Centre for Internet and Society

A Wikipedia Workshop at IISC

praskrishna — 2013-12-31T03:38:30Z

Along with Wikipedian Shiju Alex we supported the Assamese Wikipedians to organize a workshop at IISC.

Assamese Wikipedian Gitartha Bordoloi took a session explaining about Wikipedia. Almost 13 scholars from Assam who are currently researching at IISC took part in this workshop. This also opened a new avenue for us to start an Assamese Wiki community in Bangalore.

Click to download the original published by Amarasom Gl Publications. The link to the original is here.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/news/wikipedia-workshop-iisc

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

A Wikipedia Mini-hackathon in Delhi

Yuvraj Pandian — 2012-12-04T07:31:21Z

Wikipedian Yuvaraj Pandian visited the CIS office in Delhi and helped the Access to Knowledge team conduct a super-ad-hoc mini-hackathon with two other volunteers, Sheel from Delhi and Harsh from Ahmedabad. The aim was to get them a kickstart in developing userscripts/gadgets, and get them to a point where the prior existing documentation makes sense to them.

The ad-hoc plan had three parts:

The execution environment (Concept of userscripts vs gadgets, ResourceLoader)
The API concepts (Special:ApiSandbox, concept of 'actions' in the API)
Accessing the API from JS (mediawiki.api module, concept of AJAX)

Here is the account of what they did, written by Yuvi:

"We covered all parts of them slowly, with both Harsh and Sheel working at things until they fully understood what they were doing and why whatever they were doing was working.

I introduced them to the environment first by having them execute code in Chrome's JS Console, and then in their own common.js. Once they understood the context in which the code was getting executed, the 'ResourceLoader default modules'[1]documentation started making sense to them, and they could pick up other modules from there.

We then explored the API via the API Sandbox[2], which is a relatively new (and not very well known) way of letting people play around with the API. It is a massive improvement over the older, non-interactive docs[3], and both Harsh and Sheel were very excited about being able to discover all the things they could do with the API. A fair amount of time was spent messing around with it on different wikipedias (en, hi and gu) and reading bits of the API Documentation[4] to understand the concepts behind the actions - and for filling in the gaps.

Finally we had them use the API from a userscript to make calls. I went through the entire process line by line, explaining how AJAX works and how asynchronous programming works. We traced the flow of code together to understand how the seamingly nonlinear asynchronous programming model works. Then we dug into a bit of how to use the mw.loader module to make dependencies work, and why the same code that was working in the chrome js console was not working in their common.js.

It ended with them trying to port HotCat to their native language wikipedias. Harsh started to explore more about getting started with MediaWiki dev itself (rather than just gadgets), but the clone took a looooong time and we had run out of time by then. I directed him to a WMF tech open chat happening today, and hopefully that could help!

[1].https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/ResourceLoader/Default_modules
[2].https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:ApiSandbox
[3].https://en.wikipedia.org/w/api.php
[4].https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/API:Main_page

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/openness/blog-old/mini-hackathon-delhi

A Wikipedia Editing Workshop in Goa

praskrishna — 2013-03-05T09:10:24Z

On the occasion of International Women's Day, the Access to Knowledge team from the Centre for Internet & Society is organizing a wikipedia editing workshop on March 8, 2013 at Nirmala Institute of Education, from 3 p.m. to 5 p.m., followed by an offline and online editathon.

The online editathon is a month-long affair, which will be held every weekend starting with the weekend after March 8. The goal of the month-long event is to encourage more women to contribute to Wikipedia and increase representation of articles related to women in Wikipedia.

The event aims at creating new articles, expanding the existing stubs and translating English articles to various Indian languages. Members are requested to start edithons in regional language Wikipedias.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/openness/events/wikipedia-editing-workshop-in-goa

A Wiki Workshop at Raj Kumar Goel Institute of Technology, Ghaziabad

subha — 2013-01-22T03:09:25Z

The Centre for Internet & Society's Access to Knowledge team organized a Wikipedia workshop at Raj Kumar Goel Institute of Technology (RKGIT), Ghaziabad in collaboration with Metawings on January 17, 2013. Subhashish Panigrahi summarizes the happenings from the one-day workshop in this blog post.

As part of the soft skill development training program, RKGIT, an engineering college is working on a series of activities to empower the students with practical approach and competence for their professional life. We were invited to conduct a workshop for the students of mechanical engineering and help them understand the real reasons for contributions to Wikipedia as a volunteer.

Some of the focus areas we set for the workshop were:

Number of students not to exceed 60 to make sure that we get enough time and space to interact actively and pay individual attention.

Number of coordinators to support with logistics to conduct the workshop smoothly.
Active participation of teachers.
Arrangement of internet labs with multiple IP addresses for smooth user account creation.

Around 65 mechanical engineering students from second and third year participated in this workshop. We began the workshop with an interactive discussion about their practical relation with Wikipedia as students and the usability and difficulties that they face. I presented about some important facts about Wikipedia and voluntary contribution in different ways. During and after the presentation students asked a lot of questions about the notability and authenticity of articles, collaboration vs. fights among editors, references and its significance, etc.

