Centre for Internet and Society

Darshana Mandrekar speaks on Konkani Wikipedia

nitika — 2013-12-31T10:38:07Z

The Centre for Internet and Society's Access to Knowledge team (CIS-A2K) in collaboration with the Goa University is working to build Konkani Wikipedia. As part of this program it organised the Konkani Vishwakosh Digitization Program recently.

Darshana Mandrekar a participant at the Konkani Vishwakosh Digitization Program speaks about her inspiration to edit Konkani Wikipedia.

Video


Above: Darshana Mandrekar speaks about Konkani Wikipedia

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/openness/blog-old/darshana-mandrekar-on-konkani-wikipedia

Darshan Kandolkar on Konkani Vishwakosh Digitization Process

nitika — 2013-12-31T10:47:46Z

Darshan Kandolkar, talks about his experience with Konkani Vishwakosh Digitization Process and Konkani translation sprint.

Video


Above: Darshan Kandolkar's interview on Konkani Wikipedia

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/openness/blog-old/darshan-kandolkar-konkani-vishwakosh-digitization-process

D:Coding Digital Natives

praskrishna — 2015-05-08T12:30:14Z

Nishant Shah was invited for a public talk at the University of California, Los Angeles. He presented the work done on Digital Natives and spoke about questions of participation and resistance. The talk has been featured in the YouTube channel.

Nishant spoke about the ways by which technology revolution and change has been characterised through the question of voice (how technology has enabled for alternative voices to emerge as ways by which they can be heard), question of amplification (what 10 years ago might have been local phenomena are becoming global spectacles) and the question of power (what really happens when voice and amplification comes to an end).

Nishant said that in the last three years of revolutions we have also now witnessed this extraordinary thing where lot of promises were made of different kinds of revolution but which never materialised in terms of what they intended to. Citizen action happens but it doesn’t lead into anything concrete. One of the examples from India was the Anna Hazare’s campaign or India’s fight against corruption. There was this immense amount of campaign on the corruption in Indian bureaucracy and political society... the only instance of mass mobilisation that we saw in India in recent times apart from the cricket series...and how the campaign in seven short months has totally disappeared from public discourse.

For more, watch the video now:

Date: March 9, 2012
Time: 12 to 1 p.m.
Venue: Library Conference Center Presentation Room, University of California

Follow the video on YouTube

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/d-coding-digital-natives

Creative Commons comes to India

subha — 2013-07-17T06:49:55Z

Creative Commons team visited four Indian cities to spread the word about CC free licenses and CC affiliate program. Wikimedia India chapter was approached to join hands with Creative Commons for research and community building.

Jessica Coates, Global Network Manager and Jane Hornibrook, Regional Coordinator, Asia-Pacific, Creative Commons recently visited India. The Access to Knowledge team from the Centre for Internet and Society got a chance to join them for three of their meetings: one in Pune and two in Bengaluru.

Ceative Commons is a not-for-profit organization and the base for the free licenses. More than 400 million work in the world are in Creative Commons license as of today. The foundation is looking to expand its wing of voluntary affiliates in India who would support for more outreach, community building and research. "We are excited to see the wikipedians in India and their passion to contribute to Wikipedia and other Wikimedia projects. Wikimedia Commons is the largest Creative Commons license use and we are looking for joining hands with the Indian wikipedians and the Wikimedia India chapter", says Jessica Coats.


Jessica Coates and Jane Hornibrook from Creative Commons at Centre of Internet and Society, Bengaluru

Jane Hornibook, who looks after Creative Common's operation in Asia-Pacific said, "Creative Commons has many users in India. It would be exciting for us to collaborate with more academicians, wikipedians and organizations like Wikimedia India Chapter and CIS for peer research and outreach and grow our affiliate network in India.

Video

Note: This blog post is a combination of events organized in Pune by Pune Linux/Unix User Group and Symbiosis Institute of Computer Studies & Research, and CIS and the Wikimedia India Chapter in Bangalore.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/openness/blog-old/creative-commons-comes-to-india

Celebrating the success of Wikipedia in Wikipedia Summit Pune 2013

subha — 2013-04-16T12:48:40Z

Wikipedia Club Pune, a local community based outreach user group in Pune has recently organized Wikipedia Summit Pune 2013 to spread words about “Spoken Wikipedia”, a project to add recorded audio for Indic language Wikipedia articles which will help the disabled to access Wikipedia and “Bridging Editor Gender Gap.”

On January 12 and 13, 2013, I was in Pune to participate in the Wikipedia Summit Pune 2013, a two day event organized by Wikipedia Club Pune to promote Wikipedia as an effective means of education, to empower and reach out to India, to bring the country under a spotlight through Spoken Wikipedia, and to bridge the gender gap of Wikipedia editors. Here is a summary of the activities.

Day 1

On the first day, January 12, more than 100 people including students from almost 10 different schools, housewives, working professionals and free and open source activists participated. The opening ceremony began with talks from Abhishek Suryawanshi, founder member of Wikipedia Club Pune, Sudhanwa Jogelkar, President of Wikimedia India Chapter, Rishi Aacharya, Principal, PAI International Learning Solutions, and social activist Ms. Vibha.

Before the formal opening Abhishek spoke for a while about the Spoken Wikipedia project which is one main agenda of the two days event. He explained about the need of spoken wikipedia, especially for people with disabilities and how effective it would be when it spreads in 20 Indic languages. In the past wikipedians in Pune gathered and recorded articles in various Indian and international languages.

Sudhanwa Jogelkar, President, Wikimedia India Chapter introduced the chapter's role for Wikimedia movement to the audience. He spoke about the chapters' in few of the national events/projects like Wiki Loves Monument, GLAM project in Crafts Museum, Delhi and many other outreach events. There were few announcements about the chapter on the MoU to be signed from the chapter with district collector of Kanyakumari, the India Chapter being partner to Springfest, IIT, Kharagpur, Commons day celebration in February and GNUnify 2013, Pune.

Vibha, a social activist based in Delhi spoke about gender discrimination in many aspects of our social and professional life. Access to knowledge for free could bridge this and Wikipedia, being so known universally and accessed by millions of people every day could be the best platform for this.' says Vibha.

Rishi Aacharya, Principal of PAI International brought the vedic saying "Ya vidya sa vimuktaye" to explain the real meaning of knowledge which is free of its existence in an Indian context. He spoke about open source movement and Wikipedia's part in it.

After the formal opening there was a Q&A session for the participants to clarify various questions they had about Wikipedia. Then they were explained about the three parallel sessions: An Open Discussion about Gender Gap, Workshop for Indic Languages, and Spoken Wikipedia. The session on gender gap was attended by many school students. Vibha and some activists coordinated this event. In the Workshop for Indic languages and Spoken Wikipedia, wikipedians helped participants for the workshop with basic editing and the participants edited Marathi and Hindi Wikipedia. Articles from various medical subjects of common interest were chosen. There were three medical professionals to support with the medical terminologies for editors contributing to Marathi and Hindi Wikipedia.

At the end of the day there were separate wrap up tracks to summarize the learning of whole session. All of the participants gathered together to educate each other about the work they have done. Many of the participants spoke about their experience and learnings. Plans for the next day was announced. Wikipedians gathered for a group photo and socialized after the closing talks.

