at http://www.unctad.org/en/docs/iteipc20066_en.pdf , (last accessed January 28, 2015).

63 See China's great leap forward in patents , available at http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/04/04/chinas-great-leap-forward-in-patents/id=38625/ (last accessed January 28, 2015).

64 Will Knight, Wheel Patented in Australia, New Scientist (July 3, 2001), http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn965-wheel-patented-in-australia.html .

65 Keith E. Maskus, Beyond the Treaties: A Symposium on Compliance with International Intellectual Property Law, February 6, 2000.

66 U. Suthersanen, Utility Models and Innovation in Developing Countries, International Center for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD), Issue Paper No. 13 (2006), available at http://www.unctad.org/en/docs/iteipc20066_en.pdf , (last accessed January 28, 2015).

67 IPR Think Tank, National IPR Policy (First Draft) at page 1.

68 ¶ 2.3 IPR Think Tank, National IPR Policy (First Draft) at page 10.

69 See http://mhrd.gov.in/technical-education-1 (last accessed 30 January, 2015).

70 See 'Expert Group Report on Role and Strategic Use of IPR (Intellectual Property Rights) in International Research Collaborations' by European Commission 'available at http://ec.europa.eu/research/era/pdf/ipr-eur-20230_en.pdf (last accessed January 28, 2015).

71 See 'Ministry of Science makes Open Access to Research Mandatory ', available at http://cis-india.org/news/down-to-earth-july-16-2014-aparajita-singh-ministry-of-science-makes-open-access-to-research-mandatory (last accessed January 28, 2015).

72 DBT and DST Open Access Policy - Policy on Open Access to DBT and DST Funded Research, Department of Biotechnology and Department of Science and Technology, Ministry of Science and Technology, Government of India.

73 Id.

74 Id.

75 Id.

76 IPR Think Tank, National IPR Policy (First Draft) at page 11.

77 Id .

78 IPR Think Tank, National IPR Policy (First Draft) at pages 10, 11.

79 IPR Think Tank, National IPR Policy (First Draft) at page 12.

80 Id .

81 The Doha Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health and the Contradictory Trend in Bilateral and Regional Free Trade Agreements (2004), Available at http://www.quno.org/geneva/pdf/ec onomic/Occasional/TRIPS-Public-Health-FTAs.pdf.

82 World Health Organization, Report of the Commission on Intellectual Property Rights, Innovation and Public Health, Recommendation 4.26 (2006), available at http://www.who.int/intellectualproperty/ documents/thereport/CIPIHReport23032006.pdf [hereinafter WHO].

83 Fifty-Seventh World Health Assembly, May17-22,2004, (May 22, 2004), available at http:// apps.who.int/gb/ebwha/pdf_files/WHA57/A57_R14-en.pdf;

84 Preamble, Articles 7, 8, TRIPS Agreement, 1994.

85 ¶ 3.2 IPR Think Tank, National IPR Policy (First Draft) at page 12.

86 ¶ 3.6 IPR Think Tank, National IPR Policy (First Draft) at page 13.

87 See 'Open Standards Policy' , available at http://cis-india.org/news/open-standards-policy (last accessed January 28, 2015).

88 See 'The BIS, Standards and Copyright' , available at http://spicyip.com/2014/11/the-bis-standards-and-copyright.html (last accessed January 28, 2015).

89 See CIS' Letter for Establishment of Patent Pool for Low-cost Access Devices through Compulsory Licenses , available at http://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/letter-for-establishment-of-patent-pool-for-low-cost-access-devices (last accessed January 29, 2015).

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/national-ipr-policy-series-cis-comments-to-the-first-draft-of-the-national-ip-policy

Telugu Wikimedia Hackathon 2014

rahim — 2015-02-10T17:17:03Z

Telugu Wikimedia (including their projects Telugu Wikipedia, Telugu Wikisource etc.) is one of the largest and most powerful Indian language Wikimedia projects, and it is growing and expanding everyday. In the last half of 2014, Telugu Wikimedia community members contacted CIS-A2K team with a request to organize a MediaWiki tutorial workshop for them. Following their request, on 28 December 2014, CIS-A2K team organized a MediaWiki hackathon event for Telugu Wikimedia community members to enhance their skills and understanding of technical matters related to MediaWiki usage. The theme of the workshop was “Mediawiki, its extensions and tools to work around” and it aimed at allowing Wikipedians to use MediaWiki tools more effectively.

This one day workshop was organized at Golden Threshold, Hyderabad. 25 Telugu Wikimedia community members participated in this workshop. In the Hackathon, there were knowledge transferring sessions on various MediaWiki related technicalities and the participants got an opportunity to engage and communicate with each other and some of the MediaWiki expert users. Advanced MediaWiki users Rahmanuddin Shaik, Veeven and Kasyap were the speakers who gave short but eloquent speeches.

Discussion topics of this Hackathon event included:

Understanding of MediaWiki software
Basic understanding of MediaWiki extensions
Typing Telugu in English keyboard
Creating, using and managing templates
Adding and managing references, reference formats, tables, images, audios and videos following Wikipedia format
Using Wikidata
Categorization process
Geo-tagging

Some of these topics are comparatively more difficult than others. Wikidata is an addition to the Wikimedia projects that replaced Interwiki linking procedure.Typing Telugu in an English keyboard has been confusing to some users too. Using, specially creating and managing templates, categories, infoboxes, scripts require some training. In this workshop CIS-A2K attempted to teach and discuss all these topics. There was a doubt-clearing session as well, where participants were allowed to ask their questions and discuss their doubts.

CIS-A2K believes that the participants were benefited from this workshop and they will use and apply their learnings in editing and improving Wikipedia and other Wikimedia projects.

See also

Official event page (in Telugu)
Free images and media related to Hackathon 2014 (Wikimedia Commons)

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/telugu-wikimedia-hackathon-2014

RTI Responses - MHRD IP Chairs: Details of Funding & Expenditure

nehaa — 2015-02-02T13:28:30Z

In an earlier blog post titled "MHRD IPR Chairs — Underutilization of Funds and Lack of Information Regarding Expenditures", we discussed the lack of information regarding the expenditure by various MHRD Chairs in the country. We sent out RTI requests to find out more. This blog post discusses the responses that we have received so far. (Many thanks to CIS intern Varnika Chawla for her assistance)

See the earlier post on MHRD IPR Chairs — Underutilization of Funds and Lack of Information Regarding Expenditures

A wide variation in the allocation of funds among different Universities was observed. Further, it was noted that no information was available on any platform, regarding the actual utilization of these funds, and therefore, CIS had filed a Right to Information request for the same with the concerned authorities.

A four-pronged Right to Information query (dated 17.11.2014) was filed by CIS with various Universities, seeking the following:

A report on the implementation of the IPERPO Scheme and the MHRD IPR Chair funded under the Scheme at different Universities across India, for the year 2013-14;
Documents on the release of grants to the MHRD IPR Chairs under the IPERPO Scheme at different Universities, for the year 2013-14;
Documents relating to the receipt of utilization certificates and audited expenditures statements and matters related to all financial sanctions with regard to funds granted to the MHRD IPR Chair established under the IPERPO Scheme for the year 2013-14;
Documents regarding all matters related to finance and budget related to the MHRD IPR Chair under the IPERPO Scheme for 2013-14 established across different Universities.

Accordingly, CIS received the following information from Universities:

Name of University	Implementation of IPERPO Scheme	Release of Grants	Utilization Certificates & Exp. Stmts.	Finance & Budget Matters
WBNUJS, Kolkata	Information not yet available	-	-	-
DU, Delhi School of Economics, Tezpur University	Information not yet available	-	-	-
Jawaharlal Nehru University	Information not yet available	-	-	-
IIM, Ahmedabad	No MHRD IPR Chair	-	-	-
IIM, Bangalore	Established a Chair	Rs. 23,50,000	Rs. 23,50,000	Submitted
IIT Delhi	No MHRD IPR Chair	No money has been received	-	-
NLU, Jodhpur	Established a Chair	Rs. 36,00,000	Rs. 18,86,566	Submitted
University of Madras	No MHRD IPR Chair	No money has been received	-	-
Nalsar University of Law, Hyderabad	Established a Chair	Rs. 40,00,000	Rs. 37, 88,349	Submitted
NLSIU, Bangalore	Established a Chair	Rs. 45,00,000	Rs. 45,31,927	-
CUSAT, Kerala	Information not yet available	-	-	-
IIT, Bombay	No IPR Chair for 2013-14	Rs. 35,00,000	Rs. 15,66,179	Submitted

The RTI Requests were returned by NUJS Kolkata as well as IIT, Kanpur, in a response dated 28.11.2014.

IIM Ahmedabad in its response (dated 9.12.2014), informed of the fact that no MHRD IPR Chair has been established under the IPERPO Scheme at the institution.

Details of the activities undertaken by the MHRD IPR Chair, as well as their finance and budget allocation were received from IIM, Bangalore (dated 16.12.2014). It was disclosed that the focus of the IPR Chair is on research on the economic and management dimensions of IPR with special reference to the corporate, SME and agricultural sectors. Since 2011-12, the Chair has focused on creative content management and protection with reference to cinema, electronic media and classical performing arts. Several activities were undertaken by the Chair, including finalization of a Research Monograph; inclusion of IPR Economics into the Core Course in Microeconomics for the Post Graduate Programme in Software Enterprise Management; a National Workshop on “Macro Policy Environment, IPR’s and Competition Policy” was organized; and 2 Research Assistants were appointed under the Chair. Against a request for Rs. 26,10,000, a grant of Rs. 23,50,000 was received, utilized for the payment of the Chair’s salary (Rs. 19,20,000), RA honorarium (Rs. 5,40,000) and Round Table Expenses.

IIT, Delhi, in its response (dated 16.12.2014) informed that no MHRD IPR Chair has been established under the IPERPO Scheme at the University. Further, no grant money has been received by the University under the Scheme.

NLU, Jodhpur submitted a detailed reply (dated 16.12.2014). A number of IPR research and learning initiatives have been undertaken under the MHRD IPR Chair established under the IPERPO Scheme, including IPR Awareness Programmes, formulation and conduction of various undergraduate and postgraduate IPR Courses, research and suggestions on IPR Law Reforms and IPR Policies etc. NLU Jodhpur conducted a training session for researchers and teachers of IPR, a workshop for students on IP Litigation, a conference on “The Impact of IPR on Access to Medicine”, Training, Sensitization and Outreach Programmes as well as lectures and paper presentations. Funding received from the grant was utilized towards payment of the coordinator’s salary (Rs. 5,78,800) RA honorarium (Rs. 6,00,000), Ph.D. fellows’ honorarium (Rs. 3,38,000), travel grants (Rs. 2,00,000) and miscellaneous expenditure. A total of Rs. 17,00,000 was spent on sensitization and outreach programmes, workshops, conferences as well as the IP Depository.

