Centre for Internet and Society

Copyright Amendments – Empowering the Print Disabled

Rahul Cherian — 2012-09-07T11:11:26Z

The much anticipated Copyright Amendment Bill, 2012 was passed with a few changes in the Rajya Sabha on 17th May 2012 after a very spirited debate and passed by the Lok Sabha on the 22nd May 2012 with unanimous consensus.

The Bill now requires presidential assent to become a law. The Bill discusses various key aspects which have not been addressed in the present copyright regime due to reasons such as changing international standards, technological and scientific advancements. This blog post is limited to the new Section 52(1)(zb) which creates a new copyright exception for the benefit of persons with print disabilities, including persons with visual impairment and dyslexia.

Prior to the inclusive of Section 52(1)(zb) that the owner of copyright in a work had the exclusive right to adapt, make copies, communicate to the public etc. the work. Therefore, any conversion of a book into accessible formats such as Braille, Daisy, audio books, etc., for the benefit of persons with print disabilities could be undertaken only by the owner of copyright or with the permission of the owner of copyright. More often than not, owners of copyright are unwilling or disinterested to either undertake the conversion and sale of such accessible format copies or permit such conversion, for reasons varying from lack of profitability to limited target audience.

The Copyright Amendment Bill, 2012 does away with the necessity to seek the consent of the publishers for converting their books into accessible formats. To this extent, the Bill provides that it would not be an infringement of copyright for any person or any organization working for the benefit of the persons with disabilities and on a non-profit basis to create accessible format copies or distribute them to persons with disabilities who cannot enjoy the work in their normal formats. This provision is very wide and inclusive in its scope and also has some protection built in against unauthorized use by non-beneficiaries of the exception. For instance, the books so provided in accessible formats shall be for private or personal use, education or research only. Moreover, the persons or organizations providing such services have the obligation to ensure that such converted formats do not enter the mainstream business channels. While the new exception permits the recovery of the expenses incurred in converting the books, they do not permit the making of any profit under the exception. However, under a new Section 31 B any person working for the benefit of the persons with disabilities on a profit basis or for business can undertake conversion and distribution after obtaining a license from the Copyright Board in accordance with the procedure laid down in that section.

It is to be noted that the original wording of the amendment as proposed by the Copyright Office in 2006 was extremely limited in that it allowed conversion only into “specialized formats designed for persons with disabilities” and not into "all formats" as is the case now. The problem with "specialized formats" is that many persons with print disabilities, including those with dyslexia, person who lost their eyesight at a later age etc. cannot use specialized formats such as Braille and use mainstream formats such as .pdf or audio. By limiting conversion into “specialized formats” such as Braille, a large number of potential beneficiaries would have been excluded from the amendment. In order the attempt to change the wording of the proposed amendment to reflect technological developments and also benefit a larger number of persons with disabilities, the nationwide Right to Read Campaign was launched by Inclusive Planet, the Centre for Internet and Society, the Daisy Forum of India. As a result of sustained campaigning and high level advocacy during which over 70 Members of Parliament were met, we were invited to present evidence before the Parliamentary Standing Committee which fully endorsed our concerns. The Copyright Office then changed the wording from the 2006 wording to the current wording. It still took about a year and half for the amendments to be passed by both Houses of Parliament.

In conclusion, the Copyright Amendment Bill will enable persons with disabilities to be able to exercise their right to knowledge on an equal basis with others. It also shows that a small group of committed disability activists with the support of a handful of lawyers and the tool of high level advocacy can bring about effective change.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/accessibility/copyright-amendments

Copyright Access for the Disabled and Collaborative IP Policy

radha — 2011-04-02T14:27:01Z

A blog post on SPICY IP by Shamnad Basheer, November 18, 2009

In previous p osts, we covered the Right to Read Campaign, a campaign aimed at increasing access to copyrighted works for the print impaired. As many of you know, most works of literature, science and the arts are practically out of bounds for the disabled, unless converted to readable formats such as Braille or digitized and accessed via expensive screen reader software such as JAWS.

Recently, this campaign, the brainchild of CIS and Inclusive Planet, came home to us at NUJS, Kolkata and I was amazed to see the bonding between these children of a lesser god and their struggle to transform society into a more inclusive one. NUJS was particularly fortunate to host this campaign that day, as we have a student (Moiz Tundawalla, who ranks in the top 5 of his class) as well as a faculty member, Dr TV Sudhakar, who are visually impaired.

As part of the campaign, a group of us including Rahul Cherian of Inclusive Planet (and the brain behind Bookbole, one of the most innovative solutions yet catering to the needs of the visually impaired), Sunil Abraham and Nirmita Narasimhan of CIS and Lawrence Liang of ALF began working on a copyright defence that would enable the conversion of copyrighted works to more accessible formats for the disabled..formats that would enable them to enjoy such works as comfortably as the others.

Such a provision is critical, given that hardly 0.5% of all published books are accessible by the print impaired. Further, given the constitutional mandate that each one of us shall have the right to life under Article 21 (which includes the right to education and the right to read) and the right not to be discriminated against (under Article 14), the State is under a positive obligation to provide accessible works to the disabled and thereby help them lead better lives.

The Government Copyright Proposal

This is not to suggest that the Indian government lacks sensitivity on this count. Indeed, it is commendable that as far as back as 2006, the government proposed the introduction of Section 52 (1) (za) to the Copyright Act, 1957 to resolve the issue.

The proposed Section 52 (1) (za) states that the following act shall not constitute an infringement of copyright: “reproduction, issue of copies or communication to the public of any work in a format, including sign language, specially designed (emphasis added) only for the use of persons suffering from a visual, aural or other disability that prevents their enjoyment of such works in their normal format.”

While this is a great start, this draft suffers from some serious limitations:

Firstly, it restricts permissible formats to those “specially designed” for persons with disabilities. In practical terms, this means that only Braille and sign language is permitted. As many of you may know, Braille is extremely expensive to print and distribute and is not portable. Moreover persons with low vision, dyslexics, people with paralysis, cerebral palsy etc. cannot use Braille and require alternate formats.
Given recent technological developments and the burgeoning of audio formats and electronic formats that are now used by a large number of visually impaired persons, the exception ought to cover such formats as well... formats that do not strictly constitute "formats specially designed for the disabled". Indeed, any creation of a digitized version of a copyrighted work would enable access by the visually impaired (provided they have tools such as screen reading software on their respective computers).
We understand that the Indian government wishes to ensure that the defence is availed of only by the disabled and not by others, who may free ride on such an exception. While limiting the exception to “formats specially designed for the disabled” may help achieve this objective, it seriously limits the scope of access by the disabled in this technological day and age, as explained above. Rather than limit the kinds of formats that could be created, we propose that the government restrict access of works created under the aegis of this exception to only people with disabilities. One way to do this is by insisting on reliable certificates that confirm one's status as "differently-abled".
Secondly, the proposed amendment fails to ensure that software and other intellectual property protected tools required to create accessible formats and enable persons with disabilities to access such formats are available at a reasonable cost. Illustratively, the most widely used screen reading software, JAWS, is licensed at a whooping Rs 50,000!
Thirdly, the proposed amendment must provide wording to the effect that if content owners apply any technology circumvention measures or DRM locks to digital content, they must make available such content to persons with disabilities. Without such provision, the production of talking books or the use of screen reading software for the benefit of the visually impaired will be restricted if the owner of a digital work has prohibited such use of his work.

Thankfully India does not have any specific protection for anti-circumvention measures and DRM as yet. However, we're not sure if the government plans to introduce such a protection via the recent copyright amendment bill that is likely to be introduced in Parliament in December. Unfortunately, the bill is still secret and will be made available for public viewing only after it is introduced in Parliament.

Our Copyright Proposal
We've therefore proposed a more liberal and meaningful exception as below:

Section 52 (1) (za) (i): The doing of any act, the primary objective of which is to enable persons with disabilities to access copyrighted works as comfortably and flexibly as a person without a disability.
Such acts shall include, without limitation, the making of any accessible format of a work, reproducing such work/format, adapting such work/format, making available such work/format, lending such works/formats etc. and the provision of any facility that is primarily designed to enable any of the acts contemplated above.
Provided that if any entity wishes to undertake any of the above activities on a for profit basis, it shall pay such remuneration to copyright owners as may be prescribed by the Copyright Board from time to time. For the purpose of determining remuneration, the Copyright Board shall take into consideration the need to ensure that works are accessible and available at prices that are affordable, taking into account disparities of incomes for persons who are disabled.
Provided that if any software or other tool that is covered by any intellectual property right is necessary to create accessible formats or to enable access to such formats, or to enable disabled persons to access any work in any manner as contemplated above, such intellectual property protected software or tool shall be licensed at an affordable price, to be determined by the Copyright Board.
Provided that if any works are protected by technology circumvention measures or subject to DRM limitations that restrict access to the work in any way, the owner of copyright shall grant access to any person who wishes to secure such access for the primary purpose of doing any act contemplated within any of the provisions above.
Provided that the exemption or other benefits envisaged under this section can be availed of only when reasonable measures have been taken to ensure that the end beneficiary is a person with a disability.
Provided that if any act done in good faith in pursuance of any of the above provisions falls outside the ambit of such provision, such act shall not be enjoined by an injunction, whether temporary or permanent, but shall be made compensable by payment of a reasonable royalty to be determined by the Copyright Board.
This provision shall override any conflicting provision in any other legislation, regulation or rule in force in India, only to the extent of such conflict.
Section 52 (1) (za) (ii): For the purpose of Section 52 (1) (za) (i) "accessible format" means any format or form which gives a disabled person access to the work as flexibly and comfortably as a person without a disability, and shall include, but not be limited to, large print, with different typefaces and sizes all being permitted according to need, Braille, audio recordings, digital copies compatible with screen readers or refreshable Braille and audiovisual works with audio and or text description.

The above section draws from a provision recommended by the World Blind Union and supported by countries such as Brazil and NGO's such as KEI.

Readers will note that the above exception not only caters to the visually impaired, but any differently-abled person who is unable to access copyrighted works as comfortably as others. Illustratively, without the subtitling of audio-visual material, a hearing-impaired persons is unable to enjoy movies, TV programs and other audio-visual material.

CLIPP and Collaborative IP Policy Making

Readers may recollect an initiative called CLIPP (Collaborative Innovation in IP Policy), that we touched upon sometime back, but never really got around to implementing. We are still in the process of designing an appropriate IT architecture to support this endeavour, which will greatly aid transparency and public participation around IP law making in this country.

Till such time as we unleash this specialised architecture, we're trying to see if we can make do with the blogger format. Indeed, if our experiment around the parallel imports provision is anything to go by, where our posts elicited around 50 odd comments that helped suggest ways in which to interpret (and perhaps reword section 107A), there is no reason why the blogger format itself should not suffice.

Leaving comments on posts is fairly easy. You scroll down to the bottom of the post, hit the "post a comment" button and either sign in with your gmail account or click on the "anonymous" tab to post a comment anonymously. You could also chose any other online identity. For those that are averse to using the comments section at the end of this blog post, please free to email me at shamnad[at]gmail.com.

I hope all of you can take some time out to help this worthy cause by inspecting the suggested provision with a fine tooth comb and recommending ways to improve it. I understand that we have many sophisticated copyright experts on our subscriber list ..and I do hope that you will lend your minds and hearts to this cause. Needless to state, a mere copyright provision by itself is not enough--but it will certainly go some way in ensuring that we provide a better and more "inclusive" tomorrow for these children of a lesser god.

ps: Venky Hariharan, a leading open source advocate has referred me to Orca, an open source screen reader software, freely downloadable.

