Centre for Internet and Society

Wikipedia edit-a-thons to add content on LGBTs

praskrishna — 2014-07-28T06:41:42Z

From Monday, Wikipedia will hold a series of “edit-a-thons” to encourage people to add content to the site about the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) community.

The article by Renuka Phadnis was published in the Hindu on July 7, 2014. T. Vishnu Vardhan gave his inputs.

It is inspired by “Wiki Loves Pride”, a global campaign to expand and improve LGBT-related content across Wikimedia projects. The campaign focuses on the June to October period, when LGBTs around the world celebrate their community.

An “edit-a-thon” is a workshop where people are trained in how to edit the Wikipedia and add content to it, usually focussing on a particular topic.

The aim is to make Wikipedia inclusive and reflect diversity by creating content on the LGBT discourse: history, culture, rights, equal opportunities and Article 377. The focus is also on generating content in regional Indian languages which do not have equivalents for terms such as “gay”, “lesbian” or “bisexual”. The website https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/India_Access_To_Knowledge/ Events/Wiki_Loves _Pride_2014 has listed 11 languages.

The edit-a-thon will culminate in two offline events in Bangalore and Delhi on July 19, creating a forum for the community. While anyone can participate in the edit-a-thon, Vishnu, programme director for Access to Knowledge at Centre for Internet and Society (CIS), Bangalore, which works on improving Indian language Wikipedias and India-related content on Wikipedia, said, “We hope the [LGBT] community takes the lead.”

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/news/the-hindu-july-7-2014-renuka-phadnis-wikipedia-edit-a-thons-to-add-content-on-lgbts

State of Odia Language in Computing and Future Steps

subha — 2014-07-28T07:03:46Z

I participated in a "National Level Seminar on, Computer Application and Odia Language" organized by the Institute of Odia Studies and Research in Bhubaneswar on July 6, 2014 as a panelist to discuss about the state of Odia language in computing, work in progress highlighting CIS-A2K's work in the knowledge and education sector and further steps.

I wrote an article on this for the Sovereign. This can be downloaded here. The invitation for the seminar can be viewed here.

କମ୍ପ୍ୟୁଟରରେ ଓଡିଆ ଭାଷାର ସ୍ଥିତି ଓ ଭବିଷ୍ୟତ ପଦକ୍ଷେପ

ଓଡ଼ିଆ: କାଲି ଓ ଆଜି

କମ୍ପୁଟରରେ ଓଡ଼ିଆ ଭାଷାର ବ୍ୟବହାର ଆରମ୍ଭ ହେବାର ଦଶନ୍ଧିଟିଏ ବିତିଯାଇଛି । ଏ ଦଶନ୍ଧିର ଶେଷ ଆଡ଼କୁ ଏହି ବର୍ଷ ଫେବ୍ରୁଆରି ୨୦ ତାରିଖରେ ଉଲ୍ଲେଖନୀୟ ଘଟଣାଟିଏ ଘଟିଲା - ଓଡ଼ିଆ ଭାଷା ଷଷ୍ଠ ଭାରତୀୟ ଭାଷା ଭାବେ ଶାସ୍ତ୍ରୀୟ ମାନ୍ୟତା ପାଇଲା । ସାଧାରଣ ମଣିଷର ମାନସିକତା ଦୋହଲେ ଅଦିନିଆ ଝଡ଼ି କିମ୍ବା ନଈ କୂଳ ଲଙ୍ଘିଲେ । ଏ ଶାସ୍ତ୍ରୀୟ ମାନ୍ୟତା ପାଇବା ଥିଲା ସେମିତି ମନ-ଦୋହଲେଇବା ଭଳି ଘଟଣାଟିଏ । ଓଡ଼ିଆ ମାଧ୍ୟମରେ ପଢ଼ୁଥିବା ପିଲାଙ୍କ ମନରେ ଅଧିକ ଚାକିରି ପାଇବାର ନୂଆ ନୂଆ ଆଶାଟିଏ ଗଜୁରିଲା । ଘରୁ ଫେରିଥିବା ପ୍ରବାସୀ ଓଡ଼ିଆ ଦୋକାନୀଟିଏ ବେଙ୍ଗାଳୁରୁ ସହରରେ ଥିବା ତା' ଜଳଖିଆ ଦୋକାନ ଆଗରେ ଓଡ଼ିଆରେ ନାମଫଳକଟିଏ ଲଗାଇଲା । ନିର୍ବାଚନରେ ବୋଧେ ପ୍ରଥମଥର ରାଜନୈତିକ ଦଳଟିଏ ଓଡ଼ିଆ ବିଶ୍ୱବିଦ୍ୟାଳୟର ଯୋଜନା ନିର୍ବାଚନ ଇସ୍ତାହାରରେ ସାମିଲ କଲା । ଫେସବୁକରେ, ୱେବସାଇଟରେ ଅନେକ ଓଡ଼ିଆ ଏ ଆନନ୍ଦର ଉତ୍ସବ ପାଳନ କଲେ । ତେବେ ଏ ସବୁରି ଆମୋଦ ଭିତରେ ବେଳ ଆସିଛି ଆମ ଏ ଶାସ୍ତ୍ରୀୟ ଓଡ଼ିଆକୁ ଆଧୁନିକ ଜ୍ଞାନକୌଶଳର ତରାଜୁରେ ତଉଲିବା । ଆମ ଭାଷା ଗୋଟେ ପୁରାତନ ଭାଷା, ଆଉ ତା'ର ମାନେ ନୁହେଁ ଯେ ସେ କେବଳ ହାତୀଗୁମ୍ଫାର କାନ୍ଥରେ କିବା ଗୁଡ଼ହାଣ୍ଡିରେ ଲୁଚିରହିବ ଶିଉଳି ଗହଣରେ । ଭାଷାର ଅତୀତ ଯେତେ ପରିପୁଟ, ତା'ର ଅଧୁନା ବ୍ୟବହାରୀଙ୍କ ଉପରେ ନିର୍ଭର କରେ ସେ କେଉଁ ଦିଗରେ ମୁହାଁଇବ - କେବଳ ପୁରାତନ ଭାଷାର ମାନ୍ୟତା ପାଇ ଜେଜେ ହୋଇ କଣ ଘରେ ବସିରହି ଦିନ ଗଣିବ, ନାଁ ଆଧୁନିକ କୌଶଳକୁ ଆପଣେଇ ଆହୁରି ଅଧିକ ବ୍ୟବହାରରେ ଲାଗିବ । ଏକ ଭାଷା ପାଇଁ ସବୁଠାରୁ ବଡ଼ ସମ୍ପତ୍ତିଟି ହେଉଛି ତାକୁ ଦୈନନ୍ଦିନ ବ୍ୟବହାର କରୁଥିବା ଲୋକେ, ବିଶେଷ କରି ତା'କୁ ପଠନ ଓ ଲିଖନରେ ବ୍ୟବହାର କରୁଥିବା ଲୋକେ । ଏ ମୋବାଇଲ, କମ୍ପୁଟର ଓ ଇଣ୍ଟରନେଟର ଯୁଗରେ ଆମ ଭାଷା ଯଦି ଇଂରାଜୀ ସହ ତାଳ ମିଳାଇ ଚାଲି ନ ପାରୁଛି ତାହେଲେ ଆଗାମୀ ପିଢ଼ିଟି ଯେ ଆମ ଭାଷାକୁ ସମ୍ପୂର୍ଣ୍ଣ ପାଶୋରି ନ ପକାଇବ ତାହା ଲେଖକ ହଲପ କରି କହିପାରେ । ଆମ ଭାଷାର ଆଧୁନିକତାର ସ୍ଥିତି ନିର୍ଦ୍ଧାରଣ କରିବା ଓ ଚଳିତ କାମମାନଙ୍କ ବିଷୟରେ ଜାଣି ଆଗାମୀ ଦିନମାନଙ୍କ ପାଇଁ ଯୋଜନାର ରୂପରେଖ ତିଆରିବା ବୋଧେ ଏ ବେଳର ପ୍ରଥମ କାମ ।

ଓଡ଼ିଆ କମ୍ପୁଟରରେ ବ୍ୟବହାର ଉପଯୋଗୀ ହେଲା ଟିକେ ବିଳମ୍ବରେ, ଏକବିଂଶ ଶତାବ୍ଦୀର କିଛି ବର୍ଷ ଆଗରୁ । ବାକି ଭାରତୀୟ ଭାଷା ସେତେବେଳକୁ କମ୍ପୁଟରରେ ଦେଖିବାକୁ ମିଳିଲାଣି । ପ୍ରାରମ୍ଭିକ କାମ ଥିଲା ଓଡ଼ିଆରେ କମ୍ପୁଟରରେ ଟାଇପ କରି ଲେଖିବା ଓ ଆଗର ବ୍ଲକ ଟାଇପିଙ୍ଗ ବଦଳରେ ସହଜରେ ଡିଟିପି କରି ଅଳ୍ପ ସମୟରେ ଛପାଇବା । ସେ ବେଳରେ ସେ ଥିଲା ଗୋଟେ ବିରାଟ ସଫଳତା । ତିଆରି ହୋଇଥିଲା ନାନାଦି ଫଣ୍ଟ (font) । ଫଣ୍ଟ ହେଉଚି କମ୍ପୁଟରରେ ଏକ ଲିପିର ଅକ୍ଷର ସଜାଣି । ଆଉ ସବୁ ଫଣ୍ଟ ଦେଖିବାକୁ ଅଲଗା ଅଲଗା । ତେବେ ଆରମ୍ଭରେ ତିଆରି ହୋଇଥିବା ଫଣ୍ଟସବୁ ତିଆରି ହୋଇଥିଲା ଏକା ଢାଞ୍ଚାରେ - ଇଂରାଜୀ ବା ଲାଟିନ ପରିବାରର ଅକ୍ଷରସବୁର ବଦଳରେ ଓଡ଼ିଆ ଅକ୍ଷର ଖଞ୍ଜାଯାଇଥିଲା । ଯାହା ଫଳରେ କିବୋର୍ଡ଼ରେ ଇଂରାଜୀ ଅକ୍ଷରଟିଏ ଟାଇପ କଲେ ଆସୁଥିଲା ଓଡ଼ିଆ ଅକ୍ଷର । ତେବେ ଏକାଧିକ ଫଣ୍ଟ ନିର୍ମାତା ଭିନ୍ନ ଭିନ୍ନ ମାନକ ତିଆରି କରିବା ଫଳରେ ଅନେକ ଗୁଡ଼ିଏ ମାନକର ଫଣ୍ଟ - ଯେଉଁମାନଙ୍କର ନିଜ ନିଜ ଭିତରେ ତାଳମେଳ ନ ଥିଲା - ତିଆରି ହେବାରେ ଲାଗିଲା । ତେଣୁ ଅମୁକ ଫଣ୍ଟରେ ଲେଖା ପାଠ ସମୁକ ଫଣ୍ଟରେ ପଢ଼ିବା ଦୁରୂହ ହୋଇପଡ଼ିଲା । ତେବେ ଅଧିକାଂଶ ଛାପା ଓ ପ୍ରକାଶନ ସଂସ୍ଥା ଆକୃତି ନାମକ ସଫ୍ଟଓଏରଟିଏ ବ୍ୟବହାର କରୁଥିବାରୁ ଅଲଗା କମ୍ପୁଟରରେ ଟାଇପ ହୋଇଥିବା ପାଠ ଭିତରେ ଗୋଟେ ପ୍ରକାର ସମାନତା ଥିଲା । ତେବେ ଏସବୁ ଫଣ୍ଟରେ ଲେଖା ପାଠକୁ ନାଁ ଇମେଲରେ କାହାକୁ ପଠାଇହେଉଥିଲା, ନାଁ ୱେବସାଇଟରେ ବ୍ୟବହାର କରିହେଉଥିଲା, ନାଁ ଗୁଗଲରେ ଖୋଜି ହେଉଥିଲା । ଏହି ସବୁ ଅସୁବିଧାକୁ ସୁଧାରିବା ପାଇଁ ଇଉନିକୋଡ଼ ଫଣ୍ଟ ଆରମ୍ଭ କରାଗଲା । ଏହା ଥିଲା ଅଣ-ଲାଟିନ ଲିପିମାନଙ୍କ ପାଇଁ ଏକ ବରଦାନ । ଏଥିରେ ସବୁ ଲାଟିନ/ଇଂରାଜୀ ଅକ୍ଷର ସହିତ ସବୁ ଓଡ଼ିଆ ଅକ୍ଷର ମଧ୍ୟ ରହୁଥିଲା । ଆଉ ଏ ଥିଲା ଏକ ବିଶ୍ୱସ୍ତରୀୟ ମାନକ । ଅର୍ଥାତ କେବଳ ଦୁଇଟି ଓଡ଼ିଆ ଫଣ୍ଟ ଭିତରେ ସମାନତା ନୁହେଁ, ଓଡ଼ିଆ-ଗୁଜୁରାଟୀ ଭିତରେ ମଧ୍ୟ ସମାନତା ରହିଲା । ତେବେ ଆମର ପ୍ରକାଶନ ସଂସ୍ଥାମାନ ଏହାକୁ ବ୍ୟବହାର କରିବା ପାଇଁ ମଙ୍ଗିଲେ ନାହିଁ । କାରଣ ଥିଲା ସେମାନେ ବ୍ୟବହାର କରୁଥିବା ଡିଟିପି ସଫ୍ଟଓଏର (ଆଡୋବି ପେଜମେକର, କ୍ୱାର୍କ ଏକ୍ସପ୍ରେସ ଆଦି)ରେ ଓଡ଼ିଆ ଇଉନିକୋଡ଼ରେ ଯୁକ୍ତାକ୍ଷର ଆଦି ଠିକରେ କାମ କରୁନଥିଲା । ଏଣୁ ଲକ୍ଷ ଲକ୍ଷ ପୃଷ୍ଠା ବହିର ମଲାଟ ତଳୁ ବାହାରି କମ୍ପୁଟର ଓ ଇଣ୍ଟରନେଟର ପାଠକମାନଙ୍କ ପଢ଼ାହେବାରୁ ବଞ୍ଚିତ ହେଲା । ଏହାର ଗୋଟେ ବାଟ ଥିଲା ଡିଟିପି ପାଇଁ ବ୍ୟବହୃତ ଫଣ୍ଟକୁ ଓଡ଼ିଆ ଇଉନିକୋଡ଼ରେ ରୂପାନ୍ତର କରି ଇଣ୍ଟରନେଟରେ ଉପଲବ୍ଧ କରାଇବା । ବିଡ଼ମ୍ବନା ଏହିକି ଯେ, ଆମ ଖବରକାଗଜମାନେ ତା' ନ କରି ଆପଣେଇଲେ ଲେଖାକୁ ଛବି କରି ନିଜ ୱେବସାଇଟରେ, ଆଉ ଥୋକେ ଡାଇନାମିକ ଫଣ୍ଟ ନାମକ ଆଉ ଏକ ପନ୍ଥା ଧରିଲେ । ଛବି ହେଲେ ଲେଖା ସବୁ ଯେ ଖୋଜିହେବ ନାହିଁ କିବା ଆଉ କେଉଁ କାମରେ ବ୍ୟବହାର କରିହେବ ନାହିଁ ତାହା କହିବା ବାହୁଲ୍ୟ । ଡାଇନାମିକ ଫଣ୍ଟରେ ମୂଳ ସର୍ଭରରୁ ଫଣ୍ଟଟିଏ ଲୋଡ଼ ହେଇଥାଏ, ଯାହା ଫଳରେ ପାଠକର କମ୍ପୁଟରରେ ସେ ଫଣ୍ଟଟି ନ ଥିଲେ ମଧ୍ୟ ସେ ପଢ଼ିପାରେ । କିନ୍ତୁ ନାଁ ସେ ଲେଖାକୁ କପି କରି କାମରେ ଲଗାଇହୁଏ ନାଁ ଗୁଗଲ ସର୍ଚରେ ସେ ଆସେ । ଓଡ଼ିଶାର ପ୍ରାୟ ସମସ୍ତ ପ୍ରକାଶିତ ପାଠ ଭିତରୁ ଅଧା ଇଣ୍ଟରନେଟରେ ଆସେ ନାହିଁ, ଆଉ ଅଧକ ଆସେ ଏମିତିକା ମୃତ ଫରମାଟରେ ଯେ ତା'କୁ ଆଉ କେହି କାମରେ ଲଗାଇପାରିବେ ନାହିଁ । ଯଦି ପାଠକଟିଏ ନିଜ ମୋବାଇଲ କି କମ୍ପୁଟରରେ ଅବାଧରେ ନିଜ ଭାଷା ପଢ଼ିନପାରୁଛି ତାହେଲେ ସେ କେମିତି ଯେ ଭାଷାକୁ ଜାବୁଡ଼ି ଧରିବ ତାହା ଆଲୋଚନାର ବିଷୟ । ପାଠ ବଢ଼ିଲେ ପାଠକମାନଙ୍କୁ ଅଧିକ ପଠନର ସୁଯୋଗ ମିଳିବ, ବିକଳ୍ପ ମିଳିବ ବାଛିବା ପାଇଁ ନିଜ ପସନ୍ଦର ବହିଟିଏ । ଆଉ ତା ଯଦି ହୁଏ ସୁବିଧାରେ ବ୍ୟବହାର କରିହେଉଥିବା ଭଳି ସାଧନରେ ତାହେଲେ ଇଂରାଜୀ ମାଧ୍ୟମରେ ପଢ଼ୁଥିବା ଓଡ଼ିଆ ଘରର ପିଲାଟି ବି ଓଡ଼ିଆରେ ପଢ଼ିବାକୁ ଆଗଭର ହେବ ।

