Centre for Internet and Society

Openness, Videos, Impressions

nishant — 2011-09-22T12:23:13Z

The one day Open Video Summit organised by the Centre for Internet & Society, iCommons, Open Video Alliance, and Magic Lantern, to bring together a range of stakeholders to discuss the possibilities, potentials, mechanics and politics of Open Video. Nishant Shah, who participated in the conversations, was invited to summarise the impressions and ideas that ensued in the day.

The notion of free and open is under great debate even under that, and I think even when you side with a camp, there are going to be further splinters. There are many ways of defining the free and open, and I think that the tension, rather than being resolved, needs to be sustained and creatively perpetrated to keep an internal checks and balances on not getting carried away with it. All the groups did indeed circle around this in different, often tangential ways – that there is need to define, variously and almost endlessly, in defining the context of the free that we are dealing with.

Open video, in that matter, has gone through different iterations, and I think it is nice that different stakeholders have defined it variously, and also looked at the problems that it might lead to. However, for the sake of synthesis, I am going to let you have your own idea of free and open but instead look at five key words which have emerged, in my selective hearing, through the day: Access, Archive, Share, Remix, Repurpose. And it is these five that we need to now imbricate these concepts across different thematic that emerged in the groups today.

Access has been one primary question that almost everybody dealt with; Access has its legacies in the Open and Free culture movements, where technological access, dealing with questions of open standards and content, of bandwidth and infrastructure. More interestingly, in an emerging information society like India, there are other concerns of language, access, privilege, bandwidth, education etc. To contextualise access and to put it into different perspectives is something that different participants have voiced the need for.

Archive is a preoccupation with most people because archiving has close relationships with knowledge and subsequently retrieval and usage. If knowledge is being digitised so that it is made accessible to different people, there are older questions of representation, voice, empowerment, participation, ethics, privacy, ownership etc. Crop up. In education archiving has to do with the curricula building and knowledge production. In networking, collaboration and film making, it is the kind of issues that pad.ma is trying to tackle with. It also leads to notions of access, distribution etc.

Sharing is what is almost defining the spirit of the Open and Free culture movements. There is a need to understand and explore what sharing means. When does it infringe laws and what kind of regulation needs to be advocated so that sharing becomes possible. How does one overcome questions of piracy, stealing, IPR etc? More interestingly, what do we share and who do we share it with? Tools by which sharing leads to innovation? How does it lead to new participation and learning practices and pedagogies? What kind of open distribution models and networks can be built up?

Remix has been of great value because it means that you are being converted into some sort of a stakeholder or a contributor to the process. Networking and nodes, network-actor, collaborator , peer 2 peer – the possibility of looking at questions of internet and digital traces is interesting. Or imagine that the act of sharing is also a remix. Sometimes just putting it into new contexts, making it available to newer constituencies, etc. can also be looked upon as remixing. Remix as a knowledge production aesthetic and mechanics seems to have emerged.

Repurpose is my additional reading of something that perhaps needs no mention to this group, but nonetheless needs flagging. The fact remains, that the technology is not a solution in itself. It is a tool that enables the solutions which one is seeking for. The processes, paradigms, protocols and practices are indeed shaped and mediated by technologies and there are new solution possibilities which are produced. However, there still seem to be anxieties, concerns, questions and problems which are cropping up and need to be addressed outside of technology but within technology ecologies.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/openness/blog-old/OVSreport

Open Video Summit

radha — 2011-08-18T05:08:54Z

The Open Video Summit: A one-day workshop to explore issues of intellectual property and telecom policy for video is being organized by The Centre for Internet and Society (CIS), iCommons, Open Video Alliance and Magic Lantern on December 15, 2009 at TERI, Bangalore, from 9am to 6pm.

The Centre for Internet and Society (CIS), iCommons, Open Video Alliance and Magic Lantern are organizing a workshop on December 15, 2009.

This workshop in Bangalore—modelled after a similar meeting in October 2008 at Yale University—draws together experts from tech, art, film, NGOs and business to explore the future of online video.

When: December 15th, 2009

Where: The Energy and Resources Institute- Southern Regional Centre

(TERI-SRC)
4th Main, 2nd Cross, Domlur II Stage
Bangalore- 560071

What: The Open Video Summit is a one-day workshop to explore issues of intellectual property and telecom policy for video. By inviting experts from different fields to participate in the workshop, we aim to create a framework for open video in India and to better understand how the online video medium is developing. We also hope to expand the network of researchers who have open video on the radar and to foster international collaborations. We expect between 30-40 participants to attend.