Day 2

The second day, January 13, of the Wikipedia Summit in Pune was a sequel of the activities which happened on the first day. More than 40 students took part in this session. Vibha, Srishti and team were coordinating the gender gap track. Many topics related to Gender Gap, gender based discrimination, Role of gender gap in occupation, Gender gap in Wikipedia, Participation of Woman editors on Wikipedia were discussed.

One of the participating Wikipedians recording his voice for a Marathi article	Spoken Wikipedia is a project to bring out editors who are willing to contribute to Wikipedia by reading the Wikipedia articles, recording them and the uploading them to WikiCommons. These recorded audio could be used for articles on various Indic Wikipedias and would be really useful for users with disabilities. The first workshop was aimed for contribution for articles related to common diseases. "Those who are blind and unable to read can listen to the articles and get information. This will be beneficial to a lot of people", says Atharva, a school student who has contributed to an article about Rabies on Marathi Wikipedia.

Participants of the Spoken Wikipedia session worked on the articles on Hindi and Marathi Wikipedia and moved them from sandboxes to article namespaces. After all of the articles were created they recorded them. They formed groups of 3-4 members and worked together. One of them would search information mainly from the English Wikipedia articles and some of the available Marathi (or Hindi), some others would translate and the other member would record it using a mobile phone. That was a great team effort.

Over 25 voluntary organizers joined hands for making this a success. There were about 120 participants. At the end of the day participants from both the sessions gathered. Many of the participants and organizers shared their experiences and learnings. The program was concluded with socializing, taking group pictures, promises to stay in touch and taking active part in more Wikipedia activities.

This event was co-hosted by Centre for Internet and Society with a financial support of ₹ 21,600 granted by Kusuma Foundation.

Also see:

Wikipedia Summit Pune: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Summit_Pune
Wikipedia Club Pune: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Club_Pune
Pictures: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikipedia_Summit_Pune
Spoken Wikipedia Project: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Spoken_Wikipedia_-_India
Pune Club facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/groups/WikipediaClubPune

Video

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/openness/blog-old/celebrating-the-success-of-wikipedia-in-wikipedia-summit-pune-2013

Bharat Majhi Writings Now Available Under a Creative Commons License

subha — 2014-11-07T15:34:38Z

Before the advent of Odia Wikisource becoming live, Centre for Internet and Society's Access to Knowledge (CIS-A2K) got in touch with notable Odia author Bharat Majhi for bringing his writings on the Internet.

Dr. Sailen Routray, Director, Kalinga Institute of Social Sciences (KISS) (also an institutional partner of CIS-A2K) played a key role in initiating a dialog with Mr. Majhi. Five of his books are now available under Creative Commons Share Alike 4.0 (CC-by-SA 4.0) license:

Agadhu Duari
Saralarekhaa
Murtikaara
Mahanagara Padya
Highwayre Kuhudi

Bharat Majhi is a known name in Odia literary circle. His writings on societal structures in rural Odisha, the people, their life, aspiration and suffering have been critically acclaimed. These books also become the first Odia modern poetry books to be available under a CC-by-SA license and Mr. Majhi takes another leap of being the first Odia poet to release his literary work under CC-by-SA 4.0 license.

Video

In this video, Odia-language poet Bharat Majhi reciting a poem from his first book Agadhu Duari. He recently released 5 of his books under CC-by-SA 4.0 license by the efforts of Centre for Internet and Society's Access To Knowledge (CIS-A2K) and Kalinga Institute of Social Sciences (KISS).He also tells Subhashish Panigrahi about his dreams of poetry becoming a performing art coming true by it becoming more open. After other Odia author and poet Dr Jagannath Mohanty, Majhi is the first Odia poet to release poem online under CC-by-SA license and his poetry earn the title of the first Odia modern poetry under the same license.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/openness/blog-old/bharat-majhi-writings-now-available-under-cc-license

Beyond Anonymous: Shit people say on Internet piracy

nishant — 2012-06-13T14:01:59Z

This post is a series of provocations around piracy, censorship and the state of Internet in India. Like all good tasting things, these observations need to be taken with a pinch of salt. But it is the hope of the author that this serves as a response to otherwise very persistent voices that have been demonizing file-sharing online.

Firstpost published Nishant Shah's column along with the video that CIS and ALF had made on 'shit people say about piracy' as a lead story on June 7, 2012.

9 June is going to be a big day in India, for all concerned with internet regulation, censorship and the current attacks on file-sharing.

The International Hacker group Anonymous – a group that has become iconic with its members wearing Guy Fawkes mask as they mobilise protest and hacker attacks on what they see as tyrannical regimes – has called for marched protests in 16 Indian cities, to demand a free and open Internet.

They have already started launching Denial of Service attacks and taking down websites owned by the Indian government to express their displeasure about the recent regulation of the internet. Whether or not their guerrilla tactics are efficient and effective, in the right or not, is something that has been discussed quite popularly.

There are hordes of people who think of them as the NewAge Mutant Ninja Hackers, who are protecting our digital worlds from being clamped down. There are others who paint them as the Big Bad Wolf who huffed and puffed and will blow our houses away.

You might be sympathetic, suspicious or scared of the emergence of such a ‘crowd vigilante’, sporting the slogan that has spawned Internet memes galore – Y U No Wake up? – But there is no doubt that the rise of such a collective signals how discourse around piracy, rights, and openness is no longer in the domain of the uber-geek and the academic researcher.

These are concepts with very material realities that affect our everyday functioning and require not only better policies but also a more nuanced public discourse. Today, I look at some of the most ludicrous things that have been said about file-sharing, around the world, wondering why this idea of sharing has evoked such startling responses from different quarters.

File sharing and depression: There has always been a concern about the physical well-being of internet users. From Internet addiction rehabilitation clinics in China to online support groups for internet addicts (I swear I am not making this up!), from doctors worried about posture and eye-sight to mothers concerned about violent video games, we thought we had heard it all.

And then came the extraordinary study that suggested that file sharing might lead to depression. Or rather, if you are an avid file-sharer on the internet, you are prone to attacks of depression. This had the twitter world abuzz, where people were trying to make sense of this ‘scientific’ study that connected spending long hours on the interwebz with mental illness. A trending tweet just about summed up the situation, when it said, “File sharers are depressed only because of what is done to them when they share”.

File sharing and jobs: There was a time when the Music and Film Industry Associations (MAFIA) around the world used to protest file sharing by painting a romanticised picture of the independent starving artists, from whose mouths, we stole morsels, as we shared their work without paying for it. But that argument collapsed in the days of Napster (remember that?) and it has been proven over and over again, that the artist almost always benefits from their work being shared.

However, lately, research from respectable universities (expensively funded by respectable interested parties) have started hitting the real you, rather than the imagined artist. Every torrent being downloaded on the web is correlated with a lost job, because these companies can no longer afford to hire as many people as they used to, because of the growing losses. And then it goes into complicated mumbo-jumbo about how that one torrent that sits merrily on your computer, actually affects all the jobs to kingdom come and will be responsible for your children’s unemployment.

They remain silent about the jobs lost because of the funding that went into buying supporting this research.

I am not a Pirate: And lest you go away with the idea that the rest of the junta does not gaff, here are some of the gems that have come our way while working with people in the field. It is common, for instance, for people to take a moral stance on piracy, radiating a holier-than-thou ethical persona, without realising that recording that last IPL match to watch later on your tablet is also an act of piracy.