There was a short break to make way for students to settle in the internet lab for a hands on training session. We faced problems with the LAN and 3G network for mobile broadband which made this session longer than expected. There were problems for creating accounts because of the Internet explorer and X based systems and the students couldn't create their user accounts. So, we had to manage with them contributing anonymously from IP addresses. Despite these unexpected technical problems all of them edited various articles. Some of them tried to vandalize and observe the quick reversal of the vandals.

Subhashish presenting about Wikipedia to the participants

I had a discussion with the director about conducting more such workshops, especially technical workshops where students can code and contribute to MediaWiki.

Quick links:

Presentation used for this workshop: www.slideshare.net/psubhashish/you-can-also-wikipedia
English Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org (Click here to create an account on Wikipedia)

Presentation

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/openness/wikipedia-workshop-at-rkgit-ghaziabad

A Treat for the Blind

praskrishna — 2013-07-11T06:02:27Z

The WIPO treaty will provide copyright exceptions on books making them available to blind people in formats they can use.

The article by Chitra Narayanan was published in Business World on June 26, 2013. Pranesh Prakash is quoted.

For millions of visually impaired people around the globe, it’s a landmark treaty that could open up the kingdom of books for them. After days of intense deliberations at Marrakesh in Morrocco, about 600 World Intellectual Property Organisation (Wipo) negotiators, including delegates from India, reached a consensus on a treaty that will provide copyright exceptions on books making them available to blind people in formats they can use.

Wipo, a United Nations agency, is dedicated to the use of intellectual property as a means of stimulating innovation and creativity. The agency has 186 member states.

Sure, content is king. But for the visually impaired, the right platform for accessing content is what makes the difference. Thanks to audio books, a host of apps, and digital platforms such as Bookshare, which provides content in accessible formats, the technology is already there to bring the rich world of 'hardcovers' and 'paperbacks' alive for those who cannot see. What’s more, these books are compatible with all kinds of devices from mobile phones to tablets to PCs.

Now, at last, there is legal sanction as well to content that was not being made available in accessible formats by the copyrights holders. For the 15 million people who are blind in India, the treaty is expected to open education doors as well as provide entertainment needs. India has the world’s largest number of blind people.

Bangalore-based Centre for Internet Society, a policy research organisation, has been at the forefront of negotiations at WIPO to get the treaty through. Minutes after the session concluded, Pranesh Prakash, policy Director at CIS and his colleague Sunil Abraham were tweeting ecstatically about the “win”.

For five long years, this Wipo treaty has witnessed contentious discussions on issues such as including exports of copyrighted works, translations of copyrighted works and so on. According to Prakash, who responded over twitter, “On Exports we won, but re-exports which was earlier permitted has become much more difficult.”

There are also other grainy areas such as commercial availability of the books. According to a post on the Intellectual Property Watch website, soon after the agreement was reached, commercial availability still stands under Article 4 (National Law Limitations and Exceptions on Accessible Format Copies) but has disappeared from Article 5 (cross border exchange of accessible format copies).

Although blind music legend Stevie Wonder, one of the most ardent supporters of the treaty, must be crooning Signed, Sealed, Delivered... it’s early days yet. The draft of the treaty has to be ratified by governments before being adopted.

But for five long years, it has been a long hard battle between copyright owners and those fighting for human rights of the visually impaired. Finally, as one observer, put it: 'a rare victory is in sight for human rights'.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/news/business-world-june-26-2013-chitra-narayanan-a-treat-for-the-blind

A Telugu Wiki Meetup @ CIS, Bangalore

SJ Veera — 2013-08-19T06:53:18Z

On June 2, 2013, the Centre for Internet and Society (CIS) hosted a Telugu wiki meetup in its Bangalore office. Updates from the meetup is shared in this blog post.

Access the Telugu wikipedia page about the event here

Unfortunately, I was unable to attend the Telegu Wiki Mahotsavam held in Hyderabad earlier this year (in April 2013) due to personal and professional constraints even though Arjuna Rao called me twice and requested me to attend it. However, when he called again recently about a planned meetup in Bangalore, I willingly took up the initiative.

I used the "Category: Wikipedians in Bangalore" and communicated with all the Telugu users. I met T. Vishnu Vardhan, Programme Director, Access to Knowledge, Centre for Internet and Society and personally and took his views. Myself and Arjuna took the initial steps to organize this meeting. Arjuna managed to invite Dr. T. Ramakrishna and Gudipati Narayana for this meetup. He also managed to announce about this event in the press.