The University of Madras in its response (dated 29.12.2014) submitted that no MHRD IPR Chair has been established under the IPERPO Scheme and no grants were sanctioned to the University.

The requisite documents detailing expenditure incurred (Rs. 37,88,349) as well as the financial budget were made available by NALSAR University of Law (dated 22.12.2014). Expenditure was incurred towards the payment of the Chair Professor’s salary (Rs. 17,50,093), payments to the staff (Rs.7,11,544), the IPR Journal (Rs. 40,000), Travel (Rs.6,45,864), books (Rs. 2,67,740) and other miscellaneous expenditure. A link to an online report, was also made available. However, this is a dead link.

The website established for MHRD IPR Chairs itself is not functioning.

No information has been made available by Jawaharlal Nehru University, Delhi University, Delhi School of Economics and Tezpur University as well as CUSAT, Kerala as of now. Further, IIT, Kharagpur in its reply (dated 17.12.2014), sought exemption from providing the required information under Section 8(1)(d) of the RTI Act, 2005.

IIT Bombay, in its reply (dated 15.01.2015) submitted that having established a MHRD IPR Chair under the IPERPO Scheme, activities such as research, training, academic courses (Introductory Foundation Course at U.G., P.G. Level, Elective Course at P.G. Level), conducting workshops, conferences and outreach programmes and maintaining an IP Depository have been undertaken. Details about budgetary allocation were also made available. From a grant of Rs. 35,00,000, a total amount of Rs. 15,66,179 has been utilized. However, there was no IPR Chair for the year 2013-14. Out of a cumulative grant of Rs. 1,95,00,000 received till March 31, 2014, the institution has spent a total of Rs. 1,62,60,265 on IPR Activities, workshops, honorariums, salaries, conferences etc. from 2007.

Lastly, as per the information received from NLSIU, Bangalore (dated 14.01.2015), an MHRD IPR Chair has been established at the University. Several activities have been organized at NLSIU, including a Workshop on IPR in S.J.R. College of Law, the release of an IP Newsletter publication “March of the IP Law”, a conference on the Advantages of Madrid Protocol, a conference on Patents, Innovation and Trade Secrets for MSMEs in IT/ITES Sectors in Karnataka, research activities such as the Fact-Screening-and-Transforming-Processor Project, the release of a website http://iprlawindia.org which is currently under construction, conducting awareness and outreach programmes etc. The MHRD IPR Chair at NLSIU was awarded a grant of Rs.45,00,000 which was largely spent on the payment of the Chair’s salary (Rs. 24,17,378), RA honorarium (Rs. 5,88,415), workshops and conferences (Rs.1,27,805), creation of a depository of IP books (Rs. 1,00,105), publication of newsletters (Rs.1,00,000) and staff payments.

It is therefore observed that firstly, there was a variation in replies to the RTI queries filed under the same format, with some Universities providing information, some blatantly refusing to do so (IIT Kharagpur), and some delaying the process for what appear to be minor procedural irregularities.

Four Universities have still not sent the requisite information, whereas no MHRD IPR Chair has been established in four of them. Only four replied with some information.

Moreover, for the year 2013-14, MHRD allocated a grant of Rs. 1,79,50,000 among 5 Universities, disproportionately (ranging from Rs.23 lakhs-Rs. 45 lakhs per University). Out of this grant, the Universities have incurred a total expenditure of Rs. 1,41,23,021, largely for the payment of salaries of the IPR Chair (Rs. 66,66,271), honorariums for Research Assistants (24,50,183), and conducting workshops, conferences and travel for the same.

The various responses received to the RTI queries filed reveal a great variation in not just the allocation of funds by the Ministry, but also on the utilization of these funds (if at all), as well as in the range of activities conducted by the Chairs.

We're still tracking this. Watch this space for more, including copies of our RTIs and the responses as well as details from other Universities who are yet to get back to us.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/rti-responses-mhrd-ip-chairs-details-of-funding-and-expenditure

ଓଡ଼ିଆ ଭାଷା ପାଇଁ ଅନ୍ତର୍ଜାତୀୟ ପ୍ରକଳ୍ପ

subha — 2015-01-31T04:51:15Z

This is an op-ed I authored for Odia newspaper the "Samaja" that got published on January 30, 2015. Through this post I intend to highlight the needs for taking the Odia language to international fora instead of keeping it confined within the books. I have covered the focus area of 3 free and open source projects: Odia Wikipedia, Odia Wikisource and Global Voices Odia in the column highlighting the need for more people to contribute.

The Unicode version of the post is below. Interestingly 10 new accounts got created on Odia Wikipedia so far which seem to be an impact of the portion explaining about Wikipedia.

