Centre for Internet and Society

Mobile Training Workshop @ CIS

praskrishna — 2013-08-28T11:01:35Z

The Centre for Internet and Society (CIS), Bangalore welcomes you to a mobile training workshop in its office in Bangalore on Thursday, August 29, 2013. Rachita and Keerthana Chandrashekar will conduct the workshop from 12.00 p.m. to 2.00 p.m.

Social media tools provide us with a huge opportunity to make our voices heard farther and faster. Social media campaigning has been used successfully to bring about changes that traditional campaigning methods have been unable to. Keerthana Chandrashekar will talk about successful online and offline campaigning.

Agenda for Training

Case studies of successful mobile campaigns including studies relevant for CIS programmes.
Highlighting major components in a successful mobile campaign.
Outlining general communication flow of a mobile campaign.
Presentation of a sample campaign idea.
Presentation of detail campaign flow for that campaign idea.
Campaign data analysis.

About Jhatkaa

Jhatkaa is a new advocacy group committed to building citizen power across India in effective and innovative ways. We look to organize people to rapidly respond to issues in ways that maximise their collective power in a given situation. We look to achieve this goal of mobilizing citizens through the use of digital technology which will help bridge the gap of distance and time. Some of the tools that we are looking to utilize are email, mobiles, radio, social media, etc. Our belief is that through sustained collective action, huge change is possible.

The Speakers

Keerthana Chandrashekar

Keerthana is a telecommunication engineer. She graduated in 2012 from CMR Institute of Technology, Bangalore. She was trained as a data and business analyst in Mu Sigma Business Solutions Pvt. Ltd. and worked there for six months before joining Jhatkaa as a campaigner. Currently she works as a campaigner and is setting up the mobile platform for Jhatkaa.

Rachita

Rachita graduated from the University of Delhi with a Bachelors in Mass Media and Mass Communications last year. Thereafter, she worked with Greenpeace India in the Digital Media Team and now works as a campaigner with Jhatkaa.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/openness/events/mobile-training-workshop

Mobile Phone Patents: Prior Art Survey

nehaa — 2013-10-24T10:33:36Z

In this blog post, Nehaa Chaudhari discusses a study on a portion of the patent landscape around mobile phone patents, commissioned by CIS earlier this year. This prior art search was undertaken by Rohan George of Samvad Partners, who worked as a Consultant with CIS.

This research was not directly funded by an external agency. The author and CIS bear no responsibility for the accuracy of the research.

The researcher wishes to disclose as under:

As you are no doubt aware, the mobile computing related innovation is probably one of the fastest growing fields over the past 15 years. As a result, a considerable number of applications are being granted across jurisdictions on a daily basis. Therefore, it is entirely possible that, once we have completed a search over a certain topic, new patents would have been granted that cover the same topic to some extent or the other.
It is common for some patent agents to invest significant effort into ensuring that the language of the specification (particularly that of the abstract and the title, the being the first point of search ) should reveal as little about the proposed invention as is statutorily possible. This is encouraged by the fact that there are no strict rules regulating the precise manner of presentation and clarity of abstract and title. Accordingly, certain patents may have been missed due to the choice of language used in the drafting of the specification.

For the above reasons, amongst others, this survey should not be considered to be a comprehensive exposition on the field of mobile computing and mobile telecommunication related patents, but should instead be considered as a survey of patents governing the field.

This study employs among others (and other associated keywords), the following criteria as keywords/search terms for the patent searches: SIM; Micro SD; Camera Phone; Imaging Device, Phone; Image Capture, Phone; Disc Drive, Phone; Flash Memory, Phone; USB, Phone; Liquid Crystal Display, Phone; LCD, Phone; Touch Screen; Wireless Fidelity; Wireless Local Area Network, Phone; Bluetooth, Phone; GPS, Phone; GPRS, Phone; Enhanced General Packet Radio Service; EDGE, Phone; First Generation Phone; 1G, Phone; Second Generation, Phone; 2G, Phone; Third Generation, Phone; 3G, Phone; 3GPP; USB Tethering; WAP, Phone; Wireless Application Protocol; Server Push; MMS, Phone; Qwerty, Phone; Vibration, Phone.

For the list of completed searches, please click here.

For the document containing the details of the prior art search, please click here.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/mobile-phone-patents

Mobile App Developer Series: Terms of Agreement – Part IV

samantha — 2015-04-03T08:26:27Z

The following is Part Four in a series reporting on interviews conducted with 10 of Bangalore's mobile app developers and other industry stakeholders. Through this research, CIS attempts to understand how the developers interviewed engage with the law within their practice, particularly with respect to IP. Here we examine different attitudes and work practices related to contracts agreements and developer culture in the legal realm.

We left off in our blog series considering the reported reasons why one would protect their mobile app by intellectual property means and how they relate back to (or contradict) their values as a mobile app developer in India. Here, we would like to get into more of the nitty gritty of contracts—which clauses are most important to mobile app developers, and what they think of them—followed by a cultural interpretation of the dynamics of this developer community with respect to contracts, and then lastly, a look at copyright, more generally.

Contracts in mobile app developing services

Previously, we shed light on the tendency for mobile app developers, in India particularly, to create mobile apps or mobile app components for clients, often overseas, within a work-for-hire agreement. Within such an agreement, the rights to (or ownership over) one's work is generally handed over to the client the moment the code comes into creation. Simply put, if paid to carry out a particular project, whatever is created within the project belongs to the client.

This is not the only instance where we encounter contract agreements in the mobile app ecosystem, however. For startups where team players are small in number, it is likely that all will have access to any contract agreements entered into with clients. For larger corporate software developer firms, there may be a specialized department for legal-related matters. In such cases, the mobile app developers themselves would seldom lay eyes on the legalese of contracts, for the primary reason being that it doesn't concern them. Instead, the terms of agreement more familiar to them would be those that they obliged to upon working for their employer.

However, after conversing with multiple stakeholders within India's mobile app space, what we came into understanding is that the importance of contract agreements for mobile app developers may be generally underestimated by the developers—both from within the startup to the corporate employer.

Clauses of caution

Within a work-for-hire agreement, it is commonplace for developers to enter into restrictive agreements that obstruct the freedoms of what they can do with the code created for the client. Across interviews with developers in startups and SMEs working for clients, this seemed to be a prevalent problem. Problematic areas proved to be those related to the time periods in which the developer was not allowed to take up future work for competing clients (i.e. the non-compete clause), or could not talk about their work for the client at all (the “quiet period”).

Designer, Rahul Gonsalves explains how these areas of their contracts with clients may impact his team at Uncommon: “The non-compete and the quiet periods are the two bits which are most germane to us, because if I can’t do work for a year in the same area, that impacts my ability to run my company.” Fortunately, Gonsalves says that less frequently are they obliged into quiet periods—in which they would not be able to talk about the work they do for their clients—as this poses an even bigger problem when trying to keep a portfolio for prospective clients, or when writing or speaking on behalf of their experience at conferences.