We finally met at CIS and had a two-hour session:

The Programme

Welcome note by Sasi
Mutual introductions
An introduction was given to Telugu Wiki projects with practical examples. (Using, searching, editing, interaction and getting help)
Guests’ doubts were clarified by the Telugu Wikipedians Ravichandra, Arjuna and Sasi
Dr. Ramakrishna suggested that parallel to the Telugu Wikipedia development, Telugu should be encouraged to be used in administration. This should start with interactions with the officials and the organizations working towards it
Gudipati Narayana conveyed his view that Telugu Wikipedia can be used to increase the standards in Telugu teaching
Both the guests promised that they will do their bit in organizing the Wikipedia awareness events in the organizations know to them

A group photo of Telegu Wikipedians from the meetup held at CIS, Bangalore is seen below

It is decided that a Telugu Wiki Meet-Up will be held on second Saturday of every month in Bangalore for Telugu Wikipedians.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/openness/blog-old/telugu-wiki-meet-up-at-cis-june-2-2013

A Telegu Wiki Meetup @ CIS

SJ Veera (Telugu Wikipedian) — 2013-09-01T11:30:18Z

Telugu Wikipedians had their monthly meetup at the Centre for Internet and Society (CIS) in Bangalore on Saturday, July 13, 2013, 2.00 p.m. to 5.00 p.m.

Telugu Wikipedians Arjuna, Ravichandra, Sasi and Rahmanuddin participated in the meetup. Telugu lecturer Gudipati Narayana and Haribabu on behalf of Bengaluru Telugu Tejam also attended the event. Dr. T. Ramakrishna, who translated Aurobindo Ghosh's "Savitri" to Telugu was the chief guest for this meetup. This is the second monthly Telugu Wikipedia workshop in Bangalore.

An Introduction to Telugu Wiki

The workshop began with the mutual introduction and thereafter the participants were briefed about content creation and editing of articles. A practical demonstration was given by creating an article on Bengaluru Telugu Tejam. Arjuna, Ravichandra, Rahmanuddin and Sasi responded to the queries from the participants and clarified their doubts.

Introduction to Savitri

Dr. T. Ramakrishna thereafter gave a presentation of Aurobindo's book "Savitri". He spoke in length about Aurobindo Ghosh, his contributions to the freedom movement of India, and a brief background about Savitri, an epic poem in blank verse based upon a theology from the Mahabharata. Dr. Ramakrishna said that Sri Aurobindo who was a great spiritual leader and a yogi conveyed the message that religion and culture in India are not interlinked or interrelated. He also said that the characters in the present story tells to mankind how to increase spiritual energy.

Telugu Wikipedia Issues and Projects

The following were some of the observations and decisions taken at this meetup:

It was decided to complete the "Telugu Famous Personalities" as soon as possible so that new projects could be taken up.
Narayana has promised to make a plan to train Telugu lecturers and students on Telugu Wikipedia and to release it very soon to TE-Wikipedia
Rahmanuddin proposed to increase participation in Telugu Writers Meetings and Internet Meetings which are held across the globe so that the awareness on TE-Wiki can be increased
Arjuna requested to look into the plans which would answer the issues raised in Telugu Wikipedian Meet
Dr. Ramakrishna felt that more pressure should be brought on the Government of India to increase the usage of Telugu Wiki Mahotsavam.
After completing the current priorities, projects related to Bangalore should be taken up.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/openness/blog-old/telegu-wiki-meet-up-july-13-2013

A Study of J. Sai Deepak's Comments on Competition Law in India

Aarushi Bansal — 2015-11-21T06:18:42Z

In his blog, 'The Demanding Mistress', J. Sai Deepak has commented on the competition law in India, using provisions of different acts, case judgments and amendments to these acts. He has also included a comment on India’s patent law. This review studies his comments to the Competition Act, 2002 (“Competition Act”) and the Patents Act, 1970 (“Patents Act”).

Read J. Sai Deepak - The Demanding Mistress[1]. Nehaa Chaudhari provided inputs and edited this blog post.

The Nexus Between the Competition Act and the Patents Act

Sai Deepak explains the nexus between the Competition Act and the Patents Act[2] using two positions. Firstly, by using two situations to explain which of these two acts will apply under different circumstances. Secondly, by explaining the overlap that is apparent in cases of abuse of power.

Under the first issue, the two situations are thus. In a case where a patentee's patent over a technology allows him to acquire a position of dominance, Competition Act will be applied if he abuses this dominance. In case a patentee imposes a high license fee on his product, many players cannot afford it and get ejected from the market. Here, both the acts would apply, thereby indicating an overlap.

Under the second issue, it is stated that abuse of power could also happen if a patentee sets an "unfair price". Therefore, Sai Deepak argues that for ensuring fair or affordable price, there should be harmony between Competition Act and Patents Act. He has derived harmonized interpretations of "unfair price" under the Competition Act and "reasonably affordable price" under the Patents Act. He explains that the price under each law is measured according to the price for the licensee and not the price demanded or the value of the licensed technology. He further, argues that such a harmonization is possible since "price" under these two acts is essentially used in the same context. It is necessary to harmonize the two acts since the overriding effect of Section 60 of the Competition Act can be effective only when an inconsistency is proved with the other provisions or laws.