ଭାଷାଟି ଆମର ଏ ଦେଶର ମୋଟ ୬୦୦ରୁ ଅଧିକ ଭାଷା ଓ ତହିଁରୁ ୬ଟି ପୁରୁଣା ଭାଷା ଭିତରୁ ଗୋଟିଏ ବୋଲି ମାନ୍ୟତା ପାଇଲା । ଆମ ଭାଷା ମୂଳ ବିଶାଳ କଳିଙ୍ଗ ଭୂଖଣ୍ଡର ସତ୍ତାକୁ ଧରି ରଖିଥିବା ବୋଧେ ଏକଇ ଭାଷା । ଏତେ ସବୁ ପରେ ମଧ୍ୟ ଆମ ଭାଷା ଆନ୍ତର୍ଜାତିକ ସ୍ତରରେ କେତେ ପରିଚିତ, ତାହା ନକହିବା ଭଲ । ଯେଉଁଠି ନିଜ ରାଜ୍ୟର ଲୋକେ ଓଡ଼ିଆରେ କଥା ହେବାକୁ ନାରାଜ ସେଠି ଦେଶବିଦେଶରେ ପତିଆରା କଥା କହିବା ତୁଚ୍ଛା ପାଗଳାମି ବୋଲି ପାଠକେ ହୁଏତ ଭାବୁଥିବେ । ତେବେ ଏ ପ୍ରସଙ୍ଗ ଆଲୋଚନା କରିବା ପଛରେ ରହିଛି ଆମ ଓଡ଼ିଆ ଜାତିର ମାନସିକତା ବିଦେଶରୁ ଆସିଥିବା ଲୋକଟେ ଅଧିକ ଆଦର ପାଏ, ନିଜ ଲୋକେ ବିଦେଶ ଯାଇ ବାହୁଡ଼ିଲେ ଅଧିକ ସମ୍ମାନର ଅଧିକାରୀ ହୁଅନ୍ତି, ଏମିତି ଲୋକେ ମଦ ପିଇଲେ ବିଦେଶୀ ଭାଷାରେ ବକନ୍ତି ବୋଲି ଶୁଣାଯାଏ! ଏଣୁ ନିଜ ରାଇଜ ଆଉ ଦେଶରେ ଯେବେ ଆମ ଭାଷାଟି ଗାଁ କନିଆଁ, କାଳେ ବିଦେଶରେ କାଟ୍‍ତି ବଢ଼ିଲେ, ଭାଷାଟି ଏକ ଅନ୍ତର୍ଜାତୀୟ ଭାଷା ବୋଲି ବିଖ୍ୟାତ ହେବ ଆଉ ନିଜ ଲୋକଙ୍କ ତା' ପ୍ରତି ଆଦର ବଢ଼ି ।ରେ ବୋଲି ବିଚାରିବା । କେଇଦିନ ତଳେ ଇଟାଲିରୁ ଜଣେ ସାଙ୍ଗ ଜଣାଇଲେ "ଓଡ଼ିଆ' ଶବ୍ଦଟି (ସେମାନେ, ପର୍ତ୍ତୁଗୀଜ ଓ ସ୍ପାନିସ ଭାଷାଏ "ଓଦିଆ' ବୋଲି ଉଚ୍ଚାରଣ କରନ୍ତି) ଘୃଣା କରିବା ପାଇଁ ବ୍ୟବହାର ହୁଏ । ମୁହଁରେ କହିଲି ନାହିଁ, ହେଲେ ମନରେ ଭାଜିଲି ଆମ ଲୋକେ ନିଜ ଭାଷାକୁ କ'ଣ କମ ହୀନିମାନ କରନ୍ତି! ଯଦି ଆମ ଭାଷା ଜଗତର ଛାମୁଆଁ ଭାଷା ଭିତରୁ ଗୋଟେ ହୋଇପାରନ୍ତା ତା'ହେଲେ ଏ "ଘୃଣାର ଭାଷା' ହୋଇ ଆଉ ରହନ୍ତା ନାହିଁ । ତେବେ ଆମ ଭିତରୁ କେତେଜଣ ଜଗତର ଆଉ ଭାଷା ଗବେଷାଳିଙ୍କ ସଙ୍ଗେ ନିଜ ଭାଷା କଥା ପକାଉଛୁ? ଓଡ଼ିଶା ସୀମା ଡେଇଁଲେ ଓଡ଼ିଆମାନେ ଏତେ ଅନର୍ଗଳ ହିନ୍ଦୀ କହିବେ ଆପଣଙ୍କୁ ବୋଧ ହେବ ବୋଧେ ଏମାନେ ମାଆ ପେଟରୁ ହିନ୍ଦୀ ଶିଖିଥିଲେ । ଅଧିକ ଭାଷା ଶିଖିଲେ ଭଲ, କାମରେ ଆସେ । ହେଲେ ନିଜ ଭାଷାକୁ ତୁଚ୍ଛକରି କିଏ ନୂଆ ଭାଷାରେ ଏତେ ପାରଙ୍ଗମ ହୁଏନା । ଆଜି ଯାଏ ଆମ ଭାଷାର ଏତେ ସାହିତ୍ୟ ଯେ ଗଢ଼ା, ତା'ଭିତରୁ କେତେ ଅନ୍ୟ ଭାଷାରେ ଅନୁବାଦ ହୋଇଛି? ଯେଉଁମାନେ ଆମ ସାହିତ୍ୟର ମୁଖିଆ ବୋଲାଇ କାଳକାଳ ଧରି ଗାଦି ମାଡ଼ି ବସିଛନ୍ତି, ସେମାନଙ୍କୁ ପୁଚ୍ଛିବାର ବେଳ ଆସିଛି କାହିଁକି ଆମେ ଖାଲି ଅନ୍ୟ ଭାଷାରୁ ଅନୁବାଦ କରୁଛୁ, କାହିଁକି ଆମର କାଳଜୟୀ ଲେଖାମାନ ଦେଶ ଓ ଦେଶ ବାହାରେ ପଢ଼ାଯାଉନାହିଁ? ଭାରତୀୟ ଭାଷା ଭିତରୁ କେବଳ ତାମିଲ ଭାଷା କଥା ଚର୍ଚ୍ଚା ହୁଏ ଦେଶବିଦେଶରେ । କାରଣ କ'ଣ ଜାଣନ୍ତି? ବାକିସବୁ କାରଣ ବାଦ୍‍ ସବୁଠୁ ବଡ଼ କାରଣଟି ହେଲା ସେ ଭାଷାର ପୁରୋଧାମାନେ ରାଜ୍ୟ କି ଦେଶ ଭିତରେ ବାନ୍ଧି ନହୋଇ ନିଜ ଭାଷାକୁ ସାରା ଜଗତକୁ ନେଇଛନ୍ତି । ଖାଲି ପଇସାର ଟାଣରେ ଏ କାମ ହୋଇନାହିଁ, ଏଥିରେ ଧନ, ରାଜନୀତି ଆଉ କୂଟନୀତି ଲାଗିଛି । ଆମ ସାହିତ୍ୟିକମାନେ ଥରୁଟେ ବିଦେଶ ଗଲେ ସେଠି ନିଜ ଭାଷା, ରାଇଜ କଥା କେତେ ଯେ ଗପନ୍ତି ତା ମା' ଗଙ୍ଗେଇଙ୍କି ଜଣା । ଗପୁଥିଲେ ତାଙ୍କ ପରିଚିତ ମହଲରେ ଓଡ଼ିଆ ଭାଷା ବାବଦରେ ମଞ୍ଜିଟିଏ ପୋତା ହୋଇଥାନ୍ତା, ଅନ୍ତତଃ କିଛି ଭାଷାରେ ଓଡ଼ିଆ ବହି ଅନୁଦିତ ହୋଇଥାନ୍ତା, ଓଡ଼ିଆ ଭାଷାର ପୁରୁଣାପଣ ବାବଦରେ ବିଦେଶୀ ବ୍ଲଗରେ, ଖବରକାଗଜରେ, ଟେଲିଭିଜନରେ ଚର୍ଚ୍ଚା ହୋଇଥାନ୍ତା । ହୋଇଛି କି ଏଥିରୁ କାଣିଚାଏ? ଆଜିର ପିଢ଼ି ଯାହାଦେଇ ଶିଖୁଛନ୍ତି, ତାଙ୍କୁ ସେଇ ମାଧ୍ୟମରେ ଶିଖାଇପାରିଲେ ସିନା ସେମାନେ ଶିଖିବେ । ଖାଲି ଏବର ପିଢ଼ିକୁ ଦୋଷ ଦେଇ ଭାଷା ମରିଯାଉଛି ବୋଲି କୁମ୍ଭୀର କାନ୍ଦଣା କାନ୍ଦିଲେ କି ହେବ କି ଆମେ ନିଜ ଭାଷାର ବିଶ୍ୱବିଦ୍ୟାଳୟ କଥା ବିଚାରୁଛୁ, ହେଲେ ଆକାଶ କଇଆଁ ସ୍ୱରୂପ "ଶାସ୍ତ୍ରୀୟ ମାନ୍ୟତା କେନ୍ଦ୍ର ଅନୁଦାନ ରାଶି' ଆସିବାକୁ ନଚାହିଁ ବିଦେଶରୁ ରାଶି କେମିତି ଆସି ଏ କାମରେ ଲାଗିବ ତା ପାଇଁ ବାଟ ତିଆରୁଛୁ କି? ତେବେ ଏ ଦୁଃଖ ବଖାଣିଲେ ନସରେ । ଚୋରକୁ ମାନ ମାରି ଖପରାରେ ଖାଇଲେ ଏଠି ଘରବୁଡ଼ି ଆଣ୍ଠୁଏ ହେବ । ତେଣୁ ବେଳ ଥାଉଁଥାଉଁ କିଛି ନିଅଁ ପୋତା ଚାଲୁ, ତେଣିକି ଘର ଯେବେ ଗଢ଼ାଯିବ ଏ ସାହା ହେବ । ଓଡ଼ିଆର ପରିଚିତି ଦେଶବିଦେଶରେ ଯେତିକି ଉଣା, ଜଗତର ବାକି ଭାଷା ପାଇଁ ତିଆରି ହୋଇଥିବା ବିଭିନ୍ନ ଜ୍ଞାନର ଭଣ୍ଡାରରେ ମଧ୍ୟ ସେତିକି ଅଜଣା । ଇଂରାଜୀ ବାଦ୍‍ ଅନ୍ୟାନ୍ୟ ଭାଷାର ଲେଖାର ପ୍ରକାଶନ ପାଇଁ ଅନେକ ସ୍ଥାନ ରହିଛି । ତେବେ ଏମିତି କେତୋଟି ଜାଗତିକ ସ୍ଥାନରେ ଓଡ଼ିଆର ଚିହ୍ନଟେ ଯେ ରହିବା ଲୋଡ଼ା ତା କହିବା ବାହୁଲ୍ୟ । କାନ୍ଦିବୋବାଳି ରାମମୋହନ ଲାଇବ୍ରେରି ସକାଶେ କେଇଶହ ବହି ଛାପି ଯେଉଁମାନେ ନିଜର ବା ଭାଷାର ଉନ୍ନତି କରିବେ ବୋଲି ସାଧି ବସିଥିବେ ତାଙ୍କ ପାଇଁ ନାକରା ଖବର- ଆଉ ପିଲେ ଓଡ଼ିଆ ପଢ଼ୁନାହାନ୍ତି । ଓଡ଼ିଆ କଥା ଛାଡ଼ନ୍ତୁ, ପିଲେ ବହି ପଢ଼ୁନାହାନ୍ତି । ତାଙ୍କୁ ଆଜିକାଲି ଲୋଡ଼ା ଭଳିକି ଭଳି ଗେମ, ଆନିମେସନ ଆଉ ଗ୍ରାଫିକ୍‍ ନଭେଲ (କମିକ୍ସ ଭଳି ଛବି ସମ୍ବଳିତ ବହି) । ପୁଣି ପିଲାଏ ମୋବାଇଲ ଆଉ କମ୍ପ୍ୟୁଟରରୁ ଇଣ୍ଟରନେଟରେ ଖୋଜି ବସିୁଛନ୍ତି ନୂଆନୂଆ କଥା । ଆଜିର ପିଢ଼ି ଯାହା ଦେଇ ଶିଖୁଛନ୍ତି ତାଙ୍କୁ ସେଇ ମାଧ୍ୟମରେ ଶିଖାଇପାରିଲେ ସିନା ସେମାନେ ଶିଖିବେ । ଖାଲି ଏବର ପିଢ଼ିକୁ ଦୋଷ ଦେଇ ଭାଷା ମରିଯାଉଛି ବୋଲି କୁମ୍ଭୀର କାନ୍ଦଣା କାନ୍ଦିଲେ କି ହେବ? ଓଡ଼ିଆ ଉଇକିପିଡ଼ିଆ: ଇଣ୍ଟରନେଟରେ ପହଞ୍ଚôଲେ କୌଣସି ବିଷୟ ଖୋଜିବାକୁ ପ୍ରଥମେ ଖୋଲାହୁଏ ଗୁଗୁଲ କି ୟାହୁ ଭଳି ସର୍ଚ୍ଚ ଇଞ୍ଜିନ । ଖୋଜିଲାପରେ ଯାହା ପ୍ରଥମ ଲିଙ୍କ୍‍ରେ ଆସେ ସେ ହେଲା ଉଇକିପିଡ଼ିଆ । ଏଇଟି ଜଗତର ବିଶାଳତମ ଜ୍ଞାନକୋଷ । ୨୦୦୧ରେ ଇଂରାଜୀ ଉଇକିପିଡ଼ିଆରେ ପରେ ପ୍ରଥମ ଭାରତୀୟ ଭାଷା ଭାବେ ପଞ୍ଜାବୀ ଓ ଅହମିୟା ସହ ଯେ ଓଡ଼ିଆ ଏଥିରେ ସ୍ଥାନ ପାଇଲା ତା' ଅନେକ ଜାଣିନଥିବେ । ୨୦୦୨ରେ ତିଆରି ସିନା ହୋଇଗଲା । ହେଲେ ଏଥିରେ ଲେଖିବ କିଏ? ଇଂରାଜୀର ପାଠକ ଓ ଲେଖକ ଅଧିକ । ଆଉ ଉଇକିପିଡ଼ିଆରେ ଲେଖିଲେ କଉଡ଼ିଟିଏ ମିଳେନାହିଁ । ସ୍ୱେଚ୍ଛାରେ ଲେଖିବାକୁ ବିଦେଶରେ ଯେମିତି ଲୋକ ବାହାରନ୍ତି ଆମର ସେ ଅବସ୍ଥା ନାହିଁ । ତଥାପି ୨୦୧୧ ବେଳକୁ ଓଡ଼ିଶା ବାହାରେ ଥିବା କିଛି ଓଡ଼ିଆ ଏ ତିମିରରେ କିଛି ଆଲୁଅ ଜଳାଇଲେ । ଧୀରେଧୀରେ ଓଡ଼ିଶାରେ ଥିବା ଓଡ଼ିଆମାନେ ମଧ୍ୟ ସେଥିରେ ଯୋଡ଼ିହେଲେ । ଆଉ ଓଡ଼ିଆ ଉଇକିପିଡ଼ିଆ ଓଡ଼ିଆ ଭାଷାର ବିଶାଳତମ ଅନଲାଇନ ଜ୍ଞାନକୋଷ । or.wikipedia.org ରେ ଉପଲବ୍ଧ ଏ ଏନସାଇକ୍ଲୋପିଡ଼ିଆ ସୀମିତ ସ୍ୱେଚ୍ଛାସେବୀଙ୍କ ଦେଇ ସମ୍ପାଦିତ ହେଉଥିବାରୁ ସେତେ ବିଶାଳ ନୁହେଁ ସତ, କିନ୍ତୁ ଏହା ଓଡ଼ିଆ ଭାଷାରେ ଉପଲବ୍ଧ ବିଶାଳତମ ୱେବସାଇଟ । ଓଡ଼ିଆ ଉଇକିପିଡ଼ିଆର ମାସିକ ପାଠକ ୫ ଲକ୍ଷରୁ ଅଧିକ । ବହିର ପାଠ ବହି ବାହାରେ ବ୍ୟବହାର ହେବାରେ ପୁଣି ଟାଇପ କରିବାର ଯେଉଁ ବାଧକ ତା' ଏଥିରେ ନାହିଁ । ମଜାର କଥା ଯେ ଅନେକ ସମୟରେ ବିଭିନ୍ନ ଭାଷାଭାଷୀ ଉଇକିଆଳିଗଣ (ଉଇକିପିଡ଼ିଆର ସମ୍ପାଦକ) ବେଳେବେଳେ ଆପୋଷରେ ଏକ ଆଉଜଣଙ୍କ ଦେଶ-ଭାଷା-ଚଳଣି-ବ୍ୟକ୍ତିତ୍ୱଙ୍କ ସମ୍ବନ୍ଧରେ ଲେଖିବା ଦେଖାଯାଏ । ୨୮୮ରୁ ଅଧିକ ଭାଷାଭାଷୀ ଏମିତି ଅଗଣିତ ଲୋକ ଯେଉଁଠି ମିଶି ଲେଖନ୍ତି ସେଠି ଭାଷାଟିଏ ଯୋଜନଯୋଜନ ଡେଇଁ ଜଗତର କୋଣ ଅନୁକୋଣ କେଡ଼େ ସହଜରେ ପହଞ୍ଚିପାରେ ଏ ତା'ର ଏକ ଉଦାହରଣ । ଓଡ଼ିଆ ଉଇକିପାଠାଗାର: ଆମ ଭାଷାରେ ଏଯାବତ୍‍ କେଇ ଲକ୍ଷ ବହି ଛପାଯାଇସାରିବଣି । ହେଲେ ଏ ସବୁ ବହି କ'ଣ ସଭିଁଏ ପଢ଼ିବାର ସୁଯୋଗ ପାଆନ୍ତି? କାହାପାଖରେ ପାଠାଗାର ଯିବାପାଇଁ ବେଳ ନାହିଁ ତ ହାତପାହାନ୍ତାରେ ବହି ନଥିବାରୁ କିଏ ଓଡ଼ିଆ ଛାଡ଼ି ବାକି ଭାଷାର ଲେଖାପଢ଼ା ଆଦରୁଛି । ଆମ ଭାଷାର ପାଠକ କମିକମି ଯାଉଛନ୍ତି । ସମାଧାନର ପନ୍ଥା କ'ଣ ହୋଇପାରେ? ଆମ ଭାଷା ଖାଲି କ'ଣ ସାହିତ୍ୟ ଆଉ ସାହିତ୍ୟକଙ୍କ ଭାଷା କି ଲୋକମୁଖର କଥିତ ଭାଷା ହୋଇ ରହିଯିବ? ଆଜିର ପିଢ଼ି ପାଖରେ ପହଞ୍ଚôବାଲାଗି ତାକୁ ମନ ପଢ଼ିବାକୁ, ଜିଣିବାକୁ ହେବ । ଏଥି ।ଇଁ ପ୍ରାଥମିକ କାମଟି ହେଲା ବିରଳ ଓ ଛପା ହେଉନଥିବା ଅନେକ ପୁରାତନ ବହି ଇଣ୍ଟରନେଟ ଜରିଆରେ ପାଠକମାନଙ୍କ ନିକଟକୁ ନେବା । ଯଦି ପାଠାଗାରରୁ କୌଣସି କାରଣରୁ ବହିଟି ଚୋରିହୁଏ କି ପୋକ ଖାଇଯାଏ ତା'ହେଲେ ଲେଖକର ଶ୍ରମର ଦେଉଳ ଭୁଶୁଡ଼ି ଡ଼େ । ତାକୁ ସାଇତିବାର ସବୁଠୁ ବଡ଼ ବାଟ ହେଉଛି ଇଣ୍ଟରନେଟ୍‍ । ପୁରୁଣା ଓ ବିରଳ ବହିମାନ ଛପାଇବାରେ ଭୁବନେଶ୍ୱରର ସୃଜନିକା ଅନୁଷ୍ଠାନର କାମ ଏକ ଐତିହାସିକ ପଦକ୍ଷେପ । ୧୮୪୦- ୧୯୪୦ ଭିତରେ ପ୍ରକାଶିତ ପତି୍ରକା, ୨୫ରୁ ଅଧିକ ଅଭିଧାନ ତଥା ପୂର୍ଣ୍ଣଚନ୍ଦ୍ର ଭାଷାକୋଷ ଭଳି ପୋଥିକୁ ମିଶାଇ ୭୪୦ରୁ ଅଧିକ ବହିକୁ ଡିଜିଟାଲ ରୂ ଦେବାରେ ସେମାନଙ୍କ ଅବଦାନ କାହିଁରେ କେତେ । ହେଲେ ଏ ବହିର ଲେଖାସବୁ ଆଉଥରେ ବ୍ୟବହାର ହେବା, ଇଣ୍ଟରନେଟ୍‍ରେ ଖୋଜିପାଇବା ତଥା ମୋବାଇଲ ଆଦିରେ ପଢ଼ିବା ପାଇଁ ଆଉଥରେ ଟାଇପ ହେବା ଜରୁରୀ । ସବୁଯାକ ବହିକୁ ଟାଇପ କରିବା ସମ୍ଭବ ନୁହେଁ, ହେଲେ କିଛିକିଛି ବହି ଧୀରେଧୀରେ ଟାଇପ ହୋଇପାରିବ । ସେ କାମଟି ଅଧୁନା ଓଡ଼ିଆ ଉଇକିାଠାଗାରରେ ଆରମ୍ଭ ହୋଇଛି । ଇଣ୍ଟରନେଟରେ or.wikisosurce.org ରେ ପାଠକେ ଏହାକୁ ଖୋଲି ପଢ଼ିପାରିବେ ଓଡ଼ିଆ ଭାଗବତଠୁ ଆରମ୍ଭ କରି ଭଞ୍ଜ ସାହିତ୍ୟ ଏବଂ ଗୋପବନ୍ଧୁଙ୍କ ପରି ଏ ଯୁଗର ମହାନ ସାହିତ୍ୟିକଙ୍କ ରଚନାବଳୀ । ପ୍ରକଳ୍ପଟି ଅଣଲାଭକାରୀ, ଆଉ କପିରାଇଟ ନଥିବାରୁ ବହି ସବୁ ଖୋଲାରେ ପାଠକଙ୍କ ପାଇଁ ଉପଲବ୍ଧ ।