On several occasions Gonsalves and his team have tried to license their work to clients while retaining ownership... without much luck. “Clients typically do not want a perpetual license, but complete ownership.” Gonsalves goes on in explaining that, “this means they could make a derivative work or use it for another project. Depending on how bad we want the project, we'll work out some middle ground.” But it does not seem to be so easy for he and his SME to do so: “The thing about contracts is it’s all about a sort of differential bargaining power that the two parties have... you’ll have very little control about what happens once you’ve got paid.”

“The thing about contracts is it’s all about a sort of differential bargaining power that the two parties have... you’ll have very little control about what happens once you’ve got paid.”

Contract confusion

To have any sort of bargaining power within a work-for-hire arrangement requires a lot of time for negotiating, and the space for communication to begin with. In many cases, contracts may not even be introduced into a work agreement, leaving a lot of intricacies to the unknown.

“Getting these things down in a legal document is a big deal. It matters,” says Aravind Krishnaswamy of Levitum. The topic came up while speaking about the process of creating the content for one of his startup's apps, which entailed arranging contracts with several third parties involved in. Krishnaswamy and his team did so to ensure that they retained ownership (or co-ownership) over all of the content featured within their app, which features instructional videos on Indian music.

Another developer interviewed, Naveen*, shared with us his experience coming out of college and into employment. Upon joining his first employer, who happened to be a large company, he along with the new “batch” of employees attended a legal session within their training, “but that was Greek and Latin to us then,” he jokes. “We were fresh out of college and had no idea what a software license was... and it was after lunch, so everyone was sleeping.”

Lucky for Naveen, he didn't need to deal with that area too much, as his employer had a legal team to take care of such matters when it came to transactions with clients or third parties. For his current employer, on the other hand, Naveen explained that he could not recall the terms of his employment, as it had been a very long time ago when he signed his employment contract.

Not a contract culture?

Naveen suggests that the problem is one of contract-illiteracy, or simply not having the background knowledge to truly understand the legal facets of the industry, especially as you move away from India's entrepreneurial hubs: “In tier 1 cities, like Bangalore or Chennai, the colleges and students do have some knowledge about open source, licensing and terms, but when you go to tier 2 cities, that's where the problem is.”

But is anyone contract-literate anyway? With the exception of lawyers or legal departments, of course, don't we all have the immediate impulse to click “Next” or sign our signature as soon as we see the words “User Agreements” followed by infinite paragraphs in the smallest font?

However, for the developer in the increasingly-complex mobile app space with numerous parties and transactions involved, terms of contractual agreements may dictate everything from whether one can develop for competing clients, to whether an employee can contribute to open source projects on their own time. Still think that reading those clauses are a waste of time?

We are not arguing that the fact that the developer community seems to be far removed from “contract culture” is in itself a bad thing. As Jayant Tewari of Outsourced CFO & Business Advisory Services asserts: “How mobile app developers regard IP laws—or better yet, disregard—is fine for their sake.” What they must instead learn is to maneuver the landscape to avoid troubles as best as possible.

A good way of going about it, however, may be to begin with the agreements that a developer is already committed to—with clients, employers, and third parties, alike. One should be able to articulate: What is expected of me? Within what limitations? What am I not allowed to do?

Better familiarizing oneself with one's own responsibilities and commitments may be the first step for a mobile app developer to educating him- or herself and become aware of what sort of choices could stir about conflicts in the future, potentially threatening their relationships, reputation, or even livelihood.

But is it even possible to comply to all of the rules of the game?

Within such an overcrowded industry, creation and innovation does not occur in a vacuum, and as a result, many may adjust their own creations as they see fit, according to whatever ways are most convenient and carry out the best function. But at what cost—or more appropriately, what risk?

The next, and final of this blog series will shed light on responses given across interviews to the question of infringement. Here, we intend to connect the dots between the legal practices of mobile app developers and cases of infringement. We hope that after examining such numerous and wide sweeping—yet interconnected—facets of how mobile app developers in India engage with the law within their work, we will be able to comprehensively illustrate the role that these developers play in this economy, and ultimately, pass judgement on the laws that govern this space.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/mobile-app-developer-series-terms-of-agreement-iv

Mixed Reactions Among Participants In WIPO Talks On Treaty For The Blind

praskrishna — 2013-04-25T08:08:47Z

At the close of this week’s negotiating session for an international treaty on copyright exceptions for blind and visually impaired persons, some governments, including upcoming host Morocco, expressed disappointment in the outcome of a three-day drafting session, as it left so much for the diplomatic conference. But most said they are optimistic that solutions can be found.

The article by William New was published in Intellectual Property Watch on April 22, 2013. CIS is quoted.

An informal session of the WIPO Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights (SCCR) was held from 18-20 April. The diplomatic conference (top-level political negotiation) will be held in Marrakesh, Morocco from 17-28 June. The session concluded a draft treaty text with numerous areas lacking agreement (IPW, WIPO, 22 April 2013).

A delegate from Morocco said at the meeting closing that he had “mixed feelings” about the outcome of the three days and was “somewhat disappointed” by the inability to remove brackets in text, signifying areas of disagreement.

“Marrakesh will be the last chance” to agree on this treaty, he warned. “There will be no room for mistakes. In Marrakesh, we will be in front of the entire international community.” Even with pressure from creators and artists, the membership must persist with this “humanitarian gesture,” he said, adding, “We must conclude, in Marrakesh, a treaty.”

A delegate from Honduras, speaking on behalf of the Group of Latin American and Caribbean countries (GRULAC), cited concern about a “backward trend” occurring in the talks, increasing the risk of failure in Morocco.

The Egyptian delegate said the results “make us worried” for Marrakesh, as new proposals are still coming up at this late stage. “We are going with many difficulties,” he said, stressing the importance of the humanitarian side “rather than the cost and gain criterion.”

But Algeria, on behalf of the African Group, praised the treaty as “an excellent basis for Marrakesh.” Nigeria, which was active on the part of the African Group, also restated the commitment to accomplish a treaty that will be “meaningful to those who need it,” as well as to creators. “The interests are competing but not irreconcilable,” the delegate said.

The United States said the aim is to have a treaty that will lead to a solution for the blind while protecting the “world’s authors.” But there are “simply too many brackets and too many options for us to be comfortable,” he said, so everyone should be prepared to show flexibility.

Rights Holders’ Concern for Protection

Rights holders such as publishers whose works will be exported have sought to explain their concern about a treaty whose purpose would be to allow copyrighted content to circulate freely. Among their concerns is that the accessible formats may be usable by sighted readers and may make it back upstream to developed country markets. They also are viewing the approximately 280 million blind and visually impaired persons worldwide as a potential market.