Patents and Competition "Arrangements"

An arrangement[3] or collusion may exist between two market players if their activities can be foreseeably linked, even if there is no express act or formal arrangement between these parties. This has been explained through an example.

A sells a patented drug in the market. B sells another patented drug which is similar to the drug sold by A. A also has some share in B's company. When C introduces a similar drug at a much cheaper price, B is forced to reduce his the price of his drug. A follows suit.

It may be noted that since there were similarities between the drugs being sold by A and B, and, therefore the patent, it may have been possible for B to challenge A’s patent on prior art and eject A from the market, thereby reducing competition.

Since he did not challenge A's patent which was closest to that of B in terms of prior art, there may be an arrangement between A and B. This shows that A and B decided to divide the market and not encroach upon each other's trading space. In addition to this, the fact that A was a shareholder in B's company, points in the direction of a collusive activity.

Legality of Pay-for-Delay Settlement Payments

This post, as written by Amshula Prakash, refers to J. Sai Deepak's comments on the topic. She has described a Pay-For-Delay settlement [4] as a patent settlement wherein the patentee pharmaceutical company pays the generic manufacturer to remain ejected from the market for a certain period of time.

She justifies these agreements by relying on the case of Federal Trade Commission v. Actavis [5],which upheld that such agreements are lawful as long as their anti-competitive activities are covered under the exclusive patent granted to them. She opines that entering late into the market is better than not entering at all, and such a deal would anyway not go beyond the life of the patent. She concludes by reiterating J. Sai Deepak's statement that the exact impact of the agreement cannot be ascertained, as no such cases of Pay-For-Delay agreements have arisen in the Indian market yet.

Collective Bargaining

J Sai Deepak has addressed two issues under this post. Firstly, the relation between collective bargaining and cartel-like conduct. Secondly, whether any defense under S.3(3) [6] of the Competition Act is available against cartel-like conduct.

In first issue, [7] J. Sai Deepak suggests that collective bargaining is a joint venture as it increases efficiency of entities in providing services. Similarly, an agreement to reduce such efficiency is also a joint venture, since it may ensure competitiveness in the market and control over prices. He specifies grounds to determine the purpose of a collective act which helps ascertain whether it will be covered under "collective bargaining". These include the nature of business, parity between parties, past negotiations etc. He has relied on foreign sources to justify cartel-like behavior of smaller entities, like Australia's Dawson Committee and Taiwan's efforts to integrate smaller enterprises into the mainstream market to increase efficiency and competitiveness. Hence he suggests that an amendment should be made in law to permit small businesses to make an exception to cartel-like conduct and collective bargaining.

Under the second issue, [9] he opines that a strict assumption of the presence of any anticompetitive nature or agreement is counter productive to the intention of the law. The available defenses under S.3(3) for parties accused of cartel-like conduct can be justified using the proviso[10] under this section. He explains that collective bargaining may be seen as a "joint venture" under the proviso of S.3 if it is not anti-competitive. He has further supported this argument by relying on FICCI - Multiplex Association of India v. United Producers/ Distributors Forum, [11] where "collective bargaining" was accepted as a valid defense to cartel-like behavior.

Power of Competition Commission with Respect to Abuse of Powers

J. Sai Deepak has explained the powers of the Competition Commission of India (CCI),[12] firstly, with respect to abuse of powers and secondly, in terms of imposing liability.

With Respect to Abuse of Powers

With respect to abuse of powers, he refers to Section 4 of the Competition Act. It refers to a situation wherein a dominant player in the market sets a discriminatory (including predatory price) or unfair price in the sale of his good. Predatory pricing is explained in this section and not discriminatory or unfair price. J. Sai Deepak argues that since they are capable of having different meanings, there might be different forms of abuse which a dominant entity can exercise.

He relies on a test laid down in a case on unfair price, namely United Brands Company v. Commission of the European Communities.[13] A question arising under this test was whether the regulator is expected to fix prices if they are found to be unfair. To show that the CCI has the power to fix prices, S.27 and 28 of the Act have been compared. Section 27(d) empowers the CCI to direct that agreements which are in contravention of Section. Furthermore, Section 27 (g) allows the CCI to pass orders 'it may deem fit'. Section 28(2)(a) empowers the CCI to vest property rights, which creates licenses for third parties. The CCI can set future commercial terms in agreements remove complexities of the market in the interest of equity and justice. This shows the abundant powers the Competition Commission of India has to set prices.

In Terms of Imposing Liability

To answer whether these decisions of the CCI are in rem [14], he explains that the CCI can regulate market transactions and the finding of an abusive practice would be applied to other enterprises with similar practices. This shows that CCI lays down rules prescribing acceptable practices in the market.