Then there are those who only consume material pirated by others, happily ignoring the fact that the ring-tone that they copied from their friend is also an act of piracy. Ditto, people who claim “I am not a pirate”, meaning that they haven’t yet figured out the bittorrent system and hence go to the local corner shop to buy pirated DVDs of the latest releases. In their heads, they have paid somebody for the material and hence it must be alright.

Piracy is not a one-point source process. It is a networked ecosystem, and I am still to find that one person who has never shared anything and make a video of them saying “I am not a pirate”. But that is probably just wishful thinking.

There are many more such instances which make your mind boggle and your eyes goggle and you wonder if you heard it right for the first time. Do share your favourite ones if you can. In the meantime you might also want to look at the new meme video ‘Sh!t People say about Piracy’ that captures some of these responses in their absurdity.

Video

(Video by The Centre for Internet and Society , and the Alternative Law Forum)

Follow the video on YouTube

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/shit-people-say-on-internet-piracy

ଇଣ୍ଟରନେଟରେ ଓଡ଼ିଆ ଏନସାଇକ୍ଲୋପିଡ଼ିଆ "ଉଇକିପିଡ଼ିଆ" ବିକାଶ ପାଇଁ ଏକାଠି ହେଲେ ପୁରୀର ଛାତ୍ରଛାତ୍ରୀ

subha — 2016-06-18T16:21:07Z

ସଂସ୍କୃତିର ସହର ପୁରୀରେ ଛାତ୍ରଛାତ୍ରୀମାନେ ଇଣ୍ଟରନେଟରେ ଓଡ଼ିଆ ଭାଷାକୁ ଅଧିକ ବ୍ୟବହାରଯୋଗ୍ୟ କରିବା ପାଇଁ ତଥା ଓଡ଼ିଆରେ ଅଧିକ ପଠନଯୋଗ୍ୟ ଲେଖାର ବିକାଶ ଲାଗି ଓଡ଼ିଆ ଉଇକିପିଡ଼ିଆରେ ସମ୍ପାଦନା କରିବା ଆରମ୍ଭ କରିଛନ୍ତି । ପୁରୀର ୫ଟି ଭିନ୍ନ ଭିନ୍ନ ଶିକ୍ଷାନୁଷ୍ଠାନର ପାଖାପାଖି ୧୨ ଜଣ ଛାତ୍ରଛାତ୍ରୀ ନିୟମିତ ଭେଟି କର୍ମଶାଳା ମାଧ୍ୟମରେ ବିଭିନ୍ନ ବିଷୟରେ ତଥ୍ୟଭିତ୍ତିକ ଲେଖାମାନ ତିଆରି ଓ ସମ୍ପାଦନା କରୁଛନ୍ତି ।

The article that came May 20 on YourStory Odia, is about WikiTungi Puri and highlights a female editor Adyasha Sahu. WikiTungi Puri is a collective of the Odia Wikimedia community members that are based in the city of Puri.

ପୁରୀରେ ଆୟୋଜିତ ଏକ ଉଇକିପିଡ଼ିଆ କର୍ମଶାଳା ପରେ ସେଠାରେ ଆଗରୁ ଗୁଗୁଲ ଡେଭଲପର୍ସ ଗ୍ରୁପରେ ସକ୍ରିୟ ଥିବା ସ୍ୱେଚ୍ଛାସେବୀ କର୍ମୀମାନେ ଉଇକିପିଡ଼ିଆରେ ଯୋଗ ଦେଇ ବିଭିନ୍ନ ବିଷୟରେ ଲେଖିବା ଆରମ୍ଭ କଲେ । କେଇଟା ଦିନ ଭିତରେ ଆଗରୁ ଅବହେଳିତ ବିଭିନ୍ନ ବିଷୟ ଯଥା ମୋବାଇଲ, କମ୍ପ୍ୟୁଟର ଓ ଇଣ୍ଟରନେଟ ସମ୍ବନ୍ଧିତ ଲେଖା, । ଏହି ୧୨ ଜଣିଆ ଦଳରେ ଥିବା ୪ ଜଣ ଝିଅ ଓଡ଼ିଶା ଓ ଓଡ଼ିଶା ବାହାରର ବିଭିନ୍ନ ଜଣାଶୁଣା ନାରୀଙ୍କ ସମ୍ବନ୍ଧରେ ଲେଖାସବୁ ତିଆରିବା ସହିତ ଆଗରୁ ଥିବା ଲେଖାଗୁଡ଼ିକ ଉନ୍ନତ କରିଆସୁଛନ୍ତି । ଏମାନଙ୍କ ଅବଦାନ ଫଳରେ ବିଭିନ୍ନ ଜଣାଅଜଣା ବିଷୟରେ ଉପାଦେୟ ଲେଖାସବୁ ପାଠକମାନଙ୍କ ପାଇଁ ଖୋଲାରେ ଉପଲବ୍ଧ ହେଉଛି । ଆଗକୁ ଛାତ୍ର, ଶିକ୍ଷକମାନେ ବହି ବାହାରେ ଓଡ଼ିଆରେ କିଛି ପଢ଼ିବାକୁ ଚାହିଁଲେ ଏସବୁ ବ୍ୟବହାରରେ ଲାଗିବ ।

ଏମାନଙ୍କ ଭିତରୁ ଜଣେ ଉଇକିଆଳି ଆଦ୍ଯାଶା କହନ୍ତି, "ମୁଁ ପ୍ରଥମେ ଲେଖିବା ଆରମ୍ଭ କଲାବେଳକୁ ରବୀନ୍ଦ୍ରନାଥ ଠାକୁରଙ୍କ ବାବଦରେ ଛୋଟ ଲେଖାଟେ ଥିଲା । ଆଉ ମୋର ତାଙ୍କ ବାବଦରେ ଓଡ଼ିଆରେ କିଛି ପଢ଼ିବା ପାଇଁ ଇଚ୍ଛା ଥିଲେ ବି ଇଣ୍ଟରନେଟରେ କିଛି ଖୋଜି ପାଉଲି ନାହିଁ । ତେଣୁ ନିଜେ ଇଂରାଜୀରୁ ଅନୁବାଦ କରିବା ଆରମ୍ଭ କଲି । ନିକଟରେ ଗୋଟେ ପରୀକ୍ଷାରେ ତାଙ୍କ ବିଷୟରେ ପଡ଼ିଥିଲା ଯେ ମୁଁ ମୋର ନିଜ ଲେଖା ଅନୁଭୂତି କେତେ କାମରେ ଆସିଲା ତାହା ଜାଣିଲି", ବଖାଣନ୍ତି ଆଦ୍ୟାଶା ।

ଆଉ ଜଣେ ମହିଳା ଉଇକିଆଳି ଅଲିଭା ସାହୁ କହନ୍ତି, "ମୁଁ କାକଟପୁର କଲେଜରେ ପଢ଼ିଲା ବେଳେ ବାଦ୍ୟଯନ୍ତ୍ର ଉପରେ ଲେଖାଟିଏ ଥିଲା । ସେତେବେଳେ ମୁଁ ଓଡ଼ିଆରେ ବିଶେଷ କିଛି ପଢ଼ିବାକୁ ପାଇନଥିଲି । ଏମିତି ଖୋଜୁଖୋଜୁ ଦିନେ ସେ ବାବଦରେ ଲେଖାଟିଏ ପାଇଲି । ଇଂରାଜୀ ଲେଖା ଆଉ ହିନ୍ଦୀ ଲେଖା ଦୁଇଟିରୁ ମିଶାଇ ଓଡ଼ିଆକୁ ଅନୁବାଦ କଲି ।"