The International Publishers Association said they are fully committed to a treaty that will address the problem and work on the ground, and that the only accusations of bad faith have come from NGOs, not member states. The international publishers’ community wants access for visually impaired persons, “not only on paper but in reality,” he said.

A representative of the Association of American Publishers told Intellectual Property Watch that negotiators were close to a consensus document two years ago but that industry concerns had gradually increased its complexity. He said publishers “have never opposed this treaty,” and that nothing is stopping nations from adopting limitations and exceptions at the national level. More than 50 countries already have some form of limitations and exceptions, he said, while others consider that it would “politically useful” to have a treaty saying that adoption of such limitations and exceptions is an international norm.

Publishers also understand the need for flexibility for countries to adopt such provisions in suitable ways to their national systems. But in order to agree, publishers wanted it clear that such provisions adhere to international laws, including the 3-step test, which places strict conditions on the use of the limitations and exceptions. Also, this instrument must include a mechanism for accountability, a process for dealing with an authorised entity that is not complying.

“The objectives of this treaty can be attained within the established international framework,” he said.

In creating the first-ever treaty on exceptions to copyright, representatives of a range of rights holders sought to ensure that it will not harm to their existing system. In the hallways of WIPO, they expressed concern that this treaty not set a precedent of exceptions that would erode copyright. Concern over precedent led lobbyists to come not only from the publishing industry but also the film industry.

A representative of the International Video Federation implied that even if a deal is struck on a treaty, governments won’t ratify it if they do not like what it says. The treaty “needs incentives for as many ratifications as possible,” he said, and addressing commercial availability is one way to offer an incentive.

Any instrument needs to provide as much certainty as possible, he added. Fair use and fair practices are not a familiar notion in international copyright law and should not be mentioned in this treaty, he said, adding that members are “absolutely free” to do what they want on fair use.

A Motion Picture Association representative said at closing that the industry has “unambiguous support” for the treaty, but that it rejects what it sees as “attempts to roll back” other treaties. “Attempts to hijack” the treaty talks “cannot be tolerated,” he said.

A Knowledge Ecology International (KEI) representative responded that this was “hypocritical” of the MPA as it has “hijacked the political process to turn this into some kind of ACTA exercise,” referring to the controversial Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement negotiated a couple of years ago.

NGO Concerns about Lost Focus

As described by the World Blind Union (WBU), which contributed to the initial treaty concept, the new treaty is expected to: “Allow specialist organisations to make accessible copies of books in all signatory countries; Make it legal to send accessible books across national borders; Still respect copyright law: it is not an attack on publishers!; Make more books available for blind people.”

But the WBU raised alarm at the close of this week’s session. Fred Schroeder, first vice president of the WBU, said in the statement, “The purpose of this treaty is to ensure access to books for blind people and help end the ‘book famine’ we face. WBU is alarmed that some of the negotiators have focused their efforts almost exclusively on crafting language around copyright protections that have nothing to do with the ability of authorized entities to produce books for the blind and visually impaired.”

“The shift away from a treaty for the blind to a treaty focussed on rights holder protections has taken up precious negotiating time which should be directed at ensuring a treaty that makes it possible for materials to be shared internationally,” he said. “For example, the negotiators have spent considerable time talking about the concept of commercial availability when, in practice, there is no reason why an authorized entity would spend its limited resources to duplicate works in formats that already exist.” A WBU representative noted in the plenary meeting earlier that the treaty is about exceptions and does not require restating details of existing treaties and rights but rather just could make reference.

An Indian delegate asked, “Is this a WIPO treaty on access to published works for [visually impaired persons], or a WIPO treaty on the protection of the 3-step test?” He said the treaty is critical for India, which has 40 percent of the world’s blind and visually impaired people. The treaty would give the important cross-border access to accessible format books and work as a stimulus for Indian publishers to publish in those formats as well.

Jonathan Band, a Washington, DC attorney speaking on behalf of the Library Copyright Alliance, told negotiators that there are now possibly 10 references to the 3-step test in the draft text, and only one indirect reference to the principle of fair use and fair dealing. But those latter principles are found in some 45 national laws, making it a widely adopted norm, he said. Overall, the treaty has become far too complicated for countries to use, and has strayed from the original idea of having a simple template and structure.

A representative of the Center for Internet and Society (CIS) in India, said: “There is nothing in these provisions that would convert infringement by sighted people under the pretence of this treaty magically into lawful acts. And, indeed, there are multifarious ways of infringing copyright without such resort to this treaty. Yet, these very same onerous requirements (such as the “commercial availability” requirement) and bureaucratic processes will unrealistically increase transaction costs for the visually impaired and render infructuous the very purpose of this treaty.

The CIS representative cast particular blame on the European Union for going against the demands of the European Parliament to address the ‘book famine’ of the blind and visually impaired, and to live up to international obligations on disabilities. “The EU, and a few countries of Group B, including the United States, have been slowly bleeding this treaty to death through over-legislation and bureaucracy.”

“Here is what it boils down to,” he continued. “[W]hen it comes to the economic rights of copyright owners, current international law insists that there be no formalities, yet when it comes to the human rights of visually impaired person to access information – a right specifically guaranteed to them under the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities – some delegates in this room wish to ensure as many formalities as possible.”

The representative of KEI told negotiators that for the “non-Berne” clause, they would be better off to use the World Trade Organization Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) than Berne. He said TRIPS is more balanced, recognises the first-sale doctrine (which says copyright expires after sale of the item), and has other flexibilities. KEI also said in its closing remarks that the purpose of the treaty is to help visually impaired people, and anyone outside the treaty is subject to copyright law already.

A WBU representative told negotiators that the treaty must have a practical application for solving the lack of materials for blind people, especially in developing countries. “We are here to solve a human rights problem,” he said. “Our goal is not a treaty, but rather a treaty that will solve access” to published works.

As one delegate put, members will feel pressure to do whatever it takes to conclude a treaty because whoever stands in the way of this effort for blind people “will be branded as a villain.”

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/news/ip-watch-william-new-april-22-2013-mixed-reactions-among-participants-in-wipo-talks-on-treaty-for-the-blind

Ministry of Science makes open access to research mandatory

praskrishna — 2014-07-28T09:12:49Z

Researchers who fail to meet the requirements would not considered for promotions, fellowships, future grants or appointments.

The article by Aprajita Singh was published in Down to Earth magazine on July 16, 2014. T. Vishnu Vardhan gave his inputs.

The Centre has made it mandatory for the researchers who receive funds from the Centre to submit a copy of their final research papers to open access journals or online open access repositories.

