Centre for Internet and Society

Delhi High Court’s Ruling Against Publishers is a Triumph For Knowledge

sinha — 2016-09-26T15:07:07Z

The court conclusively stated that the reproduction of any work by a teacher or a pupil in the course of instruction would not constitute infringement.

The article was published in the Wire on September 23, 2016.

In a landmark judgment, Justice Rajiv Sahai Endlaw of the Delhi high court has held that reproducing books and distributing copies thereof for the purpose of education is not copyright infringement. The ruling legitimises the practice of photocopying prevalent in universities and other spaces of learning. The question of whether such photocopying without the permission of the copyright holders was legal arose in 2013. A group of five prominent publishers had filed a suit against the University of Delhi and its photocopying service provider, alleging infringement of their copyrighted titles. Specifically, they argued that the infringement arose from widely used ‘course packs’ which were photocopies of collated passages and chapters from various titles and, sometimes included entire books as well. At the heart of the matter lay the interests of students and their rights and ability to access education, academics invested in the importance of readership and the free flow of knowledge and the publishers who claimed that photocopies hurt their sales and that they ought to benefit from this practice, monetarily. The publishers wanted the court to restrain the defendants from committing ‘institutionalised infringement’ and make them apply for bouquet licenses to carry on with the practice of photocopying.

The suit caused a huge furore. Soon, students and academics joined the fray to mount a stronger defence against the publishers. Notably, Amartya Sen wrote a letter urging the publishers to reconsider the action. Thirty three academics delivered a joint statement against the suit and intervened as the Society for Promoting Educational Access and Knowledge, or SPEAK, while students put forth their interests through the Association of Students for Equitable Access to Knowledge, or ASEAK.

Pending the adjudication of the matter, the court proceeded to temporarily injunct the preparation of such course packs.

The copyright law rests on a delicate balance between the interests of copyright owners (authors, publishers, creators, artists) and copyright users (those who use and enjoy the works). The law is designed to encourage the creation of works and simultaneously, to permit the users to enjoy the works and promote arts and knowledge.

In the Indian Copyright Act, 1957, section 52 lists a number of scenarios which do not constitute infringement, including a fair dealing provision. In other words, the section is the bulwark for public enjoyment of copyrighted work – it allows largely purposive acts, including fair dealing, tied to bona fide use and copying in research, educational institutions, libraries, review, reportage, criticism, incidental copying and a greater degree of use for the benefit of disabled people.

The act of photocopying, the court ruled, is reproduction of the work and constitutes infringement, unless it is listed under section 52. It found that the acts of photocopying, preparing course packs and their distribution fell within the ambit of section 52(1)(i), which states that “the reproduction of any work – by a teacher or a pupil in the course of instruction”, would not constitute infringement. Interpreting the clause in an expansive manner, the court deemed that the application of the clause is not limited to an individual teacher-student relationship, but is applicable to educational institutions and organisations such as DU and thus, the law must reflect the realities of our burgeoning educational system.

The publishers contended that use of the copyrighted material should occur only during the course of the instruction, that is, in classroom lectures. The court disagreed and held that the course of instruction “…include(s) reproduction of any work while the process of imparting instruction by the teacher and receiving instruction by the pupil continues during the entire academic session for which the pupil is under the tutelage of the teacher and that imparting and receiving of instruction is not limited to personal interface between teacher and pupil but is a process commencing from the teacher readying herself/himself for imparting instruction, setting syllabus, prescribing text books, readings and ensuring, whether by interface in classroom/tutorials or otherwise by holding tests from time to time or clarifying doubts of students, that the pupil stands instructed in what he/she has approached the teacher to learn.”

Whereas the court liberally interpreted the provision on educational institutions, it also rigidly laid out the contours of the copyright law, pivotal in enabling public enjoyment of works. It held that copyright is a statutory right and not a natural or a common law right. Thus, the nature of copyright is limited and is subject to limitations and exceptions set in the law. It further added that “Copyright, specially in literary works, is thus not an inevitable, divine, or natural right that confers on authors the absolute ownership of their creations. It is designed rather to stimulate activity and progress in the arts for the intellectual enrichment of the public. Copyright is intended to increase and not to impede the harvest of knowledge. It is intended to motivate the creative activity of authors and inventors in order to benefit the public.”

On the issue of charging a nominal fee (40 paise per page), it was held that the said rates could not cumulatively amount to be competing with the sales price of the books. They were reasonable operational costs and only if the reproduction charges were similar to the books, could they have been said to be functioning commercially. Furthermore, the court observed that in an age of technological advancement, any act of copying for the purpose of education (within the ambit of section 52) – whether by pen and paper, or photocopying machines, or by students clicking pictures of textbooks on their cellphones should be permissible.

Justice Endlaw also pointed out that this flexing of user rights is in conformity with several international treaties. India is a signatory to the TRIPS Agreement and the Bern Convention, which allows India to decide “as to what extent utilisation of copyrighted works for teaching purpose is permitted..(provided) that the same is to the extent justified by the purpose” and does not “unreasonably prejudice the legitimate rights of the author.”

This fresh jurisprudence is a vindicates the freedom to exchange ideas and knowledge, which is crucial to fostering an excellent learning space. This will also ensure that eager students and teachers in developing countries freely share latest research and publications, without the slightest hesitation of operating in a grey area. Justice Endlaw’s judgment has aptly restored the public-serving face of copyright law, which is a huge triumph for access to knowledge.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/the-wire-anubha-sinha-september-23-2016-delhi-high-court-ruling-against-publishers-is-a-triumph-for-knowledge

To embed a tweet or not?

praskrishna — 2016-09-23T01:08:13Z

Experts say it would amount to copyright infringement if the fair use clause is exploited.

The article by Vidhi Choudhary was published by Livemint on September 23, 2016. Vidhushi Marda was quoted.

On 20 September, a user on Twitter put out details of her intriguing conversation with the driver of a leading cab hailing service that she had used. Simply put, their conversation led to the revelation of a possible scam with a direct competitor of the said cab service.

The subject of the detailed chat easily had the makings of an investigative story and, therefore, a digital news website in India reproduced the string of tweets put out by the user in the form of a story on its platform.

This was done without her consent and hence the user asked the digital platform to take that story down.

In the light of this episode, let’s take a look at the laws governing such a situation. The question is, does the use of the tweet by the digital news website amount to copyright infringement or not? Or, whether Twitter is liable or not?

As it turns out, Twitter has a safety net within the terms of service that a user must agree to before they sign up onto the platform. A company spokesperson confirmed that Twitter was not liable if a user’s Tweet is used by someone else. “On the issue of consent, one (individual/organization) needs to take consent from the other user before using his\her tweets,” the spokesperson said.

Media lawyer Apar Gupta agreed and said that Twitter’s terms of service clearly state a clause in favour of the platform which means it is not legally liable in the above mentioned situation. “They have a worldwide, irrevocable license to publish content on their platform, which is also provided for third party affiliates,” said Gupta.

The next question is whether a user’s tweet published by someone else amounts to copyright infringement.

“The law that’s applicable in such a situation is the Copyright Act. For the purpose of reportage you can path your use within the fair dealing section (52) of the Copyright Act. Secondly, if the content used was a work of literary nature and creative, it would be up for copyright protection, just a mere Twitter rant or factual statements might not be that plausible,” said Anubha Sinha, program officer, at Centre for Internet and Society (CIS).

Both Gupta and Sinha agreed that the ownership of the tweet rests with the user and only the user. “It would amount to copyright infringement if the fair use clause is exploited,” said Gupta.

To be sure, globally, too, media has been grappling with the issue. In a September 2013 article published on leading media platform, Poynter stated, “The legal rights to re-use content really only extend to Twitter, its official partners and anyone pulling tweet data through the Twitter API. So if you embed a tweet using the official Twitter-provided embed code, you should be fine. However, if you just copy and paste the text of a bunch of tweets, or download a Twitter photo and upload it to your own CMS, you may be on shakier ground. The “fair use” exceptions to copyright may still protect you depending on the circumstances, but you might have to prove it.”

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/a2k/news/livemint-september-23-2016-vidhi-choudhary-to-embed-a-tweet-or-not

Law and Economy Policy Conference 2016 (LEPC - 2016)

praskrishna — 2016-09-22T01:48:08Z

The National Institute of Public Finance and Policy (NIPFP) in collaboration with the Institute of New Economic Thinking (INET) is organising India’s first “Law Economics Policy Conference (LEPC-2016)”. The aim is to bring together legal, economic and policy thinkers to consider policy issues in a holistic manner.

The conference is guided by an eminent Steering Committee constituting Mr. Bahram Vakil (Senior Partner, AZB & Partners), Justice B.N. Srikrishna (Former Judge, Supreme Court of India), Prof. Rathin Roy (Director, NIPFP), Mr. Somasekhar Sundaresan (Advocate, Independent Legal Counsel), Mr. Rajeev Kapoor (Director, Lal Bahadur Shastri National Academy of Administration), Ms. Sunanda Nair (Director, INET) and Prof. Ajay Shah (Professor, NIPFP).

The conference will be organized from September 28 to 30, 2016 at India Habitat Centre, Lodhi Road, New Delhi. The draft programme is available here. Keynote Speech will be given by Shri Arun Jaitley - Honourable Minister of Finance, Government of India. Sunil Abraham will be serving as a discussant on the "Towards a privacy framework for India" session of this conference.

For more information, log on to Macro/Finance Group: Meetings

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/a2k/news/law-and-economy-policy-conference-2016

Tulu Wikipedia Goes 'Live' after 8 Years on Incubator

praskrishna — 2016-09-22T01:33:29Z

Eight years after being created in the Wikimedia Incubator, the Tulu-language Wikipedia is now live as the 23rd Indic language.

The Tulu Wikipedia page is available here. The project has a total of 1285 articles contributed by 198 editors.

Other news in brief:

Ongoing India At Rio Olympics 2016 Edit-a-thon promises to plant one tree for every 20 new articles created.
Wiki Loves Monuments returns to India after three years.
WikiConference India 2016, the largest Wikimedia community gathering of the year in South Asia comes to an end.
Ashutosh Sarangi , the youngest Wikimedian from the oldest Indian-language Wikipedia community.

“Made in India” Innovation Policy

praskrishna — 2016-09-22T01:15:40Z

In this post they emphasize upon the need for data-driven IP policy making in India.

This blog post written by Prof Collen Chien and Prof Contreras, and published this week (September 19, 2016) on SpicyIP mentions CIS' patent landscaping study.

A few weeks ago we were honored to participate in Jindal Global Law School’s Conference on “Innovation for Shared Prosperity”. Much of the conversation was centered on the important topic of how intellectual property (IP) policy can best support manufacturing and entrepreneurship initiatives like the “Startup India” and “Make in India”. In turn, we believe it’s also important to think about how best to foster IP policies that are truly “made in India”. In light of India’s history of implementing certain IP policies because it had to, not because it wanted to, for example recent homegrown commitments to strengthen the patent system by reducing the time to patent are notable.

The record is already replete with examples of indigenous innovation by Indian policymakers. Whether section 3(d), Form 27 patent working disclosures, or the “Middle Path” approach to requiring deposits in standards essential patent disputes – agree or disagree with them, these Indian approaches to innovation policy are themselves innovative.