Link to the original blogspot

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/news/copyright-access-for-the-disabled-and-collaborative-ip-policy

Constitution of the High Level Advisory Committee (HLAC) on National Policy on Universal Electronic Accessibility

praskrishna — 2014-04-06T06:46:15Z

The Centre for Internet and Society has been invited to serve on the high level committee on electronic accessibility policy constituted by the Government of India.

Click to read the notification issued by the Department of Electronics and Information Technology, Government of India.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/news/hlac-national-policy-universal-electronic-accessibility

Constitution of Committee for revision of Guidelines for Indian Government Websites

Admin — 2017-08-23T14:02:55Z

The ‘Guidelines for Indian Government Websites’ (GIGW) was formulated by National Informatics Centre to make Indian Government Websites usable, user centric and universally accessible.

GIGW were included as a part of Central Secretariat Manual of office Procedure by DARPG However, since the inception of GIGW, there have been a lot of changes in user demands and technology trends including major revision of HTML and CSS, etc. A Committee has been constituted to study current scenario and advice on the revision of the GIGW so that it may fulfill its mandate of benchmarking Websites and Mobile Apps that are usable, user centric and universally accessible. Nirmita Narasimhan is a member of the Committee. For more info, click here

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/accessibility/news/constitution-of-committee-for-revision-of-guidelines-for-indian-government-websites

Communication technology opens 'doors' for everyone, not only people with disabilities

praskrishna — 2014-11-04T16:36:43Z

Today, most Americans overlook improvements made since the dawn of the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) in 1990.

The article by John D. Kemp and Brandon M. Macsata was published in the Hill on October 13, 2014. Dr. Nirmita Narasimhan's report is mentioned.

Today, most Americans overlook improvements made since the dawn of the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA") in 1990. Sidewalk ramps…automatic door openers…adjustable vanity mirrors…and automatic lighting and fixture controls were all designed to help make the "physical" world more accessible for and useable by all people, including individuals with disabilities. Now, isn't it time we opened doors to the "virtual" world, and information and communication technology ("ICT")?

Since 1998, federal agencies have been required by law to make their electronic ICT accessible to people with disabilities. Better known as "Section 508" (of the Rehabilitation Act), it mandates "individuals with disabilities who are Federal employees to have access to and use of information and data that is comparable to the access to and use of the information and data by Federal employees who are not individuals with disabilities." [1]

Accessible ICT is an evolving process, evidenced by the United States Access Board, which monitors Section 508 compliance, updating its standards, as well as other telecommunications accessibility guidelines. The House Oversight and Government Reform Chairman, Darrell Issa, has introduced legislation calling for the designation of the Chief Information Officers (CIOs) in all federal Departments, including significant changes to the management of information technology. This legislation passed the House of Representatives by voice vote, with similar legislation pending in the Senate.

Congress is currently faced with countless legislative proposals focusing on IT, ranging from healthcare, Veterans benefits, telecommunications and education, to name a few.

But more needs to be done in both the public and private sectors.

Wall Street and Main Street are both being re-defined by technology. The potential for our emerging "digital economy" is endless, if that technology is made more accessible.

Consider this: CTIA recently reported that the mobile data traffic more than doubled last year! [2] We know that people with disabilities are yearning to leverage accessible technologies in their everyday lives.

Whereas there have been many improvement in accessibility features on smart phones and mobiles devices, there is a still a long way to go. A recent report, authored by Nirmita Narasimhan, Program Manager at the Centre for Internet and Society (CIS), and Axel Leblois, founder and Executive Director of G3ict, summarized the challenge:

"Senior citizens and people with physical or mental disabilities are often unable to access mobile phones because the equipment lacks the necessary accessibility features or because the price of the adapted phones and services remain unaffordable. Considering that 15 per cent of the world's population, or over one billion people, have a disability that affects their access to modern communications, the commercial opportunities for mobile service providers, manufacturers and smart phone application developers are consequently substantial." With so much of our daily lives dependent on mobile devices and the Internet, it is time that we ushered in an "accessible technology renaissance."[3]

Aside from being the "socially responsible" thing to do, it also makes good business sense! In the first quarter of 2013, e-commerce expenditures reached 50.18 billion U.S. dollars.[4] Worldwide, it is estimated that the total value of e-commerce revenue topped $1.2 trillion in U.S. dollars.[5]

Maybe the more pertinent question to ask is, "How can we NOT afford to make ICT more accessible for people with disabilities?"

Ironically, despite its increasing relevance in our everyday lives, the World Wide Web is largely inaccessible for people with disabilities. Many websites are lacking "ALT Tags," which are designed to help screen readers used by people who are blind or visually impaired identify and explain images, graphs and charts. Yet, missing ALT Tags are only the tip of the iceberg.

Last year, Walmart had over 59 million unique monthly visitors to its websites. As large as that number may seem, it pales in comparison to Amazon and Ebay, with 149 million and 91 million monthly unique visitors, respectively.[6] These companies, and many more - such as Deque, IBM and Microsoft - are investing in accessible ICT because they understand its inherent business and social value.

Ironically, just as people without disabilities benefit from physical accessibility improvements, they are already benefitting from accessible ICT. According to the UK Office of Communications (Ofcom), 80 percent of people using closed captions are not deaf or hard of hearing.[7]

What is accessible technology renaissance? It is one whereby we envision every single individual, regardless of disability, can fully access the modern marvels of technology. Technology is what drives our economy. Technology is what links our communities. Technology is what keeps us connected to the world around us. That is why it should be accessible to everyone.

[1] Section 508 Of The Rehabilitation Act. Section508.gov. http://www.section508.gov/Section-508-Of-The-Rehabilitation-Act .

[2] Mobile Data Traffic More Than Doubled Last Year, According to CTIA. Roll Call TechnoCRAT. June 17, 2014.

[3] Making mobile phones and services accessible for persons with disabilities. A joint report of ITU - The International Telecommunication Union and G3ict - The global initiative for inclusive ICTs. August 2012.

[4] Statistics 2013. E-Commerce Revenues. September 20, 2013.

[5] Statistics 2013. E-Commerce Revenues. September 20, 2013.

[6] Statistics 2013, E-Commerce Revenues, September 20, 2013.

[7] Did You Know? 80 Percent of People Who Use Closed Captions Are Not Hard of Hearing. CaptionsforYouTube. June 6, 2014.

Kemp is president and CEO of The Viscardi Center, and Macsata is general consultant of the National Business and Disability Council (NBDC) at The Viscardi Center.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/accessibility/news/the-hill-john-d-kemp-and-brandon-m-macsata-october-13-2014-communication-technology-opens-doors-for-everyone-not-only-people-with-disabilities

Comments to the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Bill, 2014

Nirmita Narasimhan and Anandhi Viswanathan — 2014-10-30T16:13:45Z

On behalf of the Centre for Internet and Society (“CIS”), the following are the comments and recommendations on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Bill, 2014 (“RPD Bill”). It was submitted to the Parliamentary Standing Committee in October 2014.

I. Definitions

Section 2(c) “Barrier”: - definition to include attitudinal barriers: Should read as follows: “Barrier means any factor which hampers the full and effective participation of persons with disabilities in society, including attitudinal, communicational, cultural, economic, environmental, institutional, political, social or structural factors which hampers the full and effective participation of persons with disabilities in society.”

Section 2(f) “Communication”: - definition to include sign language: Should read as follows: “Communication includes means and formats of communication, languages, display of text, Braille, tactile communication, signs, large print, accessible multimedia, written, audio, plain-language, sign language, human reader, augmentative and alternative modes and accessible information and communication technology.”

Section 2 (h) “establishment” to include private establishments as well. The UNCRPD places an obligation on State Parties to take ‘appropriate measures to eliminate discrimination on the basis of disability by any person, organization or private enterprise’ [Article 4(1)(e)]. It also requires that State Parties promote the employment of persons with disabilities in the private sector through appropriate policies and measures, which may include affirmative action programmes, incentives and other measures [Article 27(1)(h)]. Thus it is important that ‘establishments’ as covered under the RPD Bill, which would refer to rights relating to employment of persons with disabilities, reservation of jobs and provision of reasonable accommodation should include state as well as private establishments. The intention to ensure the representation of persons with disabilities in the private sector was also recognised by the Supreme Court in Union of India v. National Federation of the Blind. Therefore the definition should read as follows:

‘Establishment’ means and includes:

Department and Ministries of Government;

Local authorities and authorities or bodies owned, controlled or aided by the Central or State Government;

Any statutory or non-statutory body created, owned, financially or administratively controlled or aided by the Central or State Government or any such body performing public functions which are primarily welfare activities and includes Government Companies as defined in Section 617 of the Companies Act, 1956;

Any company, firm, cooperative or other society, association, trust, agency, institution, organization, union, landlord, industry, supplier of goods or services, factory or other non-statutory body which is not covered under clause (i) to (iv)

Insertion of the term “discrimination on the basis of disability” Since the term is widely used across the document, it is important to define it. A suggested definition of the term based on the definition available in the e-Accessibility Tool Kit for Policy Makers is as follows: “Accessibility is a measure of the extent to which any infrastructure, product or service can be used by a person with a disability as effectively as it can be used by a person without that disability.”

Section 2(x): definition of specified disability to be deleted.

Section 2(t): Definition of “Reasonable Accommodation” to be altered: 'disproportionate or undue burden’ to be deleted. Because there is no definition given as to what would constitute an undue burden or what would be disproportionate, along with the fact that this can be used as an exit route for public authorities and private employers to evade their responsibility to provide reasonable accommodation. Most other disability rights legislations including the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 do not have this qualification in the definition of reasonable accommodation. The definition should instead read as follows: "Reasonable accommodation" means necessary and appropriate modification and adjustments to ensure to persons with disabilities the enjoyment or exercise of rights equally with others. It can include but is not limited to:

(A) making existing facilities used by employees readily accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities;

(B) and job restructuring, part-time or modified work schedules, reassignment to a vacant position, acquisition or modification of equipment or devices, appropriate adjustment or modifications of examinations, training materials or policies, the provision of qualified readers or interpreters, and other similar accommodations for individuals with disabilities.”

II. Voting and other Rights

i. Expansion of Section 10:

It is not sufficient to only make polling stations accessible. Section 10 needs to be expanded to include the following:

To make all voter registration stations and facilities accessible to persons with disabilities
All materials and communication must be made available in multiple formats.

Election Commissions to take special measures to promote participation of persons with disabilities in the electoral process- both in terms of casting votes, as well as standing for elections.

ii. Section 11 (4) to be expanded to include Section 11 (4) (c):- to include the following: “The enjoyment of equal right to conduct their own financial affairs and avail of forms of financial credit such as bank loans, mortgages, insurance etc., should be on the same terms and conditions as other customers without discrimination or on special terms which may be advantageous to persons with disabilities.”

III. Education

Section 17 - addition of a sub section requiring the appropriate government to promote alternate teaching methods using new forms of information and communications technologies and pedagogic techniques.
All children with disabilities should have access to and training in the use of computers and educational and knowledge materials in accessible formats.
Appropriate government should promote harmonization of syllabus to enable sharing of accessible resources across the state and recognize and support the efforts of disability and other organizations in imparting training to disabled children.
The present draft limits the provisions of this Act to educational institutions funded by the appropriate government- this needs to be expanded to include all educational institutions, private and public.
The government should also accordingly revise existing schemes for providing financial aid to such families having children with disabilities to keep abreast of present financial needs along with launching new ones.
Section 16(g) - aids and ATs should be provided free of cost till the completion of school education and not just until 18 years since very often children with disabilities start their education late.
Section 15 on education - private schools should also be required to employ special educators for students with disabilities and all private educational institutions- both for school as well as higher education should admit students with disabilities without discrimination if they meet the requisite criteria.

IV. Employment

Section 19 (1) proviso - permitting for exemption of any establishment to be deleted.
Section 33 (3) - The age relaxation in upper age limit has been reduced to five years from the current norm of 10 years. This should be revised to 10 years.