ଗ୍ଲୋବାଲ ଭଏସେସ: ଉପର ଦୁଇ ପ୍ରକଳ୍ପ ତ ଗଲା ବହିର ରକ୍ଷଣାବେକ୍ଷଣ ଆଉ ଜ୍ଞାନକୋଷ ବା ଏନସାଇକ୍ଲୋପିଡ଼ିଆ ଗଢ଼ିବାର କଥା । ହେଲେ ଘଟୁଥିବା ଘଟଣା ଆଉ ଜନମତର ମହତ ମଧ୍ୟ ଊଣା ନୁହେଁ । ଘଟୁଥିବା ଘଟଣାବଳୀ ଓ ତହିଁରେ ଜନ-ଅଭିମତକୁ ଭରିବା ଲକ୍ଷ୍ୟରେ ଏକ ବିଶ୍ୱବ୍ୟାପୀ ଆନ୍ଦୋଳନ ହେଉଛି ଗ୍ଳୋବାଲ ଭଏସେସ । ସୌଭାଗ୍ୟର କଥା ଯେ ହିନ୍ଦୀ ଓ ବଙ୍ଗଳା ପରେ ଏଥିରେ ୩ୟ ଭାରତୀୟ ଭାଷା ଭାବେ ଓଡ଼ିଆ ସ୍ଥାନୀତ । ଓଡ଼ିଆ ପାଠକଙ୍କ ପାଇଁ ଖବର ବୋଲି ଯାହା ଖବରକାଗଜରେ ଆସେ ତା ବାହାରେ ଘଟୁଥିବା ଘଟଣା ସହ ପରିଚିତ ଲାଭ ପାଇଁ ଏ ଏକ ବଡ଼ ମାଧ୍ୟମ ହୋଇପାରେ । ଏହା or.globalvoicesonline.org ରେ ଉପଲବ୍ଧ । ଏ ମଧ୍ୟ ଏକ ସ୍ୱେଚ୍ଛାସେବୀ ପରିଚାଳିତ ପ୍ରକଳ୍ପ ଯାହାର ଦୁଆର ଭାଷା ଦକ୍ଷତା ଥିବା ଲେଖକଙ୍କ ପାଇଁ ଖୋଲା ।

Click to read a copy of the original article published by the Samaja here

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/openness/blog-old/op-ed-samaja-jan-2015

Poesis in the Information Age: Language and its Limit[ation]s

praskrishna — 2015-01-26T13:57:34Z

Alec Schachner, an independent scholar, translator, multi-genre musician and sound artist will give a talk on the limits/limitations of languages at the Centre for Internet & Society's office on January 30, 2015 at 5 p.m.

The Talk

An examination of the limits/limitations of language(s) through the lens of contemporary Vietnamese poetics and print culture, aiming to open a deeper dialogue on the nature of self/state expression and censorship in the age of internet connectivity.

Alec Schachner

Alec graduated from Columbia College with a degree in Sociocultural Anthropology, English & Comparative Literature, Creative Writing and Music Theory/Composition. Alec currently resides in Vietnam, where he has served as lecturer on literature for 5 years with the Faculty of English Linguistics and Literature at the Vietnam National University of Social Sciences and Humanities HCMC. He is working on English translations of several anthologies of Vietnamese poetry, one of which - the purification festival in April - just went to print across VN earlier this month. He is also pursuing research into contemporary Saigonese print culture and the social/cyber mileus surrounding literary circles/movements in the post-Socialist cultural sphere.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/a2k/events/poesis-in-the-information-age

Musician donates Gwalior Gharana songs to free e-library

praskrishna — 2015-01-22T15:25:49Z

A few years ago, Mumbai-based musician Neela Bhagwat realized that her old notebooks filled with lyrics and notations of age-old 'bandishes' were in tatters. Afraid that she might lose them forever, Bhagwat decided to make fresh copies.

The article by Sandhya Soman was published in the Times of India on January 20, 2015. T. Vishnu Vardhan gave his inputs.

Once she wrote it all down, Bhagwat handed over the notebooks to a team to upload her collection of around 330 bandishes of the Gwalior gharana to a free, online library.

"I was always keen on sharing the compositions with others. Digitization is the way to go as it can be accessed from anywhere," says Bhagwat. Based on her notebooks, around 337 bandishes have been converted to PDF format by student and music researcher Tejaswini Niranjana. "I will be uploading them soon to Wikisource, which is one of the platforms of Wikipedia," says Niranjana.

Bhagwat and a few other music-lovers like her are taking up digital archiving projects to preserve India's cultural heritage without any institutional support or grant. "I have about 337 bandishes, my guru had more than 1,000 and his guru would've had still more. So much has got lost now," says Bhagwat. Even if she is willing to teach, few are able to understand, internalize and work on these classical compositions. "No student of mine has learnt all of it. So I thought it best to keep them in the public domain," says Bhagwat.