But one problem that we have observed is that the data available to develop and evaluate Indian IP policies tends to be thin. With respect to patents, for example, it is hard to access patent records, as there are often long delays before patent applications, patent working disclosures and other documents are uploaded to the Indian Patent Office (IPO) web site, notwithstanding statutory requirements and IPO policies. While there have been some published reports of cases and published decisions (Mathur 2007, Ghosh 2012), it is generally hard, as it is in other jurisdictions, to match patent filings to them to court filings, assignment records, citations, prior art and other metrics of interest. This isn’t true just of India but many other countries. But to support world class, data-driven policy making, support for analytical work, combined with data access, is needed. This is particularly important given the demonstrated gap between rules on the books, which may appear harmonized, and rules in practice, which are not.

In developing policy, it is often useful to start with the ultimate policy goal – whether it be further improving the country’s ranking on the Innovation Index or taking a place at the international standard setting table – and then developing data-based metrics to demonstrate progress toward that goal. The assumptions behind conflicting policy positions can then be tested and vetted against actual experience within the Indian setting. It is through these processes that a “made in India” innovation policy will be truly indigenous, reflecting not only political mandates and theories, but the demonstrated experience of India’s technical, business, and legal communities.

Historically, there have been relatively few empirical studies to support data-based policy making. In the non-exhaustive list below, we highlight several studies and reports (some our own) that demonstrate the usefulness and power of empirical data:

One topic about which there have been an exceptional number of empirical studies is the Indian pharmaceutical sector. Duggan and collaborators (2012, 2014) studied the relationship between drug prices and pharmaceutical patent issuances in India, and Lanjouw and Cockburn (2000) and Nandkumar and Srikanth (2011) explored the relationship between Indian patent issuance and strength and R&D spending. Recently Sampat and Shadlen have found that policies to discourage so-called “secondary” drug patents in India and Brazil have had little direct effect.

With the initiation by foreign patent holders a few years ago of infringement suits against a variety of domestic Indian and Chinese smartphone manufacturers, many wondered how much of the Indian mobile device patent landscape was already in the hands of foreign companies. Contreras, together with Rohini Lakshané of the Centre for Internet and Society, conducted a study to find out. Their results were telling: of approximately 23,500 total Indian patents and published patent applications in the mobile device sector, only 50, about 0.00% were owned by Indian companies. It is hoped that this eye-opening result will help mobilize Indian firms and policy makers to address the lack of Indian participation in international technology standardization efforts.

WIPO publishes statistics yearly about India’s relative rank with respect to a number of innovation metrics. While many are aware that India ranked 66th in this year’s Global Innovation Index, up 15 places from 2015 (Switzerland ranked 1st), WIPO’s 2015 IP indicators report contains other findings: that India ranks in the top 15 globally in terms of patent filing activity, that non-residents are using the Indian Patent Office more heavily than are residents (Fig. 2, p. 23) and that recent filings have been dominated by computer technology, organic fine chemistry and pharmaceuticals. Others have relied on WIPO statistics to compare India’s performance with that of China and other BRIC countries.

India is by nature an innovative nation. Its innovative spirit manifests itself both in terms of technology creation as well as policy development. Nevertheless, without robust, reproducible and broadly accessible data, policy decisions will continue to be based on intuition, guesswork and partisan advocacy by those having the most to gain from the system. We encourage the Indian government and academy to continue to devote resources to develop a robust data culture within the Indian intellectual property community and to make the underlying data as widely available as quickly as possible.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/a2k/news/spicy-ip-september-19-2016-prof-colleen-v-chien-and-prof-jorge-l-contreras-made-in-india-innovation-policy

Another 5 Years: What Have We Learned about the Wikipedia Gender Gap and What Has Been Done? (Part 3.)

ting — 2016-09-22T07:54:47Z

Five years after Wikimedia Foundation’s 2011 editor survey was conducted and revealed the gender gap issue, scholars, practitioners, and communities around the globe have come a long way to address the gender imbalance of the online encyclopedia. This blog post series (of three parts) serve as a summary of movements and discoveries in Wikipedia gender gap narrowing on both local (India) and global scales.

This is the third (last) part of the blog series, please see Part 1 and Part 2.

Responding to the Wikipedia gender gap problem, former WMF Executive Director Sue Gardner set a target in 2011 to raise the female editor percentage to 25% by 2015. In an interview in August 2014, Jimmy Wales declared that “we’ve completely failed,” Gardner also noted that the solutions should come from local Wikipedian communities rather than from the Foundation on a macro scale.

Although the target was not met, initiatives and reforms taken places globally and locally in the past five years are not fruitless. And as mentioned in Part 2, we should not define this movement as merely pursuing a goal towards certain percentage or number. As for now dialogue has been created to include the issue into more strategic plans; collectives are established to cumulate and share resources across communities. There has been abundance of learning (and definitely much more to learn) in the issue.

What has been done?

Be it ongoing or spontaneous, international or local, there have been many interventions trying to address the gender gap in Wikipedia.

Intervention events

In July 2015, WikiProject Women in Red (WiR) was launched to “turn "redlinks (non-existing pages) into blue ones (existing pages).” The project encourages editors worldwide to create (or expand) female-related pages (biographies, women’s work, contribution, issues, etc.) that fit the notability criteria of Wikipedia. WiR also picks monthly and annual topics to feature. Currently in September, 2016, edit-a-thons on Women in nursing and women labour activists are happening online. And “Women scientists” edit-a-thon is a year-long featured topic for 2016. Although WiR is still primarily an English-WP project, some communities have expanded and localized it to local initiatives.

Coincidentally, in 2013, Indian Wikipedian communities have carried out one of the biggest and most well-known gender gap intervention – Lilavatis’ Daughters. “Lilavati’s Daughters” is a book of essay collections featuring nearly one hundred women scientists in Indian since the Victorian Era. The 2013 edit-a-thon was hence to create Wikipedia pages for these biographies in different Indian languages. Collaborating with institutions and colleges, the event was greeted with high popularity and success. Similar events were also carried out afterwards, including Indian Women in Science Edit-a-thon which has been held annually since 2014; the last event was held in July, 2016 at the Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore.

Another significant initiative across the globe and in Indian communities is the annual Wikiwomen’s history month in March along with the celebration of International Women’s Day on March 8^th. The initiative started in 2012, edit-a-thons, photo-thons (updating photos onto Wikimedia Commons), and meetups have been held to raise the awareness of the gender gap online, create female-related content available on Wikipedia, and to strengthen the bonding between local Wikiwomen.

Recently, Wikimedia Foundation collaborated with the United Nations to launch the one-day Her Story project Edit-a-thon on August 12^th, 2016 to celebrate International Youth Day globally. Cities in India like Chennai and Delhi also held local edit-a-thons on the day of in response to the event. With the opportunity to work alongside the UN, it is a good sign that the Wikipedia gender gap issue is drawing global attention, not just in the Wikipedian community level, but also in global institution level.

Collaborative

The Wikiwomen’s Collaborative is a global platform for female Wikipedians to share projects, insights, and support. The Collaborative also encourages participants to write blog post on the Wikiwomen’s Blog to spread more words about the gender gap issue and initiatives. A Gender Gap Task Force (GGTF) was founded in 2013 aiming to challenge the patriarchal culture of knowledge and Wikipedia. GGTF tries to fix the encyclopedia’s imbalance power structure by initiating discussion and examination on its policies and editor interaction. It has also been a place to cumulate research studies and resources on the gender gap topic. A (global) gender gap mailing list is also created to spread the news and words with more communities.

Improvement in the Interface

Aside from events and collectives organized by respective communities, the Wikipedia platform itself has also been under constant transition in the last few years, trying to create a friendlier place for women and newcomers.

Since June 2012, the new prototype Visual Editor has become available in more and more language versions of Wikimedia projects – including most Indian languages. Visual Editor enables editor to contribute without learning the Wiki markups, as it creates the “write-as-how-you-will-see-it” feature requiring only basic typing skills. Nevertheless, Visual Editor does have several limitations comparing to the traditional edit source option, including slower speed, unavailable in talk and discussion namespaces, limited template editing options, and so on. While a research in 2013 on Visual Editor’s use in English Wikipedia showed low effectiveness of the new feature in attracting and encouraging new editors, more research should also be done in the non-English (especially Global South) context. Online tutorial resources about editing are also becoming available in Indian communities.

Traditional Wiki markup editing screenshot

Visual Editor screenshot

On the other hand, mobile apps of Wikipedia has been improved in its editing function. Although the apps are still in constant development to make the function smoother and easier for mobile users, it is a great breakthrough for those who do not have personal computers to contribute in small ways (or even in great ways – some have created pages and denied the statement that mobile editing is impractical).

What’s more to be learned?

There is no denying that our Indian language communities have been putting efforts to highlight and address the gender gap issue on Wikipedia. The Wikiconference India 2016 in August also had a panel responding to this topic where panelists from both outreach and research threads proposed localized perspective and strategies to fix the problem.

However, there are still much more to be learned. First of all, we need a more organized feedback loop (a cycle of planning-executing-evaluating-sharing learning) for local interventions to learn from our success and mistakes. Secondly, the issue has to become more “public” in a sense that we are not just promoting within our own circles. Awareness-building through media coverage and institutional collaboration can bring in greater public opinions and volunteers to help the online encyclopedia become a more inclusive place. The third point is a change of mindset: women's feeling and experience should be put forward into the central of our initiatives and interventions.

“We made it clear that we were focusing on the (female) participants and their experience, the content they created online are of course important too, but that’s just the by-product.” -Wikiconference Indian 2016 Gender Gap panel presenter

In other words, as we are engaging more and more women, the focus should not be numbers but the humans. At the same time, we should always encourage women to stand out and speak out. As mentioned in the previous part, gender discrimination cases have not yet been reported in our communities, but we also have to ensure if it does happen both the female editors and the community should have a certain level of awareness (what constitutes harassment/discrimination/sexism; when and how to call out) and a report and support mechanism to the problem.

The road to a real equalized knowledge system is not easy. As many have noticed and pointed out “This is not just a Wikipedia problem!” Indeed, similar gender imbalance exists in our academies, IT industries, free and open-source software (FOSS) workplace, to name a few. Nonetheless, with the flexibility and the strong bond that Indian Wikipedian communities possess, we can be one of the pioneers in positive changes. After all, the knowledge created and action taken today will shape what our tomorrow can be like.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/another-5-years-what-have-we-learned-about-the-wikipedia-gender-gap-and-what-has-been-done-part-3

Another 5 Years: What Have We Learned about the Wikipedia Gender Gap and What Has Been Done? (Part 2)

ting — 2016-09-22T07:55:39Z

Five years after Wikimedia Foundation’s 2011 editor survey was conducted and revealed the gender gap issue, scholars, practitioners, and communities around the globe have come a long way to address the gender imbalance of the online encyclopedia. This blog post series (of three parts) serve as a summary of movements and discoveries about Wikipedia gender gap on both local (India) and global scales.

In the last part of the blog series, we examined the definition and danger of the Wikipedia gender gap. This issue has been puzzling for many – why is there such a wide gap globally?

Why is there a gender gap?

The reasons behind the Wikipedia gender gap are complex and culturally-sensitive. Two main types of barriers are discussed as “inside of Wikipedia (internal)” and “outside of Wikipedia (external).”