ଅନୁବାଦ ହେଉ କି ମୌଳିକ ଭାବେ ହେଉ, ଉଇକିପିଡ଼ିଆରେ ବିଭିନ୍ନ ପ୍ରକାଶିତ ଲେଖାର ଆଧାରରେ ଉଇକିଆଳିମାନେ ତିଆରିଚାଲିଛନ୍ତି ଭଳିକି ଭଳି ନୂଆ ଲେଖା ।

Video

ପୁରୀର ଏହି ଉଇକିଆଳିମାନେ ଏକାଠି ହୋଇ ଗଢ଼ିଛନ୍ତି "ଉଇକିଟୁଙ୍ଗି ପୁରୀ" । ପୁରୀରେ ଯୁବପିଢ଼ିଙ୍କୁ ଉଇକିପିଡ଼ିଆ ସମ୍ପର୍କରେ ଅବଗତ କରାଇବା, ପୁରୀ ସାମନ୍ତ ଚନ୍ଦ୍ରଶେଖର ସ୍ୱୟଂଶାସିତ କଲେଜରେ ଉଇକିପିଡ଼ିଆର ପ୍ରଚାର ପ୍ରସାର କରାଇବା, ପୁରୀରେ କର୍ମଶାଳା ଓ ମେଳଣ ଅଧିକରୁ ଅଧିକ ଲୋକଙ୍କୁ ଓଡ଼ିଆରେ ଟାଇପ ଶିଖାଇବା ଓ ସେମାନଙ୍କୁ ନିଜ ଅଞ୍ଚଳ ଓ ଆଗ୍ରହର ବିଷୟ ବାବଦରେ ଲେଖିବା ପାଇଁ ଆଗଭର କରାଇବା ଓ ଓଡ଼ିଆ ଢଗଢମାଳି-ଲୋକକଥା ଆଦିକୁ ଗୋଟେ ସ୍ଥାନରେ ଉପଲବ୍ଧ କରାଇବା ପାଇଁ ଉଇକିକଥା ନାମରେ ଆଉ ଏକ ପ୍ରକଳ୍ପର ବିକାଶ କରାଇବା ହେଉଛି ଏହି ଦଳର ମୁଖ୍ୟ ଲକ୍ଷ୍ୟ ।

ବାକି ଭାରତୀୟ ଓ ଏସୀୟ ଭାଷା ଭିତରୁ ଓଡ଼ିଆ ଏକ ପୁରୁଣା ଭାଷା ହୋଇ ସୁଦ୍ଧା ଓଡ଼ିଆର ଇଣ୍ଟରନେଟରେ ବ୍ୟବହାର ଖୁବ ଊଣା । ଯଦିଓ ଓଡ଼ିଶାରେ ନିୟମିତ ପ୍ରକାଶିତ ଓଡ଼ିଆ ଖବରକାଗଜ ଧୀରେ ଧୀରେ ବଢ଼ି ବଢ଼ି ଚାଲିଛି ସେସବୁ ଏଯାବତ ଇଉନିକୋଡ଼ରେ ଉପଲବ୍ଦ ହେଉନଥିବାରୁ ଲେଖାଗୁଡ଼ିକ ଇଣ୍ଟରନେଟରେ ଖୋଜିଲେ ମିଳୁନାହିଁ । ଆଉ ସବୁ କାଗଜର ପୁରୁଣା ଅଭିଲେଖ ଉପଲବ୍ଧ ହେଉନଥିବାରୁ ଜଣେ ଲୋଡ଼ାପଡ଼ିଲେ ଖବରଟେ ଖୋଜି ପାଇପାରିବ ନାହିଁ । ଏ ଦିଗରେ ପ୍ରକାଶନ ସଂସ୍ଥା, ବ୍ୟକ୍ତିବିଶେଷ ଓ ସରକାର ସଭିଏଁ ଚେଷ୍ଟା କଲେ ଯାଇ ଅଧିକରୁ ଅଧିକ ଲେଖା ଇଣ୍ଟରନେଟରେ ଉପଲବ୍ଧ ହୁଅନ୍ତା । ଏଯାଏ ଗୁଗୁଲର ପ୍ରଧାନ ପୃଷ୍ଠାରେ ଯେ ଓଡ଼ିଆ ଆସୁନାହିଁ ବୋଲି ଅନେକେ ମତ ଦିଅନ୍ତି ତା'ର ମୁଖ୍ୟ କାରଣ ହେଲା ଇଣ୍ଟରନେଟରେ ଓଡ଼ିଆ ଲେଖାର ଘୋର ଅଭାବ । ଏ ଦିଗରେ ଅଣଲାଭକାରୀ ସ୍ୱେଚ୍ଛାସେବୀଙ୍କ ଦ୍ୱାରା ପରିଚାଳିତ ସମୂହ ଉଇକିପିଡ଼ିଆର ଭୂମିକା ଉଲ୍ଲେଖଯୋଗ୍ୟ । ଉଇକିପିଡ଼ିଆ (Wikipedia) ୨୦୦୧ରେ ପ୍ରଥମେ ଇଂରାଜୀରେ ଆରମ୍ଭ ହୋଇ ଧୀରେ ଧୀରେ ବାକି ଭାଷାରେ ଆରମ୍ଭ ହେଲା । ଆନନ୍ଦର ବିଷୟ ଯେ ଓଡ଼ିଆରେ ଉଇକିପିଡ଼ିଆ ୨୦୦୨ ମସିହାରେ ପ୍ରଥମ ଭାରତୀୟ ଭାଷାର ଉଇକିପିଡ଼ିଆ ଭାବେ ଅହମୀୟା, ମାଲାୟାଲାମ ଓ ପଞ୍ଜାବୀ ସହିତ ଗଢ଼ାହେଲା । ଅଧୁନା କେବଳ ଇଂରାଜୀ ନୁହେଁ ୨୮୭ରୁ ଅଧିକ ଭାଷାରେ ଉପଲବ୍ଧ ଏହି ଖୋଲା ଅନଲାଇନ ଏନସାଇକ୍ଲୋପିଡ଼ିଆ । ଅନେକେ ଜାଣି କାବା ହେବେ ଯେ ଓଡ଼ିଆ ଉଇକିପିଡ଼ିଆରେ ଲେଖୁଥିବା ସମ୍ପାଦକ ବା ଉଇକିଆଳିଙ୍କ ସଂଖ୍ୟା ପାଖାପାଖି ୨୫-୩୦ ହେଲେ ହେଁ ଏଥିରେ ଲେଖା ପ୍ରସଙ୍ଗ ସଂଖ୍ୟା ୧୦,୬୦୦ରୁ ଅଧିକ । ପୁରୀର ଉଇକିଆଳିମାନଙ୍କ ଆସିବା ପରେ ଓଡ଼ିଆ ଉଇକିଆଳିଙ୍କ ସଂଖ୍ୟା ପାଖାପାଖି ଦୁଇଗୁଣା ବଢ଼ିଛି ବୋଲି କହିହେବ ।