Participants should bring some specialized knowledge or insight about the state of online video to the event. The workshop is highly interactive and its success will depend on the quality and dynamism of our discussions. This workshop will in turn direct iCommons research efforts in the area of online video policy.

Why: We’re now surrounded by cameras in cellphones, laptops, and everywhere else. Software and storage advances have made video remix an emergent art form. For the first time, huge numbers of people are communicating through video. Video is almost like a new language, a new toolkit for self-expression. This has some pretty profound implications.

But while sites like YouTube have enabled millions of people to broadcast themselves, it offers just a glimpse into the future of the online video medium. Heading into this future, the tools for creating, manipulating, and sharing video must be available to everyone. And while having community-developed, open source versions of these tools is a critical charge, it’s only one part of a larger puzzle. Open video requires that networks and technical, legal and business structures support the ability of huge numbers of individuals to use video in ways that go beyond just watching.

The Open Video Alliance was created to support industry coordination toward an open video ecosystem. OVA members develop free and open source software and conduct policy research to support a more participatory video medium. The OVA also coordinates the Open Video Conference, a multi-day summit of thought leaders in business, academia, art, and activism to explore the future of online video. The first OVC was host to over 800 guests, including 150 workshop leaders, panelists and speakers. Over 8,000 viewers tuned in from home to watch the live broadcast.

Meeting Organizers:

The Open Video Alliance is a coalition of organizations devoted to creating and promoting

free and open technologies, policies, and practices in online video. OVA founding members include Mozilla, the Participatory Culture Foundation, Kaltura, iCommons, and the Yale Information Society Project.

iCommons is a project-based incubator organization dedicated to promoting free culture and the global commons.

The Centre for Internet and Society critically engages with concerns of digital pluralism, public accountability and pedagogic practices, in the field of Internet and Society, with particular emphasis on South-South dialogues and exchange.

Magic Lantern Foundation is a non-profit group working with media and human rights.

This meeting made possible with the support of the Ford Foundation.

Working schedule:

Morning:

Keynote talk and brief discussion
Lightning presentations by selected participants
Breakout discussion groups

Afternoon:

Lunch
Breakout discussion groups
Plenary discussion to identify focus areas and summarize

Evening:

Film Screening

Space is limited. Please RSVP to conference@openvideoalliance.org, and feel free to contact us with any questions you may have. We look forward to meeting you in Bangalore.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/openness/blog-old/open-video-summit

Maps for Making Change Kicks Off, and You Can Get Involved!

anja — 2015-10-05T15:03:39Z

A first in India, Maps for Making Change explores the use of geographical mapping techniques to support struggles for social justice in India. On 3 December, the project officially kicks off during a one-day workshop in Delhi. But even if you can not be there with us in Delhi, there are ways to get involved.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/advocacy/other-advocacy/maps-for-making-change-kicks-off-and-you-can-get-involved

Maps for Making Change - The First Workshop

Anja Kovacs — 2015-10-05T15:09:14Z

In this first workshop in a series of three, participants will think through the potential of mapping in the context of a project that they have suggested in their application and the preparations they need to make to make these ideas a reality.

On 3 December, 'Maps for Making Change: Using Geographical Mapping Techniques to Support Struggles for Social Justice in India' will officially kick off at the India Islamic Cultural Centre on Delhi's Lodhi Road. In this first workshop in a series of three, participants will think through the potential of mapping in the context of a project that they have suggested in their application and the preparations they need to make to make these ideas a reality.

A joint initiative by the Centre for Internet and Society in Bangalore and the Tactical Tech Collective in Bangalore and the UK, Maps for Making Change is a two month project that seeks to explore the potential of digital mapping for social change specifically in the Indian context. For the first time, activists and supporters of movements and campaigns working for progressive social change in the country will get the opportunity to collectively debate and explore in detail the potential of digital mapping as a tool to support their work.

The aims of this first workshop are to:

introduce tools and techniques for mapping
assist participants to identify the information they need to collect for their mapping project

By the end of the workshop, the participants will be able to:

understand the socio-political context of mapping and how maps can be used to maximise advocacy efforts
identify different types of maps (static, interactive, collaborative, etc)
identify some of the tools used for creating, uploading and editing maps (not covering the technical aspects nor the step-by-step process for making maps, but focusing on the general web-based mapping techniques)
understand data collection for mapping

The preliminary workshop schedule is as follows:

Welcome and introductions

Why mapping?

15 min break

Mapping and Advocacy Discussion

How do you 'map'? Basic tools and techniques

What can you 'map'?