Internal	External
Challenges using Wiki mark-up and its interface	Limited access to internet and facilities
(rare in India) Challenges in getting help from community members	Lack of skills
(rare in India) Being discriminated as a newcomer	Lack of confidence
(rare in India) Experience of discriminative behavior/conflicts	Limited time
The fear of becoming “visible” as one of the few female in the community	Preference to more socially interactive online activities (Lack of interest)
	Awareness - not knowing Wikipedia is editable

(From Jadine Lannon (2013), Same Gaps Different Experience)

India v.s. the World

Unfortunately, most studies have been done in English Wikipedia and rarely in other smaller language communities, despite the fact that these barriers can vary a lot in different cultural, political, and economic context. In India, practitioners and researchers have identified a few potential causes of low female participation rate on Wikipedia. Contrary to what was discovered in the English Wikipedia, researchers have found that Indian female Wikipedians are generally more active and willing to participate in both online and offline interactions compared to those in the English Wikipedia community. Reports of gender discrimination cases are also fewer than those in the Western context. A possible explanation to both phenomena is that Indian Wikipedian communities are rather small and close-knitted which encourage more interpersonal networking and prevent anonymous attacks[1].

Awareness

However, recruiting and keeping female Wikipedians in India do have its own barriers to overcome. “Awareness” is discovered as one of the very primary barriers for most to start editing Wikipedia. Many did not know that the online encyclopedia is easily editable, and even more have not heard of (or are unfamiliar with the use of) Wikipedia. Outreach events are important portals for both men and women to discover and join local Wikipedia communities. And this is where weakness can be turned into strength; as most newcomers are brought in through community outreach events or personal connection, it creates a strong bond within the members and a more welcoming culture featuring collectivism rather than individualism.

On the societal level?

Although the binary categorization of inside and outside of Wikipedia is widely used, it can easily lead us to believe that we can draw a clear line in between Wikipedia and the offline world, but neglect the big picture which shapes both sides of the table. Ignoring the fundamental (societal) level of the issue and its linkage to other factors poses the risk of nurturing a symptom-fixing solution instead of a system-questioning culture.

For example, societal factors such as expectation on women’s/girls’ role and priority in her family can prevent them from the access to required facilities, internet, training, and personal leisure time for joining (or continuing editing) Wikipedia. On the psychological experience side, some women reported that they do not feel comfortable when being so “visible” online and in the community[2]; and this has a lot to do with how our online (and offline) society has been constructed and conceptualized as an “unsafe” space for women.

In fact, Wagner et al. (2015)[3] have found that a nation’s Gender Inequality Index (GII) is associated to the country’s editor gender bias on Wikipedia. Although it was a study focusing on Global North samples, the logic behind is most likely applicable in India (which ranked 130 out of 188 countries’ GII in 2014) – as the more unequally women is treated in the society, the less likely that she can reach the pre-requisite to be a Wikipedian, or even be online. For example, in India there is a much lower literacy rate for female than male – 53.7% to 75.3% as reported in the 2011 Census. At the same time, population (above the age of 25) with at least some secondary education is 56.6% for male and only 27% for female in India based on the UN Human Development Report.

All these societal factors and nuances feed into the gaps we see today – in higher academic positions, in industries, and eventually in Wikipedia. It is definitely not easy to address the macro-scale problems, but what we can do is to change it from the community level to influence individuals and the society. Hence, we are not just battling against an online phenomenon created by individuals’ unwillingness to participate, but challenging and redressing the patriarchal power while transforming the traditions of how knowledge flows. After all, bridging the gender gap should not be merely a target of “We will reach X% female participation rate by Y years,” it has much greater potential and responsibility in the long run for our generations and societies.

In the next part of the blog series, we talk about: What has been done? & What’s more to be learned?

[1] From Jadine Lannon (2013), Same Gaps Different Experience and from WCI 2016 presentation:

[2] Jadine, L., (2013). Same Gaps Different Experience

[3] Wagner, Garcia, Jadidi, & Strohmaier, (2015). It’s a man’s Wikipedia? Assessing gender inequality in an online encyclopedia. From the Wikipedia editor community is sensible to gender in Proceedings of the Ninth International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media 454. URL: https://www.aaai.org/ocs/index.php/ICWSM/ICWSM15/paper/viewFile/10585/10528

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/another-5-years-what-have-we-learned-about-the-wikipedia-gender-gap-and-what-has-been-done-part-2

Another 5 Years: What Have We Learned about the Wikipedia Gender Gap and What Has Been Done? (Part 1)

ting — 2016-09-21T10:13:59Z

Five years after Wikimedia Foundation’s 2011 editor survey was conducted and revealed the gender gap issue, scholars, practitioners, and communities around the globe have come a long way to address the gender imbalance of the online encyclopedia. This blog post series (of three parts) serve as a summary of movements and discoveries about Wikipedia gender gap on both local (India) and global scales.

“Our editing community continues to suffer from a lack of women editors…. only 8.5% of editors are women.”

Probably the most cited statement for Wikipedia gender gap studies, the editor survey conducted by Wikimedia Foundation in April 2011 revealed the alarming imbalance within the online encyclopedia community(s). In the same survey, the percentage of female Wikipedians in India is reported as only 3%. When we have repeatedly emphasized on the development and changes the internet can bring to our societies, how do we ensure that behind our computer screen it is not just another mirror reflecting what has been silenced and forgotten?

What is the Wikipedia gender gap?

There are two main focus on the gender gap within Wikipedia – the editor demographic and the coverage of topics – which are essentially flip sides of a coin. With fewer female contributors, we are losing a more diverse knowledge platform for all. But the issue is far more complex than simply having less information about “friendship bracelets” than “baseball cards.”

Looking at the biography pages on Wikipedia, researchers found that not only is the number of female biographies much lower than males’ (due to historical factors, availability of firsthand sources, and editors’ interest), but the linguistic and topical bias within also presents a male-centered discourse. For example, on women’s biography pages, words related to one’s gender such as “women,” “female,” “lady” will be used more commonly than the counterpart words in men’s pages; and that a women’s biography will have more information about her marriage and family life than her male counterpart’s. Studies also found that female-related articles are more likely to be linked to male-related ones but not the other way around[1]. This demonstrates that the editing preference, styles, and content are closely related to the editors’ genders and how they see the world. In other words, language and knowledge cannot be separated from one’s gender – the Internet may be bodiless but it can never become genderless[2].

Wagner et al.’s paper[3] in early 2016 also confirmed the existence of a “glass ceiling” for female figures to be considered “notable” enough to have a Wikipedia bio page (or for the page not to be deleted). Who gets to decide what is “notable enough” becomes questionable when we understand the gender bias. As a matter of fact, while the difference in male and female biography numbers is narrower for globally known figures, a larger gender gap exists for “local hero(ine)s” because of the notability threshold applied. That is to say, many women and female-related topics are underrepresented (and underappreciated) on Wikipedia.

The danger and why it matters

Low awareness

The Wikipedia gender gap is problematic and deserves more attention than ever not only because gender imbalance should be tackled both online and offline, but also that this imbalance is so prevalent and has been taken for granted by most. Little do people consider, that with every single “click” on one’s google search, we can be provided with an answer from a single-gender narration. This imbalance and its problems are behind the scene – the share of male and female editors are never on the surface without a holistic survey. While gender balance has been pushed in our business, education, and government sectors, the online encyclopedia feeding billions of internet users (and over 300 million in India itself) is still constructed in a male-dominant culture with little questioning from the public.

Legacy and influence

There is the saying that Internet is changing the human default from “forgetting” into “remembering.” Wikipedia can serve as a great tool for digitization of knowledge and the preservation of languages. What is to be recorded now will become parts of (perhaps the most accessible) history in the future, and we cannot afford a history without women’s voices and knowledge. Hence, to include more women editors and women-related content is not simply out of a concern of diversity, it is to ensure that this time we can pass on the legacy in a better and more equitable fashion for the whole population.

The vicious circle

“We’ve to participate in meet ups and workshops, then question (from family members) arises like how many guys are there, is there any girl or not. In one sentence we're discouraged by our surrounding.”

– Female editor from local community

The urgency of this problem is that the lesser women are presented in the communities, the harder a motivation can be established for new female editors to join. Now that we have made this issue visible, the core mission we have is to ensure a change in the system and environment that helps women feel more welcomed and comfortable – even when they are aware that they are the minority.

In the next part of this blog series: Why is there a Gender Gap?

[1] Wagner, Graells-Garrido, Garcia, & Menczer, (2016). Women through the glass ceiling: gender asymmetries in Wikipedia. EPJ Data Science. (5)1. Pp 1-24.

Graells-Garrido, Lalmas, & Menczer, (2015). First women second sex: gender bias in Wikipedia. In Proceedings of the 26th ACM Conference on Hypertext & Social Media (pp165).

Wagner, Garcia, Jadidi, & Strohmaier, (2015). It’s a man’s Wikipedia? Assessing gender inequality in an online encyclopedia. From the Wikipedia editor community is sensible to gender in Proceedings of the Ninth International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media 454. URL: https://www.aaai.org/ocs/index.php/ICWSM/ICWSM15/paper/viewFile/10585/10528

[2] Code, L. (2000). Encyclopedia of feminist theories. London: Routledge

[3] Wagner, Graells-Garrido, Garcia, & Menczer, (2016). Women through the glass ceiling: gender asymmetries in Wikipedia. EPJ Data Science. (5)1. Pp 1-24.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/another-5-years-what-have-we-learned-about-the-wikipedia-gender-gap-and-what-has-been-done-part-1

Software Freedom Day: The Importance of Free and Open Source Software

subha — 2016-09-18T03:46:29Z

Software Freedom Day (SFD) on September 17 celebrates the liberty that free and open software and the philosophy of freedom brings into people’s lives. When SFD was started in 2004, only 12 teams from different places joined. It grew to a whooping 1000 by 2010 across the world. Explaining the aim of the celebration, SFD’s official website says,

The article was published by DNA on September 17, 2016.

Our goal in this celebration is to educate the worldwide public about the benefits of using high quality FOSS in education, in government, at home, and in business — in short, everywhere! The non-profit organisation Software Freedom International coordinates SFD at a global level, providing support, giveaways and a point of collaboration, but volunteer teams around the world organise the local SFD events to impact their own communities.

What are FOSS, Free Software, Open Source, and FLOSS?

Free and open source software (FOSS or F/OSS), and Free/Libre and Open-Source Software (FLOSS) are umbrella terms that are used to include both Free software and open source software. Adopted by noted software freedom advocate Richard Stallman in 1983, the free software has many names — libre software, freedom-respecting software and software libre are some of them. As defined by the Free Software Foundation, one of the early advocates of software freedom, free software allows users not just to use the software with complete freedom, but to study, modify, and distribute the software and any adapted versions, in both commercial and noncommercial form. The distribution of the software for commercial and noncommercial form however depends on the particular license the software is released under. The Creative Commons licenses have recommendations for a wide array of free licenses that one can choose for software-related documentations and any creative work they create. Similarly, there are several different open licenses for software and many other works that are related to software development. “Open Source” was coined as an alternative to free software in 1998 by educational-advocacy organisation Open Source Initiative. Open source software is generally created collaboratively, made available with its source code, and it provides the user rights to study, change, and distribute the software to anyone and for any purpose.

Supported by several global organisations like Google, Canonical, Free Software Foundation, Joomla, Creative Commons and Linux Journal, Software Freedom Day draws its inspiration from the philosophy that was grown by people like Richard Stallman who argues that free software is all about the freedom and not necessarily free of cost, but it provides the liberty to users from [proprietary software developers’] unjust power. SFD encourages everyone to gather in their own cities, educate people around them about free software, promote on social media (with the hashtag #SFD2016 this year), even hacking with free software, organising hackathons, running free software installation camps, and even going creative with flying a drone running free software!

From South Asia, there are 13 celebratory events in India, 8 in Nepal, 1 in Bangladesh and 4 in Sri Lanka.

