Centre for Internet and Society

Kannada Wikipedia Orientation Workshop at IISc, Bengaluru

Gopalakrishna A — 2017-12-19T16:16:29Z

A Kannada Wikipedia orientation workshop was held at the Entrepreneurship Centre, SID, Indian Institute of Science, Bengaluru on 26 November, 2017. The day long event was aimed at adding content to Kannada Wikimedia projects on topics such as ecology, environment, wildlife and sciences of Karnataka. The event was organised by Gubbi Labs in conjunction with CIS-A2K. Gubbi Labs is a research collective and social collective run by environmental scientists. The event was attended was attended by 8 participants of which one member was female.

The participants created six articles and expanded one article. The impact of this workshop was the fact that participants were made aware of the importance of open access data. It helped initiate another similar workshop in Mysuru. Upon sharing the idea for projects like Wiki Loves Butterfly Idea, a participant was interested in starting a project titled 'Wiki Loves Spiders'. We are hoping to take this project forward on Kannada Wikipedia.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/kannada-wikipedia-orientation-workshop-at-iisc-bengaluru

Marathi Wikipedia - Vishwakosh Workshop for Science writers in IUCAA, Pune

manasarao — 2017-12-20T02:42:39Z

A day-long workshop was organised for science writers at [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inter-University_Centre_for_Astronomy_and_Astrophysics Inter-University Centre for Astronomy and Astrophysics], Pune on 7 October, 2017. Eminent astrophysicist-mathematician couple en:Jayant Narlikar|Jayant^[+] and en:Mangala Narlikar|Mangala Narlikar^[+] , and renowned ecologist en:Madhav Gadgil|Madhav Gadgil^[+] were among the dignitaries present at the event.

The workshop was planned in three sessions. Presentations and discussions were conducted in first session, while second session was focused on actual editing demonstrations on Wikipedia. In the same session the new websites based on different subjects developed by Marathi Vishwakosh were presented. The process of content contribution in text, images, audio and video forms was explained in this session. The third session was to explore networking with Dyanmandals formed by :en:Marathi Vishwakosh|Marathi Vishwakosh Nirmiti Mandal^[+] . Insisting the expertise of invited authors to contribute the articles in their own chosen fields in a well-structured format, this session will not only train the authors in content generation but also make them understand the expectations of laymen and common readers.

The mete page of the event is here.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/marathi-wikipedia-vishwakosh-workshop-for-science-writers-in-iucaa-pune

Submission to DIPP at Meeting with IP Stakeholders

sinha — 2018-01-01T01:27:28Z

Centre for Internet & Society (CIS) made a submission to the Department of Industrial Planning and Promotion (DIPP) on 7 December 2017.

Centre for Internet and Society, Indiaâ€™s (CIS) Submission to the Department of Industrial Planning and Promotion (DIPP) at Meeting with IP Stakeholders on 07 December, 2017

As the DIPP is aware, the Indian mobile device manufacturing industry is mired in issues related to licensing of standard essential patents (SEPs). Disputes have resulted in imposition of heavy interim royalty rates on Indian manufacturers, payable to foreign SEP holders. Section 146(2) of the Patent Act, 1970 mandates patentees to provide information on working of patents, which is crucial for willing licensees to access patent working information in a timely manner. This requirement, that the details of patent working be disclosed by patentees supports the goal of making unworked patents available for compulsory licensing in India, both to promote economic development and public access to patented products. Penalties for failing to furnish such information (via Form 27) are steep, potentially resulting in fines or imprisonment.
We note that in 2009, 2013 and 2015 the Controller issued public notices calling on patent owners to comply with their obligations to file statements of working on Form 27. Further, on February 12, 2013, the Indian Patent Office (IPO) announced plans to make Form 27 submissions for the year 2012 available to the public via the IPO website.
We commend the efforts of the IPO, however, our empirical research on ICT innovations as well as by Prof. Shamnad Basheer (on ICT and pharmaceutical sector) reveals that there are serious lapses as far as compliance and enforcement of statutory provisions mandating filing of Form 27 are concerned.
In the past year, we studied data available from 2009- 2016 for the mobile device sector, and could only identify and access 4,916 valid Forms 27, corresponding to 3,126 mobile device patents, leavingÂ 1,186 Indian patents for which a Form 27 could have been filed, but was not found. Â For a surprising number of Form 27s (3%) the working status of the relevant patent was not designated.

Even among the Form 27s that had been obtained, almost none contained useful information regarding the working of the subject patents or fully complying with the informational requirements of the Indian Patent Rules. Many patentees simply omitted required descriptive information from their forms without any explanation.

Via our research we also gathered complaints raised by patentees and industry observers regarding the structure of the Form 27 requirement itself. For example, patents covering complex, multi-component products that embody dozens of technical standards and thousands of patents may not necessarily be amenable to the individual-level data requested by Form 27.
Regardless, we submit that these technical difficulties should not hinder the critical statutory requirement placed on patent holders to diligently comply with Form 27 compliance. In the context of licensing of SEPs, several stakeholders recently suggested solutions as revealed from our study of the submissions made to the TRAI Consultation on Promoting Local Telecom Manufacturing:

Two industry associations, namely Telecom Equipment Manufacturers Association of India Â (TEMA) and Telecom Equipment & Services Export Promotion Council (TEPC) and a telecommunication enabler Vihan Network Limited recommended that a modified and longer version of Form 27 (Form 27S) may be designed for SEP holders that should apply right at the filing stage. Section 159 of the Patent Act, 1970 empowers the central government to make such modifications to the form, as necessary.

Further, Prof. T Ramakrishna (MHRD Chair on Intellectual Property Rights) at NLSIU, specifically recommended that Form 27 may be amended to include a new column, which may require the patent holder to declare if their patent forms a part of any standard and in case of affirmative answer â€“ the name of the Standard Setting Organisation and corresponding standard of which it is a part.
Further, we would like to draw attention to how our study was limited by the technical capabilities of the Indian Patent Officeâ€™s online Form 27 repository, such as:

IPAIRS returned either a 404 error or Connection Time Out ("site is taking too long to respond") http://ipindiaonline.gov.in/patentsearch/search/index.aspx. In our opinion, it could be redirected to InPASS as it uses the same search engine as InPASS. Â Further, http://ipindia.nic.in/patsea.htm returned a 404 error.
Some PDFs of the forms comprise scanned image files without OCR of the text. This makes them inaccessible to the visually impaired, and prevents search and discoverability of their content. This also makes them less usable by preventing copying and selection of text.
In some cases, it was difficult to identify which one in the list of documents associated with a patent is Form 27, because of obscure filenames.
For example, for Patent Number 262228, Form 27 was named 68.262228.pdf, as found on IPAIRS.
For Patent number 260603, the filename for Form 27 was "ipindiaonline.gov.in_epatentfiling_online_frmPreview.asp.pdf" on IPAIRS.
Inconsistency in search results found on IPAIRS. Searching for the peripheral documents of the patents, returned the results, "No PDF found" for one full week. The next week, the documents started showing. Some searches returned results for an entirely different patent number.
Sometimes, Form 27 found on InPASS was not found on IPAIRS and vice versa.
Runtime errors occur due to browser caching.

We are thankful to DIPP for the opportunity to make these submissions. It would be our pleasure and privilege to discuss these submissions and recommendations in details with the DIPP. We also offer our assistance on other matters aimed at developing a suitable policy framework for SEPs and FRAND in India, and, working towards sustained innovation, manufacture and availability of mobile technologies in India.

On behalf of the Centre for Internet and Society, 07 December, 2017

Anubha Sinha anubha@cisindia.org

Annexure

Complete Data of CIS' Study

See Contreras, Jorge L. and LakshanÃ©, Rohini and Lewis, Paxton, Patent Working Requirements and Complex Products (October 1, 2017). NYU Journal of Intellectual Property & Entertainment Law; Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3004283

See Shamnad Basheer, Making Patents Work: Of IP Duties and Deficient Disclosures, 7 QUEEN MARY J. INTELL. PROP. 3, 16-17 (2017).

Supra note 1.

Refer to Appendix for a breakdown of compliance of Form 27 by patent holders in the mobile device sector.

See TRAIâ€™s Consultation Paper on Promoting Local Telecom Equipment Manufacturing dated 18.09.2017 and the responses, available here: http://trai.gov.in/consultation-paper-promoting-local-telecom-equipment-manufacturing?page=2

Section 159 of the Patent Act, 1970 empowers the central government to make rules. Accordingly, the Rule 131 of the Patents Rules, 2003 prescribes Form 27 as the manner in which section 146(2) of the Act is to be implemented.

An email by Rohini Lakshane (CIS) compiling these issues was sent to Dr. K.S. Kardam (Senior Joint Controller of Patents and Designs - â€ŽIndian Patent Office) on 09.09.2017.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/submission-to-dipp-at-meeting-with-ip-stakeholders

Meeting with IP Stakeholders

Admin — 2018-01-01T15:23:18Z

Anubha Sinha attended a DIPP meeting with stakeholders on December 7, 2017 in New Delhi. The meeting was organized by the Government of India.

Anubha made submissions pertaining to CIS' study on lack of compliance and enforcement in respect of filing statements of working of patents:

Large percentage (~ 20%) of patents' Form 27s were found to be missing (dataset of approx 5000 patents);
3% of the patents did not mention status on working of patents;
Almost none of the available Form 27s provided any useful information - patentees did not bother filling out several parts of the Form.

In addition, I sent a brief on the issue drawn from Prof. Contreras' and Rohini's paper, and Rohini's older email to the IPO describing issues with the website.