Lunch break

Project scoping of participants' projects

Summary

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/events/maps-for-making-change-the-first-workshop

Open Standards Workshop at IGF '09

pranesh — 2011-08-23T02:54:03Z

The Centre for Internet and Society co-organized a workshop on 'Open Standards: A Rights-Based Framework' at the fourth Internet Governance Forum, at Sharm el-Sheikh. The panel was chaired by Aslam Raffee of Sun Microsystems and the panellists were Sir Tim Berners-Lee of W3C, Renu Budhiraja of India's DIT, Sunil Abraham of CIS, Steve Mutkoski of Microsoft, and Rishab Ghosh of UNU-MERIT.

Sir Tim Berners-Lee started the session with an address on various rights. Rights, he noted can range from being things like the rights to air and water to the right not to have the data carrier you use determine which movie you watch. Then, there are tensions between rights: the right to anonymity can clash with the right to know who posted information on making a bomb. Berners-Lee stated that for 2009, he has chosen to pursue one particular right: the right to government-held data. This data can include everything from where schools are to emergency services such as locations of hospitals. Today, we are talking about standards.

The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) is a fifteen-year old body in which all kinds of people come together for purposes of setting standards around the World Wide Web. Thus, everything from HTML, which is used to write Web pages to WCAG, which are guidelines to enable people with disabilities access websites through assistive technologies. W3C conducts its discussions openly: anybody who has a good idea has a right to participate in its discussions -- it does not matter who one works for, who one represents -- what does matter are the ideas one brings to the table. The kinds of standards that W3C deals with are of interest to an immensely wide-ranging group of people. Even ten-year olds have actually expressed their opinions about standards like HTML. All this openness of participation must be guaranteed while ensuring that the processes move forward.

Next spoke Renu Budhiraja of the Department of Information and Technology, which is a part of the Indian government. She started off by hoping that this workshop would be not only a platform to share knowledge, but also to reach consensus on a few matters. Next, she laid out why open standards are extremely important for the Indian government. What citizens want in their interactions with the government are ease of interaction and efficiency. For them it is immaterial whether a certain service is provided by Department A or Department B. Thus we need to move towards a single-window government service for citizens, enabling them to interact easily with the government's various departments. While such an initiative must be centralized for it to be effective, it is crucial that its implementation be decentralized and suited to each district or localities' needs.

There is, understandably, a huge institutional mechanism behind ensuring that these systems are based on open standards. We have expert committees, consisting of academics and knowledgeable bureaucrats, and working groups, which include industry groups. Through these, we have evolved a National Policy on Open Standards, which is currently in a draft stage, but shall be notified soon. This policy outlines the principles based on which particular standards required for governmental functioning are to be chosen or evolved. This document will ensure long-term accessibility to public documents and information, and seamless interoperability of various governmental services and departments. It will also reduce the risk of vendor lock-in and reduce costs, and thus ensure long-term, sustainable, scalable and cost-effective solutions.

Ms. Budhiraja noted that there are a few aspects of the policy that bear discussion in a forum such as the IGF. First is the issue of whether royalty-free is the only choice for innovation. All other things equal, between royalty-free and reasonable and non-discriminatory (RAND) standards, of course royalty-free is to be preferred. But what if a superior technology (JPEG200 vs. JPEG) is RAND? What should the government's position be in such a case? Further, what should the government's position be when in a particular domain a RAND standard is the only option?

Next is the issue of single vs. multiple open standards. When interoperability is what we are aiming at, can multiple standards be recommended as some in the industry are asking us to do? And then is the issue of market maturity. The government sometimes finds itself in a situation where a standard is available, but well-developed products around that standard aren't and there aren't sufficient vendors using that standard. All these issues are of great practical importance when a government works on a policy document on standards.

Next up was Sunil Abraham, Executive Director of the Centre for Internet and Society. His presentation was on open standards as citizens' and consumers' rights. He started off by citing the example of the Smart Card Operating System for Transport Application (SCOSTA) standard, and the implications that the SCOSTA story has on large-scale projects such as the National Unique ID project currently under way in India. SCOSTA, an open standard, was being written off as unimplementable by all the MNC smart card vendors who wished to push RAND standards. IIT Kanpur helped the government develop a working implementation. Within twenty days, the card manufacturers submitted modified cards for compliance testing by NIC. Because of SCOSTA being an open standard, local companies also joined the tender. The cost went down from Rs. 600 per card to Rs. 30 per card. This shows the benefits of open standards as a means of curbing oligopolistic pricing, and working for the benefit of consumers.