South Asian countries have seen adoption of both free software and open source software, in both individual and organisational level and by the government. The Free Software Movement of India was founded in Bengaluru, India in 2010 to act as a national coalition of several regional chapters working for promoting and growing the free software movement in India. The Indian government has launched an open data portal at data.gov.in portal, initiated a new policy to adopt open source software, and asked vendors to include open source software applications while making requests for proposals. Similarly, several free and open source communities and organisations like Mozilla India, Wikimedia India, Centre for Internet and Society, Open Knowledge India in India, Mozilla Bangladesh, Wikimedia Bangladesh, Bangladesh Open Source Network, Open Knowledge Bangladesh in Bangladesh, Mozilla Nepal, Wikimedians of Nepal and Open Knowledge Nepal in Nepal, Wikimedia Community User Group Pakistan in Pakistan, Lanka Software Foundation in Sri Lanka, that are operating from the subcontinent also promote free and open source software.

We promote open source and open Web technologies in the country. We are open to associate/work with existing open source or other community-run, public benefit organisations.

“Internet By The People, Internet For The People” (from Mozilla India wiki)

Mohammad Jahangir Alam, a lecturer from Southern University Bangladesh argues in a research paper that the use of open source software can help the government save enormous amount of money spent in purchasing proprietary software.

A large amount of money of the government can be saved if it uses open source software in different IT sectors of government offices and others sectors, because government is providing computers to all educational institutes from school to university level and they are using proprietary software. For this reason government is to expend a large amount of many for buying proprietary software to run the computers. Another one is government paying significant amount of money to the different vendors for buying different types of software to implement e-Governance project. So, the government can use open source software for implanting projects to minimize cost of the projects.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/openness/dna-september-17-2016-subhashish-panigrahi-software-freedom-day-importance-of-free-and-open-source-software

ସଫ୍ଟଓଏର ସ୍ୱାଧୀନତା ଦିବସ: ଆମ ହାତେ ଆମ କୋଡ଼ ଲେଖିବା

subha — 2016-09-18T03:33:00Z

Software Freedom Day (SFD), which celebrates the use of free and open software, was celebrated in many cities today. The piece sheds light on the philosophy of software freedom, and how free and open source software is making a significant social change. I have also shared how anyone can contribute to the FOSS movement in different ways and celebrate SFD.

The blog post was mirrored in Your Story, Odisha Story and Aajira Odisha on September 17, 2016. The originally published piece can be accessed here.

ଫ୍ରି ଓ ଓପନ ସୋର୍ସ ସଫ୍ଟଓଏର ପଛରେ ଥିବା ସାମାଜିକ ଆବଶ୍ୟକତା ଓ ପ୍ରତିଟି ବ୍ୟବହାରୀଙ୍କୁ ସଫ୍ଟଓଏର ବ୍ୟବହାର, ବଦଳ ଓ ବାଣ୍ଟିବାର ସୁଯୋଗ ଦେବା ଉଦ୍ଦେଶ୍ୟରେ ପାଳିତ ସଫ୍ଟଓଏର ସ୍ୱାଧୀନତା ଦିବସ ।

ସଫ୍ଟଓଏର ଶବ୍ଦଟି ବୋଧେ ଆଉ କାହାରି ପାଇଁ ଅଜଣା ଅଶୁଣା ନୁହେଁ । ଆପଣଙ୍କ ମୋବାଇଲ ଫୋନରୁ କମ୍ପୁଟରଯାଏ ଓ ଏବେ ଏକ ସ୍ଥାନରେ ନ ଥାଇ ସେଠାରେ ଥିବା ଭଳି ଅନୁଭବିବା ପାଇଁ ବ୍ୟବହୃତ ଭର୍ଚୁଆଲ ରିଆଲିଟି ଓ ଅଗମେଣ୍ଟେଡ଼ ରିଆଲିଟି ହେଡ଼ସେଟରେ ହାର୍ଡ଼ଓଏର ବା ଯାନ୍ତ୍ରିକ ଉପକରଣକୁ ସଠିକ ଭାବେ ପରିଚଳାନା କରିବା ହେଉଛି ସଫ୍ଟଓଏରର କାମ । ଆଉ ସଫ୍ଟଓଏରରେ ଟିକେ ଗୋଳମାଳ ହେଲେ କେବେ କମ୍ପୁଟରର ସ୍କ୍ରିନ ନେଳି ପଡ଼ିଯାଏ ତ ପୁଣି କେବେ କେବେ ମୋବାଇଲରେ ଠିକଣା ଜାଗାରେ ଯେତେ ଦବେଇଲେ ବି କାମକରେନା । ତେବେ ଉଣାଅଧିକ ସାଧାରଣ ଲୋକେ ସଫ୍ଟଓଏରରେ ସ୍ୱାଧୀନତା ଆଉ ତାଙ୍କ ଜୀବନ ପାଇଁ ତା’ର ଭୂମିକା ବାବଦରେ କେବେ ଶୁଣିନଥିବେ । ଆଉ ଏଇଟି ସତରେ ଏକ ଅନାଲୋଚିତ ବିଷୟ । ତେବେ ଏ ବିଷୟକୁ ବୁଝିବା ଆଗରୁ ଆମ ଚଳନ୍ତି ସମାଜର କିଛି ଉଦାହରଣ ଆଡ଼େ ଆସନ୍ତୁ ଆଖିପକେଇବା । ଦିନ ଥିଲା ଆପଣ ରେଡ଼ିଓରୁ ଆକାଶବାଣୀ ଲଗେଇ ଗୀତ, ଖବର, ନାଟକ ଆଦି ଶୁଣୁଥିଲେ । ହେଲେ କେବେ ଆକାଶବାଣୀ ଆପଣଙ୍କ ପାହୁଲାଟିଏ ମାଗିଥିଲା କି ନାଁ ଆପଣ ଭଲ ଭଲ ପ୍ରୋଗ୍ରାମ ଆସୁଛି ବୋଲି ଖୁସିରେ କେବେ କିଛି ଦେଇଥିଲେ? କିନ୍ତୁ ଆପଣଙ୍କ ଅଜାଣତରେ ଆପଣ ସତରେ କିଛି ଦେଇଛନ୍ତି । ତା’ ହେଉଛି ଟିକସ । ଆପଣ ଛୋଟରୁ ବଡ଼ ଯାଏ ଯାହା କିଣୁଛନ୍ତି ପ୍ରାୟ ସବୁ ଜିନିଷରେ ଟିକସ ଦିଅନ୍ତି ଆଉ ଚାକିରି କି ଅନ୍ୟ ଉପାୟରେ ପଇସା ଅରଜୁଥିଲେ ବର୍ଷ ଶେଷକୁ ଇନକମ ଟିକସ ବି ଦିଅନ୍ତି । ଏସବୁ ସରକାରଙ୍କ କାମରେ ଲାଗେ । ତେଣୁ ଆକାଶବାଣୀର ରେଡ଼ିଓ ପ୍ରୋଗ୍ରାମ ହେଉ କି ମୋଦିଙ୍କ ବିଦେଶ ବୁଲା ହେଉ ସବୁ ଆପଣଙ୍କ ପଇସାରେ ହିଁ ହେଉଛି । ସରକାରୀ ଓ ବେସରକାରୀ ଉଭୟ ସ୍ଥାନରେ ଏଇ ଏକା ଜିନିଷ । ତେବେ ସଫ୍ଟଓଏର କ୍ଷେତ୍ରରେ ବି ଏଇ ଏକା ଅବସ୍ଥା । ସାଧାରଣରେ ଜଣାଶୁଣା ମାଇକ୍ରୋସଫ୍ଟର ଉଇଣ୍ଡୋଜ ଅପରେଟିଂ ସିଷ୍ଟମ ପାଇଁ କେତେ ପଇସା ନିଜ ଅଜାଣତରେ ଦେଉଛନ୍ତି ତାହା ନୂଆ ଲାପଟପ କିଣିଲାବେଳକୁ କେବେ ଗଣିନଥିବେ । କିନ୍ତୁ ସେଇଟି ଜମାରୁ ମାଗଣା ଆସିନଥାଏ । ସଫ୍ଟଓଏରଟିଏ ଏକ ବା ଅନେକ ଉଚ୍ଚସ୍ତରର ନିର୍ଦ୍ଦିଷ୍ଟ କାମ କରୁଥିବା ବେଳେ ଏକ କମ୍ପୁଟର କି ମୋବାଇଲର ସାମଗ୍ରୀକ ହାର୍ଡ଼ଓଏର ବା ଯନ୍ତ୍ରପାତି ଓ ସଫ୍ଟଓଏର ସବୁକୁ ପରିଚାଳନା ପାଇଁ ଅପରେଟିଂ ସିଷ୍ଟମ ବ୍ୟବହାର କରାଯାଏ । ବିଭିନ୍ନ ଅପରେଟିଂ ସିଷ୍ଟମ ଓ ସଫ୍ଟଓଏର ଭିନ୍ନଭିନ୍ନ ଉପାୟରେ ତିଆରି ହୁଏ । କେବେ ଏସବୁ ମାଇକ୍ରୋସଫ୍ଟ କି ଆପଲ ଭଳି ବଡ଼ ବଡ଼ କମ୍ପାନି ତିଆରି କରି ବିକନ୍ତି ତ କେବେ କେବେ ବ୍ୟକ୍ତିବିଶେଷ ବା ଛୋଟ ବଡ଼ ସଂଗଠନ ମଧ୍ୟ ବିକନ୍ତି । କିନ୍ତୁ ଏସବୁ ବାଦେ ଆଉ ଏକ ଧରଣର ସଫ୍ଟଓଏର ଗଢ଼ାଳି ବ୍ୟକ୍ତିବିଶେଷ-ସଂଗଠନ-କମ୍ପାନି ମଧ୍ୟ ଅଛନ୍ତି । ସେମାନେ ସଫ୍ଟଓଏର ତିଆରି କରି ଖାଲି ବଜାରରେ ଛାଡ଼ନ୍ତି ନାହିଁ ବରଂ ସେ ସଫ୍ଟଓଏରର ସୋର୍ସ କୋଡ଼ ମଧ୍ୟ ଛାଡ଼ନ୍ତି । ଅର୍ଥାତ ଗଣିତ କଷି ଫଳାଫଳ ସଙ୍ଗେ କିପରି କଷିଲେ ସୋପାନ ତଳକୁ ସୋପାନ ଲେଖି ବୁଝାଇଦିଅନ୍ତି । ଫଳରେ ଆଉ କେହି ସେହି ସଫ୍ଟଓଏରରେ କିଛି ବଦଳ କରିବାକୁ ଚାହିଁଲେ କିମ୍ବା ପୁରୁଣା ସଫ୍ଟଓଏରରେ କିଛି ନୂଆ ଯୋଡ଼ି ଉନ୍ନତ କରିବାକୁ ଚାହିଁଲେ ତାଙ୍କୁ ସେଥିରେ କେହି ବାଧା ଦେବେନାହିଁ । କିନ୍ତୁ ନୂଆ ଫଳାଫଳ ବା ସଫ୍ଟଓଏରଟି ବଜାରରେ ଛାଡ଼ିଲା ବେଳେ ତାଙ୍କୁ ମୂଳ ଗଢ଼ାଳିଙ୍କୁ ଉପଯୁକ୍ତ ଶ୍ରେୟ ଦେବାକୁ ପଡ଼ିବ । ଧରନ୍ତୁ ଆପଣ ଚନ୍ଦକାରୁ କଲରାପତରିଆ ବାଘର ଖୋଳ ଆଣି ତାକୁ ଧଳା ରଙ୍ଗ ମାରି ଧଳା ବାଘ କଲେ । ଆପଣଙ୍କୁ ସେ ଧଳା ବାଘକୁ ଶିମିଳିପାଳରେ ଛାଡ଼ିଲା ବେଳେ ଚନ୍ଦକାରୁ ମୂଳ କଲରାପତରିଆ ବାଘ ଆଣିଥିଲେ ବୋଲି ଉଲ୍ଲେଖ କରିବାକୁ ପଡ଼ିବ । ମଜା କଥା ହେଉଛି ଏଭଳି ନିଆରା ଧାରା ଆମ ସମାଜରେ ଜମାରୁ ନୂଆ ନୁହେଁ । ଅକ୍ଷୟ ମହାନ୍ତି ସାଲବେଗଙ୍କ ଲିଖିତ ପୁରୁଣା ଗୀତକୁ ଆଉଥରେ ବୋଲିବା ପରେ ସେ ହଜିଲା ଗୀତସବୁ ଲୋକତୁଣ୍ଡରେ ଆହୁରି ଜଣାଶୁଣା ହେଲା । ହେଲେ ଅକ୍ଷୟ ମହାନ୍ତି ଗୀତର ଗାୟକ ଓ ସଙ୍ଗୀତ ନିର୍ଦ୍ଦେଶକ ଭାବେ ନାଁ ନେଲା ବେଳେ ସାଲବେଗଙ୍କ ରଚନାରୁ ବୋଲି ଲେଖିବାରେ ଉଣା କରିନାହାନ୍ତି ।