ଓଡ଼ିଆ ଉଇକିପିଡ଼ିଆରେ ଥିବା ପ୍ରସଙ୍ଗ http://or.wikipedia.org ରେ ପଢ଼ିପାରିବେ । ଏଥିରେ ସଭିଏଁ ଲେଖିପାରିବେ (ଲେଖିବା ବାବଦରେ ଦରକାରୀ ସୂଚନା) ।

ଫଟୋ: ସ୍ନେହାଶିଷ ନାୟକ (CC-BY-SA 4.0)

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/b07b23b4db1fb30b28b47b1fb30b47-b13b21b3cb3fb06-b0fb28b38b3eb07b15b4db32b2ab3fb21b3cb3fb06-b09b07b15b3fb2ab3fb21b3cb3fb06-b2cb3fb15b3eb36-b2ab3eb07b01-b0fb15b3eb20b3f-b39b47b32b47-b2ab41b30b40b30-b1bb3eb24b4db30b1bb3eb24b4db30b40

Arrested for tweeting: Legitimate or Curbing Free Speech?

praskrishna — 2012-11-02T06:09:57Z

As a man in Puducherry is arrested for allegedly posting on Twitter that MR Chidambaram's son had amassed wealth more than that of Robert Vadra, we discuss whether freedom of speech is absolute.

Sunil Abraham along with Shivam Vij, Journalist and Blogger, SB Mishra, Additional DCP, Census Wing, Economic Offence Wing, Delhi Police, and Sanjay Pinto, Advocate, Madras High Court participated in this discussion aired in NDTV on October 31, 2012.

Watch the full video on NDTV

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/news/ndtv-news-oct-31-2012-arrested-for-tweeting-legitimate-or-curbing-free-speech

Anvar v. Basheer and the New (Old) Law of Electronic Evidence

bhairav — 2014-12-04T15:53:01Z

The Supreme Court of India revised the law on electronic evidence. The judgment will have an impact on the manner in which wiretap tapes are brought before a court.

Read the original published by Law and Policy in India on September 25, 2014.

The case

On 18 September 2014, the Supreme Court of India delivered its judgment in the case of Anvar v. P. K. Basheer (Civil Appeal 4226 of 2012) to declare new law in respect of the evidentiary admissibility of the contents of electronic records. In doing so, Justice Kurian Joseph, speaking for a bench that included Chief Justice Rajendra M. Lodha and Justice Rohinton F. Nariman, overruled an earlier Supreme Court judgment in the 1995 case of State (NCT of Delhi) v. Navjot Sandhu alias Afsan Guru(2005) 11 SCC 600, popularly known as the Parliament Attacks case, and re-interpreted the application of sections 63, 65, and 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (“Evidence Act”). To appreciate the implications of this judgment, a little background may be required.

The hearsay rule

The Evidence Act was drafted to codify principles of evidence in the common law. Traditionally, a fundamental rule of evidence is that oral evidence may be adduced to prove all facts, except documents, provided always that the oral evidence is direct. Oral evidence that is not direct is challenged by the hearsay rule and, unless it is saved by one of the exceptions to the hearsay rule, is inadmissible. In India, this principle is stated in sections 59 and 60 of the Evidence Act.

The hearsay rule is both fundamental and complex; a proper examination would require a lengthy excursus, but a simple explanation should suffice. In the landmark House of Lords decision in R v. Sharp [1988] 1 All ER 65, Lord Havers – the controversial prosecutor who went on to become the Lord Chancellor – described hearsay as “Any assertion other than one made by a person while giving oral evidence in the proceedings is inadmissible as evidence of any fact or opinion asserted.” This definition was applied by courts across the common law world. Section 114 of the United Kingdom’s (UK) Criminal Justice Act, 2003, which modernised British criminal procedure, uses simpler language: “a statement not made in oral evidence in the proceedings.”

Hearsay evidence is anything said outside a court by a person absent from a trial, but which is offered by a third person during the trial as evidence. The law excludes hearsay evidence because it is difficult or impossible to determine its truth and accuracy, which is usually achieved through cross examination. Since the person who made the statement and the person to whom it was said cannot be cross examined, a third person’s account of it is excluded. There are a few exceptions to this rule which need no explanation here; they may be left to another post.

Hearsay in documents

The hearsay rule is straightforward in relation to oral evidence but a little less so in relation to documents. As mentioned earlier, oral evidence cannot prove the contents of documents. This is because it would disturb the hearsay rule (since the document is absent, the truth or accuracy of the oral evidence cannot be compared to the document). In order to prove the contents of a document, either primary or secondary evidence must be offered.

Primary evidence of the contents of a document is the document itself [section 62 of the Evidence Act]. The process of compelling the production of a document in court is called ‘discovery’. Upon discovery, a document speaks for itself. Secondary evidence of the contents of a document is, amongst other things, certified copies of that document, copies made by mechanical processes that insure accuracy, and oral accounts of the contents by someone who has seen that document. Section 63 of the Evidence Act lists the secondary evidence that may prove the contents of a document.

Secondary evidence of documentary content is an attempt at reconciling the hearsay rule with the difficulties of securing the discovery of documents. There are many situations where the original document simply cannot be produced for a variety of reasons. Section 65 of the Evidence Act lists the situations in which the original document need not be produced; instead, the secondary evidence listed in section 63 can be used to prove its content. These situations arise when the original document (i) is in hostile possession; (ii) has been stipulated to by the prejudiced party; (iii) is lost or destroyed; (iv) cannot be easily moved, i.e. physically brought to the court; (v) is a public document of the state; (vi) can be proved by certified copies when the law narrowly permits; and (vii) is a collection of several documents.

Electronic documents

As documents came to be digitised, the hearsay rule faced several new challenges. While the law had mostly anticipated primary evidence (i.e. the original document itself) and had created special conditions for secondary evidence, increasing digitisation meant that more and more documents were electronically stored. As a result, the adduction of secondary evidence of documents increased. In the Anvar case, the Supreme Court noted that “there is a revolution in the way that evidence is produced before the court”.

In India before 2000, electronically stored information was treated as a document and secondary evidence of these electronic ‘documents’ was adduced through printed reproductions or transcripts, the authenticity of which was certified by a competent signatory. The signatory would identify her signature in court and be open to cross examination. This simple procedure met the conditions of both sections 63 and 65 of the Evidence Act. In this manner, Indian courts simply adapted a law drafted over one century earlier in Victorian England. However, as the pace and proliferation of technology expanded, and as the creation and storage of electronic information grew more complex, the law had to change more substantially.

New provisions for electronic records

To bridge the widening gap between law and technology, Parliament enacted the Information Technology Act, 2000 (“IT Act”) [official pdf here] that, amongst other things, created new definitions of “data”, “electronic record”, and “computer”. According to section 2(1)(t) of the IT Act, an electronic record is “data, record or data generated, image or sound stored, received or sent in an electronic form or micro film or computer generated micro fiche” (sic).

The IT Act amended section 59 of the Evidence Act to exclude electronic records from the probative force of oral evidence in the same manner as it excluded documents. This is the re-application of the documentary hearsay rule to electronic records. But, instead of submitting electronic records to the test of secondary evidence – which, for documents, is contained in sections 63 and 65, it inserted two new evidentiary rules for electronic records in the Evidence Act: section 65A and section 65B.