From a rights-based perspective, access to the state machinery is a primary right. Citizens should not be required to pirate or purchase software to interact with the state. If e-governance solutions are based on proprietary standards, not all citizens would be equal. The South African example or requiring a particular browser to access the election commission's website shows that in a rather drastic fashion. When intellectual property interferes with governmental needs, governments have not been shy of issuing compulsory licences. This was seen when during the Great War the United States government pooled various flight-related patents and compulsorily licensed them, as well as what we are currently seeing with many Aids-related drugs being compulsorily licensed in developing countries. Thus, there are precedents for such licensing, and governments should explore them in the realm of e-governance. Many countries now have statutes that guarantee the right to government-held information. Government Interoperability Frameworks should take these into account, and mandate all government-to-citizen (G2C) information be transacted via open standards. This must be backed up by a strong accessibility policy to ensure that the governments don't discriminate between their citizens.

Proprietary standards act like pseudo-intellectual property rights, just as DRMs do. They add a layer on top of rights such as copyright, and can prevent the exercise of fair use and fair dealing rights because of an inability to legally negotiate the standards in which the content is encoded in a cost-free manner. In guaranteeing this balance between copyrights and fair dealing rights, free software and alternative IP models play a crucial role. Because of software patents being recognized in a few countries, development of free software which allows citizens to exercise their fair use rights is harmed in all countries.

Steve Mutkoski of Microsoft spoke next and placed the standards debate in a large context. He noted that standards are a technicality that are only a small part of the large issue which is interoperability in e-governance and delivery to citizens. The real challenges are organizational and semantic interoperability. Frequently interoperability is not harmed by technical issues, but by legal and organizational issues. Governments used to work on paper; during the shift to electronic data, they didn't engage in any organizational changes. Thus they continue to function with electronic data the same way that they did with paper-based data. Governments often lack strong privacy policies regarding the data that each of their departments holds. This harms governmental functioning. Additionally, legacy hardware and software have to be catered to by the standards we are talking about: sometimes an open standard just will not work.

Standards don't guarantee interoperability, and there is significant work done on this by noted academics ("Why Standards Are Not Enough To Guarantee End-to-End Interoperability" Lewis et al.; "Difficulties Implementing Standards" Egyedi & Dahanayake; "Standards Compliant, But Incompatible?" Egyedi et al.). Mandated standards lists will not help address interoperability issues between different implementations of the same standard. What would help? Transparency of implementations; collaboration with community; active participation in maintenance of standards, etc., would help. There is a need for continued public sector reform, with a focus on citizen-centric e-governance, and a need to engage with the question of whether government-mandated standards lists lead the market or follow the market.

Rishab Aiyer Ghosh, a senior researcher at UN University, Maastricht, spoke next. He started by noting that technical standards are left to technical experts. That needs to change, which is why discussing open standards at the IGF is important. He next set off a hypothetical: imagine you go to the city council office in Sharm el Sheik, and at the parking lot there it says that your car has to be a Ford if you are to park there; or if the Dutch government insists that you have a Philips TV if you are to receive the national broadcaster's signal. While these might seem absurd, situations like this arise all the time when it comes to the realm of software. Thus, the social effects of open standards are of utmost importance, and not just their technical qualities. Analysing the social effects of open standards takes us back to the economics of technology and technological standards. Technological standards exhibit network externalities: their inherent value is less than the value of others using them. Being the only person in the world with a telephone won't be very useful. Technological standards also exhibit path dependence: once you go with one technological format, it is difficult to change over to another even if that other format is superior to the first. Thus, clearly, standards benefit when there is a 'natural monopoly'. The challenge really arises when faced with the question of how to ensure a monopoly in a technology without the supplier of that technology exhibiting monopolistic tendencies. This can only be done when the technology is open and developed openly, of which the web standards and the W3C are excellent examples. If the technology or the process are semi-open, then because of the few intellectual property rights attached to the technology, some would be better off than others. Just as governments cannot insist on driving a particular make of cars as a prerequisite for access to them, they cannot insist on using a particular proprietary standard as a means of accessing them.

Many interesting questions arose when the floor was thrown open to the audience. "Should governments only mandate a particular standard when it is certain that market maturity exists?" Not really, since governmental decisions also give signals to the market and help direct attention to those standards. It would be best if roadmaps were provided, with particular under-mature standards being designated as "preferred standards", thus helping push industry in a particular direction. Examples where this strategy has borne fruit abound. This is also the strategy found in the Australian GIF. On the issue of multiplicity of standards, Sir Tim was very clear that they have to be avoided at all costs. He gave the example of XSLT and CSS, which are both stylesheet formats. He noted that their domain of operation was very different (with one being for servers and the other for clients), so having two standards with similar functions but different domains of operation does not make them multiple standards. Multiple standards defeat the purpose of the standardization process.