ଏହି ଧାରା ଆମ ସମାଜରେ ସବୁକାଳେ ସବୁସ୍ଥଳେ ରହିଛି । ହେଲେ ଆଧୁନିକ ସମାଜରେ ଅନେକ ଲାଭଖୋର କମ୍ପାନି ନିଜ ଲାଭ ଲାଗି ଏ ସାମାଜିକ ଚଳଣିଟିକୁ ପାଶୋରି ପକାଇଛନ୍ତି । ମାଇକ୍ରୋସଫ୍ଟରୁ ଆରମ୍ଭ କରି ଆକୃତି, ଅପ୍ରାନ୍ତ ଯାଏ ପ୍ରାୟ ଅଧିକାଂଶ ସାଧାରଣରେ ବ୍ୟବହାର ହେଉଥିବା ସଫ୍ଟଓଏର ହେଉଛି ପ୍ରୋପ୍ରାଇଟରି ବା ପୂରା ନିବୁଜ । ମାନେ ଆପଣ କେବଳ କିଣି ବ୍ୟବହାର କରିପାରିବେ କିନ୍ତୁ ବାଣ୍ଟିପାରିବେ ନାହିଁ କି କୌଣସି ବଦଳ କରିପାରିବେ ନାହିଁ । କଲେ ଆପଣଙ୍କ ବିରୋଧରେ କୋର୍ଟରେ ଉକ୍ତ କମ୍ପାନିମାନେ କେସ କରି ତଳିତଳାନ୍ତ ମଧ୍ୟ କରିପାରିବେ । ଏ କପିରାଇଟର ଫାନ୍ଦ ଏଡ଼େ କୁଟିଳ ଯେ ସଫ୍ଟଓଏର ତିଆରି କରିଥିବା କମ୍ପାନିମାନେ ସବୁକାଳେ ତାଙ୍କର ମନୋମୁଖୀ ପତିଆରା ରଖିପାରିବେ । ଏଣୁ ଥୋକେ ଭାବିଲେ ବଡ଼ ବଡ଼ ଧନୀ କମ୍ପାନିମାନଙ୍କର ଏ ଗୁମାନ ସେମିତି ଥାଉ । ଆମେ ଚାଲ ବିକଳ୍ପ ଓ ଉଚ୍ଚମାନର କିଛି ସଫ୍ଟଓଏର ତିଆରିବା । ଲୋକ ସ୍ୱାଧୀନ । ଯାହାକୁ ଯାହା ରସିବ ତାକୁ ସେ କିଆଫୁଲ ପରି ବାସୁ । ଆଉ ଏ ଥିଲା ଏକ ସାମାଜିକ ଆବଶ୍ୟକତା । ବିକଳ୍ପ ବାଟଟି ହେଲା ସଫ୍ଟଓଏରର ସ୍ୱାଧୀନତା । ଏଥିରେ କୌଣସି ସଫ୍ଟଓଏର ଗଢ଼ିଥିବା ମୂଳ ଗଢ଼ାଳି ଓ ତା’ ପରେ ସେଥିରେ ଯୋଗଦାନ କରିଥିବା ସଭିଙ୍କୁ ସମାନ ଭାବେ ସମ୍ମାନ ଦେଇ ଯୋଗଦାନକାରୀ ଭାବେ ସେମାନଙ୍କ ନାମ ଉଲ୍ଲେଖ କରାଯାଇଥାଏ । ଖାଲି ନାଁ ନୁହେଁ ଅନେକ ସମୟରେ ଖୋଲା ସଫ୍ଟଓଏର ସଙ୍ଗେ ଜଡ଼ିତ ବ୍ୟକ୍ତିବିଶେଷ ଓ ସଂଗଠନସବୁ ଏମିତି ଆଖିଖୋସିଲା ଭଳି କାମ କରନ୍ତି ଯେ କିଣା ଆଉ ବୁଜା ସଫ୍ଟଓଏର କିଣିବାରୁ କି ବ୍ୟବହାର କରିବାରୁ ମନ ମରିଯିବ । ତିନି ବର୍ଷ ତଳେ Firefox ବ୍ରାଉଜର ତିଆରିରେ ଭାଗନେଇଥିବା Mozillaର ସ୍ୱେଚ୍ଛାସେବୀ ଯୋଗଦାନକାରୀମାନଙ୍କୁ ସମ୍ମାନ ଜଣାଇ ଆମେରିକାର ସାନ ଫ୍ରାନସିସ୍କୋ ସହରରେ ଏକ ବିଶାଳ ସ୍ମାରକୀ ଗଢ଼ି ସେଥିରେ ସମସ୍ତଙ୍କ ନାମ ଲେଖାଯାଇଥିଲା । ଭାବନ୍ତୁ ଏ ପ୍ରକଳ୍ପରେ ସାମାନ୍ୟତମ ଯୋଗଦାନ କରିଥିବା ଲୋକଟିର ନାଁ ବି ଇତିହାସରେ ଲେଖାହୋଇ ରହିଗଲା । ୨୦୦୧ ମସିହାରେ ଇଂରାଜୀ ଓ ତା’ ପରେ ଓଡ଼ିଆ ସମେତ ବାକି ବିଶ୍ୱଭାଷାରେ ଇଣ୍ଟରନେଟରେ ତିଆରି ଖୋଲା ଜ୍ଞାନକୋଷ ଉଇକିପିଡ଼ିଆର ଇତିହାସ ବି ଏମିତି । ଏହି ଉଇକିପିଡ଼ିଆ ୱେବସାଇଟଗୁଡ଼ିକ ମିଡ଼ିଆଉଇକି ନାମକ ଖୋଲା ସଫ୍ଟଓଏରରେ ତିଆରି । ଆଉ ସେଇ ଏକା ସଫ୍ଟଓଏରକୁ ନିଜ ଆବଶ୍ୟକତା ଅନୁସାରେ ବଦଳାଇ ଉଇକିଲିକ୍ସ ଓ ଉଇକିଟ୍ରାଭେଲ ଭଳି ଅଲଗା ଅଲଗା ୱେବସାଇଟ ଆଜି ଚାଳିତ ।

ତେବେ ଅନେକେ ଭାବୁଥିବେ ଯେ ଏ ଫ୍ରି ସଫ୍ଟଓଏର କଣ ସବୁବେଳେ ମାଗଣା? ସଫ୍ଟଓଏର ସ୍ୱାଧୀନତା କ୍ଷେତ୍ରରେ ଗତ କେଇ ଦଶନ୍ଧି ଧରି କାମ କରି ଏ ଆନ୍ଦୋଳନକୁ ବହୁ ଆଗକୁ ନେଇଥିବା ରିଚାର୍ଡ଼ ଷ୍ଟଲମ୍ୟାନ ଖୁବ ସହଜ ଓ ସରଳ ଢଙ୍ଗରେ ଏ ବିଷୟଟି ବୁଝାଇଦିଅନ୍ତି ।

ଫ୍ରି ସଫ୍ଟଓଏର ମାଗଣାରେ ବଣ୍ଟାଯାଇପାରେ ବା କିଛି ଦରରେ ବିକାଯାଇପାରେ । କିନ୍ତୁ ଏଥିରେ ଥିବା “ଫ୍ରି” ମାଗଣା ନୁହେଁ ବରଂ ଖୋଲା ଜ୍ଞାନ ଭଳି “ଫ୍ରିଡ଼ମ” ବା ସ୍ୱାଧୀନତାକୁ ସୂଚାଏ ।

ତେଣୁ କୌଣସି ସଫ୍ଟଓଏର ବ୍ୟବହାର କରିବା ଆଗରୁ ତା’ର କପିରାଇଟ ବାବଦରେ ସେଥିରେ ଥିବା ନିୟମାବଳୀ ପଢ଼ିଲେ ବୁଝାପଡ଼ିବ ଯେ ତାହା ଏକ ପ୍ରୋପ୍ରାଇଟରି କି ଫ୍ରି ସଫ୍ଟଓଏର । ସ୍ୱାଧୀନତା ମଣିଷର ଜନ୍ମଗତ ଅଧିକାର । ଆଉ ଜ୍ଞାନ ବାଣ୍ଟିବା ଲାଗି । ବାନ୍ଧି ରଖିବା ଲାଗି ନୁହେଁ । କାରଣ କେହି ଜ୍ଞାନ ତିଆରି ନାହିଁ ବରଂ ସଭିଏଁ ଜ୍ଞାନର ନାନାଦି ଭଣ୍ଡାରକୁ ବ୍ୟବହାର କରିବା ପାଇଁ ବାଟ ତିଆରି କରିଥାନ୍ତି । ତେଣୁ ସେ ବାଟରେ ବାଡ଼ କିଆଁ? ନିକଟରେ ସମାଜର ଏହି ପୁରାତନ ଧାରାକୁ ବାହୁଡ଼ି ଯିବା ପାଇଁ ଅନେକ ବ୍ୟକ୍ତିବିଶେଷ, ସଂଗଠନ ଓ ବଡ଼ ବଡ଼ କମ୍ପାନି ଧୀରେ ଧୀରେ ସେମାନେ ତିଆରୁଥିବା ସଫ୍ଟଓଏରର ସୋର୍ସ କୋଡ଼ ଖୋଲାରେ ଦେଲେଣି । ଫଳରେ ସାଧାରଣ ବ୍ୟବହାରକାରୀ ଓ ସଫ୍ଟଓଏର ଗଢ଼ାଳିଙ୍କ ହାତରେ ସ୍ୱାଧୀନ ଭାବେ ସେମାନେ ବ୍ୟବହାର କରୁଥିବା ସଫ୍ଟଓଏରକୁ ନିଜ ଆବଶ୍ୟକ ଅନୁସାରେ ବ୍ୟବହାର କରିପାରିବେ । ଆଉ ସମାଜର ମୌଳିକ ଆବଶ୍ୟକତା ବିଭିନ୍ନତାର ବହୁରଙ୍ଗ ଏଥିରେ ସମୁଜ୍ଜଳେ ଫୁଟିଉଠିବ ।