See the Meeting Circular here

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/a2k/news/meeting-with-ip-stakeholders-1

Train the Trainer 2018

Admin — 2018-01-01T16:39:17Z

We are delighted to inform that the Train-the-Trainer (TTT) 2018 programme organised by CIS-A2K will be held from 26-28 January 2018, in Mysore, Karnataka, India.

CIS-A2K believes that in every experienced Wikimedian, there is a trainer. A trainer is like a candle that can light up many other candles. (S)he can inspire many other Wikimedians. The workshop attempts to groom such trainers. After three successful iterations of Train the Trainer in 2013, 2015, 2016, and 2017, CIS-A2K is going to organize the fifth iteration of the program on 26-28 January 2018 (note 25 January is day zero).

What is TTT?
Train the Trainer or TTT is a residential training program. The program attempts to groom leadership skills among the Indian Wikimedia community (including English) members. Earlier TTT have been conducted in 2013, 2015, 2016 and 2017.

Who should join?

An editor who is interested to conduct real-life and online Wiki-events such as outreach, workshop, GLAM, edit-a-thon, photowalk etc.

Any active Wikimedian contributing to any Indic language Wikimedia project is eligible to apply.
The editor must have 500+ global edits before 1 November 2017. Anyone who has already participated in an earlier iteration of TTT, cannot apply.

Please see more about this program and apply to participate or encourage the deserving candidates from your community to do so:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/CIS-A2K/Events/Train_the_Trainer_Program/2018

Note: In an effort to encourage participation from women and other minorities, at least 20 percent of the participants at TTT 2018 would comprise of women and/ or other minorities.

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

India – the last telecom licensing frontier

Admin — 2018-01-02T15:36:47Z

Rohini Lakshané was quoted in the article.

The Pervasive Technologies project paper "Patents and Mobile Devices in India: An Empirical Survey" [PDF] was cited in the article along with Compilation of Mobile Phone Patent Litigation Cases in India.

Link to the article: https://the-ken.com/india-last-telecom-licensing-frontier/

Note: The Ken website is paywalled but this article is free to read by registering for a basic access account.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/a2k/news/india-2013-the-last-telecom-licensing-frontier

October 2017 Newsletter

praskrishna — 2018-01-10T00:53:03Z

October 2017 Newsletter

Dear readers,

Previous issues of the newsletters can be accessed here.

Highlights
CIS submitted its comments on mobile accessibility guidelines to the Ministry of Electronics & IT, Govt. of India. Between 1 to 16 September, an online discussion took place on the creation of social media guidelines and strategy for Telugu Wikimedia handles online. Manasa Rao captured the developments in a blog post. Padma Venkataraman in a blog entry chronologically mapped CIS’ efforts at enhancing financial transparency and accountability at ICANN, while providing an outline of what remains to be done. Shyam Ponappa's article on NPAs and structural issues was published in the Business Standard on October 5, 2017.

Highlights

CIS submitted its comments on mobile accessibility guidelines to the Ministry of Electronics & IT, Govt. of India.
Between 1 to 16 September, an online discussion took place on the creation of social media guidelines and strategy for Telugu Wikimedia handles online. Manasa Rao captured the developments in a blog post.
Padma Venkataraman in a blog entry chronologically mapped CIS’ efforts at enhancing financial transparency and accountability at ICANN, while providing an outline of what remains to be done.
Shyam Ponappa's article on NPAs and structural issues was published in the Business Standard on October 5, 2017.

CIS in the News:

Attempted data breach of UIDAI, RBI, ISRO and Flipkart is worrisome (DailyO, October 4, 2017).
Sex, drugs and the dark web (Hindu; October 7, 2017).
Ahead of data protection law roll out, experts caution that it shouldn't limit collection and use of data (First Post; October 12, 2017).
#NAMAprivacy: The economics and business models of IoT and other issues (Medianama; October 18, 2017).
#NAMAprivacy: Data standards for IoT and home automation systems (Medianama; October 18, 2017).
Majority of top politicians' Twitter followers fake: audit (Furquan Moharkan; Deccan Herald; October 24, 2017).
Awards for those working on employment opportunities for disabled (Eastern Mirror; October 24, 2017).
Nibbling away into your bank account, salami attackers cart away a fortune (New Indian Express; October 25, 2017).
Nirmita Narasimhan wins the 18th NCPEDP-Mindtree Helen Keller Award 2017! (National Centre for Promotion of Employment for Disabled People; October 31, 2017).

-----------------------------------
Access to Knowledge
-----------------------------------
Our Access to Knowledge programme currently consists of two projects. The Pervasive Technologies project, conducted under a grant from the International Development Research Centre (IDRC), aims to conduct research on the complex interplay between low-cost pervasive technologies and intellectual property, in order to encourage the proliferation and development of such technologies as a social good. The Wikipedia project, which is under a grant from the Wikimedia Foundation, is for the growth of Indic language communities and projects by designing community collaborations and partnerships that recruit and cultivate new editors and explore innovative approaches to building projects.

►Wikipedia

Blog Entries

Odia Wikisource Turns 3 (Manasa Rao; October 22, 2017).
Wikimedia Workshop at Ismailsaheb Mulla Law College, Satara (Subodh Kulkarni; October 24, 2017).
Marathi Wikipedia Edit-a-thon at Dalit Mahila Vikas Mandal, Satara (Subodh Kulkarni; October 24, 2017).
Marathi Wikipedia Workshop at MGM Trust's College of Journalism and Mass Communication, Aurangabad (Subodh Kulkarni; October 24, 2017).
Orientation Program at Kannada University, Hampi (A. Gopalakrishna; October 24, 2017).
Marathi Wikipedia Workshop at Solapur University (Subodh Kulkarni; October 24, 2017).
Discussion on Creation of Social Media Guidelines & Strategy for Telugu Wikimedia (Manasa Rao; October 24, 2017).

►Openness

Our work in the Openness programme focuses on open data, especially open government data, open access, open education resources, open knowledge in Indic languages, open media, and open technologies and standards - hardware and software. We approach openness as a cross-cutting principle for knowledge production and distribution, and not as a thing-in-itself.

-----------------------------------

Internet Governance
-----------------------------------

As part of its research on privacy and free speech, CIS is engaged with two different projects. The first one (under a grant from Privacy International and IDRC) is on surveillance and freedom of expression (SAFEGUARDS). The second one (under a grant from MacArthur Foundation) is on restrictions that the Indian government has placed on freedom of expression online.

►Freedom of Expression

ICANN’s Problems with Accountability and the .WEB Controversy (Padma Venkataraman; October 24, 2017).
Why Presumption of Renewal is Unsuitable for the Current Registry Market Structure (Padma Venkataraman; October 29, 2017).
CIS’ Efforts Towards Greater Financial Disclosure by ICANN (Padma Venkataraman; October 29, 2017).

►Cyber Security

Participation in Event

CyFy 2017 (Organized by Observer Research Foundation; New Delhi; October 2 - 4, 2017). Sunil Abraham was a speaker.

►Privacy

Blog Entry

GDPR and India: A Comparative Analysis (Aditi Chaturvedi; October 17, 2017).

Participation in Event

Securing The Digital Payments Ecosystem (Organized by NITI Aayog; October 9, 2017).

►Big Data

Blog Entry

Revisiting Per Se vs Rule of Reason in Light of the Intel Conditional Rebate Case (Shruthi Anand; October 4, 2017).

Event Organized

Emerging Issues in the Internet of Things (CIS, Bengaluru; October 23, 2017). Andrew Rens gave a talk.

-----------------------------------

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

Article

NPAs & Structural Issues (Shyam Ponappa; Business Standard; October 4, 2017).

-----------------------------------
Researchers at Work
-----------------------------------
The Researchers at Work (RAW) programme is an interdisciplinary research initiative driven by an emerging need to understand the reconfigurations of social practices and structures through the Internet and digital media technologies, and vice versa. It aims to produce local and contextual accounts of interactions, negotiations, and resolutions between the Internet, and socio-material and geo-political processes:

Articles

Digital Native: There is no spoon, There is no privacy (Nishant Shah; October 9, 2017).
Digital Native: Finger on the buzzer (Nishant Shah; October 22, 2017).

-----------------------------------
About CIS
-----------------------------------

The Centre for Internet and Society (CIS) is a non-profit organisation that undertakes interdisciplinary research on internet and digital technologies from policy and academic perspectives. The areas of focus include digital accessibility for persons with disabilities, access to knowledge, intellectual property rights, openness (including open data, free and open source software, open standards, open access, open educational resources, and open video), internet governance, telecommunication reform, digital privacy, and cyber-security. The academic research at CIS seeks to understand the reconfigurations of social and cultural processes and structures as mediated through the internet and digital media technologies.

► Follow us elsewhere

Twitter: http://twitter.com/cis_india
Twitter - Access to Knowledge: https://twitter.com/CISA2K
Twitter - Information Policy: https://twitter.com/CIS_InfoPolicy
Facebook - Access to Knowledge: https://www.facebook.com/cisa2k
E-Mail - Access to Knowledge: a2k@cis-india.org
E-Mail - Researchers at Work: raw@cis-india.org
List - Researchers at Work: https://lists.ghserv.net/mailman/listinfo/researchers

► Support Us

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

► Request for Collaboration

We invite researchers, practitioners, artists, and theoreticians, both organisationally and as individuals, to engage with us on topics related internet and society, and improve our collective understanding of this field. To discuss such possibilities, please write to Sunil Abraham, Executive Director, at sunil@cis-india.org (for policy research), or Sumandro Chattapadhyay, Research Director, at sumandro@cis-india.org (for academic research), with an indication of the form and the content of the collaboration you might be interested in. To discuss collaborations on Indic language Wikipedia projects, write to Tanveer Hasan, Programme Officer, at tanveer@cis-india.org.