Stating this, the Department of Biotechnology (DBT) and the Department of Science and Technology (DST), both under the Ministry of Science, recently released a draft of their Open Access policy. The departments have also invited comments and suggestions on the same. The document is open for comments till July 25th.

In the draft, DBT and DST have stated that since this research is funded by the public, it is necessary that the knowledge be made accessible to the public as soon as possible, so that it can be read and built upon. This will promote research culture in India.

In the past, Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR) and Council of Scientific & Industrial Research (CSIR) have also released similar open access policies that encourage authors to make their work easily available to the public.

Traditional journals such as Nature impose a heavy subscription fee for access to their articles, thus limiting the viewers that these papers can reach. In some cases, authors may also be required to sign over their copyright of the paper to the publisher. Scientists consider it to be a matter of prestige to publish their research in these journals as it is believed that the quality of papers published here is superior to that of papers in open access journals.

But the trend slowly changing. According to T Vishnu Vardhan of Bengaluru-based Centre for Internet and Society, “For open access journals like PLoS ONE, a scientist or an author has to pay less than one-third of the cost of publishing that he would pay to traditional models. The publishers have for long been holding forth on the editorial quality that their commercial operations assure, which no more holds ground as the open access journals have historically demonstrated same level of efficiency.” He adds that this is primarily because most of the peer reviewing of scientific scholarly publication is done for free.

The policy proposes that a copy of the paper be submitted to the repository within a week of being accepted by a journal. If the journal imposes an embargo, the paper will remain in the repository, but be made open access only once the embargo ends. Journals can thus charge a subscription fee for the duration of the embargo period. However, the policy asks the authors to suggest that the embargo period be no longer than year.

The departments maintain that while they do expect the authors to publish their work in quality, peer-reviewed journals, the research work done by them should be judged on the basis of the merit of the work and not the journal it is published in.

It also states that authors must submit the deposit ID of the work in question along with the final work, and also while applying for any future funding, or their proposals will not be considered. For authors of research conducted in institutions that come under the control of DBT/DST which do not carry the deposit ID, the penalty proposed is severe. These authors will not be eligible for promotions, fellowships, future grants or appointments.

The policy also provides a copyright addendum which states that the author retains all rights to reproduce and distribute the article, as long as it is not done for monetary purposes.

It is hoped that this policy will encourage other departments to make open access research mandatory too. Senior scientist at ICAR Research Centre for Eastern Region and a member of Open Access India, Sridhar Gutam says that there is a lack of clarity amongst researchers in India over open access policies. He hopes that now that CSIR, ICAR, DBT and DST have rolled out open access policies, this will encourage discussion on the issue and once this policy is finalized, other departments and institutes of higher education and research will follow suit and introduce their own policies.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/news/down-to-earth-july-16-2014-aparajita-singh-ministry-of-science-makes-open-access-to-research-mandatory

Ministry Clearances for the Global Congress on Intellectual Property and the Public Interest 2015

Swaraj Barooah — 2015-11-21T07:16:32Z

This is to declare and share the clearances received from the Ministry of Home Affairs and the Ministry of External Affairs for the organisation of the fourth Global Congress on Intellectual Property and the Public Interest during December 15-17 in Delhi.

Global Congress 2015 - Clearance Letter - Ministry of Home Affairs: Download (PDF).
Global Congress 2015 - Clearance Letter - Ministry of External Affairs: Download (PDF).

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/a2k/ministry-clearances-global-congress-2015

Mini Workshop on Tools: Wikipedia Monthly Meetup, Hyderabad

Manasa Rao and Pavan Santhosh — 2017-02-06T12:49:00Z

Telugu Wikipedia community held its monthly meet-up in Hyderabad on 28 August 2016.

The event was marked by a presentation on quick tools by Pavan Santhosh, Community Advocate and long time member of the Telugu Wikipedia community. He demonstrated the use of PrepBio, a tool that helps create infoboxes on biographical articles. “This make the process of editing and updating edits easier,” he said. He also spoke about Wiki ToDo, a tool that helps find articles with specific edits or improvements required. “This ensures that even new editors can contribute to quality improvement on wikis,” he pointed out. At the end of the session, the community members engaged in an activity that gave them a hands on insight into using these tools.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/mini-workshop-on-tools-wikipedia-monthly-meetup-hyderabad

Mini TTT and MWT held in Kolkata

tito — 2017-06-28T09:53:55Z

A regional version of Train The Trainer and MediaWiki Training was recently conducted in Kolkata.

CIS-A2K’s widely well-regarded flagship skill building program was conducted in Kolkata between 7- 8 January 2017, in partnership with the West Bengal Wikimedians User Group. The two-day event was held at the West Bengal National University of Juridical Sciences. There were 20 participants at the event, of which 18 were male and only two female.

There were three thematic sessions, each broadly dealing with: Wikipedia, Wikimedia Commons and Wikisource. The participants were taught article enrichment and how to upgrade articles into good category articles on Wikipedia. The participants learnt reference resources in detail in addition to discussing the different types of syntax required to apply the references meaningfully. The participants were also exposed to advanced search techniques on Google in order to gather relevant references.

During the Commons session, the participants were taught the basics of creating categories and subcategories in order to help narrow down searches and hence, image utility on Commons. Facilitating easy identification of an image helps enrich articles in need of descriptive photos. Additionally, participants were encouraged to give specific file names to their images along with a detailed description of the same. This was followed by a technical session on the following popular tools and gadgets that help frequent uploaders on Commons:

Cat-a-lot is a JavaScript gadget that helps with moving images (or subcategories) between categories or adding categories to search results
Google Images tab: On File pages, adds a new tab to easily search for similar images on the Internet using Google Images
OTRS is a tool used by the Wikimedia projects, including Commons, to manage and archive email conversations. The main use of OTRS in relation to Commons is to verify and archive licensing permissions.
Flickr2Commons - Tool to easily upload single and multiple files from Flickr to Commons. This tool uses OAuth to upload files to Commons.

In addition to these on-wiki discussions, a broader discussion took place on photography tips such as the rule of thirds which helps enhance the effect and purpose of the image.

The final thematic session was on Wikisource. Participants had a hands on lesson in proofreading methodology in addition to learning about image formatting, formatting table of contents, table access page break, text divider, and tools and script of Wikisource.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/mini-ttt-and-mwt-held-in-kolkata

Mini Train the Trainer 2018

subodh — 2018-03-17T08:51:26Z

A mini train the trainer 2018 (Mini TTT 2018) program was organized by CIS-A2K at Jnana Prabodhini & Bhave High School, Sadashiv Peth, Pune on 24 and 25 February 2018. Total 19 active editors from Marathi community participated. Experienced editors from community were also involved in the program.

The objective of the workshop was to develop personality and leadership skills, boost the outreach activities, build cohesiveness and strong relations within the editors, assess the needs of the community and projects, and evolve progress plan.