V. Access

Section 40 - provides that the government shall provide for access to transport by retrofitting old modes of transport where “technically feasible and economically viable”. This can potentially lead to a situation where transport is not made accessible on the ground that it is too expensive or technically not feasible. In such instances, persons with disabilities cannot be deprived of access to transport. We thus recommend the insertion of the following clause to section 40 (1)(b): “Where a facility cannot be retrofitted because it is too technically challenging or expensive, there must be made available an alternate means of accessing that transport or facility.” Coupled with insertion of a time frame of 3 years for making all modes of transport accessible – like in the US model.

Section 41 – The following should be inserted

Accessibility of websites: All websites must conform to the current Web Content Accessibility Guidelines formulated by the World Wide Web Consortium and all government communication must be accessible electronically as well as in print.

There should be a periodic audit for accessibility of all Government websites and training must be imparted to technology developers to create and maintain accessible products, interfaces and content. Research must be ongoing to develop new and open source assistive technologies for all disabilities and in all languages and for this purpose tenders must be invited from the public as well as private sector.

To insert a new section on Procurement- “Appropriate Governments must ensure that there is a procurement policy in place which mandates that all products (hardware and software), goods and services procured by them must conform to accessibility requirements and this should be introduced in the license terms of service contracts itself.”
Section 44 (1) to refer to all “buildings accessible to the public” instead of “public buildings” - This is to ensure that it is not only government buildings that are made accessible but also all buildings available to the public such as hospitals, hotels, libraries, shops, banks etc., whether public or private, are made accessible. The UNCRPD places an obligation on State Parties to take ‘appropriate measures to eliminate discrimination on the basis of disability by any person, organization or private enterprise’ [Article 4(1)(e)]. It also specifically requires that State Parties ensure that ‘private entities that offer facilities and services which are open or provided to the public take into account all aspects of accessibility for persons with disabilities’ [Article 9(2)(b)].
To insert a new sub-section in Section 44 for periodic audit of buildings: “The Central Government must establish a system for periodic audit of all building and physical spaces and use these reports for measuring pace and extent of rectification and adherence to the standards.”
Section 45- the blanket time frame of 2 years is too ambiguous for service providers and has to be revised. The National Commission or relevant authority (for example TRAI in the case of telecom operators) may determine a reasonable time frame for provision of accessible services and such time frame may be a little more in case of rectification/ retrofitting as the case may be. The Rationale for this is that the time to provide accessible billing facilities for mobile phones or making a website accessible would be barely a matter of months, while for something else may be a year, hence such a blanket provision of time of 2 years should be avoided.

VI. General Comments

Restore section on women and girls with disabilities, which was present in the 2011 draft. The present Act does not contain specific section for them, just mentions them in a diluted manner across the legislation.
Same for children with disabilities- addition of a dedicated section for them- as present in previous draft.
Section 23(1) - the words 'within the limit of its economic capacity and development' must be removed because it is an exit route for states from formulating anything more than the minimum necessary schemes in this area. Our experience with the previous Persons With Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) 1995 Act has demonstrated that almost all the sections with 'within the economic limits' were not complied with by all states and proved ineffectual. Furthermore, the enjoyment and exercise of the fundamental rights of persons with disabilities cannot hinge on the economic capacity of states. All states will have the minimum capacity required - it is a question of priority.
Section 28 needs a sub section, which incorporates the copyright fair dealing exception to make all copyrighted cultural works accessible to persons with disabilities.
Appropriate governments should ensure that one member from the Disability Advisory Committee should be able to participate on all key policy making committees to ensure that the disability perspective is adequately represented across all government initiatives.
Section 61(b) and 67(b) should be deleted since they state unsoundness of mind as a reason for disqualification, which goes against the spirit of the UNCRPD.
Similarly Sections 76(1)(c) and 89(1)(c) should be deleted since they cite physical/ mental incapacity as a disqualification from holding office.
Sections 103 and 104 should include offences committed by the Government, public officials and government companies respectively in the discharge of their duties.
Section 73(2) - The chairperson of the National Commission has to necessarily be a person with disability.
Section 86 (2) on the Chairperson of the state commission- should be made mandatory that the Chairperson should be a person with disability
Duties and Responsibilities of Appropriate Governments: The clause “every appropriate government should set up a help line and other resources to assist persons with disabilities” should be included.
Access to emergency services: The appropriate governments should ensure that:

i. Persons with disabilities have instantaneous access to all emergency services such as ambulance, fire engine, hospital and police and to this end ensure that measures are taken to make these accessible to them;

ii. Steps are taken to ensure that during times of disasters such as floods and earthquakes, mitigation, rescue, relief and reconstruction measures take into account the needs of persons with disabilities and especially women and children with disabilities.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/accessibility/blog/comments-to-rights-of-persons-with-disablities-bill-2014

Comments to the GIGW

nirmita — 2015-05-09T16:00:11Z

The Centre for Internet and Society submitted its comments to the National Informatics Centre on April 30, 2015.

We the undersigned would like to commend the NIC for taking a leadership role in promoting eaccessibility through the notification of the Guidelines for Indian Government websites (GIGW) in 2009. Undoubtedly, web accessibility plays an ultimately crucial role in enabling and enhancing citizen participation and access to information. The development of assistive technologies both hardware and software has increased the potentiality of the constituency of persons with disabilities and elderly to become one of the largest consumer groups on the Internet. We use the word ‘potentiality’ because the current information ecosystem on the Internet, comprising information through text, electronic documents, audio, video and other multimedia presented through Indian websites are inaccessible for persons using screen readers and other technologies.

Despite the passage of 6 years since the GIGW, there has been negligible progress on the front for making Indian government websites conform to the notified standards. An evaluation of accessibility of government websites carried out in 2012[1] demonstrated that the majority yet remained inaccessible, with very slow improvement in the situation thereafter. Our interaction with government departments and government web developers revealed that there was still a relative lack of awareness of the need to conform to these guidelines coupled with an absolute lack of knowledge on how to implement them. Given this background, we submit our recommendations as below:

Mandatory: Since experience has demonstrated that voluntary compliance has not worked to bring about accessibility in government communication through the Internet, it is necessary that these guidelines be made mandatory with a strict deadline beyond which noncompliance becomes an offence, to ensure that it is taken seriously. This is now partly in place since the notification of the National Policy on Universal Electronic Accessibility[2] by the DEITy in Oct 2013. The legal mandate around this will only strengthen once the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Bill comes in force. Hence, the present recommendation.
WCAG 2.0 level AA compliance: We recommend that WCAG 2.0 level AA be specified as the standard for minimum level of compliance in the guidelines. This is recommended for several reasons.
a. These are globally accepted standards which have been well researched
b. These have assigned success criteria for each guideline, which is not present in the current draft of guidelines, thus enabling a developer to know whether the criteria have been adequately met.
c. The task of review is a constant one which is being undertaken by experts around the world through various study groups and technical committees, which will ensure that updates are timely and keep abreast of new developments. Hence, the burden of review will not be upon us. At present, we also do not have the domain expertise on this subject which is available with W3C and elsewhere globally. Instead, efforts may be focused upon making any additions to the WCAG 2.0 which are required to make them more comprehensive in the Indian context.
Meeting success criteria: For each accessibility checkpoint / guideline, there should be defined success criteria to ensure that the implementation meets acceptable levels. There should be Objective measures in place to have technical validation of all the websites. There needs to be a process defined to validate all websites on WCAG accepted tools to ensure compliance to technical standards. The recommended procedure provided by the W3C for evaluating websites known as the Website Accessibility Conformance Evaluation Methodology 1.0[3] (WCAG-EM) may also be followed in this regard.
Onus of implementation: The onus of complying with the Guidelines must be placed on the top management in an organisation/ department/ ministry. Someone like a board member or other senior person.
Accessibility audit: There should be an accessibility audit after the development of a website by a 3rd party entity independent of the website developer and website owner.
Accessibility audit agency: There must be a provision to setup an entity which can perform access audit for all government websites. The agency may include government officials from various departments, ministries or autonomous bodies, leading accessibility firms and must include end users.
Content updation: To ensure the accessibility of new content that is added to a website on a regular basis, there should be a defined accessibility process so that an existing system that is accessible is not broken.
Clarity in the specifications: There should be clear guidelines to make it easy to comprehend for all and not just a technical person. At present, some of the guidelines are ambiguous and may not be easily discernible even to an experienced developer or website development agencies who are not domain experts. For example, guideline5 states: ‘Information structure and relationship is preserved in all presentation styles’. This guideline could be clearer if it specified that tabular information should be specified with table tags, labels should be marked with label tags, Headings should be marked with heading tags. Etc. This reiterates the earlier point that adherence to WCAG 2.0 is best since it provides developers with resources such as Understanding WCAG 2.0 and Techniques for WCAG 2.0 documents. Another example is guideline 19- ‘There is adequate contrast between text and background colour’. However, it is unclear as to what is meant by ‘adequate’. WCAG 2.0 on the other hand, specifies the contrast for each level. IT specifies acceptable colour combinations for background, foreground and text which increase accessibility.
Stress on implementation: A lot of attention should be given to implementing the guidelines. The fact that there has been minimal success in adoption of the guidelines makes out a clear case for a stronger awareness strategy and adoption action plan, with a dedicated team or department in place within NIC which can work towards supporting training and retrofitting efforts with different government departments and agencies around the country. This also calls for a two tier team approach, one at the central level, with contact points set up for each state which are responsible for this implementation, with the time limit for enforcement of these guidelines. For this purpose, partnerships may be sought with private players and organisations serving the disabled and accessibility experts.

We are available to help this endeavour and are happy to provide support whether in the form of clarifications, feedback or any other manner. Our contact details are given at the end of this submission.

[1]. Accessibility of Government Websites in India: A Report (by CIS and Hans Foundation): http://cisindia.org/accessibility/accessibility-of-government-websites-in-india

[2]. Available at http://www.ncert.nic.in/announcements/notices/pdf_files/Nationalpolicyonuniversal.pdf

[3]. Available at http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG-EEM/

Click to download the submission file.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/accessibility/blog/comments-to-gigw

Comments on the draft Rights of Persons with Disabilities Rules

nirmita — 2017-03-29T03:41:25Z

The Centre for Internet & Society (CIS) submitted comments on the draft Rights of Persons with Disabilities Rules for the consideration of the Department of Empowerment of Persons with Disabilities, Government of India.

The comments were submitted to the Department of Empowerment of Persons with Disabilities on March 23, 2017. Click to download the submission here.

Introduction

We thank the Department of Empowerment of Persons with Disabilities (DEPD) for inviting comments on its draft rules. We provide brief comments on the Rules below. We would particularly like to draw the department’s attention to the need to have rules concerning measures relating to standards compliance, training and monitoring which we feel would help strengthen the Rules to address the issue of accessibility in a timely and effective manner.

Accessibility of the draft rules document

At the outset, we would like to draw attention to the fact that the Rules when first published in PDF form were only partially accessible and not easily readable for persons using screen readers. We appreciate that at a later date, an accessible Word version was provided, however we feel that even the original PDF needs to conform to the PDF/UA standards.

Policy/Guidelines on accessible communication

Following from the above point, we would like to propose that the DEPD publish at the earliest a set of guidelines for publishing accessible information and communication. The guidelines may define what constitutes information, explain how to create and disseminate accessible information and identify relevant accessibility standards. They may be applicable to all cases where printed or electronic information such as books, leaflets/ handbooks, mails, invoices, forms, data, policies and acts are created and communicated to diverse stakeholders. This guidelines may be mandatory across the Central and State Governments.