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

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/about/newsletters/october-2017-newsletter

November 2017 Newsletter

praskrishna — 2018-01-10T01:57:29Z

November 2017 Newsletter

Dear readers,

Previous issues of the newsletters can be accessed here.

Highlights
Anubha Sinha took part in the 35th Session of the World Intellectual Property Organization (“WIPO”) Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights (“SCCR”) at Geneva from 13 November, 2017 to 18 November, 2017. She posed a question on the agenda 'Other Matters' on behalf of CIS on Day 5, 17 November, 2017. CIS also gave statements on Limitations and Exceptions for Libraries and Archives and GRULAC Proposal for Analysis of Copyright in the Digital Environment. CIS-A2K signed a Memorandum of Understanding with the Telangana Government’s IT, Electronics & Communications Department with to catalyse the development of the Wikimedia movement in Telangana and improve the state of free-licensed digital content in Telugu and Urdu. The Ministry of Electronics & Information Technology, Government of India has published the Guidelines for Indian Government Websites (GIGW). Nirmita Narasimhan on behalf of the Centre for Internet & Society gave comments on GIGW. The government has already set up a Nudge unit; now, it should apply the Nobel laureate's insights on auctions relating to essential infrastructure wrote Shyam Ponappa in an article in the Business Standard on November 1, 2017. DataMeet and CIS have collaborated on identifying and addressing the challenges to open up and integrate data and information in the water sector. CIS commented on the Consultation Paper on Privacy, Security and Ownership of Data in Telecom Sector published by the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India on August 9, 2017. CIS published a report that compares laws and regulations in the United Kingdom and India to see the similarities and disjunctions in cyber security policy between them. CIS sent comments on TRAI consultation paper on promoting local telecom equipment manufacturing. The submission drew on research primarily done in the Pervasive Technologies project.

Highlights

Anubha Sinha took part in the 35th Session of the World Intellectual Property Organization (“WIPO”) Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights (“SCCR”) at Geneva from 13 November, 2017 to 18 November, 2017. She posed a question on the agenda 'Other Matters' on behalf of CIS on Day 5, 17 November, 2017. CIS also gave statements on Limitations and Exceptions for Libraries and Archives and GRULAC Proposal for Analysis of Copyright in the Digital Environment.
CIS-A2K signed a Memorandum of Understanding with the Telangana Government’s IT, Electronics & Communications Department with to catalyse the development of the Wikimedia movement in Telangana and improve the state of free-licensed digital content in Telugu and Urdu.
The Ministry of Electronics & Information Technology, Government of India has published the Guidelines for Indian Government Websites (GIGW). Nirmita Narasimhan on behalf of the Centre for Internet & Society gave comments on GIGW.
The government has already set up a Nudge unit; now, it should apply the Nobel laureate's insights on auctions relating to essential infrastructure wrote Shyam Ponappa in an article in the Business Standard on November 1, 2017.
DataMeet and CIS have collaborated on identifying and addressing the challenges to open up and integrate data and information in the water sector.
CIS commented on the Consultation Paper on Privacy, Security and Ownership of Data in Telecom Sector published by the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India on August 9, 2017.
CIS published a report that compares laws and regulations in the United Kingdom and India to see the similarities and disjunctions in cyber security policy between them.
CIS sent comments on TRAI consultation paper on promoting local telecom equipment manufacturing. The submission drew on research primarily done in the Pervasive Technologies project.

CIS in the News:

Big Data for governance (Alekhya Hanumanthu; Telangana Today; November 4, 2017).
How tech is making life easier for differently-abled (Shalini Umachandrani; November 7, 2017).
India Today Conclave Next 2017: Aadhaar was rushed, says MP Rajeev Chandrashekhar (Priya Pathak; India Today; November 8, 2017).
What You Need To Worry About Before Linking Your Mobile Number With Aadhaar (Roopa Raju and Shekhar Rai; Youth Ki Awaaz; November 8, 2017).
OPINION | Data is New Oil and Human Mind the New Battlefield. India Must Wake Up Now (Lt. General (Retd.) D. S. Hooda; News18.com; November 11, 2017).
Aadhaar seeding: benefits and concerns (Shaikh Zoaib Saleem; Livemint; November 14, 2017).
Privacy issues exist even without Aadhaar (Ronald Abraham; November 15, 2017).
Advocating for Openness: Nine Ways Civil Society Groups Have Mobilized to Defend Internet Freedom (Centre for International Media Assistance; November 15, 2017).
Govt working to set up financial CERT to tackle cyber threats (Komal Gupta; Livemint; November 16, 2017).
Financial CERT to combat cyber threats, says MoS home affairs (CISO MAG; November 17, 2017).
UIDAI admits 210 government websites made Aadhaar details public (Financial Express; November 20, 2017).
India’s internet missionaries: The women Google is relying on to spread its Next Billion message (Sunny Sen; Livemint; November 21, 2017).
FCC’s plan to repeal net neutrality may not impact India (Surabhi Agarwal; Economic Times; November 23, 2017).
Indian activists slam FCC decision to ditch net neutrality (Kul Bhushan; Hindustan Times; November 23, 2017).
FCC’s plan to repeal net neutrality may not impact India (Surabhi Agarwal; Economic Times; November 23, 2017).
Why should you keep a close eye on the net neutrality debate in the US (Subhrojit Mallick; Digit; November 24, 2017).
Cyberattacks a significant threat to democracy: Modi (Komal Gupta; Livemint; November 24, 2017).
Aadhaar verification at airports raises need for stricter data privacy regulations (Aman Sethi; Hindustan Times, November 27, 2017).
IDAP Interview Series: Interview with Nirmita Narasimhan (IDIA Law; November 27, 2017).
Govt releases white paper on data protection framework (Komal Gupta; Livemint; November 28, 2017).
Bengalureans to receive Helen Keller award (Deccan Herald; November 30, 2017).

-------------------------------------
Accessibility & Inclusion
-------------------------------------
India has an estimated 70 million persons with disabilities who don't have access to read printed materials due to some form of physical, sensory, cognitive or other disability. As part of our endeavour to make available accessible content for persons with disabilities, we are developing a text-to-speech software in 15 languages with support from the Hans Foundation. The progress made so far in the project can be accessed here.

Submission

Comments on Guidelines for Indian Government Websites (Nirmita Narasimhan; November 26, 2017).

►Copyright & Patent

35th SCCR: CIS Statement on Limitations and Exceptions for Libraries and Archives (Anubha Sinha; November 15, 2017).
35th SCCR: CIS Statement on Limitations and Exceptions for Libraries and Archives (Anubha Sinha; November 17, 2017).
35th SCCR: CIS' Question to Dr. Rostama on her Study on the Impact of the Digital Environment on Copyright Legislation (Anubha Sinha; November 19, 2017).

►Wikipedia

Blog Entry

CIS-A2K signs MoU with Telangana Government (Manasa Rao; November 8, 2017).

►Openness

-----------------------------------

Internet Governance
-----------------------------------

►Privacy

Blog Entries

A Comparison of Legal and Regulatory Approaches to Cyber Security in India and the United Kingdom (Divij Joshi; edited by Elonnai Hickok; November 12, 2017).
Counter Comments on TRAI's Consultation Paper on Privacy, Security and Ownership of Data in Telecom Sector (Amber Sinha; November 23, 2017).

Participation in Event

BIS International Seminar on Internet of Things (Organized by BIS; November 15, 2017; India Habitat Centre, New Delhi). Amber Sinha attended the event.
Internet Universality Indicators for a Safe, Secure and Inclusive Cyberspace for Sustainable Development (Organized by UNESCO in collaboration with the Ministry of Electronics and IT, Government of India; UNESCO Conference Room, Chanakyapuri, New Delhi; November 17, 2017). Amber Sinha attended the event.

Roundtable on Data Integrity and Privacy (Organized by Observer Research Foundation; November 18, 2017). The round table discussion was chaired by Shri Baijayant Panda, Hon'ble Member of Parliament.

►Cyber Security

Blog Entry

Breach Notifications: A Step towards Cyber Security for Consumers and Citizens (Amelia Andersdotter; November 14, 2017).

Event Organized

Roundtable on Enhancing Indian Cyber Security through Multi-Stakeholder Cooperation (Indian Islamic Centre; Lodhi Road; New Delhi; November 4, 2017).
Open House on Security Practices in FinTech (Organized by CIS and Has Geek; November 17, 2017).

Participation in Event

Multinational Cyber Security Forum at University of Haifa (Organized by Center for Cyber, Law and Policy and University of Haifa in collaboration with the Hewlett Foundation Cyber Initiative; November 5 - 7, 2017). Sunil Abraham participated in the meeting held in Israel.
Global Commission on the Stability of Cyberspace (GCSC) (Organized by GCSC; November 21, 2017; New Delhi). Pranesh Prakash participated in the event.

-----------------------------------
Telecom
-----------------------------------

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

Article

Nobel Laureate Richard Thaler's Views On Auctions (Shyam Ponappa; Business Standard; November 1, 2017).

Submission

Comments on TRAI Consultation Paper on Promoting Local Telecom Equipment Manufacturing (Anubha Sinha; November 26, 2017).