Along with music students, scholars also find these projects helpful.

For example, Andhra Pradesh-based lexicographer Peddi Sambasiva Rao has created a master index of all the compositions of Annamacharya for Telugu Wikisource recently. Now, he is in the process of digitizing the lyrics of all the 15,000 songs of the 15th century composer along with a fellow enthusiast. "Carnatic music lovers find it difficult to locate individual songs as there are 29 volumes of Annamacharya's works. Instead of publishing the index as a book, I thought of approaching Wikipedia, which is known to everyone," says Rao.

As the index is in Unicode, the standard text encoding format, the Telugu kirtanas will soon come up on search engines, says T Vishnu Vardhan, programme director, Access to Knowledge, CIS, which helped host these projects. "By June, we hope to have the entire Annamacharya kirtanas at a single source and eventually do the same for the songs of the Gwalior Gharana. This is the only way to make our cultural heritage accessible to future generations," says Vardhan.

Bhagwat says cultural and educations institutions should take the lead in digital archiving as the benefits are multi-fold. Once the bandishes are online, Bhagwat's students abroad will have the text along with the DVDs that she has brought out. "By the second or third Skype lesson, they would've learnt it," says Bhagwat.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/openness/news/the-times-of-india-january-20-2015-sandhya-soman-musician-donates-gwalior-gharana-songs-to-free-e-library

National IPR Policy Series : The Development of the National IPR Policy

nehaa — 2015-01-22T00:48:33Z

This is the first blog post in a series of posts on India's National IPR Policy. In this post, CIS intern, Varnika Chawla traces the evolution of the National IPR Policy.

Significant changes have been implemented in the Intellectual Property regime of India since India's accession to TRIPS in 1995. This post details the timeline of the development of Intellectual Property law in India, highlighting the discourse around the formulation of a National IPR Policy. The author has also looked at the formulation of IP Strategies in different nations across the world, summarized in the infographic, observing that the trend for the same is very recent and has only emerged over the last decade.

"Intellectual Property Right is a private right recognized within the territory of a country and assigned to an individual or individuals for a specified period of time in return for making public, the results of their creativity and innovation." India has a well-established and comprehensive legislative, judicial and administrative framework for intellectual property. The decade of 2010-2020 was declared as the Decade of Innovation, with an objective of expanding the space for dialogue for inclusive growth. With the emergence of globalization, the Indian society has become more knowledge-intensive giving rise to rapid development in the field of information technology and consequently intellectual property, thereby increasing the role of the legislature as well as the judiciary to protect and promote intellectual property rights.

India gained membership of the World Trade Organization in 1995. This membership initiated a new round of revisions resulting in the upheaval of the Indian intellectual property system. All IP legislations were hereby required to comply with the provisions of the TRIPS Agreement by 2000, with the exception of the Patents Act, which had an extended time limit to be compliant till 2005.

The Indian system of intellectual property rights is designed in a manner to ensure the protection of intellectual property while maintaining a balance between rights and obligations. There are several legislations which deal with the protection of intellectual property in India. These include thePatents Act, 1970, the Trade Marks Act, 1999, theGeographical Indications of Goods (Registration and Protection) Act, 1999, the Semiconductor Integrated Circuits Layout Design Act, 2000, the Competition Act, 2002 as well as theBiological Diversity Act, 2002. India is also thefirst country to ratify theMarrakesh Treaty, 2013 for access to copyright works for visually impaired persons. India also recently acceded to the Madrid Protocol in 2013.

National IP Strategy and the Role of WIPO

A National IP strategy has been defined by WIPO as "a vehicle for creating better functional linkages between the national economic objectives, development priorities and resources, and the IP system of the country concerned."[1] It is therefore a set of policy measures undertaken by governments in order to facilitate the proper use of IP as a strategic tool, for economic, social, cultural and technological development.[2] WIPO also gave the framework of the planning process each country should implement, in its efforts to adopt an IP strategy. As per this, the process is divided into four main stages:

Government initiative
Establishment of a National IP Strategy Formulation Committee
Presentation of draft strategy before stakeholders
Government approval of National IP Strategy,[3]

WIPO can assist in the formulation of a National IP Strategy by advising the governments as well as providing technical expertise during the planning process and providing support and assistance as and when required.[4]

India's National IPR Strategy

Realizing the significance of having a strong and well-balanced IP system in the emerging economy of India, several initiatives have been undertaken by the Department of Industrial Policy & Promotion at the policy level to create an environment conducive for the development of intellectual property and technology. Accordingly, a draft for the National IPR Strategy, outlining a set of measures and guidelines to encourage and facilitate the effective creation, protection, management and commercialization of IP for accelerating economic, social, cultural and technological development and for enhancing enterprise competitiveness prepared by the Sectoral Innovation Council on IPR was released by DIPP on September 26, 2012, inviting views from various stakeholders. It was felt that the National IP Strategy needs to be developed in a manner such that it is integrated with the overall national plan for development in order for better cooperation with IP components of specific and targeted national strategies in areas such as trade and investment, education, food and agriculture, science and technology etc.

Subsequently, a revised draft for the National IPR Strategy in India was released on July 21, 2014, detailing a vision statement, objectives and means to achieve the same.

The DIPP constituted an IPR Think Tank , as notified on November 13, 2014, in order to draft the National Intellectual Property Rights Policy and to advise DIPP on IPR-related issues. Finally, a First Draft of the National IPR Policy was submitted by the IPR Think Tank on December 19, 2014 , inviting comments and suggestions from all stakeholders on or before January 30, 2015.

National IP Strategies: Around the World

WIPO Member States adopted 45 recommendations at the 2007 General Assembly, made by the Provisional Committee on Proposals Related to a WIPO Development Agenda. This also included Member States setting up "appropriate national strategies in the field of intellectual property." These recommendations were identified for immediate and effective implementation, resulting in countries beginning to adopt the same, with the objective of promoting and enforcing IP rights. The info-graphic below highlights the formulation of IP Strategies in Member States around the world.

China announced its "National Intellectual Property Strategic Principles" in June, 2008. Japan established its "Intellectual Property Strategy Headquarters" in 2003, and its Intellectual Property Strategic Program in 2004, while USA legislated the " Prioritizing Resources and Organization for Intellectual Property Act" in 2008. Furthermore, the Presidential Advisory Council on Education, Science and Technology in Korea announced the " Strategy for Intellectual Property System Constructing Plan" on June 27, 2006, consisting of three aspects: Creation and Application, Law and Regulation, and Infrastructure. The European Union has adopted a " Strategy for the Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights in Third Countries", aimed at evaluating the recent major changes that have taken place in the international IP arena, preparing to meet the challenges in an effective manner. Finland adopted " The Government's Resolution on the Strategy Concerning Intellectual Property Rights " on March 26, 2009. Therefore, it is observed that the trend of National IP Strategies has only started recently, in the last decade.

Therefore we see the emerging need of an all-encompassing IP Policy arising in nations around the world, aimed at promoting a holistic environment conducive to the development of Intellectual Property.

[1] WIPO's Contribution to the Elaboration and Implementation of Strategies and National Plans for the Development of IP and Innovation , WTO Strategic Planning Workshop, Geneva, Switzerland, June 13, 2014.

[2] Id .

[3] Id .

[4] Id.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/the-development-of-the-national-ipr-policy

Beyond Alcohol and Angel Investors: Building Business Models in an Age of Mobile Music Streaming (Conference Learnings)

maggie — 2015-02-23T12:39:36Z

This blog post is the first of a series of blogs to document, synthesize, and analyze learnings from attending various music industry trade conferences. This first post introduces the research question, and highlights learnings about the various business models which can be accessible via the mobile, and broadly how the music industry is attempting to respond to monetization challenges.

Introduction

The Pervasive Technologies: Access to Knowledge in the Marketplace project is conducting research on access to the mobile phone hardware, software, and content in the context of the intellectual property regimes in India and China. This chapter focuses on access to music content via the mobile phone in India with a particular focus on copyright law.

Following preliminary research, it was identified that the copyright organizing institutions in India lacked legitimacy amongst stakeholders within the music industry. For the purposes of this research, these institutions include the Copyright Act, the Copyright Board, and the copyright societies. Collectively, these institutions have received constitutionality petitions, corruption allegations, and critiques of overall ineffectiveness in regulating and balancing music copyright for the maximal benefit to society. This is of particular importance in light of new modes of digital music distribution technologies (such as mobile phones, and music streaming platforms) which have resulted in a tremendous increase in music consumption but simultaneous decrease in revenue. This is in part due to new business models for music streaming services, and the increasing complexity of music copyright and licensing management in the digital content industries.

1) How have evolving music distribution technologies accessible via the mobile phone impacted business models and licensing practices amongst stakeholders in the digital music industry?

2) What are the specific copyright challenges for each stakeholder in the digital music distribution chain? How can the copyright institutions provide for a more effective regulation and regulation of music in India?

The research methodology1 includes a series of expert interviews whose participants were identified by attending the following key music industry trade conferences in India, and remotely attending in the relevant conferences abroad:

1) 6th MixRadio Music Connects Conference in Mumbai ("MRMC")2

2) The Exchange UK Conference ("Exchange")

3) Indiearth Independent Music, Film, and Media Xchange Conference ("Indiearth XChange")

4) Future of Music Coalition Policy Summit (remote attendance) ("FMC")3

5) San Francisco Music Tech Summit (remote attendance) ("SFMT")4

This first post will highlight learnings from the above conferences5, primarily to respond to the question: What business models for digital music distribution exist in the market today? How is music production financed today? The question of how each industry stakeholder is responding to monetization challenges will also be explored. The main findings documented are mainly sourced from the MRMC and IndiEarth Xchange conferences due to their focus on India and its unique, context-specific challenges.

"India should stop chasing and build business models. We are already ahead... being a mobile-first market... now must lead by learning from our rich cousins - the film and television industry. " - Sridhar Subramaniam, CEO, Sony Music India⁶

Business models and monetization seemed to be the key buzz words at the 6th annual MixRadio Music Conference held in Mumbai, with industry veteran Sridhar Subramaniam, CEO Of Sony Music India giving the opening keynote speech 'How the Industry Stands Today?'. Despite Vijay Lazarus, Secretary of the Indian Music Industry preceding the keynote with a welcome speech warning of piracy as the biggest barrier to monetization. Subramaniam seemed much more optimistic, declaring 2016 as the 'year of music' despite a 10% decline in the former year due to decreased subscription in c first aller ring-back tunes 7. This was in part due to his belief that India was ahead of the game -- being a mobile-market amidst a global trend of mobile music convergence through streaming-based music consumption. Given India's increasing preference for music access in this form, Subramaniam suggested India "stop chasing and build business models" via learning from the music industry's two rich cousins -- the television and film industry.