Review of the Competition Amendment Bill, 2012

This post discusses the proposed amendments in the Bill [15] regarding three issues. Firstly, in regards to joint dominance, i.e. position of dominance enjoyed by one or more enterprises, J. Sai Deepak argues that the Bill recognizes an oligopolistic market's collusive activities, thereby providing a legal method of identifying it. He argues that it is not yet time to introduce it into the Indian industrial arena, since S.3 which regards anti-competitive agreements, is too rigorous to harmonize the concept of joint dominance with it.

Secondly, another proposed change is to render the decision taken under S.21[16] appeal-able under S.53A of the Act. He criticizes this by saying that an appeal on S.21 while adjudicating on S.53A may lead to a multiplicity of legislations and jurisdiction issues.

Lastly, the amendment of S.5A, empowers the government to specify the values of any assets or turnovers based on the class of enterprises. The government may consult the CCI, but the consultation is not binding or of mandatory assent, which shows that the CCI might turn into a tool which furthers the powers of the executive.

Conclusion

On reading J. Sai Deepak's comments on the competition law in India, I have concluded that several provisions under legislations regulating competition in Indian markets might still not be comprehensive. This may be because many scenarios for which these provisions have been made have not yet arisen in India. Hence a few outcomes of these legislations remain to be mere speculations and as several developments in the market are still underway, laws like the Competition Act should adopt to these if and when they arise.

[1]. http://thedemandingmistress.blogspot.in/

[2]. http://thedemandingmistress.blogspot.in/2013/09/the-overlap-between-patents-and.html#links

[3]. http://thedemandingmistress.blogspot.in/2011/10/patents-and-competition-need-for.html#links

[4]. http://thedemandingmistress.blogspot.in/2013/06/legality-of-pay-for-delay-settlement.html#links

[5]. 570 U. S. ____ (2013)

[6]. Defines the type of agreements which would qualify as anti-competitive

[7]. http://thedemandingmistress.blogspot.in/2012/01/collective-bargaining-and-cartel-like.html#links

[8]. Committee of Inquiry for the Review of the Trade Practices Act of the Australian Parliament

[9]. http://thedemandingmistress.blogspot.in/2012/01/competition-act-is-collective.html#links

[10]. Refers to “any agreement entered into by way of joint ventures”.

[11]. Case No. 01 Of 2009

[12]. http://thedemandingmistress.blogspot.in/2015_01_01_archive.html

[13]. C-27/76 [1978]

[14]. http://thedemandingmistress.blogspot.in/2014/07/are-decisions-of-competition-commission.html#links

[15]. http://thedemandingmistress.blogspot.in/2015/03/a-review-of-competition-amendment-bill.html#links

[16]. Reference by Commission to statutory authority in case of contravention with the Act

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/a-study-of-j-sai-deepaks-comments-on-competition-law-in-india

A Shortcut to Freedom

tito — 2017-06-28T09:58:47Z

In our everyday life we need access to knowledge and information, we need books (and magazines, newspapers), movies (and documentaries, animations), music for education and entertainment purposes. Now, a delighting fact is almost everything we need, from a 1965 book to the latest Bollywood movie’s MP3 song, is available on the web. You knock the door, and it opens. Why should we care for free knowledge then? We have a got “a shortcut to freedom”.

Scenario 1
Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Jayalaithaa died on 5 December 2016. Kamlesh, a college student from Chennai wants to post a few photos of the leader on his Facebook wall and page paying his tribute to her. He quickly searches on Google, finds a few photos, and posts on the wall.

Scenario 2
Nilima, a young girl from Mumbai, wants to use a latest Bollywood movie song as her mobile ringtone. She too searches on Google, and quickly finds the movie song with many options such as 64 kbps, 128 kbps, remix, reprise and a few issues such as misleading download buttons, pop-up advertisement windows etc. She selects one and puts it as her mobile ringtone.

Scenario 2a
A few days later, Madhuri, a friend of Nilima finds her mobile ringtone. Madhuri requests Nilima to send a copy of the music piece, and Nilima sends it over her mobile bluetooth.

Scenario 3
Lokesh Sanyal, a school teacher from Darjeeling, West Bengal, needs a book for his studies. He first goes to his local library and also asks his friends, but fails to get a copy of the book. Now, before buying a copy of the book, he thinks to check the world wide web to see if a free PDF copy the book is available, and hurrah!, he gets the book from Torrents or some other site.

We have almost everything we require. . .
If we make a list of our requirements of content such as movies, music, books, magazines, games, softwares, we’ll find almost everything is available on the web. You just need spend some time, (be careful about malicious web pages and downloads) and you will get what you want. It might be the movie released just a week ago, or a book published in 1990. It might a photograph of your favorite actress, or music piece of Amzad Ali Khan. Whatever we want, we get.

. . . but
Let’s ponder upon these questions:

Are you using a Windows operating system in your laptop or computer? Is the copy of the Windows OS original (if you are unsure about it then did you buy a copy of the OS with registration key or installed from a CD or pendrive given by someone freely)?
How many (hundred) times you have downloaded images, videos, music, games from the web without checking or knowing its license details?
Do you know that everytime you are sharing some music or video over your mobile bluetooth, there is a possibility that you are violating some copyright and which might be punishable?