Section 65A of the Evidence Act creates special law for electronic evidence:

65A. Special provisions as to evidence relating to electronic record. – The contents of electronic records may be proved in accordance with the provisions of section 65B.

Section 65A of the Evidence Act performs the same function for electronic records that section 61 does for documentary evidence: it creates a separate procedure, distinct from the simple procedure for oral evidence, to ensure that the adduction of electronic records obeys the hearsay rule. It also secures other interests, such as the authenticity of the technology and the sanctity of the information retrieval procedure. But section 65A is further distinguished because it is a special law that stands apart from the documentary evidence procedure in sections 63 and 65.

Section 65B of the Evidence Act details this special procedure for adducing electronic records in evidence. Sub-section (2) lists the technological conditions upon which a duplicate copy (including a print-out) of an original electronic record may be used: (i) at the time of the creation of the electronic record, the computer that produced it must have been in regular use; (ii) the kind of information contained in the electronic record must have been regularly and ordinarily fed in to the computer; (iii) the computer was operating properly; and, (iv) the duplicate copy must be a reproduction of the original electronic record.

Sub-section (4) of section 65B of the Evidence Act lists additional non-technical qualifying conditions to establish the authenticity of electronic evidence. This provision requires the production of a certificate by a senior person who was responsible for the computer on which the electronic record was created, or is stored. The certificate must uniquely identify the original electronic record, describe the manner of its creation, describe the device that created it, and certify compliance with the technological conditions of sub-section (2) of section 65B.

Non-use of the special provisions

However, the special law and procedure created by sections 65A and 65B of the Evidence Act for electronic evidence were not used. Disappointingly, the cause of this non-use does not involve the law at all. India’s lower judiciary – the third tier of courts, where trials are undertaken – is vastly inept and technologically unsound. With exceptions, trial judges simply do not know the technology the IT Act comprehends. It is easier to carry on treating electronically stored information as documentary evidence. The reasons for this are systemic in India and, I suspect, endemic to poor developing countries. India’s justice system is decrepit and poorly funded. As long as the judicial system is not modernised, India’s trial judges will remain clueless about electronic evidence and the means of ensuring its authenticity.

By bypassing the special law on electronic records, Indian courts have continued to apply the provisions of sections 63 and 65 of the Evidence Act, which pertain to documents, to electronically stored information. Simply put, the courts have basically ignored sections 65A and 65B of the Evidence Act. Curiously, this state of affairs was blessed by the Supreme Court in Navjot Sandhu (the Parliament Attacks case), which was a particularly high-profile appeal from an emotive terrorism trial. On the question of the defence’s challenge to the authenticity and accuracy of certain call data records (CDRs) that the prosecution relied on, which were purported to be reproductions of the original electronically stored records, a Division Bench of Justice P. Venkatarama Reddi and Justice P. P. Naolekar held:

According to Section 63, secondary evidence means and includes, among other things, “copies made from the original by mechanical processes which in themselves ensure the accuracy of the copy, and copies compared with such copies”. Section 65 enables secondary evidence of the contents of a document to be adduced if the original is of such a nature as not to be easily movable. It is not in dispute that the information contained in the call records is stored in huge servers which cannot be easily moved and produced in the court. That is what the High Court has also observed at para 276. Hence, printouts taken from the computers/servers by mechanical process and certified by a responsible official of the service-providing company can be led into evidence through a witness who can identify the signatures of the certifying officer or otherwise speak to the facts based on his personal knowledge.

Flawed justice and political expediency in wiretap cases

The Supreme Court’s finding in Navjot Sandhu (quoted above) raised uncomfortable questions about the integrity of prosecution evidence, especially in trials related to national security or in high-profile cases of political importance. The state’s investigation of the Parliament Attacks was shoddy with respect to the interception of telephone calls. The Supreme Court’s judgment notes in prs. 148, 153, and 154 that the law and procedure of wiretaps was violated in several ways.

The Evidence Act mandates a special procedure for electronic records precisely because printed copies of such information are vulnerable to manipulation and abuse. This is what the veteran defence counsel, Mr. Shanti Bhushan, pointed out in Navjot Sandhu [see pr. 148] where there were discrepancies in the CDRs led in evidence by the prosecution. Despite these infirmities, which should have disqualified the evidence until the state demonstrated the absence of mala fide conduct, the Supreme Court stepped in to certify the secondary evidence itself, even though it is not competent to do so. The court did not compare the printed CDRs to the original electronic record. Essentially, the court allowed hearsay evidence. This is exactly the sort of situation that section 65B of the Evidence Act intended to avoid by requiring an impartial certificate under sub-section (4) that also speaks to compliance with the technical requirements of sub-section (2).

When the lack of a proper certificate regarding the authenticity and integrity of the evidence was pointed out, this is what the Supreme Court said in pr. 150:

Irrespective of the compliance of the requirements of Section 65B, which is a provision dealing with admissibility of electronic records, there is no bar to adducing secondary evidence under the other provisions of the Evidence Act, namely, Sections 63 and 65. It may be that the certificate containing the details in sub-section (4) of Section 65B is not filed in the instant case, but that does not mean that secondary evidence cannot be given even if the law permits such evidence to be given in the circumstances mentioned in the relevant provisions, namely, Sections 63 and 65.

In the years that followed, printed versions of CDRs were admitted in evidence if they were certified by an officer of the telephone company under sections 63 and 65 of the Evidence Act. The special procedure of section 65B was ignored. This has led to confusion and counter-claims. For instance, the 2011 case of Amar Singh v. Union of India (2011) 7 SCC 69 saw all the parties, including the state and the telephone company, dispute the authenticity of the printed transcripts of the CDRs, as well as the authorisation itself. Currently, in the case of Ratan Tata v. Union of India Writ Petition (Civil) 398 of 2010, a compact disc (CD) containing intercepted telephone calls was introduced in the Supreme Court without following any of the procedure contained in the Evidence Act.

Returning sanity to electronic record evidence, but at a price

In 2007, the United States District Court for Maryland handed down a landmark decision in Lorraine v. Markel American Insurance Company241 FRD 534 (D. Md. 2007) that clarified the rules regarding the discovery of electronically stored information. In American federal courts, the law of evidence is set out in the Federal Rules of Evidence. Lorraine held when electronically stored information is offered as evidence, the following tests need to be affirmed for it to be admissible: (i) is the information relevant; (ii) is it authentic; (iii) is it hearsay; (iv) is it original or, if it is a duplicate, is there admissible secondary evidence to support it; and (v) does its probative value survive the test of unfair prejudice?

In a small way, Anvar does for India what Lorraine did for US federal courts. In Anvar, the Supreme Court unequivocally returned Indian electronic evidence law to the special procedure created under section 65B of the Evidence Act. It did this by applying the maxim generalia specialibus non derogant (“the general does not detract from the specific”), which is a restatement of the principle lex specialis derogat legi generali (“special law repeals general law”). The Supreme Court held that the provisions of sections 65A and 65B of the Evidence Act created special law that overrides the general law of documentary evidence [see pr. 19]:

Proof of electronic record is a special provision introduced by the IT Act amending various provisions under the Evidence Act. The very caption of Section 65Aof the Evidence Act, read with Sections 59 and 65B is sufficient to hold that the special provisions on evidence relating to electronic record shall be governed by the procedure prescribed under Section 65B ofthe Evidence Act. That is a complete code in itself. Being a special law, the general law under Sections 63 and 65 has to yield.