Subramaniam outlined a strategic plan for growing the 200 million dollar music industry up to a billion in 5 years. He explained how the music industry is positioned where the TV industry was 5 years ago - giving content away for free via ad-supported revenues. This is due to the popular "freemium" business model for music streaming, which allows users to listen to music for "free" (data-consuming, supported by advertisements), with an option to upgrade to a paid tier.

Given recently overlapping ecosystems - standalone music services, device-embedded music services, and operator-supported music services - the question was whether there was enough advertising based revenue to sustain this cluttered industry. In three years, Subramaniam predicted moving from predominantly pirate-consumed music, to ad-supported to a consumer-paid revenue model.

This transition would be done via learning from the film industry through a technique called windowing. This is when the same content is released through multiple windows - for film, this is done first in a theatre, then via home video, then television, then broadcast TV. For the music industry, monetization could occur via exclusives, recommendations, personalization, quality, or regional restrictions; holding some kind of premium content behind a paid wall. This strategy according to Subramaniam's estimates could reach the billion dollar mark in 3 years with the goal of transitioning the 200 million pirated market, to 75 million ad supported, to 25 million subscribers.

" For the first time we have access [to music] from not just one, two, but three ecosystems - standalone music services, device embedded music services, and operator-supported music services." - Sridhar Subramaniam

Following the forward thinking strategy for future business models, the rest of MRMC's panels brought the conversation back to current services and ecosystems of standalone, device-embedded, and operator-supported music services. This increasingly crowded space, along with new international entrants makes the mapping of upcoming services extremely difficult. Nevertheless, the diversity of these services were attempted to be represented at MRMC, with "standalones" like streaming services Gaana, Hungama Australian-based Guvera, and RDIO (which acquired former Indian service Dhingana), along with download stores like Indian-based independent platforms OKListen, Songdew, and Insync. "Device-embedded" services were represented by Samsung with its MilkMusic service, and formerly Microsoft/Nokia owned MixRadio (which has been recently acquired by LINE messaging app8). Lastly, "operator supported" platforms was represented by Bharti Airtel who introduced their new Wynk app, only fully accessible for Airtel telecom subscribers. Multinational content aggregator Believe Digital also was present, providing insight on how the back-end aggregation of content works. A question from the audience inquiring about how to get ones' music onto the various platforms revealed content aggregators' main value -- providing smaller labels and independent artists the ability to ensure their content is distributed widely across multiple platforms.

Although the MRMC panel Streaming: Gathering Momentum hosted a variety of different streaming services, it seemed that there is increasingly less differentiation. Services like user-tracking playlist curation and recommendation, social media-inspired tagging, mood-based suggestions, friend-based recommendations, temporary offline downloads, and more were all being adopted in various forms. Business models of initial free-to-use/access with premium pricing for ad removal and full-on downloads were also becoming a standard across platforms. Some services prioritized specific stakeholders, like Guvera who described their advertiser/brand focused approach through brand play-list curation to target to certain music users.

The Global Music and Mobile panel at the San Francisco Music Tech Summit ("SFMT") highlighted challenges for music applications, with Kathleen McMahon, Vice-President at SoundHound noting the challenge of merely staying relevant in the app store, in part due to the decreasing differentiation with other services. In the streaming ecosystem, a variety of music consumption options are increasingly available through a singular platform (i.e. Hungama enabling on line streaming, download of songs, and purchase of ring-tunes). Given the principle product - the music itself - is the same, the differentiator is marked in part by the user interface, and perhaps more significantly, by price differentiation.

Panelists also spoke of interesting licensing challenges, one being the complexity of differing rates between web-streaming verses mobile streaming, wifi-data transfer, verses 3G access. This copyright challenge was also exemplified when a panelist lamented on the challenges of licensing in various geographic territories, asking "Should I be able to listen to my Spotify subscription wherever I go? Is this not possible purely because of rights and not technology? Do borders even make sense anymore?" These specific challenges will be discussed in an upcoming post highlighting copyright and licensing challenges, but it is worth mentioning here as a barrier to potential technological innovation and ultimately success and survival of these platforms.

" [MCNs are] the new age record label...except far more equitable and less exploitative." - Samir Bhanghra, Managing Director and Co-Founder, Qyuki ⁹

Despite the increasing competition and services, one particular streaming platform which need not be concerned is the audio-video streaming service YouTube, which has a reach of 1 billion consumers, averaging to a viewership of 450billion mins per month 10. Framed as the new broadcast company for user-uploaded content, this viewership directly translates into advertising revenue for the platform, with brands sponsoring specific content creators ("YouTubers") themselves. An interesting new stakeholder which is in part facilitating this phenomena are multi-channel networks ("MCNs"), who was represented in the MRMC Indian MCNs panel by MCNs Qyuki, Digital Quotient, Ping Network and YouTubers All India Bakchod. The MCNs described their business model as a relationship-service, which acts as an aggregator and optimizer of various YouTube channels. With back-end analytics and advertising strategies, MCNs aim to optimize monetization opportunities by focusing on maximizing CPM (clicks per impression) and identifying brand sponsors. Despite the seemingly disruptive service, Tammay Bhat of All India Bakchod was skeptical about the need for such service, asking "How will an MCN actually help me get more money and sustain? As a creator, brands are coming directly. They are so accessible and it's not that difficult. Perhaps it could help smaller creators but..."

Smaller creators and independent artists was definitely one of the target clientele for Qyuki. Samir Bhangra, co-founder of MCN Qyuki's held workshop They Say You Can Monetize Content Digitally - Really? at the IndiEarth Xchange ("the Xchange") independent music film, and media trade conference. He appealed to the independent artists by illustrating the potential reach of the one billion YouTube viewers, and explained some useful back-end analytics which can allow for more strategic and effective monetization. According to Bhangra, the CPM in India is about 1Rs per view, with the possibility of doubling or tripling this if viewed in the United States. Qyuki in particular sought to optimize monetization through ad-funded support (via CPM and brand sponsorship), payment via the MCN themselves for content creation, and 'forward integration' through increasing demand for live and digital gigs through increasing regular viewers. Bhangra even went as far as hailing Qyuki and MCNs as the "new age record label" which would allow content creators full creative control.

"Well, I support piracy so..." - Sohail Arora, Founder, KRUNK¹¹

For independent artists, social media tools like YouTube, Facebook, and other direct-to-fan digital services are of even greater importance considering the relative lack of accessibility to mass-media marketing power. In the XChange workshop Driving Your Career with Social Media, Sohail Arora, founder of booking agency and general artist management company KRUNK focused on search-engine optimization strategies for various social media platforms This included tips such as tagging influencers via social media, strategic timings of content posting, unique release and distribution of music, diversity in content posts, suggestions for increased fan engagement, and more.

The rise of new technologies seem to have brought an increased role and importance to not just social media tools, but also artists managers as well to utilize these services effectively as one of their duties. This new role and its various responsibilities was highlighted by the The Exchange Music Trade Conference ("the Exchange") in the panel The Role of Artist Management Agencies. Considering the diversity of distribution options available, and the difficulty of controlling content usage once released, I asked artist manager Arora for his thoughts on some musicians' strategies of giving away free music downloads. He responded by stressing that freely giving away music was an essential marketing tool for his artists. The ability to download and share would in turn translate to an increased number of fans, quantifiable, measurable social media support (via "likes" and "follows"), and subsequently increased ticket sales, attendance for live shows, and brand sponsorship. This perspective resulted in an interesting conversation/debate with the audience, one member of whom was Marti Bharath, producer/composer of electronic act Sapta who believed that giving away music for free led to piracy, and a devaluation of music. In response, Arora unashamedly stated that he supported piracy, which temporarily halted that conversation during the time-crunched presentation.

" Independent Music is... anything that is not Bollywood" - Nikhil Udupa - MTV Indies. "If you liked it, good. If you didn't, not my problem" - Verhnon Ibrahim, Consultant¹²

Despite the numerous social media tools and online opportunities available for self-promotion, the reach of mass media and its role as a marketing tool was not forgotten amongst the independent music scene.

In the Making Space for Culture panel, an interesting conversation arose on what it meant to be an "independent" artist. It seems that it boiled down to those who were mostly unconnected to the larger institutional support of the music industry like major labels and traditional media -- radio, newspapers, magazines, and television. On the one hand, there was a sense of ambivalence as to whether or not their work would ever appeal to the tastes of the masses. One panelist had asked - would popularization of a certain artist or music remove the label of being "independent"? Nikhil Udupa of MTV Music defined independent music in India as anything that was not Bollywood, due to its dominance in the Indian music market and overall appeal to the masses. Music industry veteran Verhnon Ibrahim conveyed the notion of an independent artist by expressing the somewhat indifference to likeability when reflecting on his days while in a heavy metal band: "If you liked it, good. If you didn't, not my problem". He seemed to imply that appeal to the masses was essentially irrelevant, and almost more revered due to a sense of being able to maintain artistic integrity and authenticity.

The title of the panel itself - Making Space for Culture - was interesting, seemingly alluding to the opinion that mass-consumed, popular music was perhaps not as "cultured" . The main grievance and topic of conversation was that independent music, film, and media did not receive adequate airtime space on traditional media - television, radio, and even print. This premise was probably the only agreement during the panel, as conversation soon evolved to heated debates on whether media created trends or merely picked up on them; and whether there was lack of quality independent content for full-time curation of independent channels, a sentiment expressed by Nikhil Udupa from MTV Indies. This panel's conversation also touched upon a sense of entitlement which independent artists held, in which audience member Guru Somayji of Bangalore-venue CounterCulture expressed his agreement. This echoed the comment from an audience member earlier in the day who stated "musicians do not deserve to be paid... venue spaces do not deserve to make money. There is no entitlement. You only make money when people are breaking down the door to listen to you."

Amidst a crowd of independent musicians and artists hoping to devote their lives to creating their art in a financially feasible way, there was an understandably ill response from the audience. The main criticism was the lack of broadcasters' efforts in finding quality content, and allowing independents a chance to perform in large venues and mass media channels. Verhnon Ibrahim, consultant and industry expert on the Making Space for Culture Panel attempted to explain that radio, television, and other traditional forms of media and communication was a mass-market game, whose purpose was to ultimately to sell ads. He cited radio's high cost of royalty payments to explain the need to curate for the majority so advertisers will get the most reach. Ibrahim stressed the need to demonstrate quantifiable forms of "deserving" - number of Facebook likes, YouTube views etc. to demonstrate virality and fan following, so the media would have to pick up on ones' popularity.