ଉପରେ ବର୍ଣ୍ଣିତ ଅସୁବିଧା - ଅଣ-ଇଉନିକୋଡ଼ରୁ ଇଉନିକୋଡ଼କୁ ଫଣ୍ଟ ରୂପାନ୍ତର କରିବାର ସାଧନଟି ପ୍ରଥମେ ୨୦୧୧ରେ ସୃଜନିକା ଅନୁଷ୍ଠାନ ଦ୍ୱାରା ଲୋକମାନଙ୍କ ପାଇଁ ଖୋଲାରେ ବିତରଣ କରାଯାଇଥିଲା ରେବତୀ ନାମକ କନଭର୍ଟର ଦେଇ । ତେବେ ସେ ସଫ୍ଟଓଏରଟି ମଧ୍ୟ ରକ୍ଷଣାବେକ୍ଷଣା ଅଭାବରୁ ପୁରୁଣା ହୋଇଗଲା ଆଉ ନିକଟ ଅତୀତରେ ଆଉ କିଛି ବନ୍ଧୁଙ୍କ ସହ ମିଶି ଲେଖକ ଏକାଧିକ ଆକୃତି ସାରଳା ଫଣ୍ଟ ତଥା ଶ୍ରୀଲିପି ନାମକ ଆଉ ଏକ ଫଣ୍ଟରୁ ଇଉନିକୋଡ଼ ରୂପାନ୍ତର ପାଇଁ କନଭର୍ଟର ତିଆରି କରିଛନ୍ତି । ଆକୃତି ସାରଳା କନଭର୍ଟରଟି http://bitly.com/akrutiodia ରେ ଓ ଶ୍ରୀଲିପି କନଭର୍ଟରଟି http://bitly.com/shreelipi ୱେବସାଇଟରେ ଉଭୟ ଅନଲାଇନ ଓ ଅଫଲାଇନରେ ବ୍ୟବହାର ପାଇଁ ସମ୍ପୂର୍ଣ୍ଣ ମାଗଣାରେ ଉପଲବ୍ଧ । ଇଣ୍ଟରନେଟର ଭାଷା ହେଲା ଇଉନିକୋଡ଼, ତାକୁ ଆଦରିଲେ ଆମ ଭାଷାର ସ୍ଥିତି ଯେ ନାହିଁରୁ କାହିଁ ହେବ ତାହା କହିବା ଏ ବିବରଣର ଅତିରଞ୍ଜନ ମାତ୍ର ହେବ ।

ଏ ତ ଗଲା ଫଣ୍ଟ-ଜନିତ ଅସୁବିଧା କଥା । ଏବେ ଆମର ବହିସବୁରେ କି କି ପ୍ରତିବନ୍ଧକ ରହିଛି ତାହା ବିଚାରିବା । ଓଡ଼ିଆ ଭାଷାରେ ଏଯାବତ ଲକ୍ଷାଧିକ ବହି ଲେଖାଯାଇଥିବ । ସେସବୁ ଭିତରୁ କେତେ ଯେ ଉପାଦେୟ ବହି ଅଛି ଆଉ ଅଚିରେ ଏସବୁ ପାଇବାର ବାଟ ଯେ ଅମଡ଼ା ଏକଥାରେ ବୋଧେ ପାଠକେ ଏକମତ ହେବେ । ଆମ ବହିସବୁ ଯଦି ଡିଜିଟାଲ ଲାଇବ୍ରେରି ମାଧ୍ୟମରେ ଖୋଲାରେ ଉପଲବ୍ଧ ହୁଅନ୍ତା ତାହେଲେ ଜ୍ଞାନଲାଭର ପଥ ସୁଗମ ହୋଇପାରନ୍ତା । ବହି ସବୁ ଇଣ୍ଟରନେଟରେ ଉପଲବ୍ଧ କରାଇବାର ସୁବିଧା ବାଟଟିଏ ହେଲା ସେସବୁକୁ ଲେଖା ବା ଟେକ୍ସଟ ରୂପରେ ରଖିବା । ଲେଖାକୁ ଇଣ୍ଟରନେଟ ଯୋଗେ ଖୋଜିହେବ, ପୁନର୍ବ୍ୟବହାର କରିହେବ ଆଉ ବିତରଣ ମଧ୍ୟ କରିହେବ । ଆଉ ଏକ ବାଟ ହେଲା ବହିକୁ ସ୍କାନ କରି ପିଡିଏଫ ରୂପରେ ଉପଲବ୍ଧ କରିହେବ । ପିଡିଏଫ ବହିସବୁ ପଢ଼ିହେଉଥିଲେ ହେଁ ଖୋଜିବା ଆଉ ପୁନର୍ବ୍ୟବହାର କରିବା ପାଖାପାଖି ଅସମ୍ଭବ । ତେବେ ଡିଟିପି ହୋଇଥିବା ବହିକୁ ଫଣ୍ଟ କନଭର୍ଟର ସାହାଯ୍ୟରେ ଇଉନିକୋଡ଼ରେ ରୂପାନ୍ତର କରିହେବ ଯାହା ବହିକୁ ସ୍କାନ କରି ପିଡିଏଫ ତିଆରିଲେ ହୋଇପାରିବ ନାହିଁ । ନ୍ୟାସନାଲ ଇନଷ୍ଟିଚ୍ୟୁଟ ଅଫ ରାଉରକେଲାର ମିଳିତ ସହଯୋଗରେ ୧୯୫୦ ମସିହା ଯାଏ ଛପା ହୋଇଥିବା ୭୪୦ ଖଣ୍ଡ ଉପାଦେୟ ଓଡ଼ିଆ ବହିକୁ ସୃଜନିକା ଅନୁଷ୍ଠାନ ତରଫରୁ ସ୍କାନ କରାଯାଇଛି । ଏଥି ମଧ୍ୟରୁ ୨୪୦ ଖଣ୍ଡ ବହି oaob.nitrkl.ac.in ରେ ଡାଉନଲୋଡ଼ ପାଇଁ ଉପଲବ୍ଧ । ତେବେ ବହିସବୁ ପ୍ରକାଶକଙ୍କ ଅନୁମତି ବିନା ଇଣ୍ଟରନେଟରେ ରଖିବା କପିରାଇଟ ଆଇନର ଉଲ୍ଲଙ୍ଘନ । ନିକଟରେ ଓଡ଼ିଆ ଉଇକିପିଡ଼ିଆ ତରଫରୁ ଆୟୋଜିତ "ଓଡ଼ିଶା ଦିବସ ୨୦୧୪" ଅବସରରେ ଭାଷାବିଦ ପଦ୍ମଶ୍ରୀ ଦେବୀପ୍ରସନ୍ନ ପଟ୍ଟନାୟକ ଓ ଭାଷା ଗବେଷକ ସୁବ୍ରତ ପୃଷ୍ଟିଙ୍କ ରଚିତ ଓଡ଼ିଆ ଭାଷାର ଗବେଷଣା ତଥ୍ୟ ସମ୍ବଳିତ ଏକ ଇଂରାଜୀ ବହି "Classical Odia" ଓ ଶ୍ରୀଯୁକ୍ତ ପୃଷ୍ଟିଙ୍କ ଦୁଇଟି ଓଡ଼ିଆ ବହି "ଭାଷା ଓ ଜାତୀୟତା" ଏବଂ "ଜାତି, ଜାଗୃତି ଓ ପ୍ରଗତି"କୁ CC-BY-SA ୩.୦ ଲାଇସେନ୍ସରେ ପୁନ-ଲାଇସେନ୍ସ କରିବାର ଅନୁମତି ଦେଲେ । ଏହି ଲାଇସେନ୍ସ ଜଣେ ପାଠକକୁ କେବଳ ବହିଟି ପଢ଼ିବାର ସୁଯୋଗ ଦେଇନଥାଏ, ବରଂ ବହିର ସ୍ରଷ୍ଟାଙ୍କୁ ଶ୍ରେୟ ଦେଇ ବହିର ଲେଖାକୁ ପୁନ-ବ୍ୟବହାର ଓ ବିତରଣ କରିପାରେ । ଏହା ଏକ ଯୁଗାନ୍ତକାରୀ ଓ ଐତିହାସିକ ପଦକ୍ଷେପ । ଯଦି ଆମ ଲେଖକ ଓ ପ୍ରକାଶକ ମାନେ ଏମିତି ଅନୁମତି ଦିଅନ୍ତେ ତେବେ ଅନେକ ଉପାଦେୟ ବହି ଇଣ୍ଟରନେଟରେ ଉପଲବ୍ଧ ହୋଇ ପାଠକର ପଠନ ଭୋକ ମେଣ୍ଟାନ୍ତା । ଶ୍ରୀଯୁକ୍ତ ପୃଷ୍ଟିଙ୍କ ବହି ଦୁଇଟିର ଲେଖାର ଫଣ୍ଟ ରୂପାନ୍ତର ହୋଇ ଏବେ ତାହା ଓଡ଼ିଆ ଉଇକିପାଠାଗାରରେ ଉପଲବ୍ଧ ହେବ । ଉଇକିପାଠାଗାର ଇଣ୍ଟରନେଟରେ wikisource.org/wiki/Main_Page/Odia ଠାରେ ଉପଲବ୍ଧ ଏକ ଡିଜିଟାଲ ଲାଇବ୍ରେରି ଯେଉଁଥିରେ କପିରାଇଟର ଜଞ୍ଜାଳରୁ ମୁକ୍ତ ବହିମାନ ପାଠକମାନଙ୍କ ପାଇଁ ଖୋଲାରେ ଉପଲବ୍ଧ । ଉଇକିପାଠାଗାରରେ ଆମ ଭାଗବତ, ମହାଭାରତଠାରୁ ଆରମ୍ଭ କରି ବିଜ୍ଞାନ ଓ ଆଇନର ବହିସବୁ ରଖାଯାଇପାରିବ । ବହୁ ବର୍ଷ ଧରି ଛପା ହୋଇନଥିବା ଅନେକ ଉପାଦେୟ ବହି ଯେ କେବଳ ପାଠକମାନଙ୍କ ଅବାଧ ପଠନର ଦିଗନ୍ତଟିଏ ବିସ୍ତାରିବ ତା' ନୁହେଁ, ବରଂ ଆମ ଭାଷାର ଅଧିକ ପାଠ ଇଣ୍ଟରନେଟରେ ଉପଲବ୍ଧ କରାଇ ଓଡ଼ିଆକୁ ଆଉ ପାଞ୍ଚ ବିଶ୍ୱସ୍ତରୀୟ ଭାଷା ସଙ୍ଗେ କାନ୍ଧ ମିଳାଇ ଛିଡ଼ାହେବାକୁ ଭରସା ଦେବ ।