Reasonable Accommodation

Rule 3(1) requires that every establishment take steps to provide reasonable accommodation. It may further be added that said measures towards reasonable accommodation be taken within a reasonable time frame, such that persons with disabilities are provided access to resources at the same time as others and not significantly later.

Standards and Guidelines

Standards are critical to implement accessibility, and it is important that we adopt the most updated globally recognised standards. To aid this endeavour, we recommend that the DEPD may appoint two experts who will primarily be responsible for implementing accessibility. Their tasks will involve identifying standards and policy requirements in different domains and coordinating with the relevant ministries to notify and implement the same. One expert may be responsible for environmental accessibility, while the other may be responsible for overseeing ICT accessibility. The experts may carry out the tasks of formulating strategies to implement accessibility compliance, as well as researching advances in international policies and standards and making recommendations to relevant Ministries.

Regarding the Rules relating to the notification of standards for ICT accessibility (Rule 17.c.), we recommend that these may be expanded and made more comprehensive. To our understanding, some of the standards mentioned in relation to ICT accessibility such as telecasting and broadcasting do not as yet address the issue of accessibility. We recommend that the relevant ministries notify standards and guidelines to be followed in their regard at the earliest. There are also critical domains such as procurement, telecommunications and mobile devices, services and applications and emergency and disaster response for which standards and guidelines need to be notified.

We propose that the deadline for notification of standards be set within 6 months of the Rules coming into force and that the standards to be adopted are those which are globally followed, such as EN 301-549 for procurement.

Past efforts have proven that the notification of guidelines alone does not necessarily result in the implementation of accessibility, and often times a web site or platform which has been made accessible, reverts to being inaccessible as time elapses and persons who are involved in updating it and maintaining are unaware of accessibility principles to be followed. Hence, each and every person developing, maintaining and updating a website should be familiar with accessibility core principles. Outsourcing accessibility compliance is a temporary solution, it will be rendered pointless as people continue to update the website and post new content that is inaccessible. Therefore, some level of training is an absolute necessity, although the specific level and nature of these trainings may vary based on the individual’s role in relation to the website. For example, a web developer would need more in depth training as compared to a communications or administrative officer whose role may be to upload documents to the web site. Creating accessible documents and communicating in an accessible manner is something which every government official should be able to do, while the needs of developers are more advanced and technical and may require two rounds of training. Each ministry and department at the Centre and state may allocate a certain portion of their budget towards this.

An Accessibility specialisation unit may also be constituted within the NIC or any other appropriate agency whose task will be especially to provide on-going practical support to government agencies on how to implement accessibility across their web sites and publications. This team may work closely with the DEPD and other government agencies to audit, trouble shoot and guide continuous progress in implementing web site accessibility across the government.

All Ministries and government agencies may be required to include a section on accessibility compliance and initiatives as part of their annual reporting. This report may also include their performance on expenditure relating to implementing accessibility, hiring employees with disabilities, trainings undertaken and affirmative action required to be taken by them as given in the RPWD Act 2016, such as steps towards incentivising affirmative action by the private sector and activities undertaken relating to Chapter VI, Chapter VII and Chapter VIII of the RPWD Act.

Training and Support

Monitoring and reporting

Regarding website accessibility, the DEPD may also consider taking up auditing web sites of government agencies at random from time to time and publish the reports periodically as a measure towards gauging progress. A comprehensive audit of all government web sites of both the Central and state government and applications may be undertaken every 3 years.

National fund

Rule 43, relating to the Utilization of the National Fund is not clear on how much money is spent on accessibility initiatives each year. It is proposed that this rule specify the percentage of funds which have to be required to be utilised each year. In the absence of this, there is a concern that the fund will be under utilised, despite there being a large need for spending on accessibility. Details of projects and spending may be published from time to time.

Office of the Chief Commissioner

The DEPD may require that at least one person of senior rank within the Office of the Chief Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities be a person with disability. This will ensure that the interests of the concerned group are directly represented at the highest level dedicated to ensuring their welfare and participation.

Transparency

Finally we recommend that the rules emphasise the need for transparency in implementing the provisions of the Act and that all initiatives, programmes and expenditure may be published in a timely and accessible manner.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/accessibility/blog/comments-on-the-draft-rights-of-persons-with-disabilities-rules

Comments on the draft Policy on IT Accessibility for People with Disabilities

nirmita — 2017-05-19T15:33:41Z

The Centre for Internet & Society gave inputs on a document on implementing digital accessibility to Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology on May 2, 2017.

We welcome the initiative of the MEITY to formulate a policy/ set of guidelines to implement electronic accessibility for persons with disabilities within the government and provide our comments to the draft document below:

Accessibility of the document:

The present document is not completely accessible. The first two Annexures cannot be read at all using a screen reader and there is also scope for improving accessibility in the rest of the document. Given the government’s policy requiring electronic accessibility and the nature of this document itself, this error may be rectified immediately. A good resource for creating accessible electronic documents is available at https://help.rnib.org.uk/help/daily-living/technology/accessible-documents

Title and content presentation:

The present title reads- ‘Policy for IT Accessibility for people with disabilities”. This may be rephrased to - Policy for Implementing IT accessibility for persons with disabilities so that its purpose is clear and differentiated from the National Policy on Universal Electronics Accessibility. The policy may be broadly divided into four main aspects- Content and communication, technology, training and procurement, since these are the four areas where specific interventions are required and have different needs and associated standards.

Preliminary sections:

The policy would benefit from clearly articulated vision, objectives, scope, applicability and statement.

Content and communication:

All communication, including documents and publications, whether print or electronic, should be universally accessible. This could include documents, mails, invoices, leaflets etc. We recommend use of Unicode, EPUB 3, EPUB 3 Accessibility Guidelines and WCAG 2.0 (level AA) as the standards to be followed while creating and publishing electronic documents and information. The need to use Unicode for regional languages is especially emphasised, as also the need to provide alternatives in case of scanned notifications and documents. We would also like to stress the need to use alternate modes of communication for transactions such as Alternative mode of authentication other than visual captcha (IE: One time password (OTP), logical reasoning (2+2) etc.)

Accessibility of technologies:

ICT accessibility interventions for different disabilities- This section should be circulated to experts of different disabilities to get their inputs. Attention may be given to also providing technology options such as the screen reader NVDA which are open source, efficient and work with indian languages. Overall, it is recommended that this section, recognises that persons with disabilities be provided with suitable assistive technologies and accessible technologies to enable them to work efficiently. The illustrative list of disabilitywise technologies may be provided as annexures to the policy/ guidelines and not be part of the main document.

Click to read the full submission here; and see the Policy and Guidelines here

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/accessibility/blog/comments-on-the-draft-policy-on-it-accessibility-for-people-with-disabilities

Comments on the Draft Outcome Document of the UN General Assembly’s Overall Review of the Implementation of WSIS Outcomes (WSIS+10)

geetha — 2015-11-18T06:33:13Z

Following the comment-period on the Zero Draft, the Draft Outcome Document of the UN General Assembly's Overall Review of implementation of WSIS Outcomes was released on 4 November 2015. Comments were sought on the Draft Outcome Document from diverse stakeholders. The Centre for Internet & Society's response to the call for comments is below.

The WSIS+10 Overall Review of the Implementation of WSIS Outcomes, scheduled for December 2015, comes as a review of the WSIS process initiated in 2003-05. At the December summit of the UN General Assembly, the WSIS vision and mandate of the IGF are to be discussed. The Draft Outcome Document, released on 4 November 2015, is towards an outcome document for the summit. Comments were sought on the Draft Outcome Document. Our comments are below.

The Draft Outcome Document of the UN General Assembly’s Overall Review of the Implementation of WSIS Outcomes (“the current Draft”) stands considerably altered from the Zero Draft. With references to development-related challenges, the Zero Draft covered areas of growth and challenges of the WSIS. It noted the persisting digital divide, the importance of innovation and investment, and of conducive legal and regulatory environments, and the inadequacy of financial mechanisms. Issues crucial to Internet governance such as net neutrality, privacy and the mandate of the IGF found mention in the Zero Draft.
The current Draft retains these, and adds to them. Some previously-omitted issues such as surveillance, the centrality of human rights and the intricate relationship of ICTs to the Sustainable Development Goals, now stand incorporated in the current Draft. This is most commendable. However, the current Draft still lacks teeth with regard to some of these issues, and fails to address several others.
In our comments to the Zero Draft, CIS had called for these issues to be addressed. We reiterate our call in the following paragraphs.

(1) ICT for Development

In the current Draft, paragraphs 14-36 deal with ICTs for development. While the draft contains rubrics like ‘Bridging the digital divide’, ‘Enabling environment’, and ‘Financial mechanisms’, the following issues are unaddressed:
Equitable development for all;
Accessibility to ICTs for persons with disabilities;
Access to knowledge and open data.

Equitable development

In the Geneva Declaration of Principles (2003), two goals are set forth as the Declaration’s “ambitious goal”: (a) the bridging of the digital divide; and (b) equitable development for all (¶ 17). The current Draft speaks in detail about the bridging of the digital divide, but the goal of equitable development is conspicuously absent. At WSIS+10, when the WSIS vision evolves to the creation of inclusive ‘knowledge societies’, equitable development should be both a key principle and a goal to stand by.
Indeed, inequitable development underscores the persistence of the digital divide. The current Draft itself refers to several instances of inequitable development; for ex., the uneven production capabilities and deployment of ICT infrastructure and technology in developing countries, landlocked countries, small island developing states, countries under occupation or suffering natural disasters, and other vulnerable states; lack of adequate financial mechanisms in vulnerable parts of the world; variably affordable (or in many cases, unaffordable) spread of ICT devices, technology and connectivity, etc.
What underscores these challenges is the inequitable and uneven spread of ICTs across states and communities, including in their production, capacity-building, technology transfers, gender-concentrated adoption of technology, and inclusiveness.
As such, it is essential that the WSIS+10 Draft Outcome Document reaffirm our commitment to equitable development for all peoples, communities and states.
We suggest the following inclusion to paragraph 5 of the current Draft:

“5. We reaffirm our common desire and commitment to the WSIS vision to build an equitable, people-centred, inclusive, and development-oriented Information Society…”

Accessibility for persons with disabilities

10. Paragraph 13 of the Geneva Declaration of Principles (2003) pledges to “pay particular attention to the special needs of marginalized and vulnerable groups of society” in the forging of an Information Society. Particularly, ¶ 13 recognises the special needs of older persons and persons with disabilities.

11. Moreover, ¶ 31 of the Geneva Declaration of Principles calls for the special needs of persons with disabilities, and also of disadvantaged and vulnerable groups, to be taken into account while promoting the use of ICTs for capacity-building. Accessibility for persons with disabilities is thus core to bridging the digital divide – as important as bridging the gender divide in access to ICTs.

12. Not only this, but the WSIS+10 Statement on the Implementation of WSIS Outcomes (June 2014) also reaffirms the commitment to “provide equitable access to information and knowledge for all… including… people with disabilities”, recognizing that it is “crucial to increase the participation of vulnerable people in the building process of Information Society…” (¶8).

13. In our previous submission, CIS had suggested language drawing attention to this. Now, the current Draft only acknowledges that “particular attention should be paid to the specific ICT challenges facing… persons with disabilities…” (paragraph 11). It acknowledges also that now, accessibility for persons with disabilities constitutes one of the core elements of quality (paragraph 22). However, there is a glaring omission of a call to action, or a reaffirmation of our commitment to bridging the divide experienced by persons with disabilities.

14. We suggest, therefore, the addition of the following language the addition of paragraph 24A to the current Draft. Sections of this suggestion are drawn from ¶8, WSIS+10 Statement on the Implementation of WSIS Outcomes.