"It's public knowledge that vast sums of money in royalties have not been collected... [due to a] situation of buying out rights, but even labels and rights holders say hundreds of thousands of pounds are not making their way back." - Terry Mardi, Managing Director, Asian Music Publishing¹³

Although several independent musicians raised grievances about the lack of avenues to perform in, and the reoccurring problem of being paid on time, there seemed to be a hesitancy when discussing business strategies and the challenges of copyright due to technological innovation. In the independent space, this was anecdotally demonstrated by one panelists' response when asked about the impact of technology on the distribution strategies for their art, and on financial returns for their livelihood. He responded: "Those are two separate things... one is about making money and making a living. The other is about making an art form. These are two separate things." Within the larger industry conference MRMC, there seemed to be a lack of representation by musicians and content creators. Yet, one particularly vocal audience member, and later panel member of the UK Exchange was Terry Mardi, Managing Director of Asian Music Publishing. Numerous times throughout both conferences, he raised the controversial issue of missing royalty payments in India, and the absence of royalty collection and distribution by unregistered copyright societies IPRS and PPL. In MRMC, this issue was ever so briefly touched upon in a panel when Bollywood playback singer Natalie Di Luccio who's worked closely with A.R. Rahman mentioned that she had never received a contract outlining her rights and her royalty dues. Although there was very little curated conversation about this issue, coffee breaks demonstrated a clear gravitation towards those vocal and concerned about the issue, while many stakeholders, particularly the few musicians in the room seemed to find this a significant gap in voices not heard and expressed in MRMC. At IndiEarth, Vivek Ragpolan, representative of the Music Composers Association of India briefly commented as an audience member about the need to take collective action regarding composers and overall musicians' rights, stressing the importance of independent artists also being included within the new provisions of the Copyright Amendment Act. Though this issue of royalty licensing will be reviewed in a future post, this brief mention demonstrates the challenge of monetization and livelihood at multiple levels -- significantly for content creators, but also for the music platforms themselves.

"It seems like the pricing model is wrong... it's the only way to explain the drop in revenue" - Tarun Malik, Apps & Content Strategy, Samsung ¹⁴

Across different platforms, panels, conferences, and countries, one particular question seemingly common to all was that of price points band business model viability. Tarun Malik, Apps & Content Strategy of Samsung in Biggies Give Their View commented on the growth of the industry. Despite an increase in overall consumption, he noted - "It seems like the pricing model is wrong...it is the only way to explain the drop in revenue". Atul Charumani, formerly Head of Content with OnMobile and currently Managing Director of Turnkey Music stated that "in no other industry where the content is produced at such a high cost, is the product given away for free." In the Global Mobile and Music Panel at the San Francisco Music Tech Summit, the moderator asked a panel of music distribution service providers - "What is the value of music? Does music have intrinsic value at this point? Or is it just how it is presented?" In response, Dean Bolte, Managing Director of Omniphone expressed that the value of music was different for every person, and that some people were willing to pay more for access than others. The priority is to ensure that those who value music more have the opportunity to express through payment, since anything was better than zero. Beyond competition between music service apps, Bolte noted that the competition for funds also occurred across app categories, noting a generation of youth conditioned to acquire music for free through Napster, yet pay for additional levels in games. He closed the panel with the insight that "the product needs to be better than the sword".

The targeting of youth and young adults was also conveyed by the somewhat surprising pervasiveness of brands, who had a larger than anticipated presence for a music industry conference. The UK Exchange demonstrated the potential of partnerships in its Brands & Music - When They Combine Forces panel. MRMC panel The Brand Sponsor also invited the Taj hotel (who seem like an unlikely sponsor) an opportunity to express its interest in supporting the discovery of new talent. Aditya Swami from MTV & MTV Indies said that brands can communicate through music, and create conversations with their consumers. Subramaniam, CEO of Sony Music mentioned the importance of funding through brands and advertising in the MRMC keynote How the Industry Stands Today, while IndiEarth's Taking it Live panel opened the day with a conversation about live venues seeking sponsorship from alcohol, clothing and other 'lifestyle' companies. Even the MCNs in the MRMC Indian MCNs panel discussed one of its main services as the securing of brand sponsorship.

"Independent music in India would not exist if it weren't for alcohol sponsorships" - Tej Brar, Artist Manager, Only Much Louder ¹⁵

Music platform MixRadio, the title sponsor of MRMC was an understandably suitable partner, since it closely correlated to the main music product. Yet, particularly in India, it soon became apparent that alcohol brands have a very significant role in financing the music industry. This was highlighted when liquor-brand Bacardi received an award during MRMC for 'excellent brand association'. It was later learned in an interview that liquor and cigarette brands are not legally able to advertise in India, hence the popularity of alcohol sponsorships for live music festivals, venues, and club nights. Tej Brar, EDM Artist Manager for Only Much Louder believed that independent music would not exist in India if it weren't for alcohol brands. This is an interesting phenomenon considering just a decade ago, the idea of synchronizing ones' music with a corporate brand would be akin to "selling out". However, in today's increasingly digital world, especially in India where non-film musicians don't have much of a presence, brand sponsorship is one of the main 'monetization strategies' for music production. The last important significant financier to mention are investors, showcased in the MRMC panel Of All Things Finance. These "angel investors" play an instrumental role in backing many of the technology start-ups and other streaming services while experimenting with various business models. Yet whether these investment decisions are one that would reap sustainable returns is still a question to be answered.

Conclusion

It seems in this mobile first market, India has the opportunity to lead the way in developing business models that grow the industry through multi-tiered windowing of music streaming. Strategically, in an ecosystem still rampant with piracy, moving consumers towards legal access to music can facilitate new sources of revenue. This opportunity has also given rise to new intermediaries like YouTube and multi-channel networks. time will tell whether their contribution will legitimately grow the industry or simply take away more pieces of what seems to be a shrinking profit pie. Independent artists are able to use new direct-to-fan distribution platforms such as YouTube, amongst others to share their works. Yet, it is clear that the sustenance of a livelihood off of digital sales and distribution is extremely difficult. It is interesting to note that the bulk of financing for music seems to be trending towards live shows and brand sponsorship. However, despite increase in digital music consumption, the distribution of the revenue needs to be further studied and understood. Given the ease of replication, this will require a further in-depth understanding of licensing and copyright management in India today.

1 See the research methodology here: http://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/copyright-management-in-age-of-mobile-music last accessed Jan 22, 2015

2 All of the panels from this conference can be found online here: http://musicconnects.indiantelevision.com/y2k14/videos.php last accessed Jan 20^th 2015

3 See here for the IndiEarth website: http://www.xchange14.indiearth.com/ last accessed Jan 20 ^th 2015

4 Watch and/or listen to the Future of Music Coalition panels here:https://futureofmusic.org/events/future-music-summit-2014 last acccesed Jan 19 ^th 2014

5 All data in this solely from public conference panels; including quotes, etc. Does not include any individual interview data.

6 As quoted from the MixRadio Music Connects Keynote panel:

7 Though it was not mentioned in the speech, it is useful to understand the initail demand for CRBTs was not necessarily genuine, for the fall in revenue was due to the crackdown by the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India to prevent false billing by telecom and value-added-service providers.

8 See http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2014/12/19/messaging-app-lines-first-acquisition-music-streaming-service-mixradio/

9 As heard in the MixMusic Radio Connects panel Indian MCNs on Nov 5^th 2014

10 According to Samir Bhangra in MixRadio Music Connects' Indian MCNs panel on Nov 5^th 2014

11 As heard at the IndiEarth Xchange conference in the Driving Your Career with Social Media panel on Dec 5^th 2014

12 Stated at IndiEarth Xchange Conference in the Making Space for Culture panel on Dec 4^th 2014

13 As heard at UK The Exchange Submerge conference on Nov 7^th 2014

14 As stated on the MixRadio Music Connects panel Crystal Ball Gazing: Bigges Give Their View on Nov 5^th 2014

15 In a conversation at the IndiEarth Music Xchange Conference on Dec 5^th, 2014

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/beyond-alcohol-and-angel-investors

Seventh Global Intellectual Property Convention

praskrishna — 2015-02-12T16:59:01Z

The Seventh Global IP Convention took place in Mumbai from January 15 to 17, 2015. Rohini Lakshané attended the event.

Agenda

Time	Detail
08.00 09.00	Registration
09.00 10.30	Inaugural Session (Majestic I & II)
10.30 11.00	Coffee Break and Networking Session
11.00 12.30	Plenary Session I: Power of IP: Gateway to Growth (Majestic I & II)
12.30 13.30	Lunch Break & Networking Session
13.30 15.30	Technical Session: I, II & III
15.30 16.00	Coffee Break and Networking Session
16.00 18.00	Technical Session: IV, V & VI

For more info on the event, click here.

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

Centre should partner local communities in 'Digital India': Expert

praskrishna — 2015-01-16T02:34:54Z

The central government needs to partner communities at the grassroots level and integrate the country's vernacular component to make the Digital India initiative a success, an expert said here Friday.

The blog entry originally published by IANS was mirrored in Zee News on January 9, 2015. T.Vishnu Vardhan was quoted.

"Whatever money it (Centre) is spending on culture, heritage conservation and preservation etc., it is always a very centralised activity.

"It is very, very essential to partner local communities," T. Vishnu Vardhan, programme director (Access to Knowledge), The Centre For Internet and Society, Bengaluru, told IANS here.

Vardhan was attending the 10th anniversary celebrations of Athe Bengali Wikimedia community at the Jadavpur University here.

Aiming to turn the country into a digitally empowered society and knowledge economy, the Narendra Modi government has envisaged the Rs.1 lakh crore Digital India project.

Global IT giant Microsoft and Google have offered to help with the programme.

Vardhan said that while going forward with the project, the Centre must integrate the vernacular components. Else it will be restricted to Delhi and metro cities. Access to culture on digitised platforms should not be limited, he observed.

"The current government talks about Digital India. But when you talk about digital India, the key thing that one needs to take into consideration is not the India but the Bharat -- the vernacular imagination of India, the regional imagination of India.

"Otherwise whatever grand plans they have will only be limited to Delhi and other metropolitan cities," said Vardhan.

He suggested that the central government take note of examples like Wikipedia's regional language domains to further the Digital India project.

"Wikipedia or wikisource where you put up the original prints source in digitised form and make it searchable... these are the examples that the government should look at because these are done with the help of local volunteers who come from the remotest regions," said Vardhan.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/openness/news/zee-news-january-9-2015-centre-should-partner-local-communities-in-digital-india

January 2015 Bulletin

praskrishna — 2015-02-26T17:02:23Z

Our newsletter for the month of January can be accessed below.