ଖାଲି ବହି ନୁହେଁ ଆମ ଖବରକାଗଜମାନ ମଧ୍ୟ ହେଲେ ଚଳନ୍ତି ଇତିହାସର ରଥଚକ । ବହି, ପତ୍ରିକା ଆଉ ଖବରକାଗଜରୁ ତଥ୍ୟ ନେଇ ଭରିହେବ ଆମ ଭାଷାର ଉଇକିପିଡ଼ିଆକୁ । ଓଡ଼ିଆ ଉଇକିପିଡ଼ିଆ ଏକ ଆନ୍ତର୍ଜାତିକ ସଙ୍ଗଠନ ଉଇକିମିଡ଼ିଆର ଅଂଶବିଶେଷ । ଅନେକେ ଇଂରାଜୀ ଉଇକିପିଡ଼ିଆରୁ ନିତି କେତେ ବିଷୟ ପଢୁଥିବେ, ହେଲେ ଥରେ ବୋଧେ ଭାବି ନଥିବେ ଓଡ଼ିଆରେ ଉଇକିପିଡ଼ିଆ ଥିବା ବାବଦରେ । ୨୦୦୨ରୁ ଆରମ୍ଭ ହୋଇ ୨୦୧୧ ଯାଏ ସୁପ୍ତିରେ ଥିଲା ଏହି ଅନଲାଇନ ଜ୍ଞାନକୋଷ । ତେବେ ବେଙ୍ଗାଳୁରୁଠାରେ କେତେଜଣ ଓଡ଼ିଆଙ୍କ ଉଦ୍ୟମରେ ପୁଣି ତେଜିଲା ଆଉ କିଛି ଉତ୍ସାହୀ ଓଡ଼ିଆ, ଓଡ଼ିଶା ଓ ଭାରତର କୋଣ-ସନୁକୋଣରୁ ଏଥିରେ ଭାଗ ନେବା ଆରମ୍ଭ କଲେ । ମାତ୍ର ୧୫ ଜଣ ସ୍ୱେଚ୍ଛାସେବୀ ଉଇକିଆଳି (ଉଇକିପିଡ଼ିଆର ସମ୍ପାଦକ)ଙ୍କ ସମ୍ପାଦିତ ୮,୦୦୦ ରୁ ଅଧିକ ପ୍ରସଙ୍ଗରେ ଭରା ଓଡ଼ିଆ ଉଇକିପିଡ଼ିଆ ଓଡ଼ିଆ ଭାଷାର ବିଶାଳତମ ଇନଲାଇନ ଜ୍ଞାନକୋଷ । ଜ୍ଞାନକୋଷ ଭିତ୍ତିକ ଲେଖା ବୋଧେ ଗୋପାଳ ପ୍ରହରାଜଙ୍କ ପୂର୍ଣ୍ଣଚନ୍ଦ୍ର ଭାଷାକୋଷ ଓ ବିନୋଦ କାନୁନଗୋଙ୍କ ଜ୍ଞାନମଣ୍ଡଳ ପରେ ଆଉ ସାମୁହିକ ଭାବେ ଲେଖାହୋଇନଥିବ । or.wikipedia.orgରେ ଉପଲବ୍ଧ ଓଡ଼ିଆ ଉଇକିପିଡ଼ିଆରେ ସମସ୍ତେ ଭାଗନେଇ ନୂଆ ପ୍ରସଙ୍ଗ ଗଢ଼ିପାରିବେଓ ଆଗରୁ ଥିବା ପ୍ରସଙ୍ଗର ସମ୍ପାଦନା କରିପାରିବେ । ଅନେକେ ଯେ ଗୁଗଲରେ ଆଉ ଫେସବୁକରେ ଓଡ଼ିଆ ଆସୁନାହିଁ ବୋଲି ଗୁମାନ କରିବସନ୍ତି ତାକୁ ଆଣିବାର ଗୋଟେ ବାଟ ହେଲା ଉଇକିପିଡ଼ିଆରେ ନିଜ ଅଞ୍ଚଳ, ପର୍ଯ୍ୟଟନ ସ୍ଥଳ, ନିଜ ପସନ୍ଦରେ ବ୍ୟକ୍ତିତ୍ୱ, ଆମର ଇତିହାସ ଓ ଆହୁରି ଅନେକ ବିଷୟରେ ପ୍ରସଙ୍ଗମାନ ଲେଖିବା ।

ଭବିଷ୍ୟତ ପାଇଁ ପନ୍ଥା:

ଓଡ଼ିଆ ବହିର ଡିଜିଟାଲ ରୂପ: ଉଇକିପାଠାଗାରରେ ଅଚିରେ ଓଡ଼ିଆ ବହି ସବୁକୁ ଡିଜିଟାଲ ରୂପରେ ଲେଖା ଭାବେ ରଖାଯାଇପାରିବ । ତେବେ ବହି ସବୁର ଲାଇସେନ୍ସକୁ Creative Commons Share-Alike କିମ୍ବା Public Domainରେ ପ୍ରକାଶକ କିମ୍ବା ସତ୍ୱାଧିକାରୀଙ୍କ ଅନୁମତି କ୍ରମେ ବଦଳାଇବାକୁ ପଡ଼ିବ ।
ଓଡ଼ିଆରେ ଅଧିକ ଇଉନିକୋଡ଼ କଣ୍ଟେଣ୍ଟ ତିଆରି: ଓଡ଼ିଆ ଉଇକିପିଡ଼ିଆ ଏଥିପାଇଁ ଏକ ପ୍ରକୃଷ୍ଠ ସ୍ଥାନ । ଏହା ସମସ୍ତଙ୍କ ପାଇଁ ଖୋଲାଥିବାରୁ ଅଧିକ ସଂଖ୍ୟକ ଲୋକ ମଧ୍ୟ ଏଥିରେ ଲେଖିପାରିବେ । ଏଥିସହିତ ଖବରକାଗଜ, ପତ୍ରପତ୍ରିକା ଆଦି ମଧ୍ୟ ନିଜର ୱେବସାଇଟରେ ଇଉନିକୋଡ଼ରେ ଲେଖାସବୁ ଦେବାକୁ ପଡ଼ିବ ।
ଓପନସୋର୍ସ ସାଧନର ବ୍ୟବହାର: ଅନେକ ଓପନସୋର୍ସ ସଫ୍ଟଓଏର ଏବେ ବ୍ୟବହୃତ ଆଡୋବ ପେଜମେକର ଆଦି ଡିଟିପି ସଫ୍ଟଓଏରର ବିକଳ୍ପ ଭାବେ ବ୍ୟବହାର ହୋଇପାରିବ । ଆକୃତି, ଶ୍ରୀଲିପି ଆଦିର ବଦଳରେ ଡିଟିପି ପାଇଁ ଇଉନିକୋଡ଼ ଫଣ୍ଟ ବ୍ୟବହାର କଲେ ଏବେ ଲେଖା ବିତରଣରେ ଯେଉ ବିରାଟ ଖମାଟିଏ ରହିଛି ତାହା କିଛିକାଂଶରେ ଭରିଯିବ । ସୁଖର କଥା ମାଗଣାରେ ଉପଲବ୍ଧ ଉବଣ୍ଟୁ ଓ ଫେଡୋରା ଭଳି ଓପନସୋର୍ସ ଅପରେଟିଙ୍ଗ ସିଷ୍ଟମ ମାଇକ୍ରୋସଫ୍ଟର ଉଇଣ୍ଡୋଜ XP, ଭିସ୍ତା ଆଦିଠୁ ଯଥେଷ୍ଟ ଅଧିକ ନିରାପଦ ଓ ଭାଇରସ ରହିତ । ବ୍ୟବହାରୀରେ ଏହାକୁ ଆପଣେଇପାରିବେ
ଓଡ଼ିଆକୁ ବାଧ୍ୟତାମୂଳକ ଭାବେ ପାଠ୍ୟକ୍ରମରେ ରଖିବା: ଶିଶୁର ଭାଷା ତା' ବୋଉର ଭାଷା ହେବା ଉଚିତ, ସେଥିପାଇଁ ଏହା ମା'ବୋଲି ମା ମା' ତୁଣ୍ଡର ଭାଷା ବୋଲି ଜଣା । ତଣ୍ଟିଚିପି ପିଲାଟିକୁ ଜନ୍ମ ହେବା ବେଳୁ ଚାକିରି ପାଇଁ ଯୋଗ୍ୟ କରିବାରେ ଯେଉଁ ବୃଥା ପରିଶ୍ରମ ଅଭିଭାବକେ କରୁଛନ୍ତି ତା' ପିଲାଟି ଉପରେ ଜୋର-ଜବରଦସ୍ତି ଏକ ବିଦେଶୀ ଭାଷା ଲଦି ଦେଉଛି । ଏହାର ପ୍ରଭାବରେ ପିଲାର ମାନସିକ ସନ୍ତୁଳନ ବିଗିଡ଼ି ନିଜ ଜାତି, ଅଞ୍ଚଳ, ରାଜ୍ୟ, ଲୋକେ ଆଉ ଏପରିକି ନିଜ ପରିବାର ପ୍ରତି ଛୁଆବେଳୁ ଏକ ପ୍ରକାର ମମତା-ରହିତ ହୋଇଯାଉଛି । ଓଡ଼ିଆ ଶିକ୍ଷା ଶିଶୁ ଶ୍ରେଣୀରୁ ନେଇ ବିଏ-ବିଏସସି ଯାଏ ବାଧ୍ୟତାମୂଳକ ହେଉ । ଓଡ଼ିଶାରେ ବାକି ରାଜ୍ୟ ଭଳି ଏକ ଗବେଷଣାମୂଳକ ଓଡ଼ିଆ ବିଶ୍ୱବିଦ୍ୟାଳୟ ପ୍ରତିଷ୍ଠା ହେଉ । ଏ ଭାଷା ଯଥେଷ୍ଟ ଆଧୁନିକ ପ୍ରେମ କବିତା ଶୁଣିଲାଣି । ଭାଷାର ଅତୀତ, ବର୍ତ୍ତମାନ ଓ ଭବିଷ୍ୟତର ବିଶ୍ଳେଷଣ ଲୋଡ଼ା ।
ଓଡ଼ିଆ ହେଉ ସରକାରୀ ଭାଷା: ଯେତେ ଯାହା ହେଉ ଯଦି ଭାଷାଟିଏ ରାଜଭାଷା ବା ସରକାରୀ କାମରେ ନ ଲାଗିଲା ତାହେଲେ ଭାଷା ପ୍ରତି ଯେତେ ମମତା ଥାଉ, ସାଧାରଣ ଲୋକଟିଏ ବ୍ୟାଙ୍କରୁ ଋଣ ଆଣିବା ବେଳେ କଷ୍ଟେମଷ୍ଟେ ଇଂରାଜୀରେ ଲେଖିବ । ଓଡ଼ିଆ ସରକାରୀ ସ୍ତରରେ ବାଧ୍ୟତାମୂଲକ ହେଲେ ବାହାରୁ ଆସୁଥିବା ଆଇଏଏସ ଅଫିସର ଯେଉଁମାନେ ସରକାରୀ କଳର ମୁଖ୍ୟ, ମଧ୍ୟ ଓଡ଼ିଆ ଶିଖିବେ ଓ ଲୋକଙ୍କର ଅସୁବିଧା ବେଶି ବୁଝିବେ । ମଣିଷର ପ୍ରାକୃତିକ ଭାଷା ଯଦି ପଠନ, ଲିଖନ, ସରବରାହ ଓ ଯୋଗାଯୋଗର ଭାଷା ହେଲା ସେ ଭାଷାର ଗତିକୁ ଯେ କେହି ରୋକିପାରିବେ ନାହିଁ ତାହା ଆମ ପାଇଁ ମାଣ୍ଡାରିନ, ଜାପାନୀ, ଥାଇ ଆଦି ଏସୀୟ ଭାଷାମାନଙ୍କଠୁ ଆରମ୍ଭ କରି ଫରାସୀ, ଜର୍ମାନ, ଋଷିଆନ, ଆରବୀ ଆଦି ଛାମୁଆଁ ଭାଷାସମୂହ ଆମ ଆଗରେ ପ୍ରମାଣ କରିଦେଇଛନ୍ତି । ଆଉ ଇଂରାଜୀକୁ ଆମର ଶତ୍ରୁ ନ ମଣି ତା' କାନ୍ଧରେ ଚଢ଼ି ଆମ୍ବ ପାରିବା କୌଶଳଟି ଏ ସାଧବର ଦାୟାଦ ଜାତିକୁ ଶିଖିବାକୁ ପଡ଼ିବ।

ଲେଖକ ପରିଚିତି:

ଶୁଭାଶିଷ ପାଣିଗ୍ରାହୀ ଜଣେ ଶିକ୍ଷା ଗବେଷକ । ସେ ଉଇକିମିଡିଆ ଫାଉଣ୍ଡେସନରୁ ଅନୁଦାନପ୍ରାପ୍ତ ସେଣ୍ଟର ଫର ଇଣ୍ଟରନେଟ ଏଣ୍ଡ ସୋସାଇଟିର ଆକସେସ ଟୁ ନଲେଜରେ ପ୍ରୋଗ୍ରାମ ଅଧିକାରୀ ଭାବେ କମ୍ପୁଟରରେ ଭାରତୀୟ ଭାଷାଶିକ୍ଷା ସମ୍ବନ୍ଧରେ କାମ କରୁଛନ୍ତି । ଉଇକିପିଡ଼ିଆ ଓ Mozilla ତଥା ଓଡ଼ିଆ ଭାଷାରେ ଇଣ୍ଟରନେଟରେ ଲୋକାଲାଇଜେସନର ମାନକ, ଓଡ଼ିଶାରେ ବିଭିନ୍ନ ବିଶ୍ୱବିଦ୍ୟାଳୟ ଓ ଶିକ୍ଷାନୁଷ୍ଠାନରେ ଛାତ୍ରମାନଙ୍କ ପାଇଁ ଉଇକିପିଡ଼ିଆ ସମ୍ପାଦନା ପ୍ରକଳ୍ପ, ବିଶ୍ୱସ୍ତରରେ OpenGLAMର ସଦସ୍ୟ ଓ ଭାରତୀୟ ଆମ୍ବାସାଡର ଭାବରେ ଓ OpenEducation ପ୍ରକଳ୍ପ ମାଧ୍ୟମରେ ଅଧିକ ଜ୍ଞାନର ବିତରଣର ସାଧନ ନିର୍ମାଣ, ଉଇକିମାନିଆ ଭଳି ଆନ୍ତର୍ଜାତୀୟ ସମ୍ମିଳନୀରେ ଭାଗନେଇ ଏସୀୟ ଭାଷାସମୂହ ପାଇଁ ମିଳିତ କାର୍ଯ୍ୟକ୍ରମ ତଥା ନାଗରିକ ସାମ୍ବାଦିକ ସଙ୍ଗଠନ Global Voicesର ଓଡ଼ିଆ ଲିଙ୍ଗୁଆ ମୁଖ୍ୟ ଭାବେ ସେ ଭାଷା ଗବେଷଣା ଓ ଭାଷାର କମ୍ପୁଟରୀକରଣ ପାଇଁ ବିଭିନ୍ନ ସାଧନ ନିର୍ମାଣରେ ସେ ସକ୍ରିୟ ।

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/openness/blog-old/state-of-odia-language-in-computing-and-future-steps

Aircel & Wikimedia Foundation announce Wikipedia Zero

pavanaja — 2014-07-07T05:58:08Z

Aircel and Wikimedia Foundation came together to announce Wikipedia Zero. As per this, users of Aircel need not pay for data for accessing Wikipedia. Dr. U.B.Pavanaja wrote a report on this in Prajavani.