ଆମ ସମାଜର ଏହି ବାଣ୍ଟିବାର ଧାରାକୁ ନୂଆ ଟେକନୋଲୋଜି ଯୁଗରେ ଉଜ୍ଜୀବିତ କରିବା ଲକ୍ଷରେ ଜଗତ ସାରା ୨୦୦୪ ମସିହାରୁ ସେପ୍ଟେମ୍ବର ମାସର ତୃତୀୟ ସପ୍ତାହରେ “ସଫ୍ଟଓଏର ଫ୍ରିଡ଼ମ ଡେ” ବା “ସଫ୍ଟଓଏର ସ୍ୱାଧୀନତା ଦିବସ” ପାଳିତ ହୋଇଆସୁଛି । ଏଥିରେ କୌଣସି ନିର୍ଦ୍ଦିଷ୍ଟ ସଫ୍ଟଓଏର ନୁହେଁ ବରଂ ଖୋଲା ସଫ୍ଟଓଏର ପଛରେ ଥିବା ଦାର୍ଶନିକ ଓ ସାମାଜିକ ଦୃଷ୍ଟିକୋଣଟି ସଭିଙ୍କୁ ବୁଝାଇବା ହେଉଛି ମୂଳ ଲକ୍ଷ । ଆଉ ଯେଯାଏ ବଡ଼ କମ୍ପାନି ସାଧାରଣ ଲୋକଙ୍କୁ ସମ୍ପୂର୍ଣ୍ଣ ତଥ୍ୟ ନ ଜଣାଇ କପିରାଇଟ ବଳରେ ବାନ୍ଧି ରଖିଥିବେ ସେଯାଏ ବ୍ୟବହାରୀ ବାପୁଡ଼ା ବା ଜାଣିବ କେମିତି ଏ ଭିତର ଗୁମର? ନିଜ ହାତରେ ନିଜ ଶାସନର ଡୋର ଧରିବା ଯେମିତି ସ୍ୱାଧୀନତା ନିଜ ବ୍ୟବହାରରେ ଲାଗୁଥିବା ସଫ୍ଟଓଏରର ସ୍ୱାଧୀନତା ବି ଏକାଭଳି ପ୍ରତିଟି ବ୍ୟବହାରକାରୀର ଅଧିକାର । ତେଣୁ ଏ ସ୍ୱାଧୀନତା ଦିବସକୁ ସଭିଏଁ ନିଆରା ଢଙ୍ଗରେ ପାଳନ୍ତି । ଆଫ୍ରିକାରେ କିଛି ବର୍ଷ ଆଗରୁ ଫ୍ରି ସଫ୍ଟଓଏର ଚାଳିତ ଏକ ଡ୍ରୋନ ବା ଚାଳକବିହୀନ ପବନଯାନଟିଏ ଛାଡ଼ିଥିଲେ । ଅନେକ ସ୍ଥାନରେ ଲୋକେ ଏକାଠି ହୋଇ ଏ ବାବଦରେ ସଫ୍ଟଓଏର ସ୍ୱାଧୀନତା ବାବଦରେ ଆଲୋଚନା କରନ୍ତି । ଆଉ ପୁଣି କେଉଁଠି ସାଧାରଣ ଲୋକଙ୍କୁ ତାଙ୍କ କମ୍ପୁଟରରେ ଫ୍ରି ସଫ୍ଟଓଏର ଇନଷ୍ଟଲ କରିବା ପାଇଁ କ୍ୟାମ୍ପ କରନ୍ତି । ଫଳରେ ଲୋକେ ନିଜ କମ୍ପୁଟରରେ ମାଇକ୍ରୋସଫ୍ଟର ବିକଳ୍ପ ଓ ଉବଣ୍ଟୁ ଭଳି ଖୋଲା ଲିନକ୍ସ ଅପରେଟିଂ ସିଷ୍ଟମ କିମ୍ବା Mozilla Firefox ଭଳି ବ୍ରାଉଜର ଇନଷ୍ଟଲ କରିପାରିବେ । ସଫ୍ଟଓଏର ସ୍ୱାଧୀନତା ଦିବସର ଚିହ୍ନ ସ୍ୱରୂପର ଲେଖକର ଏ ଲେଖାଟି ମଧ୍ୟ ଏକ ଖୋଲା ଲାଇସେନ୍ସରେ ଆଉ ଶ୍ରେୟ ଦେଇ କେହି ଚାହିଁଲେ ତାହାକୁ ପ୍ରକାଶ କରିପାରିବେ ।

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/openness/software-freedom-day

ଆମ ହାତେ ଆମ କୋଡ୍ ଲେଖିବା

subha — 2016-09-17T16:04:12Z

I authored a column on writing our code in our own hands for the editorial of Odia-language daily the "Samaja". The piece is about the philosophy of software freedom and how free and open source software is making a significant difference in our lives. I have also shared a little bit about how anyone can celebrate the Software Freedom Day today by contributing to and sharing about to FOSS.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/samaja-september-17-2016-subhashish-panigrahi-let-us-write-our-code-in-our-own-hands

It's September, and That Means It's Time for Software Freedom Day

subha — 2016-09-17T15:42:46Z

Software Freedom Day (SFD), which celebrates the use of free and open software, is just around the corner on September 17. When the day first started in 2004, only 12 teams from different places joined, but it has since grown to include hundreds registered events around the world, depending on the year.

The article was published by Global Voices on September 17, 2016.

Supported by several global organizations like Google, Canonical, Free Software Foundation, Joomla, Creative Commons and Linux Journal, Software Freedom Day draws its inspiration from the philosophy promoted by people like Richard Stallman who argue that free software is all about the freedom and not necessarily free of cost but provides the liberty to users from proprietary software developers’ power and influence. SFD encourages everyone to gather in their own cities (here's a map of places where SFD is organized this year), educate people around them about free software, and promote the cause on social media (with the hashtag #SFD2016 this year). There's also hackathons (hacking free software to modify the code and create what one wants to have in it), running free software installation camps, and even going creative with flying a drone running free software.	What are FOSS, free software, open source, and FLOSS? Free and open source software (FOSS or F/OSS), and free/libre and open-source software (FLOSS) are umbrella terms that are used to include both free software and open source software. Adopted by noted software freedom advocate Richard Stallman in 1983, free software has many names — libre software, freedom-respecting software and software libre are some of them. As defined by the Free Software Foundation, one of the early advocates of software freedom, free software allows users not just to use the software with complete freedom, but to study, modify, and distribute the software and any adapted versions, in both commercial and noncommercial form. The distribution of the software for commercial and noncommercial form, however, depends on the particular license the software is released under. “Open source” was coined as an alternative to free software in 1998 by educational-advocacy organization Open Source Initiative. Open source software is generally created collaboratively, made available with its source code, and it provides the user rights to study, change, and distribute the software to anyone and for any purpose.

From South Asia, there are 13 celebratory events in India, eight in Nepal, one in Bangladesh and four in Sri Lanka.

South Asian countries have seen adoption of both free software and open source software by individuals, organizations and the government. The Free Software Movement of India was founded in Bengaluru, India, in 2010 to act as a national coalition of several regional chapters working to promote and grow the free software movement in India.

The Indian government has launched an open data portal at data.gov.in portal for sharing large datasets like the census data under free licenses. The government's new policy emphasizes on adopting open source software. Moreover government's Ministry of Communication and Information Technology asked vendors to include open source software applications while making requests for proposals.

Similarly, there are several free and open source communities and organizations operating from the subcontinent, like Mozilla India, Wikimedia India, the Centre for Internet and Society, Open Knowledge India, Mozilla Bangladesh, Wikimedia Bangladesh, Bangladesh Open Source Network, Open Knowledge Bangladesh, Mozilla Nepal, Wikimedians of Nepal, Open Knowledge Nepal, Wikimedia Community User Group Pakistan, and the Lanka Software Foundation in Sri Lanka.

Mohammad Jahangir Alam, a lecturer from Southern University Bangladesh, argues in a research paper that the use of open source software can help the government save a enormous amount of money that are spent in purchasing proprietary software:

A Large amount of money of government can be saved if the government uses open source software in different IT sectors of government offices and others sectors, Because government is providing computer to all educational institute from school to university level and they are using proprietary software. For this reason government is to expend a large amount of many for buying proprietary software to run the computers. Another one is government paying significant amount of money to the different vendors for buying different types of software to implement e-Governance project. So, the Government can use open source software for implanting projects to minimize cost of the projects.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/openness/global-voices-september-17-2016-subhashish-panigrahi-it-is-september-and-that-means-it-is-time-for-software-freedom-day

Methodology: Statements of Working (Form 27) of Indian Mobile Device Patents

rohini — 2017-09-10T15:19:51Z

In India, if a patent is not locally worked within three years of its issuance, any person may request a compulsory license, and if the patent is not adequately worked within two years of the grant of such a compulsory license, it may be revoked. In order to provide the public with information about patent working, India requires every patentee to file an annual statement on “Form 27” describing the working of each of its issued Indian patents. We conducted the first comprehensive and systematic study of all Forms 27 filed with respect to mobile devices. We tried to empirically establish the extent to which patentees and licensees comply with the statutory requirement to declare information about the working of their patents. Research assistance was provided by interns Anna Liz Thomas and Nayana Dasgupta.

The research paper on patent landscape, Patents and Mobile Devices in India: An Empirical Survey, [PDF] was published in the Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law (2017).

The research paper on "Patent Working Requirements and Complex Products: An Empirical Assessment of India's Form 27 Practice and Compliance" has been published here (July 2017).

The dataset of all the Form 27 studied for this paper has been published here.

Research Questions

How many annual Form 27 submissions have been made to the Indian Patent Office for 4,419 granted patents identified in the landscape of mobile device patents in India?
How many patents have no corresponding Form 27 filed yet?
How many Form 27 submissions from those found are defective?
Is there an identifiable pattern in the defects and discrepancies?
Is there any discernible trend in filing of Form 27 over time and with respect to patent owners?

The objective of this paper is to quantitatively determine the extent to which patentees and licensees comply with the statutory requirement to declare information about the working of their patents according to Section 146(2) of the Patents Act, 1970 read with Rule 131 of the Patent Rules, 2003.

Section 146(2): Without prejudice to the provisions of sub-section (1), every patentee and every licensee (whether exclusive or otherwise) shall furnish in such manner and form and at such intervals (not being less than six months) as may be prescribed statements as to the extent to which the patented invention has been worked on a commercial scale in India.

Rule 131: Form and manner in which statements required under section 146(2) to be furnished

The statements shall be furnished by every patentee and every licensee under sub-section (2) of section 146 in Form 27 which shall be duly verified by the patentee or the licensee or his authorised agent.
The statements referred to in sub-rule (1) shall be furnished in respect of every calendar year within three months of the end of each year.
The Controller may publish the information received by him under sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) of section 146.

Object

The research object is Form 27 submissions made annually to the Indian Patent Office for the 4,419 granted patents.

4,052 of these patents were identified in the landscape (“the patent landscape”) developed by the Centre for Internet and Society as a part of ongoing research on patents pertaining to sub-USD-100 mobile devices sold in India. The dataset of the patent landscape can be accessed here. Another 367 patents pertaining to mobile technology identified during the landscaping exercise but excluded from it, were added to the initial set of 4,052 patents.

A blank copy of Form 27 is available here. The pro forma is defined as per Schedule II of Patent Rules, 2003.