The Centre for Internet & Society (CIS) welcomes you to the first issue of the newsletter (January 2015). Archives of our newsletters can be accessed at: http://cis-india.org/about/newsletters.

Highlights

Forbes India in an article titled “Minds that (should) matter” names Sunil Abraham as one of the Thinkers who best explain a rapidly-changing India to the world (and the world to India).

Subhashish Panigrahi won the 2015 Opensource.com Community Awards under the category 'People's Choice Awards'.
Sumandro Chattapadhyay has joined CIS team as Research Director. Sumandro has replaces Nishant Shah who stepped down from the position.
Rishika on behalf of CIS prepared an analysis of the disability exceptions in Copyright Legislations . The blog post provides in detail the country-wise exceptions in copyright legislations.
NVDA team conducted a training programme on Malayalam eSpeak with NVDA in Thiruvananthapuram on January 24 and 25, 2015. Chakshumathi's main trainer Akhil M. took eSpeak Malayalam classes and Dr. Homiyar took classes on NVDA and accessible equipment.
The Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion, Government of India invited comments on the First Draft of India's National IPR Policy. CIS made its submission.
As part of the Pervasive Technologies project, Nehaa Chaudhari has produced a research methodology document which maps the existing literature around questions of competition law intersecting with intellectual property law on the specific issue of enabling access to sub hundred dollar mobile devices .
Maggie Huang, an intern at CIS as part of the Pervasive Technologies project has written a blog entry which documents, synthesizes, and analyses learnings from attending various music industry trade conferences.

CIS-A2K team on December 28, 2014 organized a MediaWiki hackathon event for Telugu Wikimedia community members to enhance their skills and understanding of technical matters related to MediaWiki usage. The theme of the workshop was “Mediawiki, its extensions and tools to work around” and it aimed at allowing Wikipedians to use MediaWiki tools more effectively.

Subhashish Panigrahi authored an op-ed that highlights the need for taking Odia language to the international fora instead of keeping it confined in the books. The op-ed was published in the Samaja on January 30, 2015.

A journal article by Subbiah Arunachalam, Perumal Ramamoorthi and Subbiah Gunasekaran the steps taken by scientists and librarians in the West to reclaim ease of access to research findings with what is happening in India along with a few suggestions was published by the Indian National Science Academy Journals.
The Supreme Court, in Sabu George v. Union of India and Ors. (WP (C) 341/2008), is looking into the presence of material regarding pre-natal sex determination on search engines such as Google, Bing, and Yahoo that has been falling foul of section 22 of the Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques Act, 1994 as amended in 2002. Geeta Hariharan and Balaji Subramanian analyse this in their blog post.
As part of its Making Methods for Digital Humanities project, CIS-RAW organized two consultations on new figures of learning in the digital context. For a proposed journal issue on the theme of 'bodies of knowledge' which draws upon these conversations, participants were invited to write short sketches on these figures of learning. Tejas Pande wrote an abstract which examines the figure of the visual designer, and emerging practices of mapmaking.

Accessibility and Inclusion

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

NVDA and eSpeak

Monthly Update

January 2015 Report (Suman Dogra; January 31, 2015).

Event Organized

Training of Malayalam eSpeak with NVDA (Co-organized by CIS, DAISY Forum of India and Chakshumathi Assistive Technology Centre; Thiruvananthapuram; January 24-25, 2015).

Other

Blog Entries

Response to RTI Applications from Different States on Accessibility (Anandhi Viswanathan; January 31, 2015).

Access to Knowledge

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

Pervasive Technologies

As part of the Pervasive Technologies project, Maggie Huang conducted interviews with fabless semiconductor industry professionals in Taiwan. The findings from the samples are highlighted in four part series. The third and fourth parts have been published:

Blog Entries

Pervasive Technologies Project Working Document Series: Document 2 Literature Review on Competition Law + IPR + Access to < $100 Mobile Devices (Nehaa Chaudhari; January 1, 2015).
Relationship between App Developers and App Platforms: An Intellectual Property Perspective (Anubha Sinha; January 7, 2015).
Beyond Alcohol and Angel Investors: Building Business Models in an Age of Mobile Music Streaming (Conference Learnings) (Maggie Huang; January 20, 2015).
National IPR Policy Series: The Development of the National IPR Policy (Nehaa Chaudhari; January 22, 2015).
RTI Responses - MHRD IP Chairs: Details of Funding & Expenditure (Nehaa Chaudhari; January 31, 2015).
National IPR Policy Series: CIS Comments to the First Draft of the National IP Policy (Nehaa Chaudhari; January 31, 2015).

Participation in Events

Global Intellectual Property Convention (Organized by ITAG Solutions; Mumbai; January 15 - 17, 2015). Rohini Lakshané attended the event.
Library and Information Professionals Summit (LIPS) 2015 (Organized by Society for Library Professionals, National Law University Delhi with UN Information Centre for India & Bhutan and Special Library Association (USA), Asian Chapter; January 23 - 24, 2015; New Delhi). Nehaa Chaudhari was on a panel discussing Internet Technology and Challenges for Libraries in IPR Regime. She made a presentation on Technology (Internet?), Libraries and the Law (?).

Upcoming Event

Announcing the Institutional Partner for the Global Congress on Intellectual Property and the Public Interest 2015 (Organized by the National Law School of India University; New Delhi; December 2015).

Wikipedia

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

Op-ed

ଓଡ଼ିଆ ଭାଷା ପାଇଁ ଅନ୍ତର୍ଜାତୀୟ ପ୍ରକଳ୍ପ (Subhashish Panigrahi; The Samaja, January 31, 2015).

Blog Entries

Telugu Wikimedia Hackathon 2014 (Rahmanuddin Shaik; January 31, 2015).

Telugu Wikimedia Hackathon 2014 (Rahmanuddin Shaik; January 31, 2015). The event was conducted on December 28, 2014. However, the blog post was published in January 2015.

News and Media Coverage

CIS-A2K team gave its inputs to the following media coverage:

Works of Veerasalingam Pantulu on web (Hans India; January 1, 2015).
Centre should partner local communities in 'Digital India': Expert (IANS and mirrored in Zee News; January 9, 2015).
Musician donates Gwalior Gharana songs to free e-library (Times of India; January 20, 2015).

Announcement

2015 Opensource.com Community Awards : Every year, Opensource.com awards people from our community who have excelled in contributing and sharing stories about open source. Subhashish Panigrahi from the CIS-A2K team won the award under the category 'People's Choice Awards'.
CIS-A2K team also published the Telugu Wikipedia Stats tables. Most metrics have been collected from a partial dump (aka stub dump), which contains all revisions of every article, meta data, but no page content.

Participation in Event

Citizen Media Summit 2015 (Organized by Global Voices; January 24 - 25, 2015). Subhashish Panigrahi was a speaker.

Openness

Journal Article

Heads I Win, Tails You Lose: The Intransigenc of STM Publishers (Subbiah Arunachalam, Perumal Ramamoorthi and Subbiah Gunasekaran; Indian National Science Academy Journals, Proc Indian Natn SciAcad 80 No. 5 December 2014 pp. 919-929).

Internet Governance

Articles and Blog Entries

Indians Plead for #NetNeutrality as Airtel Raises Data Charges (Subhashish Panigrahi; Global Voices; December 30, 2014). The article was published in the month of December but mirrored on CIS website in January.
Indian Netizens Criticize Online Censorship of 'Jihadi' Content (Subhashish Panigrahi; Global Voices; January 6, 2015).
Security and Surveillance - Optimizing Security while Safeguarding Human Rights (Elonnai Hickok; January 19, 2015).
Search Engine and Prenatal Sex Determination: Walking the Tight Rope of the Law (Geetha Hariharan and Balaji Subramanian; January 29, 2015).

Event Co-organized

Security, Governments, and Data: Technology and Policy (Organized by CIS and Observer Research Foundation; January 8, 2015, New Delhi). Sunil Abraham, Pranesh Prakash, Elonnai Hickok, Bhairav Acharya and Nehaa Chaudhari participated in this event.

Participation in Events

Symposium on Human Rights and the Internet in India (Organized by the Center for Communication Governance at National Law University, Delhi in collaboration with the UNESCO Chair on Freedom of Communication and Information at the University of Hamburg; New Delhi; January 17, 2015). Bhairav Acharya was a panelist.
Winter School on Privacy, Surveillance and Data Protection (Organized by the Centre for Communication Governance (CCG) in collaboration with the UNESCO Chair on Freedom of Communication and Information at the University of Hamburg and the Hans Bredow; Delhi; January 19 - 23, 2015). Bhairav Acharya was a facilitator.
ASSOCHAM National Council on IT / ITes (Organized by ASSOCHAM; New Delhi; January 30, 2015). Geetha Hariharan participated in the event.

Blog Entries

Overview of the Constitutional Challenges to the IT Act (Pranesh Prakash; December 15, 2014).
Reply to RTI filed with BSNL regarding Network Neutrality and Throttling (Tarun Krishnakumar; December 22, 2014).

News & Media Coverage

CIS gave its inputs to the following media coverage:

Government blocks 32 websites to check ISIS propaganda (Kim Arora; The Times of India; January 1, 2015).
Internet users fume as govt blocks 32 sites (Jaison Lewis; Mumbai Mirror; January 1, 2015).
India 'jihadi' web blocking causes anger (BBC; January 2, 2015). This was also mirrored in Puffington Post.
Govt cracks down on cyber jehad network, blocks access to 32 websites (India Today, January 1, 2015).
Indian Government still blocks 20+ websites - Indian Censorship on Internet (Times of Assam; January 2, 2015).
350% surge in Cyber crimes in last 3 years (Devanik Saha & Indiaspend.org; Hindustan Times; January 20, 2015).
TOI literary festival kicks off today (The Times of India; January 31, 2015).

Digital Humanities

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

Staff Movement

Sumandro Chattapadhyay has joined CIS as Research Director. His academic interests span over topics of history and politics of informatics in India, new media and technology studies, and data infrastructures and economies. He is also keenly interested in questions and techniques of digital humanities. Recently, Sumandro has completed a study on policy and practices of open data in India as part of the Open Data Research Network managed by the World Wide Web Foundation. He is an involved member of DataMeet, a leading community of open data and data science enthusiasts from India. Sumandro studied economics in Visva-Bharati, Shantiniketan, and in Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi. He has variously worked on topics of urban development, information technology in governance, data visualisation, and early electronic governance in India with MOD Institute, Azim Premji University and the Sarai Programme at the Centre for the Study of Developing Societies.

Blog Entry

Figures of Learning: The Visual Designer (Tejas Pande; January 30, 2015).

About CIS

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

► Follow us elsewhere

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

► Support Us

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

► Request for Collaboration:

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

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

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/about/newsletters/january-2015-bulletin