Click here to read the article published in Prajavani on July 3, 2014.

ಗ್ಯಾಜೆಟ್ ಸುದ್ದಿ

ಏರ್‌ಸೆಲ್ ಬಳಸುವವರಿಗೆ ಉಚಿತ ವಿಕಿಪೀಡಿಯ

ಮೊಬೈಲ್ ಫೋನ್ ಸೇವೆ ನೀಡುವ ಏರ್‌ಸೆಲ್ ಕಂಪೆನಿ ಮತ್ತು ವಿಕಿಪೀಡಿಯವನ್ನು ನಡೆಸುವ ವಿಕಿಮೀಡಿಯ ಫೌಂಡೇಶನ್ ಜೊತೆಗೂಡಿದ್ದಾರೆ. ಏರ್‌ಸೆಲ್ ಗ್ರಾಹಕರು ತಮ್ಮ ಸ್ಮಾರ್ಟ್‌ಫೋನ್‌ಗಳಲ್ಲಿ ವಿಕಿಪೀಡಿಯವನ್ನು ಬಳಸಿದರೆ ಅವರು ಅಂತರಜಾಲ ಬಳಕೆಗೆ ಹಣ ನೀಡಬೇಕಾಗಿರುವುದಿಲ್ಲ. ಇದು ವಿಕಿಪೀಡಿಯ ಬಳಸುವವರಿಗೆ ಒಳ್ಳೆಯ ಸುದ್ದಿ. ವಿಕಿಪೀಡಿಯ ಝೀರೊ ಎಂಬುದು ಆಫ್ರಿಕದಲ್ಲಿ ಪ್ರಾರಂಭವಾದ ಯೋಜನೆ.

ಇದರ ಪ್ರಕಾರ ಮೊಬೈಲ್ ಸೇವೆ ನೀಡುವ ಕಂಪೆನಿ ತಮ್ಮ ಗ್ರಾಹಕರು ವಿಕಿಪೀಡಿಯ ವೀಕ್ಷಿಸಿದರೆ ಮಾಹಿತಿ ಪ್ರವಾಹಕ್ಕೆ (ಡಾಟಾ) ಹಣ ನೀಡಬೇಕಾಗಿರುವುದಿಲ್ಲ. ಭಾರತದಲ್ಲಿ ಈ ವಿಕಿಪೀಡಿಯ ಝೀರೊ ಯೋಜನೆಯಲ್ಲಿ ಸದ್ಯಕ್ಕೆ ಏರ್‌ಸೆಲ್ ಮಾತ್ರ ಭಾಗಿಯಾಗಿದೆ. ಇಂಗ್ಲಿಷ್ ಮಾತ್ರವಲ್ಲದೆ ಇತರೆ ಭಾರತೀಯ ಭಾಷೆಗಳಲ್ಲಿ ವಿಕಿಪೀಡಿಯ ಬಳಸುವವರಿಗೆ ಇದು ಒಳ್ಳೆಯ ಸುದ್ದಿ.

See the portion about Wikipedia Zero below:

Click to download the PDF here.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/openness/blog-old/prajavani-july-3-2014-article-on-wikipedia-zero

Opening Comments by India on Limitations and Exceptions for Libraries and Archives at WIPO SCCR 28

nehaa — 2014-07-21T17:55:28Z

This was the statement made by the Indian delegation at the 28th session of the World Intellectual Property Organization Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights on July 2, 2014.

Hon'ble Chair

In the quest for Knowledge society-for the developing countries- the issue of haves and have -not’s is now sliced with an additional divide of knows and Know -not’s. Libraries and Archives are the engines of creativity and promote intergeneration equity. They indeed are the modern day temples, mosques and churches- The notion of strong copyright boundaries has found its resonance to encircle spaces hitherto providing the socio economic infrastructure for developing nations. It is in this context that we need to look for appropriate international instrument to consolidate the access by way of limitations and exceptions to libraries, archives, educational institutions and other disabled people.

The overemphasis of stricter and stronger copyright as the engine of creativity is now questioned by latest studies. Ekhard Höffner a German historian has in his comprehensive research argues the fact that in the 19th century Germany outpaced UK, as the copyright laws were not strong as it was in UK. This fact goes contrary to the established view that Copyright is directly correlated to the expansion of creative works and publication. In fact Germany could do the catch up with the other powers in Europe.

I am mentioning this to emphasize for the developing world to do the catch up it is necessary to have limitations and exceptions for Libraries/archives/educational institutions. At this junction it is necessary to recognize the importance of such consensus without presuming whether what sort of International Instrument it should be.

India supports the effort of harmonizing the exceptions and limitations from an international dimension for intergenerational equity and as a tool to develope socio-economic- human resource infrastructure.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/opening-statement-of-india-on-limitations-and-exceptions-for-libraries-and-archives

ଇଣ୍ଟରନେଟରେ ଓଡ଼ିଆ ଅକ୍ଷରସଜ୍ଜା

subha — 2014-07-28T06:02:16Z

This article was published in the Samaja (Odia newspaper) on July 4, 2014.

This is an article "ଇଣ୍ଟରନେଟରେ ଓଡ଼ିଆ ଅକ୍ଷରସଜ୍ଜା" published in The Samaja on July 4, 2014 is about the Akruti Sarala - Unicode Odia converter that fellow Wikipedian Manoj Sahukar and myself worked. Akruti is a modified/extended ISCII encoding based font that is used by many users. This converter could convert them to Unicode so the text could not just be searchable on the Internet but could also be used for posting on Facebook, mail, Wikipedia, blogs and other websites. This has been published today in the editorial page.

Read a scanned version of the published article below:

Read the Samaja paper here.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/openness/blog-old/article-on-akruti-unicode-converter-in-samaja

Statement on the Limitations and Exceptions for Libraries and Archives at WIPO SCCR 28

nehaa — 2014-07-21T17:56:24Z

Nehaa Chaudhari, attending the 28th Session of the World Intellectual Property Organization (“WIPO”) Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights (“SCCR”) at Geneva from 30 June, 2014 to 04 July, 2014, made this statement on the Limitations and Exceptions for Libraries and Archives on behalf of CIS on Day 4, 03 July, 2014.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

We thank the delegation of the United States for putting forward their Objectives and Principles for Exceptions and Limitations for Libraries and Archives, presented to this Committee in Document SCCR/ 26/8. I would like to comment on two of the topics that we have discussed today- one; the adoption of national exceptions and two; limitations and exceptions in a digital environment.

First, Mr. Chair, on the adoption of national exceptions: We appreciate the recognition of the ‘public service’ role of libraries and the importance of limitations and exceptions for them to perform their role of facilitating access to and the dissemination of knowledge and information, the goals of the copyright system. However, Mr. Chair, we do believe that the true and complete realization of these objectives would not be possible without an international legal instrument that lays out minimum international standards for countries to adopt and implement, that fosters a system for cross border exchange and creates an enabling environment to facilitate the implementation and adoption of limitations and exceptions at the national level.

Second, Mr. Chair, on limitations and exceptions in a digital environment; we appreciate the objective set out in the proposal made by the United States and welcome the statements by the delegations of Kenya, Chile and South Africa, that international regulation will grant a solution to the problems facing libraries and archives in the digital environment. Mr. Chair, the digital environment presents huge opportunities for countries such as India and perhaps others in the Global South for the preservation and dissemination of knowledge and in turn benefit education and research; with libraries and archives playing a crucial role. The digital environment, Mr. Chair, also presents a fair share of challenges. These include as IFLA, CLA, EIFL, IAB, the Karisma Foundation and others have also stated- multiplicity and complexity of licenses to be negotiated with various rights holders, the mandated use of particular platforms by publishers, difficulties in obtaining copyright clearances and limitations on remote access to name a few. Additional challenges are placed by technological measures of protection, (something that we also spoke about in our submission at the previous session of this Committee; where technological measures of protection often placed on master copies of files obtained by libraries and archives prevent basic preservation activities such as file format migration and limit the ways in which end users can utilize the work in question, rendering redundant, fair use or fair dealing provisions.

Therefore, Mr. Chair, we are of the opinion that an international legal instrument addressing the challenges faced by libraries and archives in the digital environment is necessary and the way forward for members of this Committee- and existing mechanisms in national laws of those nations that do have them are insufficient.

Video

Videos of the WIPO's proceedings from June 30, 2014 to July 04, 2014 are available online. To view CIS' Statement, select 'Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights: Twenty-Eighth Session- June 30 to July 4, 2014 (Geneva, Switzerland)' from the drop-down list of videos. CIS' Statement is in the video titled SCCR/28- Thurs3 - English - Afternoon session. The length of the video is 02:13:52. The statement is available in this video from 01:38:46

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/cis-statement-on-limitations-and-exceptions-for-libraries-and-archives

Maher Reports on WIPO Copyright Deliberations

praskrishna — 2014-07-03T09:41:28Z

SAA Past President and IPWG member William Maher represented the views of American archivists as a permanent observer at the World Intellectual Property Organization’s Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights meeting, December 16-20.

Read the original published on the website of the Society of American Archivists. CIS is briefly mentioned.

Attendees discussed an international treaty for library and archives exceptions for copyright, including provisions related to orphan works and making preservation copies. Maher noted that many of the national delegates are less familiar with the mission of archives than that of public libraries; his statement on SAA’s behalf helped to bridge that gap. (View his presentation and that of the International Council on Archives representative here, at 26:30 and 34:00.)

View the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA) information flyer here.

Following is Maher's report on the meeting.

Summary Report on Service as Society of American Archivists
NGO Representative at the World Intellectual Property Organization’s
Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights, 26^th Session

William J. Maher
January 10, 2014

Executive Summary: At the December 2013 Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights (SCCR), the SAA was instrumental in educating not only the WIPO national delegates but also the library advocacy groups on the differences between libraries and archives and the specific archival needs for a treaty supporting copyright exceptions and limitations. With our coalition partners, the SAA helped prevent the marginalization of work on library and archives exceptions during future meetings. Meanwhile, new leadership of the SCCR helped the Committee avoid the stalemate that had been evident at SAA’s prior attendance in November 2011. Thus, momentum has been maintained for continued work on library and archives exceptions at the three SCCR sessions scheduled for 2014.

Next Steps: Because of the positive outcome of SCCR 26 calling for continuation of “text-based” work on library and archives exceptions over the next three meetings in 2014, it will be important for SAA to secure funding to ensure that our archival voice, experience, and particular needs continue to inform both the NGOs and national delegates at the these sessions. In addition, to help make that representation most effective, the Intellectual Property Working Group will need to develop several concise case study statements or “issue briefs” to exemplify the particular archival dimensions of the eight remaining themes in the draft text being considered for a treaty. Finally, early consultations should be held with coalition partners to develop a strategy to ensure retention of the text’s orphan works provisions.

Background: Copyright law may be established by national laws, but it is international treaties, such as the Berne Convention and the 1996 World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Copyright Treaty that provide the broad framework of copyright and authors’ rights. While current treaties allow nations to provide some exemptions to authors’ monopoly of exclusive rights, the areas for exceptions are quite limited, and none are mandated except in the recently treaty supporting exceptions for visual impaired persons.[1] Meanwhile, there continue to be onerous regimes for exclusive rights,[2] and it has been difficult to get attention to archivists’ and librarians’ specific interests in supporting acquisition, preservation, and accessibility of our of collections, and services to our users.

Fortunately, there are global actors with whom American archivists can collaborate. Thanks to 2004 and 2008 initiatives by Chile, Brazil, Uruguay, and Nicaragua, there has been a call for WIPO to develop treaty language that would require member states to enact education- and development-friendly exemptions into national law. The International Council on Archives (ICA) has commissioned a copyright working group to examine these issues, created a “white paper” entitled Current Issues in Copyright for Archives, and appointed the UK’s Tim Padfield as a representative to WIPO. By their joint work, ICA and the International Federation of Library Associations (IFLA) have created a plan to secure appropriate exceptions and limitations to copyright’s exclusive rights. The plan’s success, however, would require continued engagement in and representation at WIPO.