The World Wide Web is not free. You get content, but with those come a large number of restrictions. Knowingly or unknowingly we violate copyright everyday. So what should we do?

Of course we have a shortcut — illegal downloading, piracy, as we know that no one really cares. We can ignore everything and carry on.
Or, there is a second option, join the free and open knowledge movement and try to get more and more content under the free licenses.

One option is easy, needs no hard work, on the other hand the second option is difficult to follow, needs a lot of hard work, although that should be the process. It’s completely upto you that which option would you prefer.

Image credit

Source: WIkimedia Commons, Author: W.carter, License: CC SA 4.0 International

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/a-shortcut-to-freedom

A Seminar on E-publishing of Odia Books

praskrishna — 2014-12-07T02:41:26Z

A seminar was organized by Molybtech Technology Solutions on November 30, 2014 for the betterment of Odia language and writers at Bhanja Kala Mandap.

Subhashish Panigrahi participated in the seminar as a speaker and shared his knowledge with the audience.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/openness/news/seminar-e-publishing-odia-books

A Report of the Odia Wikipedia Workshop held in KMBB College of Engineering, Bhubaneswar

praskrishna — 2012-12-07T22:37:59Z

(By Debapriya Priyadashi Chakra) Sambad, Odisha's most widely read and largest circulated daily, on November 19, 2012, published an article about the Odia Wikipedia workshop organized in KMBB College of Engineering, Bhubaneswar, Odisha.

Read a detailed report about this workshop.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/news/report-of-odia-wikipedia-workshop-in-sambad

A Report of Odia Wikipedia Workshop at IIT, Kharagpur

praskrishna — 2012-12-05T05:20:38Z

The Samaja, Odia daily, Kolkata edition, on December 3, 2012, published an article about the Odia Wikipedia Workshop organized in IIT, Kharagpur, West Bengal.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/news/report-of-odia-wikipedia-workshop-in-iit-kharagpur

A Ludicrous Ban

Achal Prabhala and Lawrence Liang — 2012-06-04T04:22:11Z

Achal Prabhala and Lawrence Liang have written an article for the Open Magazine about the bizarre ways in which the Internet is regulated in 21st century India.

Small acts can have outsize consequences. In 15th century England, Richard III lamented that for want of a nail, a kingdom was lost. In 21st century India, the question is this: for want of copyright protection for a single film, will the whole Internet be lost? On 29 March 2012, the Madras High Court issued an order whose effect Internet users in the country are still reeling from. As we go to press, most Internet users in India are unable to access a number of popular websites that millions of people around the world use every day. These banned websites are not forums for human trafficking or illegal weapon sales, but merely extensions of ordinary human activity like learning, sharing and growing—activities that are particularly well facilitated by the Internet. That the websites have been banned is of great concern; that the order purportedly banning them, and its effect, are both inexplicable and badly understood is of greater concern still.

How did we get here?

These are the facts. Earlier in the year, a little-known Chennai firm called Copyright Labs filed a petition on behalf of RK Productions, seeking protection for their client’s upcoming release—the Tamil film 3—against copyright infringement on the Internet. The film had not opened to audiences yet; the petition sought pre-emptive protection. In response, the Madras High Court passed a ‘John Doe’ order—John Doe being American shorthand for the anonymous everyman—which has a wide, sweeping scope and is designed to protect against potential offences by necessarily nameless persons, or in other words, everyone. The order applied to several Internet Service Providers (ISPs), as well as the aforesaid nameless persons (the John Doe of India is, apparently, ‘Ashok Kumar’), binding them, and their heirs, assignees, representatives and the whole shebang, against infringing copyright in relation to the film on networks they administer.

In apparent compliance with the John Doe order, Indian ISPs reacted with obsequious haste, in singular—and totally arbitrary—fashion. Between them, they have blocked a range of torrent sites (like the Pirate Bay, which is always Target No. 1, regardless of the circumstances), a few video-sharing sites like Vimeo and DailyMotion, and for good measure, some unrelated and completely irrelevant websites such as Xmarks, which allows users to share and sync bookmarks, and Pastebin, a service to store text and code. The weirdest aspect of this countrywide clampdown on a large chunk of the Internet is that the Madras High Court order did not actually specify any websites to block at all. How—and why—the ISPs zeroed in on these particular entities remains a mystery.

The Pirate Bay certainly hosts large amounts of pirated material, but it is also in some part a way to distribute legitimate content legitimately; Vimeo, on the other hand, is the distribution channel of choice for independent films uploaded by the filmmakers themselves; Pastebin has strict policies that are respectful of copyright and is mostly used by free and open source developers to tweak and relay copyright-free software. The sweep of this clampdown by the ISPs defies logic by deeming everything illegal: the wedding video that we cherish and put up to share with our friends, the small, independently financed film we wish to distribute electronically, the piece of free and open source software we just improved upon and would like the world to know about. Luckily for us, any blocking action imposed by local ISPs can be easily subverted by going through a virtual private network—a proxy—and if you’d like to see just how easy and quick this is to execute, please go to http://anonymouse.org. You’re welcome.