By doing so, it disqualified oral evidence offered to attest secondary documentary evidence [see pr. 17]:

The Evidence Act does not contemplate or permit the proof of an electronic record by oral evidence if requirements under Section 65B of the Evidence Act are not complied with, as the law now stands in India.

The scope for oral evidence is offered later. Once electronic evidence is properly adduced according to section 65B of the Evidence Act, along with the certificate of sub-section (4), the other party may challenge the genuineness of the original electronic record. If the original electronic record is challenged, section 22A of the Evidence Act permits oral evidence as to its genuineness only. Note that section 22A disqualifies oral evidence as to the contents of the electronic record, only the genuineness of the record may be discussed. In this regard, relevant oral evidence as to the genuineness of the record can be offered by the Examiner of Electronic Evidence, an expert witness under section 45A of the Evidence Act who is appointed under section 79A of the IT Act.

While Anvar is welcome for straightening out the messy evidentiary practice regarding electronically stored information that Navjot Sandhuhad endorsed, it will extract a price from transparency and open government. The portion of Navjot Sandhu that was overruled dealt with wiretaps. In India, the wiretap empowerment is contained in section 5(2)of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 (“Telegraph Act”). The Telegraph Act is an inherited colonial law. Section 5(2) of the Telegraph Act was almost exactly duplicated thirteen years later by section 26 of the Indian Post Office Act, 1898. When the latter was referred to a Select Committee, P. Ananda Charlu – a prominent lawyer, Indian nationalist leader, and one of the original founders of the Indian National Congress in 1885 – criticised its lack of transparency, saying: “a strong and just government must not shrink from daylight”.

Wiretap leaks have become an important means of discovering governmental abuse of power, corruption, and illegality. For instance, the massive fraud enacted by under-selling 2G spectrum by A. Raja, the former telecom minister, supposedly India’s most expensive corruption scandal, caught the public’s imagination only after taped wiretapped conversations were leaked. Some of these conversations were recorded on to a CD and brought to the Supreme Court’s attention. There is no way that a whistle blower, or a person in possession of electronic evidence, can obtain the certification required by section 65B(4) of the Evidence Act without the state coming to know about it and, presumably, attempting to stop its publication.

Anvar neatly ties up electronic evidence, but it will probably discourage public interest disclosure of inquity.

Video

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/anvar-v-basheer-new-old-law-of-electronic-evidence

An Odia Wikipedia Workshop at KMBB College, Bhubaneswar

subha — 2012-12-07T22:40:32Z

The Centre for Internet and Society along with Odia Wikipedians in Bhubaneswar organized an Odia Wikipedia workshop on November 18, 2012. It was held in KMBB College of Engineering. Odia Wikipedia is a free encyclopedia in Odia language which everyone can edit.

Odia Wikipedians gathered in the temple city of Bhubaneswar on November 18, 2012 to organize the third Odia Wikipedia workshop in KMBB College of Engineering. KMBB College of Engineering is a BPUT affiliated engineering college supported by Ama Odisha, an organization working for media, communication and development of Odia language. Dr. Dhanada Mishra, Director-Academics, KMBB and a veteran educationalist and open source source enthusiast supported this event. Forty-five students from KMBB attended this workshop. The agenda for the two-and-a-half hour session was to educate students about open source movement, journey of Wikipedia and how to contribute to Odia Wikipedia and how it would help them. Nine active Odia Wikipedians joined to support this event.

Dr. Mishra began the session by introducing Odia Wikipedians to the students. He spoke about Open source movement, how the community supports various open source projects, how Wikipedia was started and how it is essential for students to take part in such activities. Subhashish Panigrahi briefly spoke about the history of Odia wikipedia, how it grew up in the recent years to its present state. Odia Wikipedian Manoranjan Behera discussed about how everyone can contribute to the Wikipedia.

To explain the easiness of typing in Odia, some of the students were invited to write text on a board and test the typing tool on Odia Wikipedia. A new article about the college was created and one of the students wrote few sentences. Wikipedians explained the importance of creating user accounts and demonstrated how to search an article, how to create an article and the basics of editing an article. A Question and Answer session was held for students to put their queries. At the end of the session, contact details were shared with the students and the Facebook group (https://www.facebook.com/groups/OdiaWiki) of Odia Wikipedia was shown so that students could continue editing and remain in touch with fellow wikipedians.

Odia daily “The Sambad” covered this event.

Presentation: Copy of Introduction to Wikipedia! on Prezi
Video:

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/openness/blog-old/odia-wikipedia-workshop-organized-in-kmbb-college-bhubaneswar

An Introduction to Bitfilm & Bitcoin in Bangalore, India

benson — 2013-03-12T05:58:24Z

An event at the Centre for Internet & Society (CIS) was organized on January 23, 2013. The all star team at CIS was awesome at organizing this event for Bitcoin. Live streaming, mainstream newspaper coverage and Twitter based Q&A made this the first Bitcoin event in India that leveraged these mediums of information transfer.

See the blog post published in Benson's Blog

Aaron Koenig gave a talk on the creation and use of Bitcoin, and on a payment system designed for the voting process of the Bitfilm Festival for Digital Film. Since the year 2000, the Bitfilm Festival has been showcasing films that use digital technology in a creative and innovative way. It takes place on the Internet. However, physical screenings of the films will be held in Bangalore and in Hamburg. Each of the 59 nominated digital animations has its own Bitcoin account, and users worldwide may vote by donating Bitcoins to the films they like anonymously and without any transfer costs. The donated money will be divided among the most popular films (the films with the most votes/Bitcoins).

A strong knowledgeable speaker, Aaron brought forward his tremendous knowledge of Bitcoin, Art & Economics.

The Twitter based Q&A can be viewed on the Twitter ID's of

@pranesh_prakash

@cis_india

@bensonsamuel

The Newspaper Articles where Bitfilm & Bitcoin made their news in India were

Deccan Herald - http://bit.ly/U74YsS

The Hindu - http://goo.gl/YJYni

The Bangalore Mirror - http://bit.ly/XfDRbZ

Bitcoin Resources In India

Local Exchange - LocalBitcoins.com

India Fourms - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?board=89.0

http://bit.ly/ZDm4jW

Blogs - bensonsamuel.com

Unocoin.com

Services - indiabitcoin.com - Official Partners of Bitpay USA in India

Meetup Group - http://www.meetup.com/Bitcoin-Bangalore-Meetup-Group/

Video

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/bensonsamuel-an-introduction-to-bitfilm-and-bitcoin-in-bangalore

An Interview of Vera Franz

praskrishna — 2013-07-15T09:49:16Z

This interview was conducted at the Diplomatic Conference to Conclude a Treaty to Facilitate Access to Published Works by Visually Impaired Persons and Persons with Print Disabilities on June 26, 2013.