The participants profiles and the expected outcomes were decided on the nature of persons. They were divided into following categories and inputs were designed accordingly -

TTT Alumni - 4 people in the group. Interest areas are - History, Culture, Indology, Literature, Gender, Sociology, Health, Arts & Culture, Rural development issues, Wikisource, Sports, People.

They are expected to work as mentors for new editors; Wikipedia pillars; Copyright issues; Should be able to do analysis and evolve improvement measures; Integration of Wikimedia Projects; Work for new developments in Wiki projects; Global engagement programs

Facilitators at Institutional & organisational Partners - 12 people in the group. From - Dayanand College, Solapur ; Soni College, Solapur ; T.C.College, Baramati; BAM University, Aurangabad; Vigyan Ashram, Pabal; Jeevan Jyoti Women Emp. Centre, Velhe; Jnana Prabodhini Women Emp.Department ; Jnana Prabodhini Research Centre, Pune ; Wikisource Internship Program at Garware college, Pune

They are expected to learn advance skills, tools & gadgets for good editing; Wikipedia pillars; Copyright issues; To conduct workshops for student community; Design internships and academic assignments for WEP; To develop thematic groups; Quality improvement; Tracking process and progress using outreach dashboard

Independent new active editors - 4 people in the group. Interest areas are - Language, Biographies,Science, Technology, Development issues, Drama, Films, Music, Finance, Commerce, Tourism, Commons

They are Working on category-wise content generation; Wikipedia pillars; Copyright issues; Building communities of interest; reference tools

Topics covered

Advanced tools and gadgets
Quality issues in Wikipedia
Event planning and reporting
Commons - Copyright, categories
Wikidata
Wikisource - Copyright, OTRS, OCR
Outreach dashboard
Global campaigns

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/mini-train-the-trainer-2018

Mini MediaWiki Training Theni

Ananth — 2019-02-13T02:34:40Z

CIS-A2k is trying to strengthen the MediaWiki movement in India, and over the last six months, the team has collaborated with different Indian Wikimedians and started a project called Indic-TechCom.

Indic-TechCom provides technical support to the Indic Wikimedia community and as of now has supported community members in Indic OCR and Indic Wikisource stats.

To increase the awareness on MediaWiki, Indic TechCom members and CIS-A2K decided to reach out to students with the Computer science background and help them understand how to contribute on MediaWiki. As a pilot project, we reached out to Nadar Saraswathi College of Engineering and Technology and organised a two-day long Mini MediaWiki training for the students on 22nd and 23rd of January 2019.

As part of the training, On Day 1, students were explained about MediaWiki and were introduced to Git, GitHub, Phabricator and Gerrit. We helped them to install MediaWiki software on their system and also helped them to understand the structure of MediaWiki.

In the second day, students were introduced to the extensions and skins, understanding the structure of extension and special pages. We also taught them how to submit patches through Gerrit.

This training had a group of 20 students and 2 faculty members who were supporting the students and guiding them in their native language. The first day of the event started slowly as students were lacking in having the knowledge of Wikimedia and its structure. After setting up the relation of the Wikimedia platform the students were able to understand the use and benefits of MediaWiki. Then the installation of MediaWiki and hosting of own MediaWiki server was done. Seven students were successfully able to install and play with Localsettings.php to get the grip of their sites.

At the end of the sessions, two[1][2] students were able to submit the patch to Gerrit and it was approved by Volker_E (Sr. User Experience Engineer, Wikimedia Foundation).

[1]. https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T214470

[2]. https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T214468

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/mini-mediawiki-training-theni

MHRD IPR Chairs — Underutilization of Funds and Lack of Information Regarding Expenditures

nehaa — 2014-11-19T15:19:18Z

Funds granted to the IPR Chairs set up by the Ministry of Human Resources and Development are often left underutilized. Details regarding the expenditures that are incurred by the Chairs are also currently unavailable. CIS intern Amulya Purushothama examines this further.

The Ministry of Human Resources and Development, Government of India (MHRD) has so far set up around 20 IPR Chairs under the Intellectual Property Education, Research and Public Outreach (IPERPO) scheme in various universities across the country.

However, as an Evaluation Committee for the Planning Commission observed last year, this scheme is failing to work for many reasons. Some of them the report says are that many of the IPR Chair positions are left vacant as the MHRD cannot find professors who are suitably qualified for the job, that there is no explicit mandate for activities to be undertaken by the chairs either under the IPERPOS scheme or the letters sanctioning the Chairs, that most of the Chairs only organize one or two day workshops and deliver a few lectures, that the research output produced by these Chairs etc. therefore has been very weak as they haven’t yet identified research questions, Therefore, the grant money under the scheme goes underutilized.

There exists an informational vacuum about the allocation of funds, expenditures of and the functioning of the MHRD IPR Chairs. The MHRD IPR Chair portal intended to provide information about the same is mostly incomplete. Out of the 20 universities where a chair has been set up, around four (CUSAT Cochin, IIM Ahmedabad, IIM Calcutta, and recently NUJS Kolkata) have been vacant for the last year (CUSAT Cochin has only recently reinstated their IPR Chair professor) and two only joined the posts in the last year (Delhi University and IIT Madras) . Only three of the professors have provided details about their research team on the portal (Delhi University, NALSAR Hyderabad and IIT Roorkee). Only IIT Roorkee and NALSAR Hyderabad have put up annual reports on the portal and even these reports do not cover expenditure made under the scheme.

The latest information regarding expenditure under the scheme can only be found in pieces and fragments. CUSAT published a self-study report that states that while Rs.50-60 lakhs are allotted every year, only Rs. 31, 49,950 has been received so far, NLSIU published an accounts report for the year 2012-2013 that states that Rs. 30, 00,000 had been received as of march 2013, but keeps quiet on the expenditure of the same.

The latest information on the issue is available in a 2013 report of an Evaluation Committee of the Planning Commission. The report says that the University of Madras last received funds of Rs.9 lakhs in 2001 and utilized most of it; that out of the Rs.100 lakhs released to NLSIU Bangalore so far, only around Rs.70 lakhs has been utilized as of 2013; that University of Delhi last received Rs.10 lakhs in 2001 and utilized only half of that. Further that CUSAT had so far received funds amounting to Rs.316.05 lakhs as of 2013 and has utilized only Rs.191.05 lakhs.

IIT Kanpur last received Rs.25 lakhs in 2006-07 and utilized Rs.17 lakhs from it; IIT Kharagpur also last received funds in 2009-10 of up to Rs.51.42 lakhs and utilized all of it. IIT madras is shown to have received Rs.25 lakhs in 2006-07 but it is unclear whether that has been utilized at all, IIT Delhi also received Rs.25 lakhs in the same year and utilized Rs.2 lakhs from it. IIT Bombay has received Rs.190 lakhs up till 2013 and has utilized only Rs.135 lakhs.