But first, the law. There is some confusion as to whether blocking whole websites for copyright infringement is legally permissible, and the answer is mostly no—and partly yes. The procedure for blocking websites in India is governed by Section 69A of the Information Techno- logy Act 2000, as amended in 2008 (the IT Act). Section 69A of the IT Act gives the Central government, or any of its officers specially authorised by it, the power to direct either a government agency or an intermediary to block access to any website under a list of very specific circumstances, namely: a) in the interests of sovereignty and integrity of lndia, b) for the defence of India, c) for the security of the State, d) for friendly relations with foreign States, e) for public order, or f) for preventing incitement to the commission of any cognisable offence relating to the previous points. Failure to comply with a blocking order thus issued is punishable by imprisonment and fines.

Importantly, however, neither copyright infringement nor obscenity (the other popular trigger for censorious actions) is listed as grounds for which a website may be blocked. Sure, the IT Act has specific provisions that lay out the consequences of transmitting obscene material and the infringement of copyright, but being blocked is not one of them. On the basis of its powers under Section 69A(2), the government has laid out procedures for blocking websites and notified the Information Technology Rules, 2009 (with the ‘Procedure and Safeguards for Blocking for Access of Information by Public’), as well as designated nodal officers who can receive these complaints under the Act.

Section 6 of these IT Rules lays out a clear procedure for initiating and implementing a block. The procedure not only involves a thorough examination of the claims, but also reiterates the grounds under which a request for a block might be permissible, namely, the conditions laid out in the IT Act. Section 7 of the same IT Rules lays out the procedure for examination of the request and places it in the hands of a committee; the procedure involves the participation of several high-ranking officials and outlines detailed steps, such as contacting the potentially offending parties and giving them time to respond or take action as appropriate, only after which blocking may be deployed if still necessary.

The law is clear that copyright infringement cannot be legitimate grounds for the blocking of a website. Section 79 of the IT Act, in fact, explicitly provides safe harbour for ISPs, though the controversial Intermediary Due Diligence Rules, 2011, have made a mockery of this section. These Intermediary Rules are currently the subject of heated debate, with many civil society organisations and even some parliamentarians calling for them to be repealed. (You can learn more about the protests at www.it2011.in).

As things stand, a copyright holder can ask for the removal of infringing content by sending a take-down notice under the provisions of the Intermediary Due Diligence Rules, however flawed they are, or by asking for a John Doe order. A take-down notice is a complaint by the copyright holder to a website, indicating the specific uniform resource locator (URL) where the infringement is allegedly happening. It is a procedure further reinforced in the 2012 amendment to the Indian Copyright Act, which reiterates the rights of intermediaries, such as ISPs, to transmit any potentially infringing content until a take-down notice is sent and examined. A John Doe order, by its wide, sweeping nature, is normally exercised with the greatest caution, and only granted in the most exceptional circumstances. John Doe orders do not provide for public examination and discussion of claims; they do not allow any other side—other than the petitioning party—to state their case; and they can be badly misunderstood by the parties involved, as vividly demonstrated in this case.

In this case, both the petition and the order are questionable in several ways. The Tamil film 3—starring Dhanush and Shruti Haasan and directed by Rajini- kanth’s daughter Aishwarya—is not exceptional. It is one of the hundreds of Tamil films made this year, following on from the thousands of Tamil films made thus far. There is no particular reason why this film alone is worthy of a John Doe order. Ironically, it is exceptional only in that until Copyright Labs’ petition, the film served as a working demonstration of the benefits of a free and open Internet: the reason we knew of the film was the massive publicity generated by the viral hit ‘Kolaveri Di’—a song whose popularity spiralled by being shared freely and widely, regardless of copyright ownership. In the case of ‘Kolaveri Di,’ the producers saw the piracy of the song as publicity, and encouraged it. Then, it would seem, they decided that any piracy of the film was, well, piracy—and decided to stop it in the most insensible and ruthless manner possible. And there you have it: not only can you now have your cake and eat it too, you can also smash it in the faces of millions of users with impunity.

Copyright Labs, the previously unknown firm in Chennai that acted for the producers of 3 appears to be run by one Harish Ram, whose Twitter feed covers the catastrophe in revealing detail. Facing the wrath of fellow tweeters who were outraged at their inability to access their favourite websites, his collected responses on the handle @harishramlh instructively outline the disastrous way by which the court order he wanted has been implemented. Harish claims that his firm was forced to take action because infringing sites “don’t respond”. His cry for help would be plausible except for one inconvenient detail: the film 3 released on 30 March 2012, and the John Doe order was obtained on 29 March 2012—a day before the film’s release. What kind of piracy could Copyright Labs have been trying to battle unsuccessfully prior to the film’s release? There are instances of pre-screening prints of a film making it to torrent sites, though these are rare. Most often, the piracy of a film only happens after its public release. At the time of Copyright Labs’ petition, it is likely that very few or no take-down notices had been served because very few or no infringing acts had been committed yet: this is the very basis of the petition and ensuing order. (A quick search on Pirate Bay confirms that the only torrents related to the film are dated after its release, and not before). A little while later, perhaps upon discovering that he too cannot watch his best friend’s wedding video on Vimeo, Harish casually tweets that he has “written to unblock the whole site and block only specific piracy links” and presto, Vimeo is unblocked.