"24A. Recalling the UN Convention on the rights of people with disabilities, the Geneva principles paragraph 11, 13, 14 and 15, Tunis Commitment paras 20, 22 and 24, and reaffirming the commitment to providing equitable access to information and knowledge for all, building ICT capacity for all and confidence in the use of ICTs by all, including youth, older persons, women, indigenous and nomadic peoples, people with disabilities, the unemployed, the poor, migrants, refugees and internally displaced people and remote and rural communities, it is crucial to increase the participation of vulnerable people in the building process of information Society and to make their voice heard by stakeholders and policy-makers at different levels. It can allow the most fragile groups of citizens worldwide to become an integrated part of their economies and also raise awareness of the target actors on the existing ICTs solution (such as tolls as e- participation, e-government, e-learning applications, etc.) designed to make their everyday life better. We recognise need for continued extension of access for people with disabilities and vulnerable people to ICTs, especially in developing countries and among marginalized communities, and reaffirm our commitment to promoting and ensuring accessibility for persons with disabilities. In particular, we call upon all stakeholders to honour and meet the targets set out in Target 2.5.B of the Connect 2020 Agenda that enabling environments ensuring accessible telecommunication/ICT for persons with disabilities should be established in all countries by 2020.”

Access to knowledge and open data

15. The Geneva Declaration of Principles dedicates a section to access to information and knowledge (B.3). It notes, in ¶26, that a “rich public domain” is essential to the growth of Information Society. It urges that public institutions be strengthened to ensure free and equitable access to information (¶26), and also that assistive technologies and universal design can remove barriers to access to information and knowledge (¶25). Particularly, the Geneva Declaration advocates the use of free and open source software, in addition to proprietary software, to meet these ends (¶27).

16. It was also recognized in the WSIS+10 Statement on the Implementation of WSIS Outcomes (‘Challenges-during implementation of Action Lines and new challenges that have emerged’) that there is a need to promote access to all information and knowledge, and to encourage open access to publications and information (C, ¶¶9 and 12).

17. In our previous submission, CIS had highlighted the importance of open access to knowledge thus: “…the implications of open access to data and knowledge (including open government data), and responsible collection and dissemination of data are much larger in light of the importance of ICTs in today’s world. As Para 7 of the Zero Draft indicates, ICTs are now becoming an indicator of development itself, as well as being a key facilitator for achieving other developmental goals. As Para 56 of the Zero Draft recognizes, in order to measure the impact of ICTs on the ground – undoubtedly within the mandate of WSIS – it is necessary that there be an enabling environment to collect and analyse reliable data. Efforts towards the same have already been undertaken by the United Nations in the form of ‘Data Revolution for Sustainable Development’. In this light, the Zero Draft rightly calls for enhancement of regional, national and local capacity to collect and conduct analyses of development and ICT statistics (Para 56). Achieving the central goals of the WSIS process requires that such data is collected and disseminated under open standards and open licenses, leading to creation of global open data on the ICT indicators concerned.”

18. This crucial element is missing from the current Draft of the WSIS+10 Outcome Document. Of course, the current Draft notes the importance of access to information and free flow of data. But it stops short of endorsing and advocating the importance of access to knowledge and free and open source software, which are essential to fostering competition and innovation, diversity of consumer/ user choice and ensuring universal access.

19. We suggest the following addition – of paragraph 23A to the current Draft:

"23A. We recognize the need to promote access for all to information and knowledge, open data, and open, affordable, and reliable technologies and services, while respecting individual privacy, and to encourage open access to publications and information, including scientific information and in the research sector, and particularly in developing and least developed countries.”

(2) Human Rights in Information Society

20. The current Draft recognizes that human rights have been central to the WSIS vision, and reaffirms that rights offline must be protected online as well. However, the current Draft omits to recognise the role played by corporations and intermediaries in facilitating access to and use of the Internet.

21. In our previous submission, CIS had noted that “the Internet is led largely by the private sector in the development and distribution of devices, protocols and content-platforms, corporations play a major role in facilitating – and sometimes, in restricting – human rights online”.

22. We reiterate our suggestion for the inclusion of paragraph 43A to the current Draft:

"43A. We recognize the critical role played by corporations and the private sector in facilitating human rights online. We affirm, in this regard, the responsibilities of the private sector set out in the Report of the Special Representative of the Secretary General on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises, A/HRC/17/31 (21 March 2011), and encourage policies and commitments towards respect and remedies for human rights.”

(3) Internet Governance

The support for multilateral governance of the Internet

23. While the section on Internet governance is not considerably altered from the zero draft, there is a large substantive change in the current Draft. The current Draft states that the governance of the Internet should be “multilateral, transparent and democratic, with full involvement of all stakeholders” (¶50). Previously, the zero draft recognized the “the general agreement that the governance of the Internet should be open, inclusive, and transparent”.

24. A return to purely ‘multilateral’ Internet governance would be regressive. Governments are, without doubt, crucial in Internet governance. As scholarship and experience have both shown, governments have played a substantial role in shaping the Internet as it is today: whether this concerns the availability of content, spread of infrastructure, licensing and regulation, etc. However, these were and continue to remain contentious spaces.

25. As such, it is essential to recognize that a plurality of governance models serve the Internet, in which the private sector, civil society, the technical community and academia play important roles. We recommend returning to the language of the zero draft in ¶32: “open, inclusive and transparent governance of the Internet”.

Governance of Critical Internet Resources

26. It is curious that the section on Internet governance in both the zero and the current Draft makes no reference to ICANN, and in particular, to the ongoing transition of IANA stewardship and the discussions surrounding the accountability of ICANN and the IANA operator. The stewardship of critical Internet resources, such as the root, is crucial to the evolution and functioning of the Internet. Today, ICANN and a few other institutions have a monopoly over the management and policy-formulation of several critical Internet resources.

27. While the WSIS in 2003-05 considered this a troubling issue, this focus seems to have shifted entirely. Open, inclusive, transparent and global Internet are misnomer-principles when ICANN – and in effect, the United States – continues to have monopoly over critical Internet resources. The allocation and administration of these resources should be decentralized and distributed, and should not be within the disproportionate control of any one jurisdiction.

28. Therefore, we reiterate our suggestion to add paragraph 53A after Para 53:

"53A. We affirm that the allocation, administration and policy involving critical Internet resources must be inclusive and decentralized, and call upon all stakeholders and in particular, states and organizations responsible for essential tasks associated with the Internet, to take immediate measures to create an environment that facilitates this development.”

Inclusiveness and Diversity in Internet Governance

29. The current Draft, in ¶52, recognizes that there is a need to “promote greater participation and engagement in Internet governance of all stakeholders…”, and calls for “stable, transparent and voluntary funding mechanisms to this end.” This is most commendable.

30. The issue of inclusiveness and diversity in Internet governance is crucial: today, Internet governance organisations and platforms suffer from a lack of inclusiveness and diversity, extending across representation, participation and operations of these organisations. As CIS submitted previously, the mention of inclusiveness and diversity becomes tokenism or formal (but not operational) principle in many cases.

31. As we submitted before, the developing world is pitifully represented in standards organisations and in ICANN, and policy discussions in organisations like ISOC occur largely in cities like Geneva and New York. For ex., 307 out of 672 registries listed in ICANN’s registry directory are based in the United States, while 624 of the 1010 ICANN-accredited registrars are US-based.

32. Not only this, but 80% of the responses received by ICANN during the ICG’s call for proposals were male. A truly global and open, inclusive and transparent governance of the Internet must not be so skewed. Representation must include not only those from developing countries, but must also extend across gender and communities.

33. We propose, therefore, the addition of a paragraph 51A after Para 51:

"51A. We draw attention to the challenges surrounding diversity and inclusiveness in organisations involved in Internet governance, including in their representation, participation and operations. We note with concern that the representation of developing countries, of women, persons with disabilities and other vulnerable groups, is far from equitable and adequate. We call upon organisations involved in Internet governance to take immediate measures to ensure diversity and inclusiveness in a substantive manner.”

Prepared by Geetha Hariharan, with inputs from Sunil Abraham and Japreet Grewal. All comments submitted towards the Draft Outcome Document may be found at this link.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/comments-on-the-draft-outcome-document-of-the-un-general-assembly2019s-overall-review-of-the-implementation-of-wsis-outcomes-wsis-10

Comments on Guidelines for Indian Government Websites

nirmita — 2017-11-26T07:08:25Z

The Ministry of Electronics & Information Technology, Government of India has published the Guidelines for Indian Government Websites (GIGW). Nirmita Narasimhan on behalf of the Centre for Internet & Society gave comments on GIGW.

See the response to suggestions and comments sent on GIGW by committee members here
See the Guidelines for Indian Government Websites here

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/accessibility/blog/comments-on-guidelines-for-indian-government-websites

Comments on Department of Empowerment of Persons with Disabilities 'Vision Document 2030'

nirmita — 2017-02-28T15:58:55Z

The Centre for Internet & Society (CIS) submitted comments for the consideration of the Department of Empowerment of Persons with Disabilities (DEPD) on the Vision Document 2030 brought out earlier this month.

We appreciate the efforts by the Department of Empowerment of Persons with Disabilities (DEPD) to put together a vision and strategy document to inform and direct the implementation of the new Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 (RPWD), and give effect to the rights of persons with disabilities as enshrined in various international treaties.

Overall, we recommend that the vision articulate more clearly in terms of quantifiable targets what it seeks to achieve at different points of time and that these targets, while taking into account the realistic situation in our country, are not so minimally set as to undermine the aims of the Act and the national commitments outlined therein.

We submit that it be kept in mind that this is not the first time that a national conversation has taken place around accessibility and standards, and that many previous attempts such as the Guidelines on Indian Government Websites (GIGW) have been in existence for nearly 8 years.

Therefore, we submit that the steps taken towards implementing this act should be more ambitious, and should seek to resolve the issue within the next 2-3 years. Accordingly please find our brief comments below:

Background

Section 2(i) is as follows: Vision: ‘To build an inclusive society in which equal opportunities are provided for the growth and development of Persons with Disabilities so that they can lead productive, safe and dignified lives.’ We propose the addition of the word ‘integration/inclusion/assimilation’ as in the phrase ‘growth, integration and development’, since that implies social acceptance, which is crucial. We also propose the addition of one more sentence as follows: ‘To enable access to technology and technology enabled resources for every person with a disability to facilitate effective communication and integration in society, as well as to ensure that accessibility considerations and standards are included across the board in all government programmes and initiatives.’
We propose in 3(a) - the inclusion of the word technologies in the phrase ‘providing appropriate aids and appliances.’ This is important since aids and appliances are not always technology-based and often times a new technology may be suitable, efficient and contemporary to address a specific need.
We propose in 3(b) - the inclusion of the word accessibility in the phrase ‘developing rehabilitation professionals/personnel.’

Long Term Vision by 2030

Inclusion of curriculum related to e-accessibility such as knowledge of the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) and universal design principles in all institutes and institutions teaching courses in engineering, computer science, IT etc.
Inclusion of disability-related issues in the curriculum of university courses in other fields as well, such as law, sociology, economics, and architecture.
Creation of a mechanism to gather more comprehensive and accurate data on persons with disabilities, such as their levels of access to technologies, information and basic resources and amenities.
Provision of training to use computers for students and children with disabilities in rural areas and provide training to students receiving aids and appliances as part of schemes. In addition, the Government should also focus on providing appropriate training and access to appropriate content in order to make full use of these technologies.

Seven Years' Strategy

The point about making documents, buildings, websites, documents etc. accessible under the Accessible India campaign [1] is appreciated; however, it should be accompanied with a mechanism for transparency and accountability. This should include periodic reports giving updates on the details of websites, documents, etc. taken up for retrofitting. At the moment, this information is not available on any of the public domain web sites such as the Accessible India campaign URLs, and repeated RTIs have failed to make this information available. Hence, there is no clarity on what the exact number of URLs and documents which have been made accessible so far is. Without accountability built into this procedure moving forward, there is very little to ensure that it happens.