IIM Ahmedabad is yet to receive any funds. IIM Calcutta last received Rs.10 lakhs in 2007-08 but there is no information on whether that was utilized. IIM Bangalore had, as of 2013, received Rs.105.98 lakhs and utilized only Rs.78.98 lakhs of it.

JNU last received Rs.10 lakhs in 2007-08 but there is no word on whether it was utilized, same is the case with Delhi School of Economics.

NALSAR, Hyderabad had received Rs.111.40 lakhs as of 2013, but had utilized Rs.79.4 lakhs until then. NLU Jodhpur had received Rs.105.00 lakhs as of 2013 and utilized a mere Rs.69 lakhs from the bounty, NLIU Bhopal received Rs.100 lakhs as of 2013 and utilized only Rs.75 lakhs. NUJS had received Rs.90 lakhs as of 2012 and only utilized Rs.75 lakhs. IIT Roorkee had received Rs.30 lakhs as per 2012 and had utilized the entire amount; Tezpur University had received Rs.59 lakhs and utilized only Rs.29 lakhs as of 2013.

This wide variation in allocation of funds and in the utilization of funds, the report says, is due to lack of suitable proposals for seminars, workshops, conferences etc., “non-receipt of requests” for setting up of new Chairs, non-receipt of bills for grants that have already been released and a lack of continued attention to the scheme.

The details of how any of these funds were actually utilized are at present unavailable online. Statistics from the last financial year are unavailable anywhere on the internet as well; CIS has filed a Right to Information request for the same with the concerned authorities.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/mhrd-ipr-chairs-underutilization-of-funds-and-lack-of-information-regarding-expenditures

MHRD IPR Chair Series: Introduction

Amulya Purushothama — 2015-09-03T15:17:22Z

In this blog post, Amulya Purushothama announces our new MHRD IPR Chair Series and charts the sequence of events, starting from the establishment of the MHRD IPR Chairs, to discussions surrounding their purpose and functioning, to concerns surrounding the lack of information about the IPR Chairs, the first round of RTIs CIS had filed in regard to this and the responses received. This series will document and analyze further RTIs filed and responses received in this regard.

Special thanks to CIS Intern Aditya Garg for his research and support on this.

Genesis of MHRD IPR Chairs

The Intellectual Property Education, Research and Public Outreach (IPERPO) scheme (Scheme) was set up by the Ministry for Human Resources and Development (MHRD) to encourage study of IP rights and research and create awareness about IP matters. The Scheme was also supposed to develop specialized courses, train enforcement personnel, organize seminars and workshops on IPR matters, develop inputs, awareness on WTO matters and evolve strategies of regional co-operation.

It was under this scheme that the MHRD-IPR Chairs were set up. These IPR Chairs were set up in 20 Universities and Institutes across India including 6 in Universities, 6 in IITs, 5 in National Law Universities and 3 in IIMs.

Performance of MHRD IPR Chairs

CIS had reported that the Planning Commission and the MHRD in 2014 organized a stakeholders consultation where they discussed India’s National Program on Intellectual Property Management. Apart from discussing the need to revisit the purpose behind the MHRD IPR Chairs program, One of the documents discussed in the context of evaluating how the IPR Chairs function was the Report of the Evaluation Committee on Continuation of the Scheme of IPERO in the XII Five Year Plan Period 2012-2017 (Evaluation Committee Report).

The Evaluation Committee Report among other things noted that many IPR Chair positions are left vacant, that there is no explicit mandate for the activities to be undertaken by the MHRD IPR Chairs, that most of the Chairs only organize a few workshops and deliver lectures and as a consequence the research outputs produced by the Chairs have been very weak. This leads to underutilization of funds available under the scheme.

The Evaluation Committee Report stated that the IPR Chairs were not performing well due to a number of reasons such as: inability to find a suitable Professor level person to occupy the IPR Chair, absence of qualification-criteria for the IPR chair in the Scheme, lack of focus on research, development of human resource and teaching, non-appointment of adequate staff by IPR Chairs, flow of funds to the IPR Chair being interrupted due to lack of proper documentation, uncertainty about the continuation of IPR Chairs etc.

Informational vacuum around MHRD IPR Chairs

The MHRD launched the MHRD IPR Chair Gateway recently. It was developed by the IPR Chair of NALSAR to serve as a forum where the information about the team of the MHRD IPR Chair, research work done by them, events hosted by them and degrees offered by them are available in one common platform. This gateway is a definite improvement when compared to the website of the Copyright Office which was the central host for the MHRD IPR Chairs earlier.

However, the website is difficult to navigate through and even though the design of the gateway is comprehensive, the information is uploaded by the individual IPR Chairs themselves. The information about some MHRD IPR Chairs is up to date, while some others. None of the Chairs seem to have uploaded the mandated Annual Report of their work.

As CIS has reported earlier there exists an informational vacuum around the activities of the MHRD IPR Chairs, the funds allocated to them and accounts of utilization of these funds. Most of the information that is available can only be found in pieces and fragments. The last near comprehensive account of allocation and expenditure of funds with regard to all the IPR Chairs is the Evaluation Committee Report that dates back to 2013.

The following table shows a matrix of individual MHRD IPR Chairs, their status, and information available about them.