WIPO’s Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights (SCCR) is the body authorized to draft language for international treaties on copyright and generally meets twice a year. The possibility of “library and archives rights” was the subject of a special SCCR meeting in Geneva in November 2011. This meeting was the first time the Society of American Archivists was able to participate as an ad hoc Non-Governmental Organization (NGO) observer, and I attended as SAA’s representative. Subsequently, SAA applied for and was granted status as a permanent NGO observer, and on that basis sent me once again as a representative to the SCCR 26 meeting December 16-20, 2013. Given what I had observed in 2011, the protocol and process of the SCCR made much more sense in 2013. Perhaps this was just part of the learning curve, but it equally well could be a result of new leadership of the committee.

The effort to develop a treaty to provide exceptions and limitations for libraries and archives has been tied to development concerns of the “global South.” When the WIPO General Assembly adopted a development agenda in 2007, SCCR had a mandate to make development needs an integral part of its work. It commissioned Kenneth Crews to provide a report examining copyright laws of 149 of WIPO’s 184 member states.[3] Results, not surprisingly, showed wide variations in national practices and a general lack of provisions addressing library and archives needs. In 2010, SCCR expanded its consideration of exemptions and limitations to include provisions for visually impaired persons, libraries and archives, and education. Then, in June 2011, the 41-member Africa Group presented a draft WIPO treaty for these latter areas, based heavily on a 2010 proposal from IFLA. Finally, IFLA itself presented its own “Treaty Proposal on Copyright Limitations and Exceptions for Libraries and Archives” (TLIB) at the November 2011 meeting.[4] The draft was cosponsored by ICA, Electronic Information for Libraries (EIFL), and a library NGO called Innovarte.[5]

Although IFLA, as an NGO, cannot propose treaty language, at the 23^rd session of SCCR in November 2011 a coalition of Brazil, Ecuador, and Uruguay put forward a document incorporating all of the essential elements of IFLA’s proposal, and that document received standing for debate and discussion within SCCR. However, the discussion revealed deep divides among the national delegates. Developed countries argued that their separate laws already contained provisions to meet the needs of users for access to library and archival material and that no mandatory treaty was needed. Developing and lesser developed countries argued that the needs of their populations for access to information and knowledge was impaired by the lack of exceptions and limitations to copyright and particularly by the lack of an international instrument that could provide predictability and uniformity across national borders. At best, the developed countries suggested the adoption of so-called “soft law,” or guidelines that countries could adopt. At worst, some argued that attention to balancing copyright with exceptions and limitations was unnecessary use of the committee’s time.

In the end, while the November 2011 SCCR 23 could not agree on the nature of the “international instrument” it would be pursuing, it adopted a work plan to continue to discuss library and archives exceptions at its future meetings while also focusing attention on the creation of exceptions to support the needs of visually impaired persons (VIPs). Over the course of 2012 and through mid-2013 (i.e., SCCR 24-25), the Committee focused most of these discussion of exceptions on the VIP matter, but it did set a timetable to devote particular attention to the library and archives exceptions over the course of SCCR 26 through 29, with the objective of adopting a text for submission to a diplomatic conference in 2015.

Despite the seemingly intractable positions evident in 2011 and widely reported through early 2013 regarding VIP provisions, a June 2013 diplomatic conference in Marrakesh was able to reach an unexpected agreement on a VIP treaty. This was an important development because it represented a first. It elevated copyright exceptions to treaty status, and it involved obtaining consensus among hitherto seemingly irreconcilable parties.

The so-called “Miracle of Marrakesh” set the stage for potential drama at the December 2013 SCCR 26. Could the momentum of creating copyright exceptions carry forward from the VIP area to also support library and archives exceptions? Would the publishing industry, collective rights organizations, and the global north be able to argue that the exceptions created at Marrakesh had rebalanced copyright so that attention could now focus on other areas of exclusive rights, such as the long-deferred matter of exclusive rights for broadcasting organizations?

Preparations: Once it was clear that SAA Council would be funding participation at SCCR 26, I was asked to join various listservs and e-mail lists of other treaty advocates and invited to to brainstorm and coordinate positions among treaty-friendly NGOs. These collaborations involved assessing the variant drafts that national delegates had put forward for the 11 separate “topics” or provisions of a proposed treaty text and advising on which variant was best for our particular needs. Particularly important was being able to participate in the shaping of the message for a general publicity piece to explain to the public why copyright reform for libraries and archives mattered. Because of this access and participation, SAA was able to have its logo appear on the ultimate piece after we were sure that it adequately reflected archival as well as library concerns.[6] Throughout the entire preparation period, as well as during the week of SCCR, there were multiple and frequent consultations with the SAA Intellectual Property Workding Group (IPWG) and the SAA Executive Director, especially in drafting the main statement for SAA to present as well as the text for the “Side Event” presentation.

SCCR 26, December 16-20, 2013: The schedule for SCCR 26 allocated the first two days to a discussion of exclusive rights for broadcasting organizations, a question of limited interest to archivists. This was to be followed by two days devoted to exceptions and limitations for libraries and archives, and a final day discussing issues relating to whether exceptions could be created to support educational institutions and organizations. The session opened on December 16 with the election of Martin Moscoso of Peru as a new chair to lead the committee for the next two years. He had most recently served as facilitator over informal discussions between opposing sides at Marrakesh and had strong support from the Committee.

Moscoso proved adept at maintaining good order, identifying issues for potential consensus, and managing situations when positions of some national delegates conflicted sharply. The resultant draft text for the SCCR’s plan for future work suggests that the matter of the exceptions for libraries and archives being sought by the Africa Group (AG) and the Group of Latin American and Caribbean countries (GRULAC) will remain on the agenda. Overall, the SCCR session showed a much more positive spirit and productivity than that of November 2011.

Library and Archives Exceptions and Limitations: Despite some efforts by global North countries to extend the broadcasting discussion beyond the scheduled two days, the Chair directed the Committee to follow the previously agreed-upon allocation of time. After calling upon regional groupings and national delegates offered for general comments on library and archives exceptions, the floor was opened the floor for presentations by approximately two dozen NGOs.

Interventions from Non-Governmental Organizations: Unlike some other international bodies such as the telecommunications union where invited NGOs participate in floor debate, at SCCR NGOs’ formal involvement is limited to scheduled opportunities to offer statements or “interventions” on the policy issues before SCCR. By long convention, these interventions are limited to three minutes, with some prior chairs enforcing the time limit vigorously. The NGOs at SCCR contained representatives from both sides. Those speaking against the need for library and archives exceptions included Motion Picture Association, International Federation of Journalists, International Federation of Musicians, International Publishers Association, Group of Scientific, Technical and Medical Publishers, Federation of Reproductions Rights Organizations, etc. Those speaking in favor of L&A exceptions included the Canadian Library Association, Center for Internet and Society, German Library Federation, Karisma Fundaćion (Colombia human rights organization), IFLA, eIFL, ICA and the SAA. In his intervention, Jamie Love of Knowledge Ecology International pointed out that the needs of archives were particularly striking yet seemingly less complex than those of libraries.

A central part of my presence as SAA’s NGO representative at SCCR was this opportunity to provide a formal position statement to the Committee.[7] Within the allowed three minutes, I noted how the recent UNESCO “Universal Declaration on Archives” called for broad public access to archives. I also noted that because the public increasingly expected archival content be online, copyright represented a major barrier to the archival mission and to the public’s right to access. Noting the insufficiency of the U.S.’s Section 108 library and archives exceptions, I called the national delegates’ attention to the need to develop a treaty that would provide cross-border uniformity. I closed by suggesting that the viability of both archives and the copyright system required exceptions to support public access for heritage and accountability. The statement appears to have been well-received by treaty advocates based on several comments that received through the end of the week. Perhaps the best indication of this was the blog entry provided by Manon Ress of Knowledge Ecology International, who reproduced my statement in full, immediately preceded by her comment: “The room is clearly divided but the intellectual argument is being won by the libraries and archives. Here are some of the very strong statements.”[8]

Debate by National Delegates on Proposal for Library and Archives Treaty: Following a previously developed work plan, the Committee adopted a text-based discussion of the awkwardly titled: “Working document containing comments on and textual suggestions towards an appropriate international legal instrument (in whatever form) on exceptions and limitations for libraries and archives.” The work plan had called for discussion of the draft text through its 11 topics which had been built from texts first by the Africa Group and Brazil/Ecuador.[9] Over the two allocated days, the delegates were able to complete work on the first two topics (copying for preservation and for users), touch briefly on legal deposit (topic 3), and begin discussion of library lending (topic 4). Those skeptical of the need for an international treaty kept trying to steer the discussion toward a review of current national practices and the need to protect the authors’ interests. Advocates for the treaty emphasized the need for a base level of exceptions and the need to establish uniformity across national borders. Insofar as multiple phrasings of the the proposed provisions were left in document, those proposals appear to have basically survived the discussion, but it became clear that there was overlap among some of the themes, such as copying for users and library lending/document delivery. Thus, some consolidation could be expected. For archives, issues about preservation, including the need to remove limits on the number of preservation copies, were well handled. However, one of our most important topics, orphan works copying and distribution, was deeper into the work plan and was not addressed.

Overall, there was little change in the delegates’ positions during the meeting. In short, the global North argued that an international instrument was not needed because many countries had addressed these concerns with national laws. They therefore tried to steer SCCR’s work towards merely studying the laws and practices of member states. In addition, a number called for an update of Kenneth Crews’ 2007/08 study, presumably on the assumption that legislation in some countries may have changed in the past 6 years.

Throughout, the SCCR Chair worked to find a consensus for the future work. On the down side, it appeared that the complexity of the copyright issues archivists face are quite foreign to these policy makers, no matter how much we restated the principles that we would like to see incorporated into an international instrument. The discussion at SCCR 26 clarified that our most important task is to have a rich roster of simple, practical examples of how the lack of a specific exception militates against the public’s need for information and records. We also need to counter the claim that national laws already provide locally tailored solutions by explaining the cross-border, international nature of the problem. Good, clear, and provocative examples in our prepared remarks and in briefing sheets, will advance the understanding of friendly delegates. on whom we have to rely. The IFLA and eIFL representatives began working on such a set of

“Side Event” Presentation: SCCR meetings often include “side events” beyond the official proceedings of the Committee. These events include evening receptions as well as the more typical early afternoon panel sessions on some issue of relevance to the topics being considered. At SCCR 26, the Thursday December 19 side event, sponsored by IFLA, was titled “‘Digital Gridlock’” What Future for Libraries and Archives?” Its particular point was to clarify how access to library and archival material is impeded by copyright limits, and how the problem is fundamentally an international one that can only be solved by a treaty providing consistency across borders. The speakers were allocated five to ten minutes. I was asked to present on how copyright affected the future of archives. My remarks were titled, “It's My Heritage, Why Can't I Have It? The Unintended Consequences of the Digital Embargo.”

Realizing that neither the delegates nor all the other NGOs understood what archives contain and what archivists do, I drew on my own archives’ experience to describe the scope and use of institutional archives and manuscript collections. I focused on the increasing expectations to meet users needs via online holdings, and I emphasized how copyright in orphan works was a major impediment to meet these expectations. I cited an example of a NARA project where the use of its data files increased 335 times when the data were put online.[10] I made a special point of citing core statistics from Maggie Dickson’s University of North Carolina study to underscore the excessiveness of a strict authors’ rights and permissions regime for archival digital projects.[11] I closed with two specific examples drawn from collections and users at the University of Illinois Archives, in which key cultural heritage information was not readily available to individuals of those communities unless they could afford travel to see the originals. The presentation was well-received and generated some useful discussion during the question period. Overall, the “Side Event” was a successful opportunity to explain the archival concerns and clarify that they are not precisely the same as libraries’.

Education Exceptions: Friday morning, December 20, was devoted to general statements from NGOs, and regional and national delegates about the set of exceptions that the Africa Group had proposed to support educational organizations and educational activities. These call for a broad array of exceptions to allow copying and digitization of works in support of education and research activities at all levels. Overall, the concept appears to face a tough road ahead. Because this issue was at a very early stage, only the morning of the last day was dedicated to discussing it.

Conclusions and Closure of SCCR 26: One the defining elements of any SCCR meeting is the last day’s work to prepare a “Conclusions” document. It summarizes what work was completed during the session, including consensus statements on issues where possible. Most importantly it identifies the work plan and allocation of time in the coming SCCR meeting(s) for particular issues. Because the Conclusions define what it the SCCR has accomplished and where its priorities and policies are headed, each sentence in the relatively short document (generally 3-4 pages) is subjected to great scrutiny and sometimes nearly endless debate late into the night or wee hours of the morning.

Given the smoothness of the earlier days of the week, there was some hope that floor fights would be minimized and that the evening might end early. Unfortunately, that was not the case, even if the ultimate result was positive for those interested in library and archives exceptions. Those delegations advocating for a broadcast treaty and merely more study for the library and archives area launched an effort to allocate the majority of time in the next three SCCR meetings (i.e., three days in each) to broadcasting, with only two days in each for “exceptions.” Thanks to the some effective work by the librarians and archivists present in connecting with a few of the sympathetic to neutral country delegates, wording in the final version of Conclusion item 31 included the specific reference to libraries and archives as the lead topic for the latter two days of the April 2014 SCCR.

Nevertheless, the issue of relative allocation of time during the three 2014 SCCR meetings was contentious. Because of some persistent resistance by treaty-sympathetic countries, the Committee’s eventual consensus was that the allocation of days for the July and December SCCRs would need to be deferred pending outcomes of the April meeting. While this may seem a small accomplishment or even just a delaying action, in fact it reflects significant success by treaty advocates in not allowing the momentum from Marrakesh to be turned back.

Advocacy as Education of Multiple Publics: SAA’s experience at the SCCR in 2011 and especially in 2013 demonstrates that a central part of successful policy advocacy is not simply communicating our position, but also the extent to which we use the interchange as an opportunity for education. Because the policy makers and stakeholders whom we want to reach are only minimally aware of the mission and professional practices of archivists, influencing policy cannot start until we are recognized as a distinct sector with a mission that matters to the public and communities we serve. Ironically, the low visibility of archives and archivists among the public can work to our advantage in that if we sharpen our message carefully, we can immediately create a positive foundation for future interactions. By providing concise statements that focus on the broad cultural and educational value of archives combined with the substantial professional and ethical standards we have developed over the past three-quarters of a century, we can obtain not just respect for our mission but also a sympathetic hearing for our policy needs.