It was noted that governmental choices are of practical importance to citizens. During the Hurricane Katrina emergency, the federal emergency website only worked properly if Internet Explorer was used. How do we move forward? We must move forward by having policies that strike a balance between allowing for the natural evolution of standards and stability. The Government Interoperability Frameworks must be dynamic documents, allowing for categorization between standards and having clear roadmaps to enable industry to provide solutions to the government in a timely fashion. Governments must be strong in order to push industry towards openness, for the sake of its citizens, and not let industry dictate proprietary standards as the solution. Some opined that since there are dozens of domains that governments function in, maintaining lists of standards is a time-consuming process that is not justified, but others rebutted that by noting that for enterprise architectures to work, governments have to maintain such lists internally. Opening up that list to citizens and service providers would not entail greater overheads.

Sunil Abraham talking Open Standards at IGF09

(Video added on December 30, 2009)

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/openness/blog-old/dcos-workshop-09

Open Video Summit

radha — 2009-12-10T06:21:01Z

The Centre for Internet and Society (CIS), iCommons, Open Video Alliance and Magic Lantern are organizing a workshop on December 15, 2009 at TERI, Bangalore

The Centre for Internet and Society (CIS), iCommons, Open Video Alliance and Magic Lantern are organizing a workshop on December 15, 2009.

When: December 15th, 2009

Where: The Energy and Resources Institute- Southern Regional Centre

(TERI-SRC)
4th Main, 2nd Cross, Domlur II Stage
Bangalore- 560071

Meeting Organizers:

The Open Video Alliance is a coalition of organizations devoted to creating and promoting

iCommons is a project-based incubator organization dedicated to promoting free culture and the global commons.

Magic Lantern Foundation is a non-profit group working with media and human rights.

This meeting made possible with the support of the Ford Foundation.

Working schedule:

Morning:

Keynote talk and brief discussion
Lightning presentations by selected participants
Breakout discussion groups

Afternoon:

Lunch
Breakout discussion groups
Plenary discussion to identify focus areas and summarize

Evening:

Film Screening

Space is limited. Please RSVP to conference@openvideoalliance.org, and feel free to contact us with any questions you may have. We look forward to meeting you in Bangalore.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/events/open-video-summit-1

Call for Applications: 'Maps for Making Change' - Using Geographical Mapping Techniques to Support Struggles for Social Justice in India

anja — 2015-10-05T15:04:12Z

Deadline: 20 November 2009. Maps for Making Change is a two-month project specifically designed for activists and supporters of social movements and campaigns in India. It provides participants with an exciting opportunity to explore how a range of digital mapping techniques can be used to support struggles for social justice. It also allows you to immediately develop and implement in practice a concrete mapping project relevant to your campaign or movement, with full technical support. Interested in joining us? Send in your application by 20 November 2009.

Background

Most of us think of maps as representations of territory. But have you ever wondered why bastis, slums, unauthorised colonies and monuments of minorities and poor people rarely are given prominence on maps – or at times are even absent altogether? All too often only seats of power, such as big hospitals, the colonies of the rich and diplomatic missions, receive detailed mention. This is because maps simultaneously also function as representations of relations of power and control: which places, communities, historical monuments, townships, colonies and roads are highlighted on a map reflects the power and control that various communities and classes possess or lack. In modern times, this is particularly obvious in planning processes, which incorporate maps as crucial tools in villages and cities alike. To challenge the practice of privileging the powerful on maps, and to create maps from the margins and of margins, therefore has emerged as an important aspect as well as a tool of our fights against injustice in society.

Maps for Making Change

Today, with the emergence of new technologies such as GPS and the Internet, mapping techniques have advanced beyond the confines of professional cartographers and can be mobilised and used to fight for social justice by anyone with an interest in maps. Are you someone concerned with the state of social justice in the country today? Are you working closely, as an activist or a supporter, with a campaign or social movement? Are you interested in exploring how digital geographical mapping techniques might help facilitate or support your advocacy and awareness raising campaigns and understanding of the power relations in society? Perhaps you already have some ideas on how maps can fit into your work, but you require technical support to put these into practice? Then this is for you.