Research Methods

[Corresponding research questions

How many annual Form 27 submissions have been made to the Indian Patent Office for 4,419 granted patents identified in the landscape of mobile device patents in India?
How many patents have no corresponding Form 27 filed yet?
How many Form 27 submissions from those found are defective?]

Outsourcing the searching of the submitted copies of Form 27 to a contractor

Owing to the repetitive nature of the process for collecting the forms, as well the large scale of the project, the task of searching was outsourced to a contractor. Price quotations were invited from five data entry operators and two firms of patent attorneys. On the basis of the quotation, deliverable time, scope and nature of the results delivered, and quality assurance, the contract was awarded to one firm. The firm offered the best price for a commensurate deliverable time and assured quality of results.

Form 27 retrieval online

Form 27 were searched from IPAIRS (Indian Patent Information Retrieval System) and InPASS (Indian Patent Advanced Search System) public databases of the Indian Patent Office.

InPASS has two features: Application Status and E-Register. We checked both features, in case forms not found through one could be located through the other. We indeed found that, sometimes, the forms not available on E-register could be found through the Application Status table, and vice versa.

Case 1: Accessing form 27 using Application Status tab on INPASS

A search portal is located at ipindiaservices.gov.in/publicsearch.

Enter the patent number in the “Patent Number” search field without the kind codes (IN) and click on “Search”. E.g., for patent number IN263932B, enter ‘263932’ in the “Patent Number” field.
Once the queried patent is displayed, select the “Application Status” tab to access the list of documents that were filed for the requested patent.

In the Application Status tab, scroll down to the bottom to view “Application Status table”. Click on the “View Documents” button to access the list of the documents filed for the queried patent. A pop-up window opens with the results.

In the window, a list of hyperlinks to various documents is displayed. Sometimes Form 27/ working statement is explicitly named so. At other times, it may have a different title. Once you click on the form 27 link, a PDF file opens in a new tab. There may be more than one Form 27 in the list of documents as Form 27 is an annual submission.

Case 2: No record of Form 27 found (Application status tab)

If the form is not present on InPASS, that is, if it has not been uploaded to the website, or if it has not been submitted to the Indian Patent Office (IPO), then it will not be displayed in the list of documents described in Case 1, step 5. Such instances have been logged as “No record found”.

Case 3: Accessing form 27 using E-Register tab on INPASS

At http://ipindiaservices.gov.in/publicsearch, a patent search portal is displayed. Enter the patent number by following the same steps as described in Case 1 until the queried patent is displayed. Select the “E-register” tab to access the e-register data corresponding to the queried patent.

In the “E-register” tab, scroll to the bottom to view the “Information u/s 146” table. The “Information u/s 146” table includes a list of Form 27 filed for the queried patent. As visible in the screenshot below, on clicking the “261762_2015” hyperlink, Form 27 for the queried patent opens. There could be multiple form 27s corresponding to different years.

Case 4: No record of Form 27 found (E-register)

If the form is not present in the E-register, that is, if it has not been uploaded to the website or if it has not been submitted to the IPO, then the E-Register tab displays “Eregister Not Available”.

Case 5: Searching on IPAIRS

Both InPASS and IPAIRS fetch forms from the same URL. However, we observed that one search engine sometimes displays the forms when the other doesn’t. The IPAIRS search engine was used when Form 27 was not found on InPASS.

IPAIRS patent search homepage: http://ipindiaonline.gov.in/patentsearch/search/index.aspx On the home page, in the Application Status tab, enter the full patent application number and CAPTCHA.
A window containing information pertaining to the patent application opens. At the bottom of the window, there is a “View Documents” button.

On clicking on “View Documents”, a new window with list of hyperlinked documents opens as described in Case 1, Step 5.

The URL for the new window displayed via “View Documents” on IPAIRS is the same as the URL displayed via “View Documents” in the “Application Status” tab on InPASS. For example, for patent number 263932, the URL for this window is the same on IPAIRS and InPASS: http://ipindiaonline.gov.in/patentsearch/GrantedSearch/viewdoc.aspx?id=Bx6eZ7YQLgsl3yH1LqKHjg==&loc=wDBSZCsAt7zoiVrqcFJsRw==

Form 27 retrieval via Right To Information (RTI) requests

CIS filed two requests under the RTI Act, 2005 with the Office of the Controller General of Patents, Designs, and Trade Marks in Mumbai.

CIS' RTI application to the Indian Patent Office in Mumbai, March 2016 [PDF]. The IPO's reply, April 2016 [PDF].

(View text: https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/rti-request-to-indian-patents-office-for-form-27-statement-of-working-of-patents-march-2016)

CIS' RTI application to the IPO in Mumbai, June 2015 [PDF]. The IPO's reply, June 2015 [PDF].

(View text: https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/rti-request-to-indian-patents-office-for-form-27-statement-of-working-of-patents-2015)

InPASS and IPAIRS yielded Form 27 for 1,999 patents out of 4,419. For Form 27 pertaining to 61 of the remaining patents, CIS made a request in March 2016 under the Right to Information Act (2005) to the office of the Indian Patent Office located in Mumbai.

How the 61 patents were chosen
37 of the 50 companies in the patent landscape owned granted patents. We took one patent from each of the 37 companies. [See Annexure 4 (PDF)of Methodology: Patent landscaping in the Indian mobile device market] The remaining were patents litigated in India, as well as patents transferred from one of the companies in the landscape to another.

IPO’s reply to the March 2016 RTI application
The IPO replied in April 2016 that it could provide CIS with forms for eleven of the requested patents. As for the rest of the forms, the IPO stated, “As thousand [sic] of Form-27 are filed in this office, it is very difficult to segregate Form-27 for the patent numbers enlisted in your RTI application as it needs diversion of huge official/ staff manpower and it will affect day to day [sic] work of this office.”

Repeating the Form 27 search online

A few days after CIS received the reply from the IPO, Form 27 pertaining to patents in the landscape started appearing on InPASS and IPAIRS E-register portal. CIS’ contractor repeated the search for forms for all 4,419 patents as some forms filed in 2016 and 2015 were found. Forms for additional 1,003 patents were found, taking the number of patents with at least one corresponding form to 3,002.

Of the 1,417 patents for which forms were not found, 481 are either expired or there is no log corresponding to them in the E-Register.

Schema for the results

Information from the Form 27 was logged into a spreadsheet with the following heads:
Serial Number -- Assignee -- Patent Number -- Status -- Application Date -- Grant Date -- Title -- Application Number -- Form 27 presence -- Multiple Forms -- Number of years -- Year -- If Worked -- Working/ Non-working Status -- Working/ Non-working Information -- Licensing Status -- Licensing Information -- Comments.

Detailed legend and process of logging the results

Assignee: Name of the company that owns the patent. Annexure 4 [PDF] lists 50 companies studied for the patent landscape. 37 of those companies owned patents in India. Thus, the assignee could be one of 37 companies among the 50 in Annexure 4. Where two assignees are mentioned, the patent was transferred from the second assignee to the first on account of sale of the patent, company merger, etc. For example, "Huawei|NEC" indicates that a patent that belonged to NEC was transferred to Huawei.

Form 27 presence: Whether or not Form 27 was found. Entries in this column are either “Yes” or “No”. If case Form 27 was not found, the subsequent columns are unpopulated.

Multiple Forms: If more than one Form 27 was found, the number of years for which it was found. In some cases, more than one form was found for the same patent for the same year. We have considered these instances as a single form for the same year and noted the defect in the “Comments” column.

Year: The year for which the form was filed. This information was found in #2 of the pro forma of Form 27. In the case of patents with Form 27 filed for more than one year, the entries for different years have been logged into consecutive rows.

If Worked: This information was found in 3(i) of the pro forma. Depending on whether the text of Form 27 states that the patent was “worked” or “not worked”, results have been logged as either “Yes” or “No”. In instances where it is not explicitly stated whether the patent has been worked or not, or where 3(i) is blank, the results are logged as “Not disclosed” with a description of the defect in the “Comments” column.

Working/ Non-working status: Corresponds to 3(i)a in the case of patents stated as “worked” and to 3(i)b in the case of those stated as “not worked”. The results have been marked as:

Description is generic (future use)
Description is generic (present use)
Description is specific
No description

Description is generic (future use): No specific information been provided as required by 3(i)a or 3(i)b. The description indicates that in the future the patentee might “work” or license the patent or do both. E.g: “May be worked in the future depending on the market demand and when technology is mature.”

“We are still assessing the commercial and technological aspects of working of this patent in India and negotiating marketing and distribution of patented product with related parties.”

“Technical developments [sic] are still continuing” or “Negotiations and technical developments [sic] are still continuing”.

Description is generic (present use): No specific information been provided as required by 3(i)a or 3(i)b. The description indicates that the patentee may be “working” the patent. E.g:, “DUE TO THE NATURE OF THE INVENTION, IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO DETERMINE ACCURATELY WHETHER THE PATENTED INVENTION HAS BEEN WORKED IN INDIA OR NOT. Improvements in the invention are continuing to be made. The Patentee is actively looking for licensees and customers to commercialise the invention in the Indian environment.”

“... This patent is among a large number of patents in the patentee’s complex portfolio which may cover the products services and embedded technologies provided by the patentee or its licensee(s) in India. This patent might worked [sic] in India in some of the patentee(s) existing or future products, services and embedded technologies. Given the extremely Iarge number of patents that may apply to any given product or service of the patentee, it is very difficult to Identify and accurately update which of those patents would apply to the numerous products, services and embedded technologies.”

Description is specific: Specific information has been provided as required in 3(i)a or 3(i)b.

E.g, “Quantum of the patented product-303520 and value of the patented product in INR-2790524299”.

No description: 3(i)a and 3(i)b are blank.

Working/non-working information: Contains the full text of the descriptions mentioned in “Working/non-working status” column. These have been reproduced verbatim from Form 27 filings.

Licensing status: States whether or not the patent has been licensed as per 3(ii) of the pro forma for Form 27. Results are logged as “Yes” (licensed), “No” (no-licensed), “Cross-licensed” and “Not disclosed”.

“Not disclosed” indicates that the response to 3(ii) is either blank or there is an explicit statement that licensing information would not be disclosed on Form 27. E.g: “As all the licenses are confidential in nature, the details pertaining to the same are not being disclosed herein and may be provided to the Patent Office as and when the same is specifically directed by the Patent Office under sealed cover so that such details are not laid open in public domain.”

Licensing information: Contains the full text of the response reproduced verbatim from 3(ii). (Blank fields when there is no text in 3(ii))

For patents marked as licensed, this column contains the names and addresses of licensees and/ or sub-licensees.

For patents marked as not-licensed, this column is either blank or contains statements such as, “Information Not readily available; efforts will be made to collect and submit further information, if asked for.”, “None”, “No licensees”.

For patents marked as “cross-licensed”, the patentee states that it has a cross-licensing agreement with its licensees. E.g: “There is a cross license agreement between <company name> and at least one licensee, giving mutual rights to produce despite monopoly afforded by patents that are hold by any of the companies. There is no information available on whether the technology of said patent is included products sold by such licensee. As all the licenses are confidential in nature, the details pertaining to the same shall be provided under specific directions from the Patent Office.”

Comments: Contains information about defects and notable observations from the Form 27 submissions.

Validation of results

Validation of the results was done via deduplication first and then random sampling of 10% of the results.

Analysis of results

[Corresponding research questions:
4. Is there an identifiable pattern in the defects and discrepancies?
5. Is there any discernible trend in filing of Form 27 over time and with respect to patent owners?]

The results logged into the spreadsheet were analysed to find a pattern in the defects in the submissions. Visualisations will be created, if necessary.