Articles

Digital native: Rebellion by Google Doc (Nishant Shah; Indian Express; November 4, 2017)
Digital native: Let there be life (Nishant Shah; Indian Express; November 19, 2017).

-----------------------------------

About CIS
-----------------------------------
The Centre for Internet and Society (CIS) is a non-profit organisation that undertakes interdisciplinary research on internet and digital technologies from policy and academic perspectives. The areas of focus include digital accessibility for persons with disabilities, access to knowledge, intellectual property rights, openness (including open data, free and open source software, open standards, open access, open educational resources, and open video), internet governance, telecommunication reform, digital privacy, and cyber-security. The academic research at CIS seeks to understand the reconfigurations of social and cultural processes and structures as mediated through the internet and digital media technologies.

► Follow us elsewhere

Twitter: http://twitter.com/cis_india
Twitter - Access to Knowledge: https://twitter.com/CISA2K
Twitter - Information Policy: https://twitter.com/CIS_InfoPolicy
Facebook - Access to Knowledge: https://www.facebook.com/cisa2k
E-Mail - Access to Knowledge: a2k@cis-india.org
E-Mail - Researchers at Work: raw@cis-india.org
List - Researchers at Work: https://lists.ghserv.net/mailman/listinfo/researchers

► Support Us

► Request for Collaboration

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/about/newsletters/november-2017-newsletter

[Updated] Exclusive: OnePlus 5T’s Face Unlock feature may have infringed upon SensibleVision’s face recognition patents

Admin — 2018-01-17T01:07:51Z

The blog post by Nachiket Mhatre was published by mysmartprice on December 22, 2017.

Update

We had reached out to OnePlus early in the morning yesterday (that is, December 22) for an official statement prior to publishing the post later in the evening. Even a day later, as of this update, OnePlus hasn’t issued any clarifying statement either confirming or denying the patent infringement claim made by SensibleVision.

We had also contacted George Brostoff, the CEO and Co-Founder of SensibleVision, regarding the legal ramifications of his claim and if SensibleVision is contemplating legal action against OnePlus. Brostoff issued the following statement in response:

“Actually the comment by the patent expert quoted in the linked article is spot on,” noted Brostoff before issuing additional clarifying statement. “Legal process is always SensibleVision’s last resort. We pursue legal patent infringement only with companies that we have approached first through non-legal means and if they choose to then use our patented technology in the markets that our patents cover. Some of our patents are US only. We see companies like OnePlus as our possible customers. Our technology, both patented and proprietary, provides them with the possibility of better performance and more secure solutions. When companies license our solutions, they get the benefits of our broad patent portfolio and SensibleVision’s early entry into the market, something that helps minimize other companies claiming patent infringement against them. Unlike India, OnePlus currently has little to no US sales presence. So while they are on our partnership ‘radar’, they are not on our ‘legal’ radar for infringement.”

The gist of SensibleVision’s statement is that it probably won’t file a patent infringement lawsuit, but instead approach OnePlus to settle the matter amicably — say, by forging a Global Patent License Agreement (GPLA) — wherein OnePlus could be expected to pay to licence SensibleVision patents that are allegedly being employed in the OnePlus 5T’s Face Unlock system.

What’s interesting is Brostoff admitting that some of SensibleVision’s patents are valid only in the US, with him further insinuating that OnePlus’s sales volumes in the USA cannot justify prohibitive patent litigation costs.

We asked our resident patent expert, Rohini Lakshane, for her opinion on this statement and she confirmed that, in some cases, patent infringement settlements awarded by the US courts are in proportion to sales value and volume of the infringing products. In short, SensibleVision might not be too keen on taking the legal route against OnePlus, because the potential settlement payout might not be enough to cover the excessive cost of litigation in US patent courts.

The original story continues…

The OnePlus 5T’s Face Unlock technology has been critically acclaimed across the board, with our personal experience too pegging the biometric security system as one of the fastest face recognition implementations available in the market today, while being seemingly secure and impenetrable to simple workarounds. Even as technology critics and consumers wonder if this piece of biometric security is too good to be true, there could be a patent war brewing on the horizon for OnePlus.

Speaking in an interview with MySmartPrice, the CEO and Co-Founder of SensibleVision, George Brostoff, claimed that OnePlus might have infringed upon at least one of the patents belonging to the biometric security solutions provider. He also revealed that, in addition to other unspecified face recognition patents, OnePlus may have employed SensibleVision’s patent pertaining to the use of the screen as an illuminator. In fact, Brostoff claims to have notified “several companies” about their infringement of that particular patent.

“This is nothing new. We have been doing this for years. It even appears that they may be using several patented technologies,” said George Brostoff when asked what he made of OnePlus 5T’s Face Unlock implementation. “We have not licensed our patents to OnePlus or their supplier. From the video on Forbes, they are likely infringing at the very least on our illumination patent.”

Analysis from a patent and IP expert

Brostoff refused to divulge further details citing that SensibleVision has since handed the matter over to its legal firm, which probably means that we might hear more about this in the near future. Patent infringement claims in particular are extremely difficult to verify, so we spoke with Rohini Lakshane, who’s a Public Policy Researcher with extensive experience on patent and intellectual property regulation for more insight into the matter and an expert analysis on what this potential patent spat could entail.

“SensibleVision is a US company. Patents are valid only in the jurisdiction where they have been granted. Unless the company has registered a patent application or was awarded one for face recognition in China, there is no infringement. That is with respect to sale of the devices in China. With respect to sale in India, again, SensibleVision needs to have registered the patents in India,” explains Lakshane. “The way licensing works is the companies that hold many patents for a particular technology often license entire patent portfolios for use anywhere in the world. This is called Global Patent Licence Agreement (GPLA). This is usually confidential. What patents and how many are in the portfolio and what are the licensing terms [Editor’s note: in other words, how much money changes hands, among other things] is also confidential.”

From what Brostoff has revealed to us during the course of the interview, there seems to be no patent sharing agreement between OnePlus and SensibleVision to our knowledge. While it’s not easy to file and win patent lawsuits against Chinese companies in China, Lakshane suggests that SensibleVision can at least potentially begin patent infringement proceedings in the USA, where it has filed for the aforementioned patent.

However, all of this is conjecture from an expert in the field, as there’s no concrete corroborating proof legitimising SensibleVision’s patent infringement claims against OnePlus either. We have contacted OnePlus for its response on the matter, and will update this article with the official statement, so keep watching this space.

Read the original story here

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/a2k/news/nachiket-mhatre-december-22-2017-exclusive-oneplus-5ts-face-unlock-feature-may-infringed-upon-sensiblevisions-face-recognition-patents

January 2018 Newsletter

praskrishna — 2018-03-01T01:35:56Z

January 2018 Newsletter

Dear readers,

Previous issues of the newsletters can be accessed here.

Highlights
The paper titled "Patent Working Requirements and Complex Products" has been published in the latest issue of the NYU Journal of Intellectual Property and Entertainment Law. It is one of the outputs of the Pervasive Technology project and has been authored by Prof. Jorge L. Contreras, Paxton M. Lewis, and Rohini Lakshané. CIS made a submission to the Department of Industrial Planning and Promotion on mobile patents. CIS offered its assistance on matters aimed at developing a suitable policy framework for SEPs and FRAND in India, and, working towards sustained innovation, manufacture and availability of mobile technologies in India The use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in healthcare in India is increasing with new startups and large ICT companies offering AI solutions for healthcare challenges in the country. The report by by Yesha Paul, Elonnai Hickok, Amber Sinha and Udbhav Tiwari seeks to map the present state of AI in the healthcare sector in India. About 27% of India's population is still illiterate or barely literate. Most privacy policies and terms of services for web and mobile applications are in English and therefore it is only 10% of us who can actually read them before we provide our consent. The article by Sunil Abraham was published in Deccan Herald on January 20, 2018. CIS made a submission to TRAI Consultation on inputs to the National Telecom Policy. CIS in its submission also recommended what all should be the main objectives of TRAI while drafting the next edition of National Telecom Policy. Under a research grant from the Azim Premji University CIS has initiated a study of the ongoing updation process of the National Register of Citizens (NRC) in Assam and the resultant reform of citizen identification infrastructure in India. The 2G judgment of December 2017 provides a critique of how no proper evidence was presented on existence of an FCFS policy and its improper implementation, wrote Shyam Ponappa in his article in the Business Standard which was published on January 3, 2018.

Highlights

The paper titled "Patent Working Requirements and Complex Products" has been published in the latest issue of the NYU Journal of Intellectual Property and Entertainment Law. It is one of the outputs of the Pervasive Technology project and has been authored by Prof. Jorge L. Contreras, Paxton M. Lewis, and Rohini Lakshané.
CIS made a submission to the Department of Industrial Planning and Promotion on mobile patents. CIS offered its assistance on matters aimed at developing a suitable policy framework for SEPs and FRAND in India, and, working towards sustained innovation, manufacture and availability of mobile technologies in India
The use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in healthcare in India is increasing with new startups and large ICT companies offering AI solutions for healthcare challenges in the country. The report by by Yesha Paul, Elonnai Hickok, Amber Sinha and Udbhav Tiwari seeks to map the present state of AI in the healthcare sector in India.
About 27% of India's population is still illiterate or barely literate. Most privacy policies and terms of services for web and mobile applications are in English and therefore it is only 10% of us who can actually read them before we provide our consent. The article by Sunil Abraham was published in Deccan Herald on January 20, 2018.
CIS made a submission to TRAI Consultation on inputs to the National Telecom Policy. CIS in its submission also recommended what all should be the main objectives of TRAI while drafting the next edition of National Telecom Policy.
Under a research grant from the Azim Premji University CIS has initiated a study of the ongoing updation process of the National Register of Citizens (NRC) in Assam and the resultant reform of citizen identification infrastructure in India.
The 2G judgment of December 2017 provides a critique of how no proper evidence was presented on existence of an FCFS policy and its improper implementation, wrote Shyam Ponappa in his article in the Business Standard which was published on January 3, 2018.