Maps for Making Change is a two-month project that will provide you with the opportunity to explore how mapping can be used to support your campaigns, struggles and movements to fight against injustice. It is jointly organised by the Centre for Internet and Society (Bangalore) and the Tactical Technology Collective (Bangalore and London), and brings together activists and technologists. Over the course of the project, participants will:

explore and share ideas about the possible uses of geographical maps within the context of campaigns and movements in India;
try out a range of mapping tools and get training and support in the creation and use of maps;

develop and implement your own mapping project, involving the creation and use as well as dissemination of maps, relevant to your campaign's or movement's advocacy and goals.

Format

Maps for Making Change will take the form of three workshops, with time in between each for participants to work on a mapping project of their choice. The first workshop will take place in Delhi on 3 December, and will be an introductory event, where tools and tactics will be explored and discussed and participants can determine the nature of the information they need to collect to implement their own mapping project. The second workshop will take place over 3 days during the first week of January (exact dates and location to be decided), and will involve actual work on mapping projects, using data and other resources collected by participants in the intervening time. The third workshop will be a two-day event during the first week of February (exact dates and location to be decided), and will be the time for participants to provide overall feedback, as well as to do the final touches on the projects and launch them. Not only during the workshops, but throughout the two-month project period, and at every stage of the development of your project plan, technical support will be available to help participants make your ideas a reality.

The organisers will cover travel and accommodation expenses of those who are selected to participate in the project. There is no participation fee. By applying, applicants commit themselves, however, to devoting the necessary time to this project. Where relevant, an organisational commitment to allow you to do this would also be required.

Who should apply?

This is an event for activists and supporters of movements and campaigns based in India. Preference will be given to applicants that intend to use the project directly for their work within a campaign or movement. Applications are welcomed from individuals, but also from groups of people who are working within the same campaign or movement and who would like to develop and implement a mapping project together. Those who have been centrally involved in designing and implementing communication strategies of campaigns and movements are particularly encouraged to apply, but such a role is not at all a prerequisite to be part of Maps for Making Change. Participants from appropriate backgrounds who simply want to explore the technology and its uses without immediately implementing it will be welcome in so far as space allows.

We would like to also encourage applications from students who are involved with campaigns or movements and who would like to learn these skills so as to use them in their advocacy efforts. Students will be provided with special assistance during the programme.

All participants should have some familiarity with computer use. While more advanced technology skills are useful, they are not essential: technology support will be provided as required for all participants to ensure that everyone completes their own mapping project.

Regretfully, we will be able to accommodate translation only from Hindi to English and vice versa, so applicants will need to be comfortable with either of these languages.

How to apply

Please answer the questions below in Hindi or in English. You do not need to write long responses (up to 300 words max), but please provide us with enough information to understand your involvement in and commitment to campaigns or movements for social justice, as well as your skills and interest. We also would like to know why you want to be part of the Maps for Making Change project and what are some of the contributions (of whatever kind) you could make to it.

You can send your answers by email to maps4change@cis-india.org, or by post to:

Maps for Making Change

c/o Centre for Internet and Society

No. D2, 3rd Floor, Sheriff Chambers

14, Cunningham Road

Bangalore 560052

The last day for applications is 20 November 2009. Early applications will make us very happy though! :)

Application Questions:

Please provide answers to all the following questions.

1) Basic personal information:

Name:
Gender:
Date of birth:
Nationality:
Affiliation/organisation:
E-mail address (if available):
Telephone and emergency contact number(s):
Preferred language of communication:
Veg/non veg:
Anything else we should know about you (allergies, medical condition, special needs):

Are you applying individually or as part of a team? If as part of a team, please provide the names of the other team members here;

2) Where are you from, where do you live now, and what is your current movement/organisational affiliation (movement/organisation you work with, its mission, position you have within it, is your organisation a non-profit, etc.)?

3) What is your wider experience of working with campaigns or movements for social justice? What kinds of initiatives have you been involved in? What kind of responsibilities have you taken up within these?

4) Have you been involved with any technology projects for non-profit organisations or campaigns or movements for social change? If so please briefly explain your experience (what worked, what didn't, what did you like, what not, etc?) and your role within the project. If you haven't been involved with such a project, please explain why you are interested in exploring the use of technology for social change.

5) Why are you interested in joining Maps for Making Change in particular? How can you and your movement/organisation benefit from your participation?

6) Do you already have an idea in mind that involves using maps for social change and that you would like to develop into a project that can support the work of the campaign or movement that you are involved with? If so, please explain.

7) To help us better understand the kind of technical support we will need to provide during Maps for Making Change, please describe your current technical expertise and ability.

8) All participants are encouraged to teach as well as to learn. What kind of contribution to the group's learning do you think you could make?

If you require more information about the project or about the application process, please email us at maps4change@cis-india.org, or call us at 080 4092 6283.