Three Years Strategy

Review of legislations for persons with disabilities : we propose that a time line be set for this, say within 6 months and a list of existing and new policy/ legislation requiring interventions/ formulation be drawn up for action. Priority tasks could be to take up accessible procurement, accessibility of mobile applications, web sites and electronic documents.
One of the foremost tasks should be to identify and notify appropriate standards for different domains of accessibility such as procurement, electronic documents, television and so on, as well as reaffirm/ update any existing standards already recognized by the Government so that the process of retrofitting existing resources, as well as building new accessible ones commences at the earliest.
It is recommended that the Government of India put together an advisory committee of subject matter experts from NGOs and other civil society bodies who can advise on initiatives to be taken for environmental and information accessibility.
Regarding the plan for making 50% of all government web sites and documents accessible[2] , this target needs to be revised. The Accessible India campaign, which lists the same target in its strategy document,[3] has already been underway for the past one and a half years, and we hope that this target would have already been achieved under those efforts. Hence, if the Government sets a target of 50% over the next three years, this implies either that work has not been taking place thus far, or that very little will be done over that period of time. Furthermore, the RPWD Act requires all service providers to make their services accessible within 2 years of notification of regulation by the Central Government[4], hence the time stipulated under the Act is much lesser than the vision is providing for and should be amended to making all web sites and documents accessible within 2 years. It may further be noted that the GIGW had been notified since 2009 and despite being in place for eight years, there is currently no official information on how many websites been made fully compliant with these standards. Therefore, we submit that a strict approach with regard to any deadlines and regulatory measures are necessary.
It is respectfully submitted that the number of 500 language interpreters[5] is simply not enough. This would work out to approximately 15 interpreters per state in 3 years, a number that we consider far too low for the time allotted. We submit instead that it is urgent that an attempt be made to train at least 30 people per state/UT per year, which would work out to 90 interpreters per state/UT over the 3-year period.
It is crucial the DEPD try to work with the Digital India campaign and the Smart Cities Mission to ensure that upcoming smart cities are born accessible. To this end, there needs to be specific measures to ensure that accessibility standards are part of the Terms of Reference and contracts for smart cities and that there is sufficient guidance and accountability for this.

[1]. Section C.6

[2]. Section D.6

[3]. http://www.disabilityaffairs.gov.in/upload/uploadfiles/files/Accessible%20India%20Campaign_Brochure.pdf

[4]. Chapter VIII, Section 46

[5]. Section D.7

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/accessibility/blog/comments-on-depds-vision-document-2030

Comments and Feedback on the Draft Twelfth Five Year Plan with respect to Persons with Disabilities

Rahul Cherian — 2012-12-28T15:33:02Z

The Centre for Internet & Society was one of the ten organizations representing people with disabilities that sent comments and feedback on the draft twelfth five year plan.

We write to you on behalf of the organizations representing people with disabilities listed at the end of this document. At the outset, we would like to thank you for circulating the Draft Twelfth Five Year Plan with respect to persons with disabilities in advance in order to gain the feedback and the perspective of all interested parties and stakeholders, including persons with disabilities. However, we would like to bring to your attention that while the entire budgetary allocation has been given to us in this draft, the specifics of the allocation i.e. the detailed break up has not been given, and so any input that we may have may be insufficient in the absence of this information.

The World Health Organization estimates that globally about 1 billion people (or 14% of the population) live with some form of disability of who nearly 200 million experience considerable difficulties in functioning.[1] Given the large prevalence of disability of approximately 14% of the population, it is submitted that the statistics of the 2001 census which states that only 2.11 % of the population is disabled is wholly inaccurate. If the financial outlay is based on the flawed assumption that only 2.11% of the population is disabled, we fear that the financial outlay will be substantially less than is necessary to meet the actual needs of people with disabilities. Therefore we recommend that the Twelfth V Year Plan should be based on realistic numbers of the persons with disabilities in the country. It is recommended that at least 5% of the total outlay for the Twelfth Plan should be for disability related projects. It is also recommended that a reality check is done on the benefits available to persons with disabilities such as pensions. Unless this is done, the benefits available to persons with disabilities is wholly inadequate.

We would like to point out that the document you had circulated does not give the status of the implementation of the various schemes that were proposed under the Eleventh V Year. Without the status of implementation of schemes proposed earlier, we are concerned that merely reiterating the same schemes for the upcoming Plan period may lead to suboptimal usage of the allocated funds particularly with respect to those schemes that have not been implemented to the maximum extent possible. We therefore request you to include the status of implementation of the various schemes that were proposed in the earlier Plan period to enable transparency in this exercise.

Before we give specific input and comments on the financial outlay, we would like to point out our grievance in the wording of Sec. 24.218[2] of the draft which states that persons with disabilities have "un-evolved capacities" and we strongly believe that this approach that persons with disabilities will completely obscure the optimistic approaches sought to be achieved by this Plan. While it is appreciated that persons with disabilities need some protection, using terminology like "unevolved capacity" is just reaffirming a protectionist attitude as well as patronizing one. We hope that this terminology will be removed from the document. We also point out that in point number 24.227 the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities is wrongly mentioned as "United Nations Conference on Rehabilitation of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD)". This error must be rectified.

Be that as it may, the undersigned would like to place on record our appreciation for the inclusion of many aspects into the above mentioned document. We would also like to bring your attention to several aspects given below which we believe should be covered in the Twelfth V Year Plan (hereinafter referred to as "the Plan").

Specific Input

I. Detection of Disability
Early detection of disabilities in babies and children is critical to determine what types of early intervention and rehabilitation is required to be provided. The Plan must provide financial outlay for the following with respect to detection of disabilities for further action:

At birth screening - Every baby born should be examined in detail using a standard examination checklist, to detect anomalies. The checklist should focus on detecting anomalies so that further follow up on developmental delay could be identified for at risk cases which could further lead to interventions. At birth screening must be made mandatory and the mother and child should not be discharged from hospitals without completing this procedure. Special attention must be taken to screen high risk babies (such as babies born to mothers who have diabetes, high blood pressure, thyroid deficiency, pre-term babies, babies with history of perinatal hypoxia, neonatal infections, low birth weight babies, etc.). The screening should be done free of cost and appropriate allocation should be done for the training of medical professionals and soliciting of equipment for this purpose.
Additional Screening In addition, screening by health workers, medical officers and doctors are required at stages like vaccinations, routine check ups, etc. The Plan must include allocation for training programs to be formulated and appropriate training must be given to all health care workers on how to diagnose disabilities and how to determine developmental milestones. Allocation of funds must be made to train doctors at maternity clinics/hospitals on conducting adequate checks/tests for early detection of developmental delays and disabilities If any disability is suspected, the child must be referred to the medical officer. There must be recognition of the fact that failure to detect disabilities at the early stage may lead to secondary disabilities.
Universal screening camps - The Plan itself must provide financial outlay to enable each state to organize bi annual universal screening camps for all school going children in the state to detect disabilities. The screening must be conducted for all disabilities. These camps must include the necessary manpower /specialists (including audiologist /speech therapist, clinical child psychologist, physiotherapist, etc.) and equipment required to detect all types of disabilities in babies. Appropriate budgetary allocations need to be in place. Universal screening camps must be held in conjunction with setting up of early intervention centres failing which the children identified to have disabilities will tend to face social stigma.
Registration of Births of Children with Disabilities: In accordance with the Persons with Disabilities Act, the Registrar General appointed under section 3 of the Births and Deaths Registration Act, 1969 shall whilst carrying out the superintendence duties of registering births and deaths in the country ensure, including by issuing general directions to all Chief Registrars and other concerned officials, that the registration of births and deaths of all children with disabilities is undertaken in accordance with the procedure specified in the Births and Deaths Registration Act of 1969.

II. Early Intervention
Early intervention has been touched upon in the policy document. However, there is not enough emphasis on this area. The importance of early intervention is well established. Early intervention provides support for infants and young children with disabilities, their families and communities, in order to promote the child's development and inclusion. Without early intervention it is extremely difficult for children with disabilities to be integrated into mainstream society. Delay in diagnosis and treatment results in irreversible damage to the child's development. Early intervention could be in the form of medical intervention and/or variety of disability specific rehabilitation intervention like different therapies and specialized training (specialized training or therapy). Early intervention would also include:

Counseling and training of parents of children with disability.
Early stimulation for High risk babies
Early Intervention for Developmental Delay, Speech & Hearing Problems, Visual Problems, Autism Intervention etc.
Parental guidance for supporting activities of daily living.

It is critical that early intervention centres are set up in each district in the country. The State of Kerala has created a blue print for setting up early intervention centres in each district in the State. This document is attached separately for your information. The Plan should incorporate salient features from this document. Point 24.226 must be modified accordingly.

III. Education
While the Plan places emphasis on education in point 24.222 a most critical aspect has been left out. Training of teachers to impart education to children with disabilities in an inclusive school setup is extremely critical if such children are to get a meaningful education. In this connection the Plan should provide financial outlay for ensuring that both mainstream teachers and teachers in special schools are provided the necessary training for imparting education to children with disabilities. The salary of all such teachers should be on par with regular teachers. The Plan should also provide for refresher training to be imparted to teachers in this connection. In addition to the above, the Plan should provide adequate financial outlay to ensure that all educational materials are provided to children with disabilities in the accessible formats they require including in Braille, Daisy, etc. It is also critical to ensure that schools are made accessible such that children with disabilities have equal access to 4 all parts of the school. Moreover, it is imperative that adequate accessible transportation is provided to enable children with disabilities to reach the school. In this connection, point 24.245 is adequately modified. The Plan should also ensure that children with disabilities have access to schools at every taluk.

In point 24.222 there is a mention of setting up a national accessible library. This is an extremely encouraging move. However, the national accessible library is not mentioned in the responsibilities of any of the Ministry. We recommend that the national accessible library is included in the responsibilities of the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment. The Plan makes no mention of the HEPSN scheme and capacity building in colleges and universities. This should be addressed explicitly. In addition, the Plan makes no mention of the role of the UGC. Given the fact that the UGC is responsible for higher education in India, it needs to promote inclusive higher education through adequate capacity building through incentivizing the setting up of resource centers and accessible content creation. It could also interface with organizations like the National Assessment Accreditation Council (NAAC) that is responsible for accrediting colleges and universities to ensure that the provision of certain minimum standards / disabled student registration be made compulsory to receive accreditation and consequent larger share of UGC grants. Financial support for college / university professors (human / technological) needs to be specifically mentioned and augmented over the Xlth plan outlays. Several existing plans including the ADIP Scheme and the IEDC Scheme need to be brought in line with practical realities and the amounts payable under such Scheme should be significantly enhanced.

IV. Employment
Point 24.221 rightly highlights reservation as being critical. However, the Plan does not tackle the issue of the huge backlog in this area that has crept in over the year. The Plan must deal with this issue on a priority basis. The Plan should also provide for bridge training to be provided to persons with disabilities to enable them to be equipped to perform their respective roles after they are recruited to mainstream jobs. In this connection it is critical that all government offices must be made accessible (both in terms of physical accessibility and also in terms of accessibility of the electronic infrastructure) failing which disabled employees will not be able work from these offices. Point 24.225 should be therefore adequately modified to reflect this. The Plan should provide for setting up of career guidance cells in every district for persons with disabilities. The Plan should provide financial outlay to ensure that they necessary assistive aids such as computer screen reading software is made available at government offices free of cost for employees with visual impairment. Lastly the Plan should also provide financial outlay to ensure that accessible transport is provided to persons with disabilities to travel to and from the work place. In the alternative the Plan should provide for additional payments to be made to ensure that persons with disabilities can make their own arrangements to take the mode of transport they are most comfortable in to come and go from their workplace.