Prior Art

Extraordinary writ petition in the matter of a public interest litigation, filed in the High Court of Delhi, Shamnad Basheer vs Union of India and others, C.M. No. 5590 of 2015 http://spicyip.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/FORM-27-WP-1R-copy.pdf

The petitioner(s) “sought to investigate the commercial working of certain patented inventions in India, particularly in relation to three key areas”. One of these areas include telecommunications technology. Para 53 to 58 of the writ elucidate on the petitioners’ observations and findings on “High technology patents and trolls”, while para 59 and 60 refer to the linkage between patents and products. Annexure P-8 of this petition contains copies of Form 27 filed by Ericsson in India. Annexure P-11 contains a “summary of findings of Form 27 investigations conducted by the petitioner”. Annexure P-4 (II. Telecommunications Sector) contains a list of 58 patents pertaining to the telecommunications domain in India. 21 of these are coincide with the patent landscape mentioned in “Research Object”.
Basheer had published a report in 2011 based on the findings of his RTI investigation of Form 27 pertaining to pharmaceutical patents in India. The report titled “RTI Applications and “Working” of Foreign Drugs in India?” is available at: http://www.spicyip.com/docs/Workingpatents.doc The report sheds light on lack of filing, incomplete filing and violation of patent working norms by pharmaceutical companies. He states having encountered difficulties during the RTI process: The RTI process was a very arduous one, with the patent office refusing information or claiming missing files in some cases. We had to resort to the appellate procedure in almost all cases. And in one case concerning the drugs Tarceva and Sutent, both the CPIO (Delhi office) and the appellate authority refused to provide information. We had to then take the matter up directly with Controller General PH Kurian who immediately ordered that the information be provided. Upon his instructions, the information was provided within 24 hours. However, we received this information only on the 4^th of April 2011, more than 6 months since we began the RTI process! (Source: Drug Firms and Patent "Working": Extent of Compliance with Form 27 http://spicyip.com/2011/04/drug-firms-and-patent-working-extent-of.html

Limitations

If Form 27 is not found on InPASS or INPAIRS, it is not possible to determine if the form has not been submitted to the IPO or it has been submitted but the IPO has not uploaded it. There is no publicly available database or log where such information is available.
Technical issues with the IPAIRS website hampered the speed of searching for and downloading Form 27. At the time of trial run in May 2015, the website was not available for nearly a week. Technical issues also lead to conflicting search results on IPAIRS and INPASS at times. For example, the form may be available via one search engine but not via another, even though they are fetched the files from the same database. Runtime errors occur due to browser caching.

Edited, September 10, 2017: To add -- URLs of the research paper on Form 27 published in July 2017, and of the dataset containing raw data, which was published and licensed CC-BY-SA 4.0.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/methodology-statements-of-working-form-27-of-indian-mobile-device-patents

Where is the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership Headed?

sinha — 2016-09-17T14:15:05Z

The Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) – the Asian answer to the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) is still being furiously scripted.

The blog post was originally published in Spicy IP on September 7, 2016. It can be read here.

The US-led TPP and China-led RCEP were always touted as rivals racing to set global trade standards before the conclusion of the other. Well, TPP gunned ahead and is currently in the ratification phase, where as RCEP is yet to be concluded and talks may very well enter 2017. The latest round of RCEP talks ended last month and paints a worrisome picture for the global south, given that it will bring 3.5 billion people and 12% of world trade into its fold.

Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) do not enable zero-sum free trade. In fact, each country leaves with disproportionate gains and losses in their kitty, after the conclusion of the agreement. And the worst casualties are environment, public health, labour rights, SMEs and local markets. Since there is plenty of give and take occurring in a context of fluid foreign policy relations, it becomes imperative to locate the ‘barter’. Last month, Balaji wrote an excellent comparative analysis(I & II) of the RCEP IPR text, and this post complements that. I present a regional overview of negotiations and the impact on course of the agreement, as gathered from press coverage of the meetings and the leaks; and to provide a more wholesome picture of the barters, I discuss other relevant chapters at the end of this post. Further, as the negotiations are conducted in secrecy, different organisations and individuals have ‘leaked’ draft texts. KEI and bilaterals.org are two such organizations that regularly collate and release latest RCEP texts. I rely on RCEP’s IP Chapter(October 15, 2015 version) and Terms of Reference by the Working Group on Electronic Commerce(August 2015 version). Analysing the Telecommunications Services chapter is outside the scope of the post, and I link it here for the interest of our readers.

Impact on E-commerce

What is currently available are the terms for reference establishing the Working Group’s mandate on drafting a chapter on e-commerce. The document acknowledges the need for inclusion of a provision for special and differential treatment, and additional flexibilities to the least developed ASEAN countries. It draws a list of relevant elements for possible inclusion in the RCEP. I reproduce the list here (emphasis supplied is mine):

I. General Provisions

Cooperation
Electronic Supply of Services

II. Trade Faciliation

Paperless Trading
Electronic Signature and Digital Certification

III. Creating a Conducive Environment for Electronic Commerce

Online Consumer Protection
Online Personal Data Protection
Unsolicited Commercial E-mail
Domestic Regulatory Frameworks
Custom Duties
Non-Discriminatory Treatment of Digital Products

IV. Promoting Cross Border Electronic Commerce

Prohibition on Requirements Concerning the Location of Computing Facilities
Prohibition on Requirements Concerning Disclosure of Source Code
Cross- Border Transfer of Information by Electronic Means

While there is no clarity on customs duties, there is a mention of non-discriminatory treatment of digital products. While India has no law on non-discriminatory treatment of digital products, this may conflict with the Indian government’s policy on adoption of open source software for government use.

More alarmingly, the first prohibition restrains governments from mandating data localisation. The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and Trade in Services Agreement (TISA) also bar governments from making rules on data localisation, i.e. requiring physical situation of servers and storage in their countries’ territories. This is a worrisome provision because it may effectuate surreptitious surveillance. The prohibition on disclosure of source code is also troublesome and is aimed to stop examination and review of code in computing devices. This would effectively ban security researchers from finding security vulnerabilities in devices, and the if the provision is drafted like its counterpart in the TPP, there will also be prohibitions on checks by regulating authorities.

Re ‘Cross- Border Transfer of Information by Electronic Means’, the provision will be most likely drafted to favour big data and advertising companies’ operations enabling unrestricted transfer of personal data(like the TPP). If that is the case, then it will be in conflict with Rule 7 of the Information Technology (Reasonable security practices and sensitive personal data or information) Rules 2011, which permits cross-border flow of personal information only in situations where the recipient of the information complies with Indian data protection standards as a bare minimum.

Impact on farmer's seeds

RCEP is bound to hit farmers the worst: not only are countries reducing tariffs for increased import of agricultural products, there also exists an obligation to join the International Union for Protection of New Varieties of Plants (UPOV system), which would mandate members to introduce a new IPR: the breeders’ right over new plant varieties. Japan and Korea want RCEP members to join UPOV 1991, and Japan has proposed criminal penalties for the infringement of breeders’ rights.

While India has applied to become a member to the UPOV Convention, in 2001 it passed the Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers’ Rights Act, and thereby built a sui generis system of protection (ambitiously trying to balance breeders’ rights and farmers’ rights). It will be naive to expect a similar attempt in balanced lawmaking by other countries. Furthermore, “…India’s current legislation is less stringent than UPOV 1991. It allows farmers to continue with their seed practices, except they cannot sell packaged seeds of protected varieties. The space for both small farmers and public breeders to freely work with seeds will be lost of RCEP goes the way of what Korea and Japan are proposing.” Using FTAs to reduce farmers’ freedom has been well documented, and you may read more on that here.

The text also desires all RCEP members to codify traditional knowledge and make it available to various patent offices. This push is widely regarded as problematic, as it is feared that documenting and digitization of existing knowledge may propel companies to use that information for commercial gains, to the detriment of the indigenous people and farming communities. On the other hand, it would be feasible to share such data in a confidential manner with patent offices, as India has done under the TKDL.

Massive reduction in tariffs

Tariffs emerged as an enormous sticking point in the August round, and there was pressure on India to eliminate tariffs completely. India proposed a differential tariff reduction plan, but countries kept pushing for a single-tier plan – particularly Japan. Finally, in what is seen as a big loss, India offered tariff cuts as high as 80% goods trade for all RCEP partners, except China. With China, India said that it was only comfortable with a 65% tariff cut initially, given the skewed trade deficit between China and India. It is worth noting that for India, RCEP will become the first FTA to forge trade partnerships with China, Australia,and New Zealand.

As a result of the heavy concession in tariffs, the Kerala Agriculture Minister has moved a cabinet note, and written a letter to the Centre expressing serious concerns on lowering of tariffs for agricultural products. He also requested to include Kerala in the RCEP pre-negotiation talks.

Staving off ISDS

Provisions on investor-to-state dispute settlement (ISDS) are being pushed by Japan and South Korea. Countries are not convinced about agreeing to this, especially India. In fact, India is in the process of rolling back on bilateral investment treaties, and has already moved for BIT termination with 57 countries. We’ve already seen ISDS being (mis)used by private entities against governments – there have been enough challenges to countries’ IPR laws and policies as well.

Mobilised Movements against the RCEP

Individuals and organizations are advocating for scrapping the RCEP, given the impact that it is expected to have on people’s rights and freedoms. A ‘People’s Strategy Meeting’ last month conducted large-scale sessions to inform civil society organizations, NGOs, trade unions, farmers groups and other peoples’ movements in the Asia-pacific region. Many have also been persistently calling out for a meeting with negotiators of their respective countries and for a public hearing on the RCEP. The Asia Pacific Research Network has released a policy brief on the RCEP, and you may read that here.

The road ahead

Looking at the larger picture, it is evident now that neo-FTAs’ focus on trade has descended into attacks on sovereign states’ economic and social policies.

With respect to the RCEP IPR text, India is trying to eliminate TRIPS plus provisions from the text. And after heavy concessions on the tariff front, it will be bargaining for liberalisation in services in the next rounds. India’s aim is to clinch a deal allowing for free-er movement of its workers and professionals. Further, the negotiations are going to proceed quickly now. Members are becoming desperate to lock down the text, and therefore, this year we will see more rounds than the usual scheduled ones. The urgency is driven largely by Japan and Korea – both of which wish to ratify the TPP soon and would like the RCEP to work in tandem.

In another worrisome development, Phillipines, Thailand and Indonesia have met with US trade officials on what they need to do to join the TPP, once it is implemented. These countries are considering making serious changes to their labour, environmental, IP, and other standards. Yesterday, US Prez. Obama arrived in Vietnam for the Asean summit, trying hard to sell the TPP. Japan and Korea are already TPP members, and if ASEAN countries come under TPP’s fold as well, we may see an upping of standards at the RCEP.

India will have to deploy serious negotiating chops at the upcoming rounds if it is remotely hopeful of steering the RCEP standards away from the TPP.

Author’s note: Added the sentence “On the other hand, it would be feasible to share such data in a confidential manner with patent offices, as India has done under the TKDL.”

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/spicy-ip-september-7-2016-anubha-sinha-where-is-the-regional-comprehensive-economic-partnership-headed

Making Telugu Suitable for Internet

rahim — 2016-09-06T14:21:49Z

In brief, the article speaks of steps in making a language other than English suitable for Internet and computers, what input methods, fonts and content are available in Telugu as on date and what challenges are ahead in making language fully available on Internet and in computers.

Click to download the file here

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/ammanudi-september-6-2016-making-telugu-suitable-for-internet