In this regard, according to comments from more than one of the stakeholders at SCCR 26, SAA was extremely effective in its communications and advocacy for the archives sector. SCCR 26 also demonstrated that archivists can obtain a hearing and audience for our concerns that is clearly well out of proportion to our inescapably small size. Indeed, it is the power of the archival message that has made stakeholders much larger than ourselves seek us out as coalition partners. In the process, we have gained significant leverage to advance our positions.

To the extent that SAA wishes to build on the success at SCCR 26, an infrastructure is needed for this advocacy. First, there needs to be a physical presence at WIPO. Many of the occasions SAA had for influencing the text of coalition advocacy pieces would not have arisen if our planned presence at SCCR had not opened the door to our participation in the coalition’s communication channels through which positions were formulated collaboratively. Only through these were we able to make clear to library and other prospective allies those fundamentally different and compelling archival needs. We to be able to dedicate significant amounts of time to collaboration in the weeks leading up to the meeting. Significant preparation is needed to prepare concise, targeted position statements that can be effectively delivered in time that is measured in seconds rather than minutes. The statements need be supplemented by practical examples of archival needs and the benefits to the public from our holdings and professional work. The examples need to reflect the breadth of the publics whom archives serve as well as how these relate to international policy objectives being sought.

It goes without saying that SAA’s representative has been absolutely dependent upon and grateful for the strong support provided by the Intellectual Property Working Group, especially its chair, and for the confidence and support of the SAA Executive Director. Education is essential for effective advocacy, but it is preeminently a team effort.

Endnotes

^[1]. According to the Berne Convention and the World Trade Organization’s 1994 TRIPS agreement, any exemptions provided by national legislation are supposed to meet a “three-step-test.” “Members shall confine limitations and exceptions to exclusive rights to certain special cases which do not conflict with a normal exploitation of the work and do not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the rights holder.” See: Berne 9.2. at http://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/ip/berne/trtdocs_wo001.html

^[2]. For example, the 1996 WIPO Treaty required countries to create legal prohibitions against circumventing any electronic copy-protection mechanisms that copyright holders have used on their works, making archival migration and preservation of electronic records very difficult.

^[3]. Kenneth Crews, Study of Copyright Limitations and Exceptions for Libraries and Archives, http://www.wipo.int/edocs/mdocs/copyright/en/sccr_17/sccr_17_2.pdf.

^[4]. Available at: http://www.ifla.org/en/node/5856 .

^[5]. The TLIB proposal calls for copyright exceptions and limitations that would enable libraries and archives to engage in: parallel importation; library lending; reproduction and supply of copies; preservation; making and distributing accessible copies for persons with disabilities; providing access to retracted, withdrawn, and orphan works; cross-border uses; translation of legally acquired works for specific users/user groups; freedom from contract provisions which would otherwise overwrite the exceptions; circumvent technological protection measures for lawful access; and enjoy limitations on liability for libraries and archives work.

^[6]. The resultant flyer can be seen at: http://www.ifla.org/files/assets/hq/topics/exceptions-limitations/ifla_wipo_message_overview_final.pdf

^[7]. The full text of the intervention on behalf of the SAA can be found attached as Appendix A.

^[8]. http://keionline.org/node/1863 Unfortunately, because the SAA’s acronym was mistranslated, WIPO interpreters muddled the translation of the SCCR Chair’s Spanish language introduction of my intervention. Thus, Ms. Ress misidentified the first text as being from the International Council on Archives. While the ICA intervention was quite good, the text Ms. Ress replicates on the KEI blog is a verbatim transcript of the SAA remarks. The video of the SAA presentation can be seen at: http://www.wipo.int/webcasting/en/index.jsp – Scroll down to below the title "Video on Demand," and in the right-hand menu, select “SCCR/26-Wed 18-English, Afternoon Session.” SAA’s intervention begins at minute 34.

^[9]. Those themes/topics, with a brief summary of the provisions being sought, were:

1): Preservation : It shall be permitted for libraries and archives to reproduce works, or materials protected by related rights, for the purposes of preservation or replacement, in accordance with fair practice.

2) Right of reproduction: A library or archives may reproduce and distribute a copy of a copyright work to a library user, or to another library or archive, for purposes of: education, private study by a users, or interlibrary document supply.

3) Legal deposit: Treaty member countries may determine that specific libraries and archives or any other institution shall serve as designated repositories in which at least one copy of every work published in the country is to be deposited and retained.

4) Library Lending: It shall be permitted for a library to lend copyright works, or materials protected by related rights, to a user, or to another library.

5) Parallel Importation: Libraries and archives shall have the right to buy, import or otherwise acquire copies of any work published in any other Member State with the permission of the author of that work.

6) Cross border uses: To the extent that it is necessary for the exercise of a limitation or exception provided for in this Treaty, cross-border uses shall be permitted.

7) Orphan works, works out of commerce. Libraries and archives shall have the right to reproduce, preserve and make available in any format or retracted any withdrawn works from public access or orphaned works.

8) Limitations on Liability: A librarian or archivist acting in good faith within the scope of his or her duties, is protected from claims for damages, from criminal liability, and from copyright infringement.

9) Technological Protection Measures: Libraries and archives may circumvent technological protection measures to exercise any of the rights provided by this treaty. 10) Contracts: contractual provisions may not overwrite the limitations and exceptions.

10) Margaret O’Neill Adams, “Analyzing archives and finding facts: use and users of digital data records,” Archival Science 7( 2007):21–36.

11) Maggie Dickson, “Due Diligence, Futile Effort: Copyright and the Digitization of the Thomas E. Watson Papers,” American Archivist 73 (2010): 626-36.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/news/society-of-american-archivists-july-2-2014-maher-reports-on-wipo-copyright-deliberations

Statement on the Proposed Treaty for the Protection of Broadcasting Organizations at WIPO SCCR 28

nehaa — 2014-07-14T05:40:27Z

Nehaa Chaudhari, attending the 28th Session of the World Intellectual Property Organization (“WIPO”) Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights (“SCCR”) at Geneva from 30 June, 2014 to 04 July, 2014, made this statement on the Proposed Treaty for the Protection of Broadcasting Organizations on behalf of CIS on Day 3, 02 July, 2014.

Thank you, Mister Chair.

Mister Chair, there are two things that I would like to talk about, on behalf of CIS- first, on justifications for this Treaty; second on the scope and the rights sought to be granted under this Treaty, which I will speak of together, if I may.

On justifying the need for this Treaty, Mr. Chair, we would reiterate what we have said in past sessions of this Committee – there has been no conclusive demonstration on the need for this Treaty and on why existing mechanisms in international legal instruments, including, among others TRIPS and the Rome Convention are not sufficient to address the concerns of the broadcasters. We have heard that these are insufficient, but no justifications as to why- something that KEI also pointed out in their statement before us. Further, Mr. Chair, we’re concerned by the fact that the latest study on the unauthorised use of signals presented to this Committee is the one from 2010 at the 20^th Session of this Committee. We strongly support the proposal made by India, TWN, CCIA and TACD to update this study and include an impact assessment of ALL the stakeholders, something that the earlier study does not address; in order to more comprehensively assess not just the need, but also the impact of this proposed treaty, and address some of the questions and concerns raised by TACD and TWN in their statement earlier.

Without prejudice to this submission on the need for this treaty, Mr. Chair, we would also like to comment on the scope of, and the rights under this Treaty.

Mr. Chair, we would continue to submit that this proposed treaty should be based on a signals based approach and not a rights based approach. We have heard submissions by broadcasters at this and at previous sessions of this Committee, where the basis of seeking additional protection for broadcaster is to protect the underlying investment. Mr. Chair, investments made in infrastructure for broadcasting in the traditional sense are very different from those required for an IP based transmission, even if the same broadcaster is engaging in both. Therefore, Mr. Chair, given that the rationale for seeking this additional layer of rights over and above existing copyright is the protection of investment for broadcasting in the traditional sense is the , IP based transmissions should not be covered in any way under this Treaty.

Further, Mr. Chair, fixation and post fixation rights envisaged under Article 9 of Working Document SCCR 27/2/ Rev. and indicated in the Informal Document circulated today, are inconsistent with a signals based approach. We are strongly opposed to all of the rights indicated in the Third Row of this Informal Discussion Document. This Document, we believe, is moving the discussion towards a rights based approached and not a signals based approach, which we find deeply concerning. We also believe, Mr. Chair, that it is not logical to prescribe a term of protection (beyond the life of a signal), least of all 20 or 50 year term (as under Article 11 of this Working Document) for a signal that lasts milliseconds.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Video

Videos of the WIPO's proceedings from June 30, 2014 to July 04, 2014 are available online. To view CIS' Statement, select 'Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights: Twenty-Eighth Session- June 30 to July 4, 2014 (Geneva, Switzerland)' from the drop-down list of videos. CIS' Statement is in the video titled SCCR/28- Wed2 - English - Morning session. The length of the video is 44:51. The statement is available in this video from 24 minutes, 00 seconds- when the Chair recognizes CIS.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/cis-statement-on-proposed-treaty-for-protection-of-broadcasting-organizations

SpicyIP Tidbit: India ratifies the Marrakesh Treaty for the Visually Impaired

praskrishna — 2014-07-02T05:31:23Z

In an encouraging step towards promoting accessibility among the differently abled, India became the first country to ratify the Marrakesh Treaty to Facilitate Access to Published Works for Persons Who Are Blind, Visually Impaired or Otherwise Print Disabled, 2013.

Click here to read the post published in Spicy IP on July 1, 2014.

The treaty aims to increase the access that differently abled people have to copyright protected material. This will dilute an extremely formidable barrier to access to knowledge that the nearly 285 million visually impaired people around the world face. We had previously blogged about the salient features of the treaty here, as well as the India’s signing of the same here. Notice that the signing had taken place in April of this year and the ratification occurred in June. This is somewhat of a record between the signing and ratification of a treaty at the WIPO and demonstrates India’s commitment towards these objectives. There are close to 78 different signatories of the treaty in the past one year along with the EU. India’s Copyright Act was amended in 2012 to add the exceptions required under the treaty. The Accessible Books Consortium was also launched at the same WIPO event. The ABC is to implement the legal framework created by the treaty. For the CIS post on this, see here.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/news/spicy-ip-july-1-2014-thomas-j-vallianeth-spicy-ip-tidbit-india-ratifies-the-marrakesh-treaty-for-the-visually-impaired

India's Ratification of the Marrakesh Treaty Celebrated; Accessible Books Consortium Launched

nehaa — 2014-07-01T11:09:08Z

On Day 1 of the 28th Session of the World Intellectual Property Organization (“WIPO”) Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights (“SCCR”), the WIPO organized an event to mark India’s ratification of the Marrakesh Treaty to Facilitate Access to Published Works for Persons Who Are Blind, Visually Impaired or Otherwise Print Disabled, 2013 (“Marrakesh Treaty”), and to launch the Accessible Books Consortium (“ABC”).

India Becomes the First Country to Ratify the Marrakesh Treaty

Francis Gurry, Director General, WIPO said that the Marrakesh Treaty received 79 signatures in the twelve month period that the treaty was open for signatures. He further said that India’s ratification of the Marrakesh Treaty one year from its conclusion was a “WIPO record of sorts” and a “great example from a major country” of the importance attached to the Marrakesh Treaty.

Dilip Sinha, Ambassador and Permanent Representative of India to the United Nations in Geneva handed over India’s Instrument of Accession to the Marrakesh Treaty to Francis Gurry. Ambassador Sinha in his speech stressed on the importance of the Marrakesh Treaty to India and said that it helped that India had its amendments to its Copyright Act, 1957 in place, incorporating the provisions of the Marrakesh Treaty.

Maryanne Diamond, the Immediate Past President of the World Blind Union (“WBU”) congratulated India on its ratification. Calling it a country who showed “huge leadership” in negotiations of the Marrakesh Treaty, Ms. Diamond said that this ratification was extremely significant, with India being home to a large number of blind and print disabled people and a part of the Global South. Ms. Diamond urged other nations to follow India’s example and make it a priority to ratify the Marrakesh Treaty.

Jens Bammel, Secretary General, International Publishers Association (“IPA”) also congratulated India on its ratification of the Marrakesh Treaty and called on other member states to ratify it.

Accessible Books Consortium Launched

At the launch of the ABC, Mr. Gurry said that the Marrakesh Treaty was only the means to an end, where the end was books in the hands of print disabled and visually impaired persons across the world. “To make it operational,” said Mr. Gurry, “we need to have operational activities.” He said that the ABC was an operational activity which would “breathe life” into and “make operational” the legal framework provided by the Marrakesh Treaty.

What Does it Do?

Mr. Gurry said that the ABC aimed at achieving three things- first, capacity building; second, international book exchange and third, international book exchange.

Capacity Building- Mr. Gurry said that the ABC seeks to provide training on accessible book production and distribution. He thanked the Republic of Korea which has committed to providing financial assistance for training in respect of production of books in accessible formats.
International Book Exchange- Mr. Gurry said that this activity was an IT supported facility, namely, the TIGAR Service which has its origins in India. This would allow participating institutions to perform international searches of databases to find out if accessible formats of books are available.
Inclusive Publishing- Mr. Gurry said that at the end of the day, “books should be born accessible” and technology was creating the “promise of the realization of this aspiration.” Mr. Gurry said that the ABC would promote accessible publishing and to this end, had drawn up a charter of accessible publishing- Accessible Publishing Best Practice Guidelines for Publishers. Elsevier is the first publisher to have signed this charter.