The following articles were written by CIS members:

Digital native: Memory card is full (Nishant Shah; Indian Express; January 3, 2018).
The 2G Judgment of December 2017: What Was It About? (Shyam Ponappa; Business Standard; January 3, 2018).
Fixing Aadhaar: Security developers' task is to trim chances of data breach (Sunil Abraham; Business Standard; January 10, 2018).
Another Step towards Privacy Law (Elonnai Hickok; Governance Now; January 15, 2018).

Data Protection: We can innovate, leapfrog (Sunil Abraham; Deccan Herald; January 20, 2018).

CIS in the News:

From net neutrality to IBC & Aadhaar, how Vidhi is framing key government legislation (Surabhi Agarwal and Samanwaya Rautray; Economic Times; January 4, 2018).
UIDAI denies any breach of Aadhaar database (Komal Gupta; Livemint; January 7, 2018).
Token security or tokenized security? (Manasa Venkataraman and Ajay Patri; Livemint; January 9, 2018).
UIDAI introduces new two-layer security system to improve Aadhaar privacy (Economic Times; January 11, 2018).
Hammered government offers Virtual ID firewall to protect your Aadhaar (New Indian Express; January 11, 2018).
Virtual Aadhaar ID: too little, too late? (Yuthika Bhargava; Hindu; January 11, 2018).
India To Introduce Virtual ID For Aadhaar To Strengthen Privacy (Bloomberg Quint; January 11, 2018).
UIDAI's Virtual ID, limited KYC does little to protect Aadhaar data already collected, say critics (Business Today; January 12, 2018).
Aadhaar Body Talked About Virtual ID 7 Years Ago, Put It Off: UIDAI Chief (Sukriti Dwivedi; NDTV; January 13, 2018).
Bengaluru gives data safety tips to panel (Deccan Herald; January 14, 2018).
Is your personal information under lock and key? (Sravanthi Challapalli; Hindu Businessline; January 16, 2018).
Aadhaar-privacy debate: How the 12-digit number went from personal identifier to all pervasive transaction tool (First Post; January 18, 2018).
Paytm Payments Bank woos corporates with digital incentives (Komal Gupta and Remya Nair; Livemint; January 24, 2018).
Aadhaar's new security measures are good, it is still work in progress (Alnoor Peermohamed; Business Standard; January 25, 2018).

►Wikipedia

Blog Entries

Government of Odisha adopting Creative Commons License to Promote Transparency and Access to Knowledge (Sailesh Patnaik; January 17, 2018).
Experience and Learning outcome from Wikipedia Education Program (Lakshmi Karlekar; January 30, 2018).

Events Organized

Marathi Wikipedia Workshop at Dept. of Mass Communication, Solapur University (Organized by CIS-A2K and Dept of Mass Communication, Solapur University; Solapur; January 2, 2018).
Marathi Wikipedia Workshop at Dayanand College, Solapur (Organized by CIS-A2K and Dayanand College, Solapur; Solapur; January 3, 2018).
Marathi Wikipedia Workshop at Willingdon College, Sangli (Organized by CIS-A2K and Willingdon College; Sangli; January 5, 2018).
Marathi Wikipedia Workshop at Govt.Science & Arts College, Aurangabad (Organized by CIS-A2K and Govt.Science & Arts College; Aurangabad; January 9, 2018).
Marathi Wikipedia Workshop at Dr.Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada Vidyapeeth (Organized by CIS-A2K and Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University; Aurangabad; January 10, 2018).
Marathi Wikipedia Workshop at Shivaji University, Kolhapur (Organized by CIS-A2K and Shivaji University; Kolhapur; January 15, 2018).
Wikidata Workshop (Organized by CIS-A2K and Andhra Loyola College; Vijaywada; January 20 - 21, 2018).
Train the Trainer 2018 (Organized by CIS-A2K; Mysore; January 26 - 28, 2018).

►Pervasive Technologies

Research Paper

Patent Working Requirements and Complex Products (Jorge L. Contreras, Rohini Lakshané and Paxton M. Lewis; JIPEL NYU Journal of Intellectual Property & Entertainment Law, Vol. 7 - No.1 on January 16, 2018).

Submission

Submission to DIPP at Meeting with IP Stakeholders (Anubha Sinha; January 1, 2018). The submission was made in December 2017 but it was published on the website in January 2018.

►Openness

-----------------------------------

Internet Governance
-----------------------------------

►Privacy

Blog Entry

Artificial Intelligence and the Healthcare Industry in India (Yesha Paul, Elonnai Hickok, Amber Sinha and Udbhav Tiwari (Ecosystem mapping by Shweta Mohandas, Sidharth Ray and Elonnai Hickok. Designed by Saumyaa Naidu under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License; January 26, 2018).

Events Organized

Roundtable on A.I. and Manufacturing and Services (TERI, Bengaluru; January 19, 2018).

null Bangalore Meet: Special Session on Digital Identity and Privacy (CIS, Bengaluru; January 19, 2018). Sunil Abraham gave a talk.

►Free Speech and Expression

Blog Entries

Internet Governance Forum Report 2017 (Shweta Mohandas; January 11, 2018).

Mobile net ban during peaceful protest leaves farmers confused (Shruti Jain; January 19, 2018).

‘Hurt sentiments’ cost Udaipur internet access for four days (Shruti Jain; January 19, 2018).

-----------------------------------

Article

Submission to TRAI Consultation on "Inputs for Formulation of National Telecom Policy - 2018" (Pranesh Prakash; January 25, 2018).

Blog Entry

Life of a Tuple: National Register of Citizens (NRC) and the Reform of Citizen Identification Infrastructure in Assam (Sumandro Chattapadhyay; January 22, 2018). All posts related to the study can be found here.

-----------------------------------
About CIS
-----------------------------------

► Follow us elsewhere

Twitter: http://twitter.com/cis_india
Twitter - Access to Knowledge: https://twitter.com/CISA2K
Twitter - Information Policy: https://twitter.com/CIS_InfoPolicy
Facebook - Access to Knowledge: https://www.facebook.com/cisa2k
E-Mail - Access to Knowledge: a2k@cis-india.org
E-Mail - Researchers at Work: raw@cis-india.org
List - Researchers at Work: https://lists.ghserv.net/mailman/listinfo/researchers

► Support Us

► Request for Collaboration

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/about/newsletters/Qjanuary-2018-newsletter

Fifth International IPR Conference (GIPC 2013)

praskrishna — 2013-02-03T02:04:49Z

ITAG Business Solutions is organizing its Fifth International IPR conference "GIPC 2013" at Hotel LaLit Ashok, Bangalore, India on the theme "IPR: The Powerhouse of Tomorrow". Snehashish Ghosh is participating in the event and will speak on Pervasive Technologies: Access to Knowledge in the Market Place.

The Institute of International Trade and Sughrue are the co-organisers of this event. Full details of the event can be seen here.

The conference shall deal with specific technology in various industries, World leaders and the various IPR solutions.

The subjects to be covered in the conference are from idea to asset encompassing all relevant topics including valuation, commercialization, technology transfer, litigation, counterfeiting, analyzing the techno, legal and commercial solution to all associated problems in the field of intellectual property. The conference will deal with complex issues in simple manner about patentability of business methods, software and emerging field of technologies namely electronics, telecommunications, green technologies, nanotechnologies and pharmaceuticals. The emerging BRICS economies need to provide IP competitiveness to the Western Nations through innovation and creativity.

Click to see the agenda.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/news/fifth-intl-ipr-conference-gipc-2013

Global Congress On IP and Public Interest Adopts Principles for Negotiations

praskrishna — 2014-01-13T08:32:25Z

A recent conference on intellectual property and the public interest concluded with the adoption of public interest principles to guide international trade negotiations and international organisations.

This article by William New was published in the Intellectual Property Watch on January 6, 2014.

The Open African Innovation Research (Open A.I.R.) conference and the Global Congress on IP & the Public Interest took place in Cape Town, South Africa from 9-13 December. The conference hosted by the University of Cape Town was funded by Canada’s International Development Research Centre (IDRC), and Germany’s Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ), among others.

Principles adopted at the conference included transparency, preservation of rights within international agreements such as national flexibilities, protection for internet service providers, strengthening of the public domain, and access to knowledge and to medicines.

The event included a fairly diverse representation, and not all participants necessarily signed on to the principles that emerged from the event.

According to infojustice.org, some 200 people have signed the “Global Congress Declaration on Public Interest Principles for International IP Negotiations,” which is available here.

The declaration calls for “’a positive agenda in international intellectual property law making’ which would include a more open negotiating process, respect for stakeholders’ social and economic welfare, and preserve states’ freedoms to protect access to knowledge goods,” infojustice.org said.

In particular, the declaration took aim at the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement (TPP) being negotiated by 12 countries led by the United States. It urged negotiators of the TPP and future negotiations to ensure the “ongoing release of proposed legal provisions for public comment and maximize the ability of all interested persons and organizations to observe and participate in negotiation processes.”