V. Accessibility
Access to the physical environment as well as to information, technology and communication is an essential requirement for integration of persons with disability into mainstream society. It is critical to recognize that the lack of provision of accessibility is the same as discrimination against persons with disabilities. The provision of accessibility both by the Government and by the private sector is therefore critical and the Plan must make an effective strategy to ensure that both these stakeholders provide the necessary accessibility to persons with disabilities.

While accessibility is tackled in a general manner in point 24.225, this has not been adequately tackled in the responsibilities of the Ministries in the subsequent pages of the document. The responsibilities of each of the Ministries with respect to accessibility must be explicitly specified in the document. While the Ministry of Communication and Information Technology has been allotted some responsibilities, this does not cover access to content, access to telecommunication services or access to broadcasting. For further information on access to content, telecommunication services and broadcasting see Annexure A. In addition, point 24.225 mentions that only important government buildings must be made accessible. This approach is fraught with danger and the Plan must provide for all government buildings and buildings accessible to the public in general must be made accessible. The Government must also formulate a set of standards for accessibility.

We would also like to point out that the recommendation under the obligations of the Ministry of Railways to provide one coach for persons with disabilities is blatant discrimination and is "ghettoisation" of persons with disabilities. It is submitted that this is the same as asking any other minority community to use only a particular coach on the train and is in violation of Article 14, Article 15 and Article 21 of the Constitution. This provision will prevent persons with disabilities from having equal access to the air conditioned coaches, first class coaches and will also prevent persons with disabilities from travel on an equal basis with others. The Ministry of Railways should instead be mandated to ensure that every coach is made accessible for persons with disabilities. In addition, the Plan requires the Ministry of Railways only to make multilevel and multiple platform railways stations to be made accessible. This is blatantly discriminatory to rural India. We therefore recommend that all railway stations are made accessible, including toilets, rest rooms etc.

VI. Independent Living
In point 24.226, the Plan does touch upon the subject of Independent Living. However, there needs to be detailed specifications on the manner in which Independent Living for persons with disabilities are provided. The setting up of Independent Living Centres is extremely crucial in light of Article 19 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. While this is not something which can be achieved overnight, the Government can begin by commissioning the setting up of one independent living centres or townships in each State over the next 5 years, which are fully accessible, and thus creating a model which can be replicated easily in the years to come. This would include independent living for persons with physical disability as well as psychosocial disabilities.

It has come to our attention that there has been a report filed by a committee under the Chairmanship of Additional Secretary, Department of Rural Development, Ministry of Rural Development, to make recommendations on the criteria for grant of benefits under the Indira Gandhi National Disability Pension Scheme. While the Scheme already includes "severe" and "multiple" disabilities, the Committee has also recommended the specific inclusion of autism and cerebral palsy. While the committee report itself is not available, this information is available in the press note . Choosing specific categories should not be encouraged whereas disability should be acknowledged based on the definition for persons with disabilities as provided by UNCRPD.

A crucial aspect to a real development of an individual with disability is not just pension but the support and assistance that he or she requires to live independently by effectively functioning and contributing in the family and community. In this respect, there is a huge requirement for personal assistants for persons with severe and profound disabilities. The National Social Assistance program should look at allocating funds to be disbursed for the payment of personal assistants for persons with disabilities rather than mere pension.

VII. Identity Cards and BPL Cards
We urge that the Plan takes all steps to ensure that identity cards are made available to all persons with disabilities in the country to ensure that they can easily access all the benefits available to them. These cards should be recognized throughout the country and accepted by all departments and authorities. We also urge that the Plan redoubles it efforts to ensure that BPL Cards are given to the applicable persons with disabilities.

Conclusion

In conclusion, we appreciate the initiative of the Government to double the financial outlay for persons with disabilities in the Twelfth V Year Plan to Rs. 32684 crores. However, there are significant areas that must be tackled as mentioned above if there has to be meaningful progress of persons with disabilities. We humbly request the Government to consider the points given above when finalizing the Plan.

We are happy to provide you any additional information in this connection.

Thank you and best regards,
Prepared by

Inclusive Planet Centre for Disability Law and Policy
Rahul Cherian and Amba Salelkar

With Input From:

Centre for Internet and Society
Nirmita Narasimhan
nirmita@cis-india.org
Xavier's Resource Center for the Visually Challenged
Sam Taraporevala
sam@xrcvc.org
Daisy Forum of India
Dipendra Manocha
dipendra.manocha@gmail.com
Andhjan Kalyan Trust
Praful Vyas
aktrust.drj@gmail.com
Parivaar
J.P. Gadkari
jpgadkari@gmail.com
Ummeed Child Development Centre
vibha.krishnamurthy@ummeed.org
National Centre for Autism, India
Merry Barua
actionforautism@gmail.com
Network of Persons with disAbility Organisations
Srinivasulu
npdoap@gmail.com
Disabilities Legislative Unit, South
dlu.south@gmail.com
National Platform for the Rights of the Disabled
A. Muralidharan
nprd.in@gmail.com

[1]. http://whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/2011/9789240685215jeng.pdf
[2]. Protection acknowledging that Persons with Disabilities have 'un-evolved' capacities as a consequence of their disabilities and thereby have rights to protection; on the part of parents, community and the State from abuse and from participation in activities likely to cause them harm.

ANNEXURE A - Access to Content, Telecommunication Services and Broadcasting

Access to Content

Objective
All published content, whether printed or electronic, must be made available in accessible formats at the same time as it is first published and with no extra cost or hardship to persons with disabilities.

Strategy/ activities

Books for education- both at the school and university levels, must be made available in accessible electronic formats. This could be a target to be achieved in five years. CBSE and state board syllabi in all languages may be made available in accessible electronic formats.
Funds may be outlayed towards digitizing public libraries.
Government may frame schemes for funding disability organizations which are engaged in converting books into accessible formats, as is done in other countries like USA.
All the public libraries should have the facility to provide books in accessible formats to its disabled readership.
Government may promote open access and open education resources amongst educational, scientific and research organizations and libraries and stress the need for accessibility.
All government information must be available in accessible formats which can be accessed on multiple platforms like computers or mobile phones, including information provided through RTIs, etc.
All archives containing digital copies of books must be able to provide a requested book in an accessible format, even where they have been unable to completely digitize their archives in an accessible manner. However, the long term target must be to have all archives completely accessible.

Access to Telecommunication Services

Objective:
To ensure that every person with a disability has access to basic telephone and broadband services both in rural as well as urban areas.

Strategy/ Activities:

Public Kiosks and Common Service Centres set up by the Government must have at least one machine which is fitted with assistive technology for every ward.
Each school and college with an ICT centre must have at least one computer befitted with assistive technology and should be manned by a trained instructor who can guide students in using them.
Research and development must be funded in open source and cloud based solutions like screen readers and operating systems which will facilitate universal access at no cost to user. These research projects must necessarily have persons with disabilities to advise on the efficacy and design of the product.
Assistive technologies for computers and mobile phones must be developed in local languages and be made available at low cost.
Schemes may be launched to provide funds to persons with disabilities to purchase assistive technologies for their computers or handsets.
Each household with a person with disability must have a broadband connection and telephone connection.
At least 1 public pay phone in each area must be accessible with texting facility.
A national toll free emergency number must be set up like Reach 112 in Europe.
TRAI must include persons with disabilities in its periodic survey to gauge their access to telecommunication services. Similarly the DoT and DIT must make available data on ICT access for persons with disabilities.
A Code of Good practice should be evolved for servicing disabled customers which contains both minimum as well as best practices to be adhered to by service providers.

Service providers/ operators:

Should make their services accessible for persons with disabilities. Information about their accessible services must be available on their web site, which should also adhere to WCAG standards.
Should collect data on the number of their disabled customers and frame at least 1 or 2 schemes for persons with different disabilities and provide basic accommodations like accessible billing and accessible customer care. They could have a public relations officer to service the complaints of disabled customers.

The charter of the Universal Service Obligation Fund must be expanded to include 'persons with disabilities' as an underserved community and all ongoing projects must be made inclusive.
The DoT must make special mention of persons with disabilities in the Telecom Policy and also formulate specific policies to connect them with accessible telecom services.

Access to Broadcasting

Objective
To provide broadcasting access to persons with various disabilities.

Strategy/ Activities:

It must be made mandatory for all television programming to be recorded with clearly legible and appropriate audio descriptions and closed captioning.
All films must have clearly legible and appropriate closed captioning and audio description, and sign language tracks recorded and this must be made a prerequisite for obtaining a censor certificate.
All new theatres must have facilities for patrons to access closed captioning/audio descriptions/sign language, without which they should not be granted licenses. Existing theatres should be granted a period of 1 year within which such facilities should be obtained. These facilities should be available at no extra charge beyond that of the ticket to patrons.
In the ongoing compulsory digitalization of cable television in India, all set top boxes being procured must be made accessible to persons with vision/cognitive disabilities. Optional voice navigation must be made mandatory for all set top boxes being sold/imported into India.
All new television receivers/set top boxes must have built-in decoder circuitry or capability designed to display closed captioned video programming, the transmission and delivery of video description services, and the conveyance of emergency information. Existing patrons should be allowed to exchange their television receivers/set top boxes for accessible ones.
All new television sets sold or imported in India must be equipped with built-in closed caption decoder circuitry or capability designed to display closed-captioned video programming/ audio descriptions, and have the capability to decode and make available the transmission and delivery of video/audio description services, and have the capability to decode and make available emergency information in a manner that is accessible to individuals who are disabled.

Inclusive Planet Centre for Disability Law and Policy
12/21 Custain Beach Road, Santhome,
Chennai - 600 004.
Tel: +91-44-24611313
Fax: +91-44-24617924
www.inclusiveplanet.org.in

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/accessibility/blog/feedback-on-draft-twelfth-five-year-plan

CIS-TWN Analysis of WIPO Treaty for the Print Disabled (SCCR/22/15)

pranesh — 2011-10-12T08:29:01Z

CIS and the Third World Network (TWN) conducted a quick analysis of the "Consensus document on an international instrument on limitations and exceptions for persons with print disabilities presented by Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Chile, Ecuador, Mexico, Paraguay, and the United States of America" presented as WIPO document numbered SCCR/22/15.