India, WBU and IPA delighted

Praising the ABC, Ambassador Sinha called it an indicator of what multi-stakeholder cooperation needs to do. He said that the ABC would assist organizations such as the DAISY Forum of India in achieving the goal of access to books in accessible formats. Congratulating the WIPO for its efforts on this front, Ambassador Sinha said that this would help nations like India realize their goal of achieving the purposes of the Marrakesh Treaty. Ms. Diamond, representing the WBU congratulated Elsevier on signing the charter. Jens Bammel, on behalf of the IPA expressed concern for making books available in accessible formats for non English speakers. The ABC, he said, was a project initiated to “genuinely complement” the Marrakesh Treaty, and would create a global catalogue of accessible works, whether provided by libraries or by publishers. Expressing his delight that the ABC was being supported equally by all stakeholders, Mr. Bammel reached out to member states to support this initiative politically.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/accessibility/blog/indias-ratification-of-marrakesh-treaty-celebrated

June 2014 Bulletin

praskrishna — 2014-07-14T10:05:11Z

Our newsletter for month of June is below:

Highlights

Nehaa Chaudhari participated in a Stakeholders Consultation organized by the Planning Commission and the Ministry of Human Resource Development in New Delhi, February 21, 2014, on Mapping Institutions of Intellectual Property. She blogged about the outcome in a two-part series. The first part discusses establishment of a National Institute of Intellectual Property Rights and the second part deals with the documents introduced at the Stakeholders’ Consultation for India’s National Programme on Intellectual Property.
For the first time in the history of Indian books, 10 Telugu books by a single author were released under Creative Commons license (CC-BY-SA 3.0). These books will be uploaded on Telugu Wikisource and converted into Unicode (searchable) text. This will ensure that these books are freely read, both online and offline in various formats like PDF, epub, mobi, text, etc. This is a major milestone initiative by CIS-A2K to make the sum of all knowledge in Telugu freely available to all Telugus over the internet.
ICANN published a call for public comments on "Enhancing ICANN Accountability" in the wake of the IANA stewardship transition spearheaded by ICANN and related concerns of ICANN's external and internal accountability mechanisms. CIS submitted its comments.
ICANN sought comments on the existing barriers to Registrar Accreditation and operation and suggestions on how these challenges might be mitigated. CIS sent its comments.
Vodafone, the world’s second largest mobile carrier released a report disclosing to what extent governments can request their customers’ data. Joe Sheehan analyses the report to tell us that if more companies were transparent about the level of government surveillance their customers were being subjected to then the public would press the government for stronger privacy safeguards and protections.

Accessibility and Inclusion

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

NVDA and eSpeak

►Monthly Update

Work Report for June (by Suman Dogra, June 30, 2014).

►Other

Blog Entry

For a Truly Inclusive Consultative Process (by Amba Salelkar, June 25, 2014).

Media Coverage

NISH Website to Help the Disabled (The New Indian Express, June 26, 2014).

Access to Knowledge

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

►Analysis

Mapping Institutions of Intellectual Property (Part A): India's National Programme on Intellectual Property Management (by Nehaa Chaudhari, June 10, 2014). This discusses establishment of a National Institute of Intellectual Property Rights.
Mapping Institutions of Intellectual Property: Part B — India's National Program on Intellectual Property Management (by Nehaa Chaudhari, June 26, 2014). This deals with the documents introduced at the Stakeholders’ Consultation for India’s National Program on Intellectual Property

►Participation in Event

Yogyakarta Meeting on Open Culture and Critical Making (organized by organized by HONF Foundation, Catec, and r0g, June 12 – 15, 2014). Sharath Chandra Ram was a panelist.

Wikipedia

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

The following were done this month:

►Articles / Blog Entries

Twitter weekly Curation WeAreWikipedia brings one Wikipedian Every Week (by Diptiman Panigrahi, June 16, 2014).
This Twitter Account Puts a Face to the Unsung Volunteer Editors Behind Wikipedia (by Subhashish Panigrahi, Global Voices, June 18, 2014).
Odia Language gets a new Unicode Font Converter (by Subhashish Panigrahi, June 20, 2014).
Ten Telugu Books Re-released Under CC-BY-SA 3.0 License (by Rahmanuddin Shaik, June 22, 2014).

►Events Organized

Kannada Wikipedia Workshop for Kannada Book Lovers (co-organized by Navakarnataka Publications, Bangalore, June 4, 2014). Dr. U.B.Pavanaja conducted the workshop.
Knowledge and Openness in the Digital Era (co-organized by Andhra Loyola College and CIS, Vijaywada, June 24-25, 2014).

►News and Media Coverage
CIS gave its inputs to the following media coverage:

Knowledge and Openness in the Digital Era: Coverage in Sakshi (Sakshi, June 25, 2014).
Knowledge and Openness in the Digital Era: Coverage in Enadu (Enadu, June 25, 2014).
Loyola Faculty Enlightened About Open Edn Resources (The New Indian Express, June 25, 2014).

Internet Governance

Freedom of Expression

As part of our project on Freedom of Expression (funded through a grant from the MacArthur Foundation) to study the restrictions placed on freedom of expression online by the Indian government and contribute to the debates around Internet governance and freedom of expression at forums like ICANN, ITU, IGF, WSIS, etc., we bring you the following outputs:

►Submissions

CIS Comments: Enhancing ICANN Accountability (by Geetha Hariharan, June 10, 2014).
Comments to ICANN Supporting the DNS Industry in Underserved Regions (by Jyoti Panday, June 13, 2014).

►Blog Entries

Free Speech and Contempt of Court: Overview (by Gautam Bhatia, June 8, 2014).
Multi-stakeholder Models of Internet Governance within States: Why, Who & How? (by Geetha Hariharan, June 16, 2014).
UN Human Rights Council Urged to Protect Human Rights Online (by Geetha Hariharan, June 19, 2014).
Free Speech and Source Protection for Journalists (by Gautam Bhatia, June 19, 2014).
WSIS+10 High Level Event: A Bird's Eye Report (by Geetha Hariharan, June 20, 2014).
Understanding IANA Stewardship Transition (by Smarika Kumar, June 22, 2014).
IANA Transition: Suggestions for Process Design (by Smarika Kumar, June 22, 2014).
Free Speech and Civil Defamation (by Gautam Bhatia, June 25, 2014).
CIS Policy Brief: IANA Transition Fundamentals & Suggestions for Process Design (by Geetha Hariharan and Smarika Kumar, June 22, 2014).
An Evidence based Intermediary Liability Policy Framework: Workshop at IGF (by Jyoti Panday, June 30, 2014).

►FOEX Live
We are also posting a selection of news from across India implicating online freedom of expression and use of digital technology: June 8 – 15, 2014 and June 16 – 23, 2014.

Privacy

As part of our Surveillance and Freedom: Global Understandings and Rights Development (SAFEGUARD) project with Privacy International we are engaged in enhancing respect for the right to privacy in developing countries. We have produced the following outputs during the month:

►Blog Entries

A Review of the Functioning of the Cyber Appellate Tribunal and Adjudicatory Officers under the IT Act (by Divij Joshi, June 16, 2014).
Content Removal on Facebook — A Case of Privatised Censorship? (by Jessamine Mathew, June 16, 2014).
Vodafone Report Explains Government Access to Customer Data (by Joe Sheehan, June 16, 2014).

►Event Organized

Privacy and Surveillance Roundtable (co-organized with the Cellular Operators Association of India and the Council for Fair Business Practices, June 28, 2014, IMC Building, Churchgate, Mumbai).

►Participation in Events

Commonwealth Domain Name System Forum 2014 (organized by the CTO, hosted by ICANN, and supported by Nominet and the Public Interest Registry, London, June 19, 2014). Pranesh Prakash was a panelist. Jyoti Panday participated in the event.
Research Advisory Network Meeting (organized by the Global Commission on Internet Governance’s Research Advisory Network, OECD Headquarters, Paris, June 26-27, 2014). Sunil Abraham was a panelist.

►News & Media Coverage

CIS gave its inputs to the following media coverage:

Right to be forgotten poses a legal dilemma in India (by Leslie D' Monte, Livemint, June 5, 2014).
Stay connected even when you go underground (by Sunita Sekhar, The Hindu, June 12, 2014).

Digital Humanities

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

►Blog Entries

Not a Goodbye; More a ‘Come Again’: Thoughts on being Research Director at a moment of transition (by Nishant Shah, June 15, 2014).
Living in the Archival Moment (by P.P. Sneha, June 19, 2014).

Telecom

CIS is involved in promoting access and accessibility to telecommunications services and resources and has provided inputs to ongoing policy discussions and consultation papers published by TRAI. It has prepared reports on unlicensed spectrum and accessibility of mobile phones for persons with disabilities and also works with the USOF to include funding projects for persons with disabilities in its mandate:

►Newspaper Column

A Great Start (for the Modi government) (by Shyam Ponappa, Business Standard and Organizing India Blogspot, June 5, 2014).

About CIS

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

► Follow us elsewhere

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

► Support Us

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

► Request for Collaboration:

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

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

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/about/newsletters/june-2014-bulletin

Access to Knowledge Bulletin — June 2014

praskrishna — 2014-10-04T15:31:04Z

The Access to Knowledge (Wikipedia) newsletter for the month of June 2014:

Telugu Books Re-release Under Creative Commons License

Ten Telugu Books Re-released Under CC-BY-SA 3.0 License (by Rahmanuddin Shaik, June 22, 2014). For the first time in the history of Indian books, 10 Telugu books by a single author were released under Creative Commons license (CC-BY-SA 3.0) on June 22, 2014 at 10 a.m. at Golden Threshold, Abids, Hyderabad.
CIS-A2K has collaborated with Telugu Wikipedians in convincing Indu Gnaana Vedika to re-release 10 of their books under CC-BY-SA 3.0 license which is compatible with Wikipedia and other Wikimedia projects. Unlike the predominant digitization efforts (which only makes scanned images available), these books will be uploaded on Telugu Wikisource and converted into Unicode (searchable) text. This will ensure that these books are freely read, both online and offline in various formats like PDF, epub, mobi, text, etc. This is a major milestone initiative by CIS-A2K to make the sum of all knowledge in Telugu freely available to all Telugus over the internet and is part of its Telugu language area plan.

Article

This Twitter Account Puts a Face to the Unsung Volunteer Editors Behind Wikipedia (by Subhashish Panigrahi, Global Voices, June 18, 2014).

Blog Entries

Twitter weekly Curation WeAreWikipedia brings one Wikipedian Every Week (by Diptiman Panigrahi, June 16, 2014).
Odia Language gets a new Unicode Font Converter (by Subhashish Panigrahi, June 20, 2014).

Events Organized

Kannada Wikipedia Workshop for Kannada Book Lovers (co-organized by Navakarnataka Publications, Bangalore, June 4, 2014). Dr. U.B.Pavanaja conducted the workshop.
Knowledge and Openness in the Digital Era (co-organized by Andhra Loyola College and CIS, Vijaywada, June 24-25, 2014).

News and Media Coverage

CIS gave its inputs to the following media coverage:

Knowledge and Openness in the Digital Era: Coverage in Sakshi (June 25, 2014).
Knowledge and Openness in the Digital Era: Coverage in Enadu (June 25, 2014).
Loyola Faculty Enlightened About Open Edn Resources (The New Indian Express, June 25, 2014).

Wikimedia Foundation has funded A2K to anchor the growth of Wikimedia movement in India. The A2K team consists of six members, four based in Bangalore: T. Vishnu Vardhan, Dr. U.B. Pavanaja, Subhashish Panigrahi and Rahmanuddin Shaikh. One team member Nitika Tandon is based in Delhi. We also have one Advisor Dr. Tejaswini Niranjana working with us. Archives of our newsletters can be accessed here. Wikipedians from various communities can request for outreach programs, technical bugs, logistics-merchandize and media, public relations and communications here.

About CIS

Follow us elsewhere

Twitter: https://twitter.com/CISA2K
CIS group on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/groups/cis.india
Visit us at: https://cis-india.org

Request for Collaboration:

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

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/about/newsletters/access-to-knowledge-bulletin-june-2014

Mapping Institutions of Intellectual Property: Part B — India's National Program on Intellectual Property Management

nehaa — 2014-06-26T15:27:18Z

As a second part in the series on Mapping Institutions of Intellectual Property this blog post deals with the documents introduced at the Stakeholders’ Consultation for India’s National Program on Intellectual Property.

Many thanks to CIS interns Jessamine Matthew, Tanvi Mani and Upasana Chauhan for their support on this.

On the 21st of February, 2014, the Planning Commission and the Ministry of Human Resource Development (“MHRD”), Government of India organized a Stakeholders Consultation at New Delhi (“the Consultation”) to discuss India’s National Program on Intellectual Property Management. (Click here: http://cis-india.org/a2k/blog/mapping-institutions-of-intellectual-property-part-a to read our post about this, the first in this series on mapping institutions of intellectual property). I attended this Consultation on behalf of CIS. Discussions were informed by three documents introduced at this meeting, the important parts of which have been summarized below:

Report of the Evaluation Committee on Continuation of the Scheme of Intellectual Property Education, Research and Public Outreach (IPERPO) (“the Scheme”) in the XII Five Year Plan Period 2012-2017 (PDF, 21378 Kb)

Introduction

The Evaluation Committee involved in the preparation of this report comprised of Prof. Sudhir K. Jain, Shri T.C. James and Shri J.R. Agarwal. The rationale behind such scrutiny was to yield recommendations with regard to whether the Scheme should be continued or not. And if the answer was found to be in affirmative, to analyze the scope for improvement, phasing of expenditure and setting of targets for each component of the Scheme.

Essentially the report seeks to analyze the overall impact of the Scheme in the discipline of IP rights with respect to education and awareness. It examines the trajectory of progress of the MHRD-IP Chairs and assesses ways to monitor them more efficiently. In addition to that it also analyzes the procedure adopted to release grants to the Chairs and to recognized universities and explores the possibility of widening the scope of the Scheme.

Genesis of the Scheme

The Scheme was formulated to encourage study of IP rights and research, and create awareness about copyright and IP matters. It also aimed 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 cooperation.

Under the Scheme, the purposes for which expenditure is to be incurred by the Ministry are clearly chalked out. The details of the same are given in the Report of the Committee. It also lays down the eligibility of Institutions/ Organizations that are to be selected under the Scheme.