Vera Franz praises Rahul Cherian of Inclusive Planet while talking about her work. Watch the video below:

Video

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/news/interview-of-vera-franz

Aaron Swartz: The First Martyr of the Free Information Movement

lawrence — 2013-01-24T12:26:02Z

Well known American computer programmer, writer, political organizer and Internet activist died on January 11, 2013. Lawrence Liang from the Alternative Law Forum discusses with Newsclick the tragic loss. The interview was conducted by Prabir Purkayastha.

This interview was originally published by NewsClick on January 19, 2013.

Discussing on the immediate background in which this tragic event happened, Lawrence says that all of us are collectively mourning the death of an extremely talented individual. He adds that Aaron was facing a very difficult trial ahead. A couple of years ago he had plugged his computer on to the MIT network and had downloaded approximately four million articles from JSTOR (primary database for social science and other science journals) and he had intended to make freely available. This act of his in many ways marks Aaaron's short life but one which is marked by a certain commitment and activism around the idea of free knowledge.

Lawrence further says that his anger at databases like JSTOR was the fact that they were charging extraordinary amounts of money to provide access (which meant that they were not available to most people in the world) without paying any royalty to the authors contributing to the article or to the people who do the peer review of the articles. Here is a scenario which is rent control of the worst kind essentially of knowledge which is completely privatised and enclosed (public knowledge which is enclosed in this particular way).

Most researchers and academics who work and contribute towards making of journals do not get compensated for it but are paid for by public money because they happen to be employed by universities or research centres. And then all this material goes behind pay walls. And that is the context in which we need to understand Aaron's life. Click below to watch the full interview:

Video

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/openness/blog-old/aaron-swartz-the-first-martyr-of-free-information-movement

A Kannada Wikipedia Workshop at Sagara

pavanaja — 2014-03-25T08:51:36Z

On Sunday, July 28, 2013, a day-long Kannada Wikipedia workshop was conducted at Sagara, Shimoga Dist, Karnataka by the Centre for Internet and Society's Access to Knowledge (CIS-A2K) team. In this post, I share with you the happenings from the workshop.

Video

Some months ago, I got a phone call from Chinmaya M Rao from Sagara, Shimoga District requesting me to conduct a Kannada Wikipedia workshop at Sagara. He informed me that there are quite a good number of writers in that area who are interested in adding content to Kannada Wikipedia but don't know how to. Many telephonic discussions followed, many dates were considered, changed, iterated and finally the workshop was organised on Sunday, July 28, 2013. The programme was inaugurated by Shri Kagodu Thimmappa, Speaker of the current Legislative Assembly of Karnataka. Famous Kannada writer Naa D'Souza was the chief guest. Shri G.T. Shridhar Sharma, President of Kannada Times Media World, presided over the function. The programme was jointly organised by CIS and Kannada Times Media World, Sagara.

	Speaking after inaugurating the workshop, Shri Kagodu Thimmappa said "the basic knowledge of technology has become important as one could get ample, accurate information on various topics, and current affairs of the world in a minute all languages, including Kannada. It is the onus of the people of the sate to preserve and promote the use of Kannada language." (Deccan Herald, Shimaga edition, July 30, 2013). Naa D'Souza mentioned how earlier knowledge was the monopoly of some particular sections of the society and how technology has transformed knowledge into an asset of all the people irrespective of caste, race, religion, region and financial status.
Seen above is a picture of Shri Kagodu Thimmappa inagurating the workshop

I then gave a brief introduction to Wikipedia and Kannada Wikipedia. There are many encylopaedias in Kannada but very few are regularly updated. They are seldom digitised. People who add content to Kannada Wikipedia are in search of authentic information. These are available in many encylopaedias brought in by various academies, associations and universities funded by the Government of Karnataka. People of the state have a right on these content. I requested Shri Kagodu Thimmappa to bring them under the Creative Commons License so that the active Kannada Wikipedians can make use of them to add content into Kannada Wikipedia. Shri Kagodu Thimmappa promised to look into this.

After the inauguration, the actual presentation by me started at a cybercafe run by Istam Computers. It was raining heavily. Participants walked for 5 minutes in heavy rain to reach the venue. The presentation went on till lunch time. The place was very congested. One participant, B. V. Ravindranath, who is a practicing Chartered Accountant at Sagara, offered his place to conduct the hands-on workshop. Hence, all participants went to the new venue which was quite comfortable. Participants did the hands-on editing of Wikipedia till 7.30 p.m. Eleven persons participated in the workshop and edited actively. Some were seen editing Kannada Wikipedia regularly after the workshop.
Dr. U.B. Pavanaja is seen sharing a light moment with participants from the workshop in the above picture.

After the inauguration, the actual presentation by me started at a cybercafe run by Istam Computers. It was raining heavily. Participants walked for 5 minutes in heavy rain to reach the venue. The presentation went on till lunch time. The place was very congested. One participant, B. V. Ravindranath, who is a practicing Chartered Accountant at Sagara, offered his place to conduct the hands-on workshop. Hence, all participants went to the new venue which was quite comfortable. Participants did the hands-on editing of Wikipedia till 7.30 p.m. Eleven persons participated in the workshop and edited actively. Some were seen editing Kannada Wikipedia regularly after the workshop.

Dr. U.B. Pavanaja is seen sharing a light moment with participants from the workshop in the above picture.

An active Kannada Wikipedian, B S Chandrashekhar from Sagara, who has more than 4500 edits on Kannada Wikipedia to his credit was felicitated during the inauguration function. He is 79 years old. Despite his old age, he actively paticipated in the workshop till the end and learnt many intricacies which he was otherwise unaware of.

In the end, I would like to personally thank Chinmay Rao and G. T. Shridhar Sharma of Kannada Times who toiled a lot in organising the wokrshop. Also thanks to B. V. Ravindranath, CA, who provided the venue for the hands-on workshop.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/openness/kannada-wiki-workshop-at-sagara

Centre for Internet and Society

Darshana Mandrekar speaks on Konkani Wikipedia

Video

Darshan Kandolkar on Konkani Vishwakosh Digitization Process

Video

D:Coding Digital Natives

Creative Commons comes to India

Video

Celebrating the success of Wikipedia in Wikipedia Summit Pune 2013

Day 1

Day 2

Also see:

Video

Bharat Majhi Writings Now Available Under a Creative Commons License

Beyond Anonymous: Shit people say on Internet piracy

Video

ଇଣ୍ଟରନେଟରେ ଓଡ଼ିଆ ଏନସାଇକ୍ଲୋପିଡ଼ିଆ "ଉଇକିପିଡ଼ିଆ" ବିକାଶ ପାଇଁ ଏକାଠି ହେଲେ ପୁରୀର ଛାତ୍ରଛାତ୍ରୀ

Video

Arrested for tweeting: Legitimate or Curbing Free Speech?

Anvar v. Basheer and the New (Old) Law of Electronic Evidence

The case

The hearsay rule

Hearsay in documents

Electronic documents

New provisions for electronic records

Non-use of the special provisions

Flawed justice and political expediency in wiretap cases

Returning sanity to electronic record evidence, but at a price

Video

An Odia Wikipedia Workshop at KMBB College, Bhubaneswar

Presentation:

Video:

An Introduction to Bitfilm & Bitcoin in Bangalore, India

Video

An Interview of Vera Franz

Video

Aaron Swartz: The First Martyr of the Free Information Movement

Video

A Kannada Wikipedia Workshop at Sagara

Video