Regulators, take note. This is how the Internet is governed in 21st century India: by the fluctuating whims of an excited young man in Chennai in possession of a court order he neither deserves nor understands.

Thanks to the fact that our governments and corporations are constantly fantasising about how to censor our Internet (and frequently succeeding), the people who bring us the Internet, the hapless ISPs, have been beaten into submission; they now jump to the mildest murmur of reproach with wildly imaginative and unduly overreaching reactions. The last thing we need in an online environment full of dirty tricks is more dirty tricks. If anyone in power has any desire to keep the Internet working for the millions of Indians who prosper by it, safe harbour for ISPs must be restored in the IT Act—and the Intermediary Due Diligence Rules must be repealed.

Our courts cannot be used as quack-houses to buy pills for imaginary problems. The copyright industry is not a sick patient; it’s just a hypochondriac. Films don’t fail because of piracy; they fail because they’re not worth watching. The most popular films in this country are also the most pirated, and yet they remain money-spinners. The real problem is the unbending inability of this industry to adjust to the world; to the Internet; to the life-changing technologies that human beings have witnessed and embraced and prospered by over the past two decades. Instead of responding to these changes creatively, film producers and music distributors think that digging in their heels and acting like petulant children is going to delude consumers into seeing them as something grander than they are. The reality is that they are simply packers of culture and knowledge who aren’t even wrapping up their products competently. For now, though, these children have been given a nuclear bomb to play with, and they just used it to kill a cockroach. Beware the radiation.

Lawrence Liang is a lawyer and researcher at the Alternative Law Forum; Achal Prabhala is a writer and researcher in Bangalore

Click to read the original published in the Open Magazine on June 2, 2012

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/a2k/a-ludicrous-ban

A lifetime of five years on the internet

praskrishna — 2013-05-20T09:04:28Z

Centre for Internet and Society observes its fifth anniversary on Sunday.

The article by Subir Ghosh was published in DNA on May 19, 2013. Sunil Abraham is quoted in this.

Five years is a long time in the internet space. The past five years, certainly, has been. And so has it been for the Centre for Internet and Society that completes five years here.

When a group of citizens got together to come under a platform called CIS five years ago, they had wanted to work on policy issues about the internet that had a bearing on society. They, in fact, still do; except that the new media space itself has undergone a metamorphosis. Five years ago social media was just starting off, few people had smart phones, and online speech was not a burning issue.

Sunil Abraham, executive director of city-based CIS, affirms this, and goes on to assert: “Five years ago, privacy was not a mainstream concern. Today, many different actors and stakeholders are interested in the configuration of the draft Privacy Bill. We first warned the public about the draconian measures in the IT Act during the 2008 amendment. Four years later, many more people are familiar with problematic sections and are adopting various strategies to amend the Act and it’s associated rules.”

Likewise, five years ago, people dismissed “shared spectrum” as a pipe dream; today “shared spectrum” is mentioned in the National Telecom Policy. CIS usually thinks ahead, and works on a range of issues.

“For internet adoption in India to grow dramatically from the dismal statistics today, we need to ensure continued access to cheap devices and affordable and ubiquitous broadband,” says Abraham.

“With Ericsson suing Micromax for Rs100 crore, the mobile wars have come to India. If we have to protect innovation in sub-100 dollar devices, we need to configure our patent and copyright policy carefully.”

But since CIS works primarily on policy issues, shouldn’t it have been based in Delhi rather than in Bangalore? “We do have a small office in Delhi. But we are headquartered in Bangalore because we need to keep learning from technologists and the technical community,” explains Abraham.

When an organisation calling itself the Centre for Internet and Society (www.cis-india.org) observes its fifth anniversary, it shouldn’t surprise anyone that many of the activities related to the anniversary celebrations (May 20-23) have precious little to do with the internet, and is more about society itself. And yes, an entire evening is devoted to Kannada. There’s a talk by Chandrashekhara Kambara on ‘Kannada in the modern era,’ and another by UB Pavanaja titled ‘From Palm Leaf to Tablet – Journey of Kannada’.

“We are looking at the complete eco-system. For instance, during the digitalisation of TV in India, what will happen to the internet? Do TV promoting policies undermine the growth of broadband? On the second day we look at the connection between another older technology - cinema and the Internet.”

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/news/dna-india-may-19-2013-subir-ghosh-a-lifetime-of-five-years-on-the-internet