S.No.	Name of Institute	Instituted	Present Status	Last Active	Website	Information Available
1	University of Delhi		Active (since February 2014)		Chair is supposed to be working in Cluster Innovation Centre, DU.	Information present on the MHRD website; no separate dedicated website.
2	University of Madras		Active (Co-coordinator assigned)		None.	None, even on University of Madras website.
3	Cochin University of Science and Technology (CUSAT), Cochin	2003	Not Active	March 2012	http://ciprs.cusat.ac.in/hrdchair.php Link on CUSAT’s Schools of Legal Studies’ website which is supposed to redirect – broken	Provides information of work done under the Chair till 2012.
4	Tezpur University	2010	Active		http://www.tezu.ernet.in/mhrdipr/index.html	Lists their objects and past activities up to 2012; interestingly the name of the IPR Chair cannot be found on this website, although the name of the Staff is present.
5	National Law School of India University (NLSIU), Bangalore		Active		https://www.nls.ac.in/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=65%3Athe-centre-for-intellectual-property-research-and-advocacy-cipra&catid=6%3Aacademic-programmes&Itemid=32	Provides information about their project (developed iprlawindia.org). No dedicated website.
6	Indian Institute of Technology (IIT), Kanpur		Not Active (site says selection process is ongoing)	June 2010	None.	None.
7	Indian Institute of Technology (IIT), Kharagpur		Not Active	October 2013	None.	None.
8	Indian Institute of Technology (IIT), Bombay		Active		Functions under Shailesh J. Mehta School of Management, IIT-B (http://www.som.iitb.ac.in/) but no separate website.	Nothing on the SJMSOM website.
9	Indian Institute of Technology (IIT), Madras		Active		Works under Department of Management Studies, IIT-Madras (http://www.doms.iitm.ac.in/) but no separate website.	Annual Report for 2014-15: https://www.dropbox.com/s/4tmyrkdmwvfa3ud/Annual%20Report%20IPR%20Chair%20IITM%202014-2015.pdf?dl=0
10	Indian Institute of Technology (IIT), Delhi		Currently on Leave		Works under Department of Management Studies, IIT-Delhi (http://dms.iitd.ac.in/ ) but no separate website.	Nothing on the DOMS website.
11	Indian Institute of Technology (IIT), Roorkee		Active		http://www.iitr.ac.in/ipr/ - Website of their IPR Cell; doesn’t list the work of the MHRD IPR Chair separately.	Basic activities undertaken by their Cell; nothing in particular about research work done by the Chair.
12	Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU), Delhi		Active		Works under Centre for Economic Studies and Planning, School of Social Sciences, JNU. No separate website.	No information about the work undertaken.
13	Delhi School of Economics, DU, Delhi		Not Active		None.	None.
14	Indian Institute of Management (IIM), Ahmadabad		Not Active.		None.	None.
15	Indian Institute of Management (IIM), Calcutta		Not Active.		None.	None.
16	Indian Institute of Management (IIM), Bangalore		Active	2004	No information on the IIM Bangalore website.	None.
17	NALSAR University of Law, Hyderabad		Active		Works under N. C. Banerjee Centre for Intellectual Property Rights Studies.	List of activities undertake have been mentioned in the Centre’s working. No separate dedicated website.
18	National Law University (NLU), Jodhpur		Active		http://www.nlujodhpur.ac.in/mhrd_ipr_chair.php	Lists down the work undertaken, events hosted, research, etc.
19	National Law University (NLU), Bhopal		Active		None.	None.
20	West Bengal National University of Juridical Sciences (WBNUJS), Kolkata		Not Active	December 2013	None.	None

As can be seen, out of the twenty MHRD IPR Chairs, only 13 remain active while the rest have become inactive. The MHRD Chair at IIT Kanpur was last active over five years ago in June 2010. Out of the twenty, 11 IPR Chairs either do not have a website or redirect to a broken link. Out of the 20, fifteen do not provide any information or only provide for outdated information. Only one of the twenty, the IIT Madras Chair, has provided the mandated Annual Report for 2014-2015.

RTIs and Responses

CIS has filed several RTIs before the IPR Chairs asking for information regarding allocation of funds and utilization of funds.

The first round of RTIs filed in November 2014, elicited adequate responses from seven out of twenty IPR Chairs. Among the rest, the IPR Chairs at Jawaharlal Nehru University, Delhi University, Delhi School of Economics, Tezpur University and CUSAT Kerala did not provide information. And IIT Kharagpur sought exemption from providing this information under Section 8(1) (d) of the RTI Act, 2005.

Of those who did respond favorably to the RTI and had received money (five in number), three institutions, NLU Jodhpur, NALSAR University of Law, Hyderabad and IIT Bombay had underutilized the funds allocated to them. NLSIU, Bangalore had spent more than the allocated funds and IIM, Bangalore had spent the entire amount allocated.

MHRD IPR Chair Series

We have since followed up with the IPR Chairs with further RTI applications and received responses for the same. Updates on the same will now be part of our MHRD IPR Chair Series. Watch this space.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/mhrd-ipr-chair-series-introduction

MHRD IPR Chair Series: Information Received from University of Madras

Karan Tripathi — 2016-02-19T15:34:57Z

This post provides a factual description about the operation of Ministry of Human Resource Development IPR Chair’s Intellectual Property Education, Research and Public Outreach (IPERPO) scheme in University of Madras. The author has analysed all the data received under various heads such as income, grants from MHRD, planned and non planned expenditure, nature and frequency of programmes organised and the allocation of funds for the same. Throughout the course of observation and presentation of the analysed data, the author seeks to trace the presence of unjustified underutilisation of funds by the aforementioned university as provided by the MHRD during the period of 2001-2014.

Nehaa Chaudhari provided inputs and feedback.

To collect the information for the given study, an RTI application was filed to the University of Madras on 16/02/2015 by the Centre for Internet and Society. The reply to RTI application was received on 19/03/2015. These are the documents received by CIS from University of Madras:

For RTI Response click here (Univ of Madras – Response to RTI)
For complete supporting documents click here (Univ of Madras – Response and Report)

Hereinafter, in order to receive any information about University of Madras’ RTI reply, kindly refer to the above mentioned links. Following are the queries mentioned in the RTI application along with their replies.

Reports on the implementation of the IPERPO scheme of the Ministry of Human Resource Development and the implementation of the MHRD IPR Chair funded under the scheme at University of Madras from 2001-2014

Reply: According to the documents available with CIS, University of Madras submitted the implementation documents only for the period of 2010-2012. Documents for the period of 2001-2009 and 2013-2014 are not submitted by the University.

Documents indicating the date on which such an IPR Chair was set up at your institution and a copy of the application made by University of Madras to the MHRD for instituting such an IPR Chair and documents received by University of Madras from the MHRD approving the same

Reply: The IPR Chair in the Department of Legal Studies, University of Madras was established in the year of 2001 and it has been in an active state. The documents received by the University from MHRD are also submitted in the form of Syndicate letters.

Documents detailing the release of grants to the MHRD IPR Chairs under the IPERPO Scheme

Reply: Documents regarding this track are not submitted by the University. On the reply letter the University has mentioned that no such documents are available on records.

Documents relating to receipts of utilisation certificates and audited expenditure statements and matters related to all financial sanctions with regard to funds granted to the MHRD IPR Chair established under the IPERPO scheme at UNIVERSITY OF MADRAS Roorkee

Reply: The University has submitted utilisation certificates only for the 2010-2012. According to the documents available with CIS, utilisation certificates pertaining to other financial years are not submitted by the University.

Documents regarding all matters pertaining to finance and budget related the MHRD IPR Chair under the IPERPOs scheme established at University of Madras

Reply: Documents pertaining to this track are not submitted by the University. In the RTI reply the University has mentioned that no such information is available on records.

Details of the IPR Chair’s salary under the IPERPO Scheme indicating whether this amount is paid over and above the professional’s usual salary

Reply: Documents required under this track are not submitted by the University. The University, in the RTI reply, has mentioned that the information sought is voluminous in nature and as it will amount to drain on resources, the information seeker is advised to fix up a prior appointment with the HOD to pursue the records.