Looking forward to hearing from you!

The Maps for Making Change Team

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/advocacy/other-advocacy/maps-for-making-change

Report on Second National Workshop on Web Accessibility, 5-7 June 2009

sachia — 2013-02-04T05:52:05Z

Nirmita Narsimhan reports on the second National Workshop on Web Accessibility for web developers, hosted by CIS in Bangalore from 5 to 7 June 2009, and attended by 15 participants.

The second National Workshop on Web Accessibility for web developers was held at the CIS office in Bangalore, 5-7 June 2009. Although this was intended to be more a city-based workshop, we still got participants from other states such as Kerala, Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh. There were in all 15 participants predominantly from the web development and web designing backgrounds, college students and even a person from the academic field and 3 trainers. There were also some who had already prior knowledge of accessibility and this helped to raise the level of issues which were being discussed from a basic level to a more advanced level. Overall, the workshop was extremely well received and many of the participants expressed their willingness to participate in more such workshops in the future.

The workshop was structured differently from the last one--the sessions were more practical-oriented and the trainers stressed a lot on group work. There were sessions on understanding disability, WCAG 2.0 principles and group exercises of designing accessible pages. This workshop featured some additional topics such as Flash accessibility, accessibility in documents and role play exercises for problem solving for different disabilities. For instance, in one of the sessions, the participants were asked to prepare a caption for a one minute video. One of the participants, already working on accessibility, demonstrated Orca for Linux.

Specific Outcomes

1. The participants understood the importance of creating accessible web pages and learnt about various techniques, tools and resources for accessibility.
2. All the presentations and lectures were video documented.
3. The participants filled up feed back forms and action points to be undertaken after the workshop. CIS distributed T-Shirts and certificates to all the participants.

To download a complete report on the workshop in pdf format, please click here.

Video

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/accessibility/blog/second-national-workshop

Workshop for Web Developers on Web Accessibility

royson — 2011-08-23T22:52:40Z

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/accessibility/publications/workshop

Workshop on Reforming the International ICT Standardization System

pranesh — 2011-08-23T02:56:30Z

On Day 4, the last day, of the Internet Governance Forum, a workshop was conducted by the Dynamic Coalition on Open Standards on the reforming the international ICT standardisation system. The panellists were Bob Jolliffe of Freedom to Innovate South Africa, Sunil Abraham of the Centre for Internet and Society, Ashish Gautam of IBM India, and Aslam Raffee, Chairperson of the Government IT Officers' Council, OSS Working Group, Republic of South Africa, who moderated the session.

Mr. Rafee, after introducing the panellists, laid out the parameters of the discussion. He noted that the discussion was not about "open standards" per se, but about the standardisation process.

Mr. Jolliffe noted that the main problems revolved around the question of legitimacy of the Standard Setting Organizations, which often arises from "standardisation by corporations" (a phrase coined by Martin Bryan), as shown by the representatives of the individual countries to the international bodies. For the international standardization process to acquire legitimacy, the national bodies need to do so first. A start can be made, Mr. Jolliffe noted, through simple steps like increase in stakeholder participation beyond vendors, full disclosure of institutional affiliations at the standardisation bodies, better streamlining of processes such as the fast-track system, and full and clear disclosures with regard to IP licensing terms would help in increasing accountability and legitimacy of standard setting organizations.

He also indicated that financial transparency, modernisation of processes (including remote participation), regulation of proportional influence of private interests, a code of best practices and innovation in patent searches, full interest disclosures, and clear display of IPR policies of committees would help in increasing the openness of standards.

Mr. Abraham chose to focus on the national standardization processes, and the lessons that can be learnt from those. He highlighted that the discussions around open standards were really discussions about standards followed by public institutions. He analogized the situation to private houses vs. the public road infrastructure, noting how the road infrastructure cannot be private. Ensuring that the public infrastructure was open to all, he said, was the important role played by the standardisation process. He went on to highlight the importance of open standards as a lever in the hands of governments which can be used to fix monopoly situations, as it was in the case of SCOSTA smart card standard, where the use of an open standard led to a drop in price from Rs.600 to Rs.30 and increased the number of vendors from 3 to 12. He then narrated a number of "stories" from India, Pakistan and Malaysia to show the various forms of weaknesses within the national standard setting processes. He further concluded that countries with weak institutions are the ones less likely to support open standards.

Mr. Abraham added the need to adopt common definitions of "open standards" and transparency of processes and encouragement of remote participation as suggestions for the standardization system.