SCCR/22/15

ORIGINAL: English

DATE: June 20, 2011

Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights

Twenty-Second Session Geneva, June 15 to 24, 2011

Consensus document on an international instrument on limitations and exceptions for persons with print disabilities presented by Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Chile, Ecuador, Mexico, Paraguay, and the United States of America

PREAMBLE

Recalling the principles of non-discrimination, equal opportunity and access, proclaimed in the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities,

Mindful of the obstacles that are prejudicial to human development and the fulfillment of disabled persons with regard to education, research, access to information and communication,

Emphasizing the importance of copyright protection as an incentive for literary and artistic creation and enhancing opportunities for everyone to participate in the cultural life of the community, to enjoy the arts and to share in scientific advancement and its benefits,

Recognizing the importance of both accessibility to the achievement of equal opportunities in all spheres of society and of the protection of the rights of authors in their literary and artistic works in a manner as effective and uniform as possible,

Aware of the many barriers to access to information and communication experienced by persons who are blind or have limited vision, or have other disabilities regarding access to published works,

Aware that the majority of visually impaired persons/persons with a print disability live in countries of low or moderate incomes,

Desiring to provide full and equal access to information, culture and communication for the visually impaired persons/persons with a print disability and, towards that end, considering the need both to expand the number of works in accessible formats and to improve access to those works,

Recognizing the opportunities and challenges for the visually impaired/persons with a print disability presented by the development of new information and communication technologies, including technological publishing and communication platforms that are transnational in nature,

Recognizing the need to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers,

Aware that national copyright legislation is territorial in nature, and where activity is undertaken across jurisdictions, uncertainty regarding the legality of activity undermines the development and use of new technologies and services that can potentially improve the lives of the visually impaired/persons with print disabilities,

Recognizing the large number of Members who, to that end, have established exceptions and limitations in their national copyright laws for visually impaired persons/persons with a print disability, yet the continuing shortage of works in ~~special~~accessible formats for such persons,

Recognizing that the preference is for works to be made accessible by rightholders to people with disabilities at publication and that, to the extent that the market is unable to provide appropriate access to works for visually impaired persons/persons with a print disability, it is recognized that alternative measures are needed to improve such access,

Recognizing the need to maintain a balance between the rights of authors and the larger public interest, particularly education, research and access to information, and that such a balance must facilitate effective and timely access to works for the benefit of visually impaired persons/persons with a print disability,

Emphasizing the importance and flexibility of the three-step test for limitations and exceptions established in Article 9(2) of the Berne Convention and other international instruments,

Considering the discussions within the WIPO Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights on the issue of exceptions and limitations for the benefit of visually impaired persons/persons with a print disability and the various proposals tabled by Member States,

Prompted by a desire to contribute to the implementation of the relevant recommendations of the Development Agenda of the World Intellectual Property Organization,

Taking into account the importance of an international legal instrument/joint recommendation/treaty both to increase the number and range of accessible format works available to visually impaired persons/persons with a print disability in the world and to provide the necessary minimum flexibilities in copyright laws that are needed to ensure full and equal access to information and communication for persons who are visually impaired/have a print disability in order to support their full and effective participation in society on an equal basis with others and to ensure the opportunity to develop and utilize their creative, artistic and intellectual potential, for their own benefit and for the enrichment of society,

Have agreed as follows:

ARTICLE A

DEFINITIONS

For purposes of these provisions

"work" means a work in which copyright subsists, whether published or otherwise made publicly available in any media.

"accessible format copy" means a copy of a work in an alternative manner or form which gives a beneficiary person access to the work, including to permit the person to have access as feasibly and comfortably as a person without a print disability. The accessible format copy must respect the integrity of the original work and be used exclusively by beneficiary persons~~persons with print disabilities~~.¹

[Possible enumeration of different formats.]²

"authorized entity" means a governmental agency, a non-profit entity or an~~non-profit~~ organization³ that has as one of its ~~primary missions~~activities to assist persons with print disabilities by providing them with services relating to education, training, adaptive reading, or information access.

An authorized entity maintains policies and procedures to establish the bona fide nature of persons with print disabilities that they serve.

An authorized entity has the trust of both persons with print disabilities and copyright rights holders. It is understood that to obtain the trust of rightholders and beneficiary persons, it is not necessary to require the prior permission of said rightholders or beneficiary persons.⁴

~~If an authorized entity is a nation-wide network of organizations, then all organizations, institutions, and entities that participate in the network must adhere to these characteristics.~~

"reasonable price for developed countries" means that the accessible format copy of the work is available at a similar or lower price than the price of the work available to persons without print disabilities in that market.

"reasonable price for developing countries" means that the accessible format copy of the work is available at prices that are affordable in that market, taking into account the humanitarian needs of persons with print disabilities.

References to 'copyright' include copyright and any relevant rights related to copyright that are provided by a Contracting Party in compliance with ~~the Rome Convention, the TRIPS Agreement, the WPPT or otherwise~~any applicable international treaties or otherwise.⁵

ARTICLE B

BENEFICIARY PERSONS

A beneficiary person is a person who

is blind;
has a visual impairment or a perceptual or reading disability, such as dyslexia, which cannot be improved by the use of corrective lenses to give visual function substantially equivalent to that of a person who has no such impairment or disability and so is unable to read printed works to substantially the same degree as a person without an impairment or disability; or
is unable, through physical disability, to hold or manipulate a book or to focus or move the eyes to the extent that would be normally acceptable for reading.

ARTICLE C

NATIONAL LAW EXCEPTIONS ON ACCESSIBLE FORMAT COPIES

Member State/Contracting Party should/shall provide in their national copyright law for an exception or limitation to the right of reproduction, the right of distribution and the right of making available to the public, as defined in article 8 of the WCT, for beneficiary persons as defined herein.
A Member State/Contracting Party may fulfill Article C (1) by providing an exception or limitation in its national copyright law such that
1. Authorized entities shall be permitted without the authorization of the owner of copyright to make an accessible format copy of a work, supply that accessible format copy or an accessible format copy obtained from another authorized entity to a beneficiary person by any means, including by non-commercial lending or by electronic communication by wire or wireless means, and undertake any intermediate steps to achieve these objectives, when all of the following conditions are met:
  1. the authorized entity wishing to undertake said activity has lawful access to that work or a copy of that work;
  2. the work is converted to an accessible format copy, which may include any means needed to navigate information in the accessible format, but does not introduce changes other than those needed to make the work accessible to the beneficiary person;
  3. copies of the work in the accessible format are supplied exclusively to be used by beneficiary persons; and
  4. ~~4. the activity is undertaken on a non-profit basis.~~ ⁶
  5. A beneficiary person or someone acting on his or her behalf may make an accessible format copy of a work for the personal use of the beneficiary person where the beneficiary person has lawful access to that work or a copy of that work.
2. A Member State/Contracting Party may fulfill Article C (1) by providing any other exception or limitation in its national copyright law that is limited 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 right holder.
3. The Member State/Contracting Party may limit said exceptions or limitations to published works which, in the applicable ~~special~~accessible format, cannot be otherwise obtained within a reasonable time and at a reasonable price.
4. It shall be a matter for national law to determine whether exceptions or limitations referred to in this Article are subject to remuneration.
ARTICLE D

CROSS-BORDER EXCHANGE OF ACCESSIBLE FORMAT COPIES
1. Member States/Contracting Parties should/shall provide that if an accessible format copy of a work is made under an exception or limitation or export license in their national law, that accessible format copy may be distributed or made available to a beneficiary person in another Member State/Contracting Party by an authorized entity ~~where that other Member State/Contracting Party would permit that beneficiary person to make or import that accessible copy~~.⁷
2. A Member State/Contracting Party may fulfill Article D(1) by providing an exception or limitation in its national copyright law such that:
  1. Authorized entities shall be permitted without the authorization of the owner of copyright to distribute or make available accessible format copies to authorized entities in other Member States/Contracting Parties for the exclusive use of persons with print disabilities, where such activity is undertaken on a non-profit basis.⁸
  2. Authorized entities shall be permitted without the authorization of the owner of copyright to distribute or make available accessible format copies to persons with print disabilities in other Member States/Contracting Parties where the authorized entity has verified the individual is properly entitled to receive such accessible format copies under that other Member State/Contracting Party's national law.⁹
The Member State/Contracting Party may limit said distribution or making available to published works which, in the applicable ~~special~~accessible format, cannot be otherwise obtained within a reasonable time and at a reasonable price, in the country of importation.
1. Without prejudice to other exceptions to the exclusive rights of authors that are otherwise permitted by the Berne Convention or the TRIPS Agreement, a Member State/Contracting Party may fulfill Article D(1) by providing any other exception or limitation in its national copyright law that is limited 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 right holder.
ARTICLE E

IMPORTATION OF ACCESSIBLE FORMAT COPIES

To the extent that national law would permit a beneficiary person or an authorized entity acting on the beneficiary person’s behalf to make an accessible format copy of a work, the national law should/shall permit a beneficiary person or an authorized entity acting on that person's behalf to import an accessible format copy.¹⁰

ARTICLE F

CIRCUMVENTION OF TECHNOLOGICAL PROTECTION MEASURES

Member States/Contracting Parties should/shall ensure that beneficiaries of the exception provided by Article C have the means to enjoy the exception where technological protection measures have been applied to a work.

In the absence of voluntary measures by rightholders and to the extent that copies of the work in the accessible format are not available commercially at a reasonable price or via authorized entities, Member States/Contracting Parties should/shall take appropriate measures to ensure that beneficiaries of the exception provided by Article C have the means of benefiting from that exception when technical protection measures have been applied to a work, to the extent necessary to benefit from that exception.¹¹

~~ARTICLE G~~

~~RELATIONSHIP WITH CONTRACTS~~

~~Nothing herein shall prevent Member States/Contracting Parties from addressing the relationship of contract law and statutory exceptions and limitations for beneficiary persons.~~

ARTICLE H

RESPECT FOR PRIVACY

In the implementation of these exceptions and limitations, Member States/Contracting Parties should/shall endeavour to protect the privacy of beneficiary persons on an equal basis with others.

[End of document]
1. This change must be replicated everywhere where appropriate. ↩
2. Formats should not be enumerated, since even the disabilities are not enumerated. ↩
3. Non-profit organizations alone cannot cope with the needs of visually impaired people in the developing world. Thus, while it may sound like the ideal, it is impractical given the realities of the situation in the developing world. ↩
4. A "trust" system would make it impossible for developing countries to actualize these provisions. If despite this, copyright infringement happens, then national remedies exist for such infringement. ↩
5. To clarify: what is the purpose of these and not mentioning WCT, Berne, etc.? ↩
6. To be deleted for the same reasons as above. Non-profit basis, if insisted upon, can be retained in Article D(2)(A), but not here. ↩
7. Import law provisions are already there in Article E, and should remain there. In Art. E, it states, “shall permit” import, and here, “would permit”. ↩
8. This instance of "non-profit basis" may be retained if necessary. ↩
9. To clarify: what would such verification require? Would self-certification suffice? ↩
10. It should be clarified, possibly through an agreed statement, that nothing in this article shall derogate from the flexibility provided in Art. 6 of the TRIPS Agreement, which allows for countries to provide international exhaustion.
  
  Thus, if the principle of international exhaustion is in place (i.e., parallel importation is allowed), then importation can be carried out by anyone, and not just by a beneficiary person or an authorized entity. ↩
11. This second paragraph weakens the principle established in the first by adding more conditions. They are almost phrased as alternatives, and the first alternative (paragraph) is the better one. ↩

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/cis-analysis-july2011-treaty-print-disabilities

CIS's Statement at SCCR 24 on the Treaty for the Visually Impaired

pranesh — 2012-07-22T12:01:28Z

This was the statement read out by Pranesh Prakash at the 24th meeting of the WIPO Standing Committee for Copyright and Related Rights in Geneva, on Friday, July 20, 2012.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I would like to associate CIS with the statements made by the WBU, eIFL, IFLA, KEI, ISOC, and CLA.

We NGOs been making statements at SCCR on this the topic of a treaty for the reading-disabled since 2009 now.

In this room there are a number of organizations that work with and for persons with disabilities which come here to Geneva, SCCR after SCCR. They do not come here to watch the enactment of an elaborate ritual, but to seek solutions for the very real knowledge drought that is being faced by the reading-disabled everywhere, and particularly in developing countries.

The way work on this treaty — or rather this binding-or-non-binding international instrument — has been stalled by some member states is a matter of shame. In India our Parliament recently passed an amendment to our copyright law that grants persons with disabilities, and those who are working for them, a strong yet simply-worded right to have equal access to copyrighted works as sighted persons.

An instrument that lays down detailed guidelines on rules and procedures to be followed by authorized entities will not work. An instrument that subjects the enjoyment of fundamental freedoms by persons with visual impairments to market forces and bureaucratic practices will not work.

Importantly, an instrument that ignores realities of the world: that the vast majority of persons with visual impairment live in developing countries just will not work.

I implore the delegations here to keep up the constructive spirit I have seen most of them display in the past two days, and ensure that the 2012 General Assembly convenes a Diplomatic Conference on this topic.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/cis-statement-sccr24-treaty-visually-impaired