MHRD-IPR Chairs

Around 20 MHRD-IPR Chairs have been set up across various universities, IITs and National Law Universities for growth and development of IPR education, research and training. The staff –pattern followed for MHRD-IPR chair is one Chair Professor, two Research associates, one Steno-cum- Documentation assistant and one group-D employee. Such appointments are supposed to be made in accordance with the rules and guidelines of the UGC. Apart from the recurring expenditure towards salaries of the above-mentioned staff, the Chairs have also been given a non-recurring provision for library, equipments and ancillary items. However, such grants are to be given upon fulfilment of certain conditions imposed under the Scheme.

The working of MHRD-IPR Chairs is overlooked by two committees-namely, the ‘Coordinating Committee’ and ‘Review Committee’. The Coordinating Committee is responsible for discussing proposed activities and resolving pending disputes while the Review Committee review their progress periodically.

Observations on Performance of IPR Chairs

Inability to find a suitable Professor level person to occupy the IPR Chair.
Absence of qualification- criteria for the IPR Chair in the Scheme.
Less focus on research component, development of human resource and teaching.
Few IPR-Chairs have appointed full staff which is complementary to their working.
Flow of fund to IPR-Chairs is interrupted dur to lack of proper documentation.
Uncertainty about the continuation of IPR Chairs which has a detrimental effect on their performance.
Active participation in seminars and workshops organized by universities, institutes and colleges on IPR awareness.

Plan Allocation and Expenditure

There exists variations with respect to allocation and actual expenditure of funds due to various reasons.

New Initiatives to be taken during XII Plan

New IPR-Chairs should be established to encourage research in the field of IPR and create a pool of trained human resources.
IPR Centres/ Cells should be set up and they should be linked to the IPR-Chairs.
Internal Monitoring and Information Systems should exist for effective implementation of the Scheme.
National Seminars/ Conference should be held annually.
World Intellectually Property Day should be celebrated annually with various themes as decided by WIPO.
Awareness about copyright and IPR should be spread through print and electronic media.
Copyright Office should be strengthened and modernized to bring it at par with offices in the USA, UK.

Specific Recommendations

The Committee recommended that the post of IPR-Chairs needs to be incentivized and given full functional autonomy. Moreover, the support provided by Government to the Chairs should be long-term.
The appointment of academic and administrative staff needs to be revised periodically.
Only publicly funded universities and institutes of higher learning should be beneficiaries to this Scheme.
The proposed activities and achievements of the IPR Chairs should be made public.
IPR Chairs should provide assistance to the Central Government by way of research and providing solutions to policy problems and issues.
Some flexibility should be allowed with respect to documentation for uninterrupted flow of accounts.
Provision for replacement/ purchase of equipments.
It should be made mandatory for IPR-Chairs to appoint full staff and conduct lon term training programmes in advanced areas of IPR at the national level.
The work of the IPR Chairs needs to be chalked out explicitly by the Scheme.
Having a scheme for converting the well-functioning Chairs into Specialized IPR Centres with the participation of MHRD.
Raising awareness on IPR issues and problems by holding workshops and seminars. Moreover, universities and colleges should ensure adequate participation in such seminars/ workshops.
School-curriculum should include Chapters on IPR.
Modernization of the Copyright Office should be considered to be a priority to ensure easy access and to make copyright registration easier.

Note on the establishment of an Inter-University Centre for Intellectual Property Rights

Background

The Inter-University Centre for Intellectual Property Rights (“the Centre”) will be established under UGC/ Ministry of HRD, Government of India. Broadly, the mission of this independent autonomous Policy Research Centre is to provide research and policy inputs in the arena of IPR. The targeted audience for these inputs will be the State and Central Governments. In addition to that, it also seeks to serve as a connecting bridge for dialogue between developing countries on IPR. To actualize the mission, it will work on inter-disciplinary research and disseminate information on various socio-legal and other aspects of IPR. It will also promote, integrate and develop models and mechanisms associated with IPR.

Functions

In order to make IPR resources more accessible, the Centre will establish a repository of such resources by entering into collaboration with other organizations and institutions. It will also provide assistance to stakeholders by ways of and not limited to organization of seminars, awareness programmes. As a means to encourage inter-disciplinary research which is quintessential for this Centre, it would offer visiting fellowships and forge links with national and international research institutions. As a nodal centre with respect to interfacing government on IP matters, it will also have the added responsibility of reviewing performance of MHRD-IP chairs.

Broad Deliverables and Outcomes of the Centre

The Deliverables of this Centre world would include Policy Research Inputs, Research Publications, Research Monographs, Treaty Analysis, Sensitization Programmes and National and International Conferences. On the other hand, the outcomes would include Research on thrust areas, Knowledge Management in IPRs, IPR Online Resources and discussions.

Linkages

The Centre seeks to link MHRD-IP Chairs, Industry Associations, Civil Society Advocacy Groups and Public Institutes with IPR research capacity.

Organizational Structure and Funding

The organizational structure of the Centre would include the Governing Council, Governing Board and the Research Advisory Council. Each Council/ Board will comprise of Chairman, Ex-Officio Members and Nominated Members. The individuals who are responsible for the nomination of members to these structures are the President, Chairman of the GB and Chairman of the Centre respectively. It has laid down the specification of such composition in its note on establishment.

For the purpose of funding, the Centre would depend on UGC for its building infrastructure, salary and non-salary components. In addition to that it will also aim to create its own corpus by means of consultancy and other grant-in-aids. Towards capital expenditure, the required allocation would be Rs. 65 crores. While the revenue expenditure is estimated at Rs. 25 crores annually. A detailed break-down of the expenditure also been laid down by the Centre in its note.

Discussion Paper for the Establishment of a National Institute for Intellectual Property Rights

Introduction

The National Institute for Intellectual Property Rights (“the Institute’) will be established as an autonomous policy research institute under the Department of Higher Education, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Government of India. It envisages a specialization in policy research and development cooperation in the field of IP rights. Further, it aims to provide multi-stakeholder collaborations in the fields of IPRs. It will provide policy inputs to the government of India for formulating legislations and international agreements. The Institute will serve as a common platform for dialogue among developing countries on IPR issues. Moreover, it will act as a ‘Hub and ‘spoke’ model to connect and coordinate with the MHRD IPR Chairs/ other institutions working in the field of IPRs.

Vision: To be an institute of excellence in policy research and advocacy of IPR.

Mission: To provide effective research and policy inputs in the field of IPR.

Objectives

The Institute would serve as a think-tank to provide policy inputs on IPR at a regional, national and international level. It would work on interdisciplinary research involving multi-stakeholders and focus on IPR trade related issues and their impact on socio-economic aspects at regional, national and international levels. Further, it would disseminate information regarding the social, legal, ethical and economic aspects of IPR. It would endeavour to promote, integrate and develop ‘Academia-Industry’ knowledge structures. Models and mechanisms associated with IPR. Further, it would coordinate the activities of ‘MHRD-IPR’ chairs on behalf of the Ministry of HRD. Lastly, it would engage in capacity building and provide inputs on IPR policy makers including the judiciary.

Functions

In order to realize the objectives elucidated, the Institute would perform the following functions. It would undertake inter-disciplinary research and provide necessary inputs to the State and Central governments to formulate the required policy in IPR. It would further establish a repository of IPR resources in collaboration with various academic institutions, organizations, chairs and stakeholders engaged in IPRs. It would also offer visiting fellowships to encourage multi-disciplinary research. It would organize and participate in seminars, conferences and awareness programs. It would also undertake consultancy and conduct training in IPR to assist various stakeholders. Additionally, it would forge links with national and international IP research institutions/ organizations and act as a nodal institute to interface various Ministries/Departments of the Government on IP related matters. In furtherance of its adjudicative functions it would also undertake a review on the performance of MHRD-IPR chairs on behalf of the Ministry of Human Resource Development. Lastly, it would offer a Ph.D program in IPR in association with reputed Universities/ Institutions in India and abroad.

The Institute will mainly focus on: (I) Research, (ii) Policy and Advocacy, (iii) International Collaboration and (iv) Developmental Agenda

The Broad Deliverables and outcomes of the Institute include:

Deliverables : (i) Policy Research Inputs (ii) Research Publications (iii) Research Monographs (iv) Treaty Analysis (v) Sensitization Programs (vi) National and International Conclaves/Conferences/Roundtables

Outcomes: (i) Research on thrust areas: Preparation of occasional briefs/ annual briefs and discussion papers/ books/journals. (ii) Knowledge and Management of IPRs: Documenting and mapping the competencies on various segments of IP (iii) IPR Online resources: Online documents relating to IPR policy inputs (iv) National/ International Conferences/ Public Debate and Distinguished Lectures: To provide a common platform for deliberation on contemporary IPR practices, issues and critical analysis.

Linkages and Network

The Institute will establish linkages and network with:

MHRD-IPR Chairs
Industry Associations (National and International)
Civil Society Advocacy Groups
Public Institutes with IPR research capacity

Organizational Structure

The organizational structure of the Institute would include the following sub committees:

Steering Committee: Ex-Officio Members: The Secretary, DHE,MHRD would be the president of the Committee. The members would include the Secretary of The DIPP,MOC, The Secretaries of the Ministry of Environment and Forests and The Department of Science and Technology, The Joint Secretaries of the (BP&CR),MHRD and the DIPP. MOC, GOI, The Director of (BP&CR),MHRD, The Vice Chancellor, Delhi University (Host Institution) and the Director of the NIIPR. The Members nominated by the President are the Two Members from the governing board, the two vice- chancellors of Universities having MHRD Chairs, the two directors of IITs/IIMs having MHRD IP Chairs and the two experts from the regulatory/ research councils.
Governing Board: The Chairman of the governing board shall be appointed by the president of the Steering Committee as per the procedure given in Rule 33.
Ex-Officio Members: These members include the Joint Secretary (BP&CR),MHRD, Joint Secretary (DIPP),GOI, The Director (BP&CR),MHRD and The Director, NIIPR who will be the member Secretary.The members nominated by the Chairman of the GB includes the Two Faculty Members of the Institute, The Two MHRD IPR Chair professors and Three National and International Experts in the field of IPR.
The Research Advisory Council: The Director of the Institute is the Chairman of the Research Advisory Council. The Ex-Officio Members include the Deans and Two Professors of the Institute. The members nominated by the Chairman include two IP experts and one representative each from The Ministry of Culture, Arts, Agriculture, Information technology, Environment and Forests, Science and Technology and External Affairs, Two representatives from Civil Society Advocacy Groups and the Administrative Officer of the Institute would be a Non Member Secretary.

Funding

The Institute will be established by UGC funding for its building, infrastructure salary and non-salary components. The institute will also strive to create its own corpus by way of consultancy and other grant-in aids from relevant National/ International Organizations to compliment the UGC funding. Required allocation is estimated at Rs 65 crore towards capital expenditure relating to acquisition of land, building (Academic Block, Conference Halls, Guest House, Administrative Block, Faculty Quarters, Equipment, IT infrastructure etc) The revenue expenditure is estimated at Rs. 25 crore annually, towards meeting the operating activities of the proposed Institute.

The report also contains particulars with respect to staff requirements. It also contains estimates with respect to Non-recurring Capital Expenditure and Recurring Expenditure per annum.

Lastly, attached along with the report is the Memorandum of Association for the National Institute for Intellectual Property Rights.

The memorandum contains the objectives, functions, members of the Steering Committee and the Rules of the Institute.

The Rules include the functions and powers of the Governing Board. The Board is to carry out the objectives of the Institute. It will be subject to the limitations of the Department of Higher Education, MHRD (the Department will also have the power to inspect the Institute at any time). The Governing Board will have the power to:

Manage the affairs of the Institute, consider annual and supplementary budgets,
Create and abolish emoluments structures of various posts,
Appoint staff to these posts,
Enter into agreements with the Central or State Governments or public or private organisations or individuals for grants, donations etc,
Appoint Committees or Sub-Committees,
Delegate any administrative or financial powers to the Director,
Prepare budget estimate and sanction expenditure,
Prepare for the recruitment of offices, faculty and establishment of the Insitute, terms and conditions of scholarships, fellowships, etc.

It also contains details regarding meetings and the powers and functions of the chairman.There are guidelines for the appointment of the Director and Staff Employees.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/mapping-institutions-of-intellectual-property-part-b

Knowledge and Openness in the Digital Era: Coverage in Sakshi

praskrishna — 2014-07-04T11:31:57Z

Sakshi covered the Vijaywada event on June 25, 2014. T. Vishnu Vardhan and Rahmanuddin Shaik gave their inputs.

Given below is a scanned version of the coverage published in the district edition:

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/news/coverage-of-event-in-vijaywada-june-25-2014-sakshi

Loyola Faculty Enlightened About Open Edn Resources

praskrishna — 2014-07-02T04:50:48Z

“The tremendous changes in the digital technology have introduced the newage faculty to certain open and collaborative tools like Wiki, termed as open educational resources (OER),” Centre for Internet and Society (CIS) progarmme director T Vishnu Vardhan has said.

The article published in the New Indian Express on June 25, 2014 can be read here. T. Vishnu Vardhan gave his inputs.

Adressing a two-day national workshop on ‘“Openness of Knowledge in Digital Era’ at Andhra Loyola College here Tuesday, Vishnu Vardhan stressed that within this context of digital era, openness and transparency gained newer significance, which creates a pre-condition for the transformation of society into knowledge society.

Pointing out that many of the websites were offering opportunity to access the information in almost all Indian languages and with everyone making use of Wikipedia as an OER tool, he explained the changes in the digital technology and also introduced the faculty to certain open and collaborative tools like Wikipedia.

Besides to giving a historical overview of the free and open source software movement, mass collaboration on the internet, details about Wikipedia authors and users, the participants were educated about using the simple technological tools like QR code to create increased and seamless access to knowledge using pervasive technologies like mobile phones.

Graduate and postgraduate teaching faculty from various streams partcipated in the workshop meant to discuss and learn new development in the fields of knowledge sharing and access in digital era.

CIS programme officer Rahimanuddin Shaik, jounalist Malladi Kameswara Rao, ALC principal Fr Kishore, college vice-principal Fr Anil kumaralso participated.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/news/the-new-indian-express-june-25-2014-loyola-faculty-enlightened-about-open-edn-resources