Mr. Gautam from IBM India chose to talk about the standards principles that the company follows, and the need for reform of the standardization processes.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/openness/blog-old/workshop-on-reforming-the-international-ict-standardization-system

DCOS Agreement on Procurement

pranesh — 2011-08-23T02:58:35Z

On December 6, 2008, at the closing of the third Internet Governance Forum in Hyderabad, India, the Dynamic Coalition on Open Standards (DCOS), of which the Centre for Internet and Society is a member, released an agreement entitled the "Dynamic Coalition on Open Standards (DCOS) Agreement on Procurement in Support of Interoperability and Open Standards".

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/openness/blog-old/dcos-agreement-on-procurement

Launch of Public Juris (An Online Archive of Legal Resources)

aparna — 2015-04-24T12:07:59Z

Aparna Balachandran, Rochelle Pinto, and Abhijit Bhattacharya announce the launch of Public Juris, an online archive of legal resources.

We are pleased to announce the launch of Public Juris, an online archive of legal sources and would like to elicit the active participation of the scholarly community in conceptualizing and building Public Juris as a site where we are able to provide access to material needed for law and social science research in South Asia. We would very much appreciate feedback, support and collaboration as we develop this project.

Who we are: We are two historians (Rochelle Pinto and Aparna Balachandran, Centre for the Study of Culture and Society, Bangalore) and an archivist (Abhijit Bhattacharya, Centre for the Study of Social Sciences, Kolkata) who are interested in issues of technology, users and access in relation to state and private archives in India (see blog).

The Project: We are soliciting contributions for an online digital archive of legal sources called “Public Juris” focusing on, but not limited to, South Asia. We hope this archive will be a useful and easily accessible resource for historians and other scholars interested in the study of different aspects of the law. We see this archive as particularly useful to students and teachers in South Asia and elsewhere who for logistical, economic or political reasons may not be able to travel to libraries and archives in order to access material of this kind. Eventually, we envisage that an online archive of this kind will allow students to broaden the thematic and regional range of their research.

How it will work: We do not have any strict definition of what constitute legal sources — they could range from acts and regulations to court cases, police records and petitions. For example, one set of records that has already been contributed to the archive centres on disputes over ceremonial privileges between the Valangi and Idangai castes in the city of Madras in the early nineteenth century. Documents that are not usually archived, such as leaflets, pamphlets, people’s enquiry reports, photographs, and advertisements, but which are critical to understanding the relationship between law and the public, can also find a space here. The material could be in any language.

As a community of scholars we are in possession of resources that can be harnessed usefully and inexpensively. All of us, for instance, have material collected from different locations that we have already used for our research or which is simply superfluous. This research could be shared. Since the archive inevitably leaves different traces for specific readings by different researchers, our research material could be put to other uses in other works. Hence, just as the Centre for the Study of Law and Governance has asked for your writings for their library, we would like to extend our request for collaborative energies within the LASS community to contribute to constructing a shared resource. Please do claim authorship of this archive by sharing with us material that you think should define and belongs in Public Juris.

Modalities: If you would like to contribute to this online archive, we request you to either bring the material with you when you attend the inaugural LASSNET conference in January, or if you prefer, send it by post to the Centre for Internet and Society (Centre for Internet and Society, No. D2, 3rd Floor, Sheriff Chambers, 14, Cunningham Road, Bangalore, Karnataka 560052, India). We will undertake to scan the material and make it available on the Public Juris website which is in the process of being constructed and designed. We will acknowledge the contributor on the website, unless specifically asked not to do so. We will also make sure that once scanned, the material will be sent back to the contributor

If you have any questions about this initiative, please do contact aparna@cscs.res.in or rochelle@cscs.res.in. If you would like to contribute to the archive, please do contact us and let us know what kind of materials you would be willing to provide. We look forward to hearing from you.

Aparna Balachandran, Centre for the Study of Culture and Society
Rochelle Pinto, Centre for the Study of Culture and Society
Abhijit Bhattacharya, Centre for the Study of Social Sciences

In conversation with

Pratiksha Baxi, Anchor, LASS

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/raw/histories-of-the-internet/blogs/the-cyborgs/announcing-the-launch-of-public-juris

Consilience 2010 Report

praskrishna — 2011-08-22T13:25:25Z

A report of the proceedings

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/a2k/publications/consilience-2010

Software Day Info

praskrishna — 2011-08-22T13:24:42Z

An information about the competition.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/a2k/publications/software-freedom-info

Privacy Matters - A Public Conference in Chennai

praskrishna — 2011-08-23T10:40:44Z

This conference was held on August 6, 2011 in Chennai. The report is now online.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/privacy-chennai-report.pdf