Other principles, which echo debates at international organisations in Geneva, include ensuring that nations: retain sovereignty to take actions in their public interest without constraint from intellectual property rights, be able to use anti-circumvention measures without liability, and that IP enforcement measures be “reasonable and proportional.”

Additional principles called for avoiding “the creation of new dispute resolution fora parallel to, and that may conflict with, the multilateral system,” and ensuring that IP agreements are “consistent with international law, including international human rights law and the Convention on Biological Diversity.”

Finally, the declaration said: "We record our serious concerns about the closed and secretive processes being used for current international negotiations while acknowledging the efforts of some countries to promote positive proposals within them."

Statement on Global Fund IP Policy and Generics

Also at the Cape Town event, a statement was adopted raising concern over a policy being considered by the Global Fund for AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria that would establish tiered pricing for medicines.

“We note with growing concern the weakening of the Global Fund’s support for expanding access to safe, affordable generic medications as the answer to unaffordable essential drugs,” the statement said. “We are extremely concerned about the recent announcement of a ‘blue-ribbon Task Force’ on tiered-pricing of medicines in middle-income countries.”

In addition, the statement raised concern about a new Global Fund partnership with the International Federation of Pharmaceutical Manufacturers and Associations on “fake medicines.” It said the effort could create confusion in consumers’ minds about generic medicines. For them, the best approach would be “strong drug regulatory agencies together with effective technology transfer.”

"The Global Fund should retain its public interest focus and disentangle the interests of public health from the interests of those who claim intellectual-property over drugs," it said. "Regressive policy suggestions and public campaigns that undermine generic competition are counter to the Fund’s public mission."

Open A.I.R.

One aspect of the Open A.I.R. project is that the fellows who have been trained over the past few years now will go out and spread the word.

Seble Baraki, legal researcher at the Justice and Legal Systems Research Institute in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, told Intellectual Property Watch, “I go and tell people what I’ve learned and see how it is going to help” on issues like health or branding to ensure high quality products.

"By being here, I think I have brought the issue of IP in my government," she said. For instance, they have a conference on law and development with the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), and she has consistently mentioned that they should include something on development and IP. Now, they have agreed to do it, she said.

From studying in the North (Sweden), she had a certain idea about intellectual property. "Being part of this project helped me to see how to look at how to use IP from a public interest and development perspective.

Now, she said, she plans to go home and look at how it really makes a difference in her city, to see how IP can be used. Being part of this project, she added, "changed how you think about IP."

Other Highlights

The weeklong conference was packed with speakers and activities, and involved many of the leading figures in the public interest movement related to intellectual property rights. It also involved a first-time training on traditional knowledge related to IP rights.

The death of South African leader and “father” Nelson Mandela profoundly impacted the meeting. For example, a participant from Côte d’Ivoire said he was going to “live tweet” a journey through Mandela’s whole life, traveling from country to country.

Separately, Diane Peters, general counsel at Creative Commons, suggested a focus on a positive agenda, not taking away the right of another. There are ways to structure a dialogue so that everyone’s needs are addressed, she said.

“We are all part of some ecosystem,” she said, thinking and learning from the ideas of others. Limitations and exceptions are a right, Peters said. Authors should recognise that they also are re-using others’ ideas, same for the people who re-use and remix. “I’m really happy with how the dialogue-shaping is going,” she said.

Peters also said Creative Commons takes the view that their licences are not an answer to the problems of the copyright system. (CC licences include the version used by Intellectual Property Watch allowing re-use of our content for non-commercial purposes with attribution).

[Update: Creative Commons recently issued a policy statement on copyright reform].

The Struggle for Balance

Discussions during the week showed the diversity of topics and interests in fields affected by intellectual property rights. There were few vocal champions of the IP system, but there also was no blanket condemnation of it. Rather, discussions were attempts to address specific opportunities within IP, or concerns about its effects in certain cases. Not everyone held the same view and there were some debates during the week.

But given the variety and number of advocates from different sectors, such as the access to medicines and access to knowledge movements, there were some rallying cries around certain issues.

One relatively common area was the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement (TPP), as concerns are high about raising IP protection levels without the participation of public interest groups. A speaker asserted that the United States is using the TPP to target BRIC countries (Brazil, Russia, India, China) as it did in the negotiations for the 1994 World Trade Organization Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS).

There also were a number of discussions about the meaning of “open,” in issues like open access, open education, and open source. On a related note, Sunil Abraham, executive director of the Bangalore, India-based Centre for Internet and Society, said there are different types of open standards, and that using digital signatures instead of biometrics gives a decentralised system that protects human rights.

One speaker said they had been struck during the week by the need for a South-South network. Another asked how developing countries can use IP frameworks that have been predetermined in the North and that are not appropriate.

Participants repeatedly expressed positive attitudes about such a large and high-energy gathering (which the beautiful setting did nothing to diminish), allowing endless networking opportunities. But there was an urgency about the gathering for many, as global efforts to strengthen the IP system are working against their goals.

“We are seeing an assault on pretty much every single level,” one public health advocate said at the closing session. “Even when we win” and are able to advance the cause for access to medicines, the judges have been trained by the North (meaning with a pro-IP slant) and “turn the whole thing over.”

George Washington University Prof. Susan Sell described the “forum-shifting” that occurs with forces seeking to strengthen global intellectual property rules, as they seek international organisations where they can effect change in their favour. She likened it to a “cat and mouse” situation. She also said that IP policy is not an end in itself, but is public policy.

A participant from Jordan said that country did not play “cat-and-mouse” very well as when it signed its bilateral free trade agreement with the United States it took in all the bad aspects of the US copyright law.

Another speaker said the IP system does not encourage innovation for need but rather innovation for profit. He said governments in countries with strong rights holders are “captured,” and that governments need to be recaptured. He said organisations like the Gates and Clinton foundations are promoters of strong IP protection. Developing countries, activists, need to stop being the mouse, he said, and “start becoming the dog that chases the cat.”

“How do we forum-shift to all of the spaces we can win,” another speaker asked later, “[and] push the IP maximalist agenda to where we are not always on the defensive?”

“We are seeing an assault on pretty much every single level,” said a third. “Even when we win and are able to insert an agenda for [access to medicines], the judges have been trained by the North and turn the whole thing over.”

The mood, as Sell characterised it, is that “we can never stop and congratulate ourselves too much, because it just keeps coming.”

The annual event will continue next December, this time in Kuala Lumpur.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/news/ip-watch-january-6-2014-william-new-global-congress-on-ip-and-public-interest-adopts-principles-for-negotiations

Hacking, Modding & Making

praskrishna — 2012-04-09T09:51:41Z

Seeber's electronics laboratory is a room in a unit he shares with his mother. Every available space is taken up with teetering towers of electronic parts, writes Brendan Shanahan for GQ.

Like subprime lending or the line at the motor registry, patent and copyright laws control all our lives but no one really understands them. In the world of DIY Tech, however, it is not a subject that can be ignored.

" If they are infringing on patents then it's a question you have to ask within the individual jurisdiction," says Abraham. "In many jurisdictions design many not have protection. Whether it's legal or illegal is an open question."

At its heart Abraham's argument is pragmatic: the developing world, especially China, is too big to stop. Companies can fight patent wars in every world territory, hire private detectives, pressure governments and prosecute consumers who buy rip-off products, but, ultimately, they won't win. The genie is out of the bottle.

"If something has been made technologically possible, we cannot make it illegal and hope that everyone will now pretend that this is no longer technologically possible," says Abraham. "We can't have the government checking everyone's iPod and laptop. The better move is to change the model."

Abraham has many suggestions for making copyright law more flexible to benefit manufacturers and consumers. One thing is certain: in a world in which Amazon, not even five years after the launch of the Kindle, is now selling more e-books than all hard copy books combined, and technology such as 3D printing will soon be standard, it would be unwise to cling to old certainities. The music industry may come to be regarded as merely the canary in a digital coalmine of failed industries.

Read the full post here

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/news/hacking-modding-making

Resources

pranesh — 2009-10-20T03:29:16Z

A collection of resources that will help one navigate through the arguments and evidence for and against the Indian "Bayh-Dole" bill.

PUPFIP

Bayh-Dole

Technology Transfer

Innovation's Golden Goose (The Economist)

Improving Innovation(The Economist)

Scientific Culture

Patents and America's Universities(The Economist)

When Academia Puts Profits Ahead of Wonder(The New York Times)

Bayhing for blood or Doling out cash?(The Economist)

Evaluative Pieces

University Licensing under Bayh-Dole: What are the Issues and Evidence?(Thursby and Thursby)

Is Bayh-Dole Good for Developing Countries? Lessons from the US Experience(So et al.)

The Law of Unintended Consequences(Fortune Magazine)

The Growth of patenting and licensing by U.S. universities and the Bayh-Dole Act (Mowery et al.)

Overall Assessment of the Bayh-Dole Act (Nelson, Mowery, et al.)

General Resources

Joint Ventures and Intellectual Property(Andreas Panagopoulos)

Patents vs. Other Knowledge Transfer(Agrawal and Henderson)

Incentives Structure and Licensing Success(Dan Elfenbein)

University Licensing and Research Behavior(Lach and Schankerman)

Open Science and Private Property(Paul David)

IP Alternatives

New Approaches to Filling the Gap in TB Drug Discovery (Casenghi, Cole and Nathan)

The Role of Prizes in Developing Low-Cost Point-of-Care Rapid Diagnostic Tests and Better Drugs for TB(James Love)

How to boost R&D for essential drugs and diagnostics

Scrooge and intellectual property rights (BMJ January 2006)

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/a2k/publications/pupfip/resources

Arguments Against the PUPFIP Bill

pranesh — 2011-09-12T11:03:09Z

The Protection and Utilisation of Public Funded Intellectual Property Bill (PUPFIP Bill) is a new legislation being considered by Parliament, which was introduced in the 2008 winter session of the Rajya Sabha. It is modelled on the American Bayh-Dole Act (University and Small Business Patent Procedures Act) of 1980. On this page, we explore some of the reasons that the bill is unnecessary, and how it will be harmful if passed.