2.0 Comparative Analysis between University Response and the guidelines of MHRD Scheme Document

The Scheme Document of MHRD (http://copyright.gov.in/Documents/scheme.pdf) is a comprehensive document which consists of guidelines regarding Intellectual Property Education, Research and Public Outreach. It talks about a list of objectives, purposes, conditions and eligibility criteria for a University to ensure in order to implement IPERPO in a truest sense. This document provides the procedural as well as qualifying conditions for an Institute to ensure or fulfil before applying for the MHRD grant. Some of these conditions include maintenance of utilization certificates, audit reports, expenditure statements and event information which would be open to access on demand by MDHR or Comptroller and Auditor General of India.

Objectives

According to the documents available with CIS, University of Madras has organised certain activities under the IPR Chair to fulfil the objectives mentioned in the scheme document. As part of IPR Teaching, an elective course on IPR was introduced under the Choice-Based Credit System (CBCS) for the students in the third semester. In order to fulfil the objectives pertaining to promotion of IPR, the University encourages Master of Law students to select IPR related areas for their dissertation. For furthering its commitment towards IPR research, the University organised a two day national seminar on Emerging Trends in Intellectual Property Rights on 13^th and 14^th October 2011. In addition to this, One day workshop was also organised for the law college teachers from Tamil Nadu and Puducherry on 17^th March 2012.

Eligibility

University of Madras is recognized by the University Grants Commission. Therefore, it fulfils the eligibility criteria mentioned in the scheme document.

3.0 Financial Analysis

As per the documents available with CIS, financial statements and utilisation certificates is only provided for the period 2010-2012. Therefore, this section would go on to analyse this period only and would not be able to provide information for the period 2001-2009 and 2013-2014.

Financial Year 2010-2011

In this financial year, a total amount of Rs. 30,00,000 was received by the University under the IPERPO scheme out of which a sum of Rs. 1,79,000 was utilized for the purpose for which it was sanctioned.

In this financial year the maximum amount of money was utilised for the salary of the Research officer. As stated earlier, expenditure statement for the costs incurred on other heads are not mentioned by the University.

Financial Year 2011-2012

In this financial year, a total amount of Rs. 30,00,000 was sanctioned to the University by MHRD out of which a sum of Rs. 7,61,614 was utilized for the purpose for which it was granted.

In this financial year also the maximum amount of money was spent on the salary of the Research Officer.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/mhrd-ipr-chair-series-information-received-from-university-of-madras

MHRD IPR Chair Series: Information Received from Tezpur University

Karan Tripathi — 2016-04-26T16:27:55Z

Throughout the course of observation and presentation of the analysed data, the author seeks to trace the presence of unjustified underutilisation of funds by the aforementioned university as provided by the MHRD during the period 2013-2014.

To collect the information for the given study, an RTI application was filed to the Tezpur University on 16/01/2015 by the Centre for Internet and Society. The reply to RTI application was received on 05/02/2015. These are the documents received by CIS from Tezpur University:

For RTI Response click here (Tezpur Receipt of RTI). Also see Tezpur Forwarded Response
For complete supporting documents see (Tezpur- Annual Report, Financial Statement, Report on IPR Cell)

Hereinafter, in order to receive any information about Tezpur University’s RTI reply, kindly refer to the above mentioned links. Following are the queries mentioned in the RTI application along with their replies.

1. Reports on the implementation of the IPERPO scheme of the Ministry of Human Resource Development and the implementation of the MHRD IPR Chair funded under the scheme at Tezpur University from 2003-2014

Reply: Tezpur University has submitted detailed documents for the period 2013-2014 in order to highlight various activities undertaken by the University to implement the IPERPO scheme. This information is sent to CIS through summary documents, notices and newsletters.

2. Documents detailing the release of grants to the MHRD IPR Chairs under the IPERPO Scheme

Reply: The University received a grant of Rs.25,00,000 from MHRD under the IPERPO scheme for the period 2013-2014.

3. Documents relating to receipts of utilisation certificates and audited expenditure statements and matters related to all financial sanctions with regard to funds granted to the MHRD IPR Chair established under the IPERPO scheme at Tezpur University

Reply: The University has submitted the utilisation certificate for the period 2013-2014 along with the expenditure statement.

4. Documents regarding all matters pertaining to finance and budget related the MHRD IPR Chair under the IPERPOs scheme established at Tezpur University

Reply: As per the documents submitted to CIS, the proposed budget for the period 2013-2014 is not submitted by the University. However, the budget for the period 2014-2015 is submitted and the sum of Rs. 49,79,231 is proposed by the University.

2.0 Comparative Analysis between University Response and the guidelines of MHRD Scheme Document

Objectives

In order to fulfil the objectives mentioned in the scheme document, Tezpur University undertook following activities:

Conducted courses in the mainstream undergraduate, post graduate and PhD programmes
Facilitated assessment and IPR filings of university innovations
Field work on Geographical Indication: Muga Silk of Assam
Training of IPR Officers
Outreach programmes at Dilbrugarh University and Silchar
Colloquium on Contemporary Physics and the Role of IPR
Training programmes on traditional knowledge and communication with stakeholders

Eligibility

Tezpur University is recognized by the University Grants Commission. Therefore, it fulfils the eligibility criteria mentioned in the scheme document.

3.0 Financial Analysis

Tezpur University received grants in two instalments for the same financial year (2013-2014). The first instalment was sanctioned on 19^th August 2013 and the second instalment was sanctioned on 26^th March 2014.

Financial Year 2013-2014

In this financial year a total grant of Rs. 33,00,000 was sanctioned to the University in two instalments of Rs. 25,00,000 and Rs. 8,00,000. Out of this, a total sum of Rs. 35,24,446 was utilised by the University.

It is clear from the above drawn chart that the maximum amount of money was spent on the salaries of Chair Professor and his staff.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/mhrd-ipr-chair-series-information-received-from-tezpur-university

MHRD IPR Chair Series: Information Received from NUJS

nehaa — 2016-05-15T07:51:55Z

The author has analysed all the data received under various heads such as income, grants from MHRD, planned and non-planned expenditure, nature and frequency of programmes organised and the allocation of funds for the same. Throughout the course of observation and presentation of the analysed data, the author seeks to trace the presence of unjustified underutilisation of funds by the aforementioned university as provided by the MHRD during the period of 2013-2014.

To collect the information for the given study, an RTI application was filed to NUJS on 09/02/2015 by the Centre for Internet and Society. The reply to RTI application was received on 24/02/2015.

These are the documents received by CIS from NUJS:

For the RTI application filed by the CIS, click here
For the reply to the RTI application, click here

NUJS did not entertain the RTI and furnished no documents for perusal.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/mhrd-ipr-chair-series-information-received-from-nujs