Summary

How is the legislation unnecessary?

The Indian government does not have vast reserves of underutilized patents, as the U.S. did in 1980.
Technology transfer is very important, but pushing IPRs aggressively is not the best way of ensuring technology transfer.

How is the legislation harmful?

Excessive patenting lead to gridlocks and retards innovation.
The legislation makes mandatory that which is optional now, and is anyway being followed in many institutions.
Copyright, trademark, etc., seem to be covered under the definition of “public funded IP”.
It will result in a form of double taxation for research, and will increase the consumer cost of all products based on publicly-funded research.
It could have unintended consequences of varied kinds, including discouraging fundamental research as well as discouraging industrial research.
Non-disclosure requirements in the Bill restricts the dissemination of research within the academic community, and curtails freedom of speech.
Exclusive licensing enables restriction on the dissemination of academic research in the marketplace, and increase in cost of products based on public-funded research.

Arguments

How is the legislation unnecessary?

1) The Indian government does not have vast reserves of underutilized patents, as the U.S. did in 1980.

The idea behind the Bayh-Dole Act was that the research funded by the government (and owned, in the US, by the government) was being underutilized. In 1980, over 28,000 unlicensed patents lay with the U.S. government.[1] The Act shifted the title of such works from the government to the University or small business that conducted the research, thus allowing them to take out patents on the research outputs. In India, under present laws, the researcher(s) own the rights over their research whether they be government-funded or not. Usually, due to employment contracts, the research institutes already have the right to patent their inventions. Thus, currently, there is no need for an enabling legislation in this regard, as there was in the U.S.

In fact, currently, the Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) has over 5173 patents (counting both those in force and those under dispute), while only 222 patents are licensed (with 68 of them being under dispute). Thus, even with the IP being in the institute's hands, there is a "problem" situation similar to that which necessitated Bayh-Dole in the U.S. Thus, quite contrary to the aims of the Act, further patenting will only lead to a situation of even more underutilized patents.

2) Technology transfer is very important, but pushing IPRs aggressively is not the best way of ensuring technology transfer.

At a recent seminar held at NUJS Kolkata on the PUPFIP Bill, it was revealed that while IIT-Kharagpur’s TTO-equivalent (called the Sponsored Research & Industrial Consultancy division - SRIC) currently handles over Rs.300 crores through 850 projects, only around Rs. 5-15 crores (exact figures weren't available) are currently made through its patent portfolio.[2] Thus patents don't seem, on the face of things, to be the best way of ensuring technology transfer. Indeed, the oft-cited 28,0000 unlicensed patents held by the U.S. government were composed primarily of patents for which industry had refused to take exclusive licences.[3]

Many contend that one of the most important functions of a patent is to get inventors to disclose their inventions rather than keep them as secrets. This reason for awarding a patent is invalidated if stronger protection is granted to trade secrets (no term limit, for instance) than for patents. Secondly, this reason for granting patents is not valid in case of government-funded research in academia and research institutes. The culture of publication and the economy of reputation are sufficient to ensure disclosure. Even without these intrinsic factors, there grant requirements can necessitate publication. If mere publication is believed to be insufficient, then the government would do well to ask for technology dissemination plans before grants are made. At any rate, monopoly rights in the form of patents are thoroughly unnecessary.

How is the legislation harmful?

1) Excessive patenting lead to gridlocks and retard innovation.

It sees protection of IPR as the sole means of encouraging innovation and driving research to the doorstep of consumers. The trend around the world is that of exploring alternative forms of spurring innovation. Even in India, CSIR has gone for an innovative "Open Source Drug Discovery" project, which has proven very successful so far. Furthermore, recent literature shows that excessive patenting is harming research and innovation by creating gridlocks.[4] If platform technologies and basic research (such as SNP) gets mired in patents, then the transaction costs increase (not only in terms of money, but more importantly in administrative terms). This ends up in research clearances getting blocked, and thus retards innovation. It must be remembered that intellectual property is not only an output, but also an input. The more aggressively the outputs are guarded and prevented from being shared, the more the inputs will be affected. The study of patent thickets and gridlocks has reached such a stage that the U.S. law has been changed to reflect this. Firstly, the Bayh-Dole Act was amended in 2000 to state that the objectives of the Bayh-Dole Act were to be carried out "without unduly encumbering future research and discovery". Now, the courts (in the Bilski case) have increased the standard of obviousness in patent law (which means that less patents will be granted). Furthermore, the U.S.P.T.O. and the U.S. Senate are currently considering means of overhauling the U.S. patent system, which many fear is close to breaking down due to over-patenting. All these are signs that the footsteps we are seeking to follow are themselves turning back.

2) The legislation makes mandatory that which is optional now, and is anyway being followed in many institutions.

While the CSIR labs pursue patents aggressively, they also run the OSSD project. The latter might not be permissible if the Act is passed as it stands. Furthermore, this would increase the number of underutilized patents, which is a problem faced currently by CSIR, which has had an aggressive patent policy since the 1990s. Unlicensed patents constitute around 93% of CSIR's total patent portfolio. (In contrast, MIT averages around 50% licensing of patents.) If aggressive patenting is made mandatory, it adds substantially to administrative costs of all institutes which receive any grants from the government. These institutes might not be large enough to merit a dedicated team of professionals to handle

3) Copyright, trademark, etc., seem to be covered under the definition of "public funded IP".

This leads to a ridiculous need to attempt to commercialise all government-funded research literature (and the government funds science research, social sciences, arts, etc.). Furthermore, while the definition of "public funded IP" includes copyrights, trademarks, etc., yet the substantive provisions seem to only include those forms of IP which have to be registered compulsorily (copyright and trademark don't -- copyright comes into existence when an original work is expressed in a medium, and trademark can come into existence by use). Importantly, seeking to commercialise all copyrighted works of research would hamper the movement for open access to scholarly literature. The inititative towards open access to scholarly literature is something that National Knowledge Commission has recommended, and is a move that would result in increased dissemination of public-funded research, which seems to be an aim of the PUPFIP Bill as well.

4) It will result in a form of double taxation for research, and will increase the consumer cost of all products based on publicly-funded research.

This bill would increase the consumer cost of all products based on publicly-funded research, because of the additional burden of patent royalties.

Public funds research -> Institute patents research -> Pharma MNC gets exclusive license over research -> Drug reaches market.

Assuming an exclusive licence: Cost of the drug = cost of manufacturing, storage, etc. + mark-up (monopolistic) cost + cost of licence.

Thus, in effect, the public has to pay twice for the research: it pays once to enable the scientist to conduct the research, and once again in the form of royalties to have that research brought to the marketplace.

5) It could have unintended consequences of varied kinds, including discouraging fundamental research as well as discouraging industrial research.

The former could happen since institutions and individual scientists have a financial incentive to shift their focus away from fundamental research; the latter, conversely, because the filings and bureaucracy involved could drive scientists away from reporting or even engaging in industrial research [pdf]. Faculty and researcher involvement in the business of licensing is a sub-optimal usage of their talents, and there are scientists who would rather stay away from business (as is shown by the intake of former industry-researchers into government-funded labs such as those of CSIR).

6) Non-disclosure requirements in the Bill restricts the dissemination of research within the academic community, and curtails freedom of speech.

This will bring about a shift in science and research which is always done upon others' work. This is why in the U.S., the National Institute of Health (N.I.H.) has sought to ensure (without any legal authority) that it only finances that research that on single nucleotide polymorphism (S.N.P.) which is not patented, and is shared freely amongst scholars. Since this requirement of the N.I.H.'s does not have any legal backing (since it is contradictory to the Bayh-Dole Act), institutions are free to get the grant from N.I.H. and then go ahead and patent their inventions.

7) Exclusive licensing enables restriction on the dissemination of academic research in the marketplace, and increase in cost of products based on public-funded research.

The bill allows for both assignment of licences as well as exclusive licences. Both of these enable monopolistic pricing to be undertaken by the licensee/assignee. There are not even any mechanisms in the Act to ensure, for instance, that a public call is made to ascertain that no parties are willing to consider a non-exclusive licence. Patents are generally said to grant a monopoly right because of the opportunity to recover costs of research and development. When the research is being done by public-funded money, there is no justification for monopoly rights on that research, since there are no excessive costs to recover.

Footnotes:

[1] See So et al. and Thursby and Thursby, quoted in the National Knowledge Commission's letter to the Prime Minister.

[2] See Prof. Vivekanandans' presentation "Patenting and Technology Transfer-the IIT Khargpur Experience"

[3] See Anthony So et al., Is Bayh-Dole Good for Developing Countries, 6 PLoS Biol e262 (2008)

[4] See Michael A. Heller & Rebecca S. Eisenberg, Can Patents Deter Innovation? The Anticommons in Biomedical Research, 280 Science 698 (1998)

Additional Resources

On the PUPFIP Bill

February 5, 2004: NIPER holds parallel session of Indian Science Congress (Express Pharma)
October 27, 2006: Susan Finston, India to Propose New Technology Transfer Legislation (Bayh-Dole 25)
January 16, 2007: National Knowledge Commision's Letter to Indian Prime Minister (National Knowledge Commission)
April 15, 2007: Archita Bhatta, Proposed IPR law raises concern (Down to Earth)
May 31, 2007: Science & Technology needs to be core of the economic development says Kapil Sibal (PIB Press Release)
November 13, 2007: Government Accords Approval to National Biotechnology Development Strategy (PIB Press Release)
February 1, 2008: Yudhijit Bhattacharjee, Indian Government Hopes Bill Will Stimulate Innovation (Science)
February 19, 2008: Shamnad Basheer, Exporting Bayh Dole to India: Whither Transparency? (Part 1) (Part 2) (SpicyIP)
March 17, 2008: Kalpana Pathak, Varsities may soon own patent rights (Business Standard)
March 17, 2008: P.T. Jyothi Datta, Public-funded research may pay dividends for scientists (Business Line)
March 17, 2008: Joff Wild, India considers Bayh-Dole style legislation (IAM Magazine)
April 30, 2008: M.K. Unnikrishnan and Pradeepti Nayak, Lessons from Bayh Dole Act and its relevance to India (PharmaBiz)
July 2008: Sean M. O'Connor, Historical Context of U.S. Bayh-Dole Act: Implications for Indian Government Funded Research Patent Policy (STEM Newsletter)
July 7, 2008: Shamnad Basheer, Mysterious Indian "Bayh Dole" Bill: SpicyIP Procures a Copy (SpicyIP)
July 09, 2008: Latha Jishnu, Does India need a Bayh-Dole Act? (Business Standard)
September 2008: V.C. Vivekanandan, Transplanting Bayh-Dole Act- Issues at Stake Authors (13 Journal of Intell. Prop. 480)
September 18, 2008: Shamnad Basheer, Indian Patent Bill: Let's not be too hasty (SciDev.net)
October 28, 2008: Anthony So et al., Is Bayh-Dole Good for Developing Countries, 6 PLoS Biol e262 (2008)
October 31, 2008: Cabinet gives approval for Protection and Utilization of Public Funded Intellectual Property Bill, 2008 (PIB Press Release)
November 2008: Annette Lin et al., The Bayh-Dole Act and Promoting the Transfer of Technology of Publicly Funded-Research (UAEM White Paper on the Proposed Indian Bayh-Dole Analogue)
November 1, 2008: Editorial: Not in Public Interest (Mint)
November 12, 2008: Ben Butkus, As India Mulls Bill Modeled on Bayh-Dole, Critics Claim It May Stifle Innovation (Biotech Transfer Weekly)
December 16, 2008: Pranesh Prakash, Indian "Bayh Dole" Bill before Parliament (Commons Law)
January 23, 2009: Editorial: Time to Rethink Intellectual Property Laws (SciDev.net)
March 12, 2009: Feroz Ali Khader, Does Patenting Research Change the Culture of Science? (The Hindu)
April 24, 2009: Sunil Abraham & Pranesh Prakash, Does India Need Its Own Bayh-Dole? (Indian Express)
September 21, 2009: C.H. Unnikrishnan, Proposed Patent Bill Is Flawed, Say Experts (Mint)
September 23, 2009: Editorial: An Idea That's A Patent Misfit (Mint)
October 2009: Bhaven N. Sampat, The Bayh-Dole Model in Developing Countries: Reflections on the Indian Bill on Publicly Funded Intellectual Property (UNCTAD - ICTSD Policy Brief No. 5)
January 2010: Amit Shovon Ray & Sabyasachi Saha, Patenting Public-Funded Research for Technology Transfer: A Conceptual-Empirical Synthesis of US Evidence and Lessons for India (ICRIER Working Paper No. 244)
January 2010: Mrinalini Kochupillai, The Protection and Utilization of Public Funded Intellectual Property Bill, 2008: A Critique in the Light of India's Innovation Environment, 15 J. Intell. Prop. Rights 19 (2010)
January 16, 2010: Amit Shovon Ray & Sabyasachi Saha, Intellectual Bottlenecks (Financial Express)
January 21, 2010: Latha Jishnu, Perils of the US Model (Business Standard)
January 22, 2010: Rema Nagarajan, Scientists Fume Over New Patent Bill (Times of India)
January 26, 2010: Shamnad Basheer, The Problem with Patents (Mint)
February 5, 2010: Shalini Butani, Public Research May Become More Private (Business Line)
February 8, 2010: Anika Gupta, Scientists Want Changes in Innovation Bill (Mint)
February 9, 2010: C.H. Unnikrishnan, Parliament Panel Wants Govt Review on Innovation Bill (Mint)
February 15, 2010: Leena Menghaney, A Bad Example from the U.S. (Down to Earth)
February 19, 2010: Pranesh Prakash, A Patent Conundrum (Indian Express)
SpicyIP coverage by tag 'Bayh Dole'
Presentations from NUJS, Kolkata conference on the PUPFIP Bill

On Bayh-Dole

Newspapers and Magazines

Academic Journals

Amy Kapczynski et al., Addressing Global Health Inequities: An Open Licensing Approach for University Innovation, 20 Berkeley Tech. L.J. 1031 (2005)
Anthony So et al., Is Bayh-Dole Good for Developing Countries, 6 PLoS Biol. e262 (2008)
Arti K. Rai & Rebecca S. Eisenberg, Bayh-Dole Reform and the Progress of Biomedicine, 66 Law & Contemp. Probs. 289 (2003)
David C. Mowery & Arvids A. Aiedonis, Numbers, Quality, and Entry: How Has the Bayh-Dole Act Affected U.S. University Patenting and Licensing?, 1 Innovation Pol'y Econ. 187 (2000)
David C. Mowery, et al., Learning to Patent: Institutional Experience, Learning, and the Characteristics of U.S. University Patents After the Bayh-Dole Act, 1981-1992, 48 Mgmt. Sci. 73 (2002)
Donald Kennedy, Editorial: Enclosing the Research Commons, 294 Science 2249 (2001)
F.M. Scherer, The Political Economy of Patent Policy Reform in the United States, 7 Colorado J. Telecomm. High Tech. L. 167 (2009)
Henry Steck, Corporatization of the University: Seeking Conceptual Clarity, 585 Annals of Am. Acad. Pol. & Soc. Sci. 66 (2003)
Jason Owen-Smith, Trends and Transitions in the Institutional Environment for Public and Private Science, 49 Higher Educ. 91 (2005)
Jerry G. Thursby & Marie C. Thursby, University Licensing and the Bayh-Dole Act, 301 Science 1052 (2003)
Jerry G. Thursby & Marie C. Thursby, Who is Selling the Ivory Tower? Sources of Growth in University Licensing, 48 Mgmt. Sci. 90 (2002)
Josh Lerner, Review of 'Ivory Tower', 43 J. Econ. Litt. 510 (2005)
Joshua B. Powers, R&D Funding Source and University Technology Transfer: What is Stimulating Universities to Be More Entrepreneurial?, 45 Research in Higher Educ. 1 (2004)
Lita Nelsen, The Rise of Intellectual Property Protection in the American University, 279 Science 1460 (1998)
Marcia Angell & Arnold S. Relman, Patents, Profits & American Medicine: Conflicts of Interest in the Testing & Marketing of New Drugs, 131 Daedalus 102 (2002)
Maria Jelenik, Review: Two Books on Technology Transfer, 50 Admin. Sci. Q. 131 (2005) (Review of 'Ivory Tower')
Michael A. Heller & Rebecca S. Eisenberg, Can Patents Deter Innovation? The Anticommons in Biomedical Research, 280 Science 698 (1998)
Rebecca Henderson, et al., Universities as a Source of Commercia Technology: A Detailed Analsis of University Patenting, 1965-1988, 80 Rev. Econ. Statistics 119 (1998)
Rebecca S. Eisenberg, Public Research and Private Development: Patents and Technology Transfer in Government-Sponsorded Research, 82 Virginia L. Rev. 1663 (1996)
Rebecca S. Eisenberg & Richard R. Nelson, Public vs. Proprietary Science: A Fruitful Tension?, 131 Daedalus 89 (2002)
Richard Jensen & Marie Thursby, Proofs and Prototypes for Sale: The Licensing of University Inventions, 91 Am. Econ. Rev. 240 (2001)
Roberto Mazzoleni & Richard R. Nelson, Economic Theories about the Benefits and Costs of Patents, 32 J. Econ. Issues 1031 (1998)
Thomas A. Massaro, Innovation, Technology Transfer, and Patent Policy: The University Contribution, 82 Virginia L. Rev. 1729 (1996)
Walter W. Powell & Jason Owen-Smith, Universities and the Market for Intellectual Property in the Life Sciences, 17 J. Pol'y Analysis Mgmt. 253 (1998)
William M. Sage, Funding Fairness: Public Investment, Proprietary Rights and Access to Health Care Technology, 82 Virginia L. Rev. 1737 (1996)
Zach W. Hall & Christopher Scott, University-Industry Partnership, 291 Science 553 (2001)

Resources

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/a2k/publications/pupfip/why-no-pupfip

Centre for Internet and Society

Kannada Wikipedia Orientation Workshop at IISc, Bengaluru

Marathi Wikipedia - Vishwakosh Workshop for Science writers in IUCAA, Pune

Submission to DIPP at Meeting with IP Stakeholders

Annexure

Meeting with IP Stakeholders

Train the Trainer 2018

India – the last telecom licensing frontier

October 2017 Newsletter

November 2017 Newsletter

[Updated] Exclusive: OnePlus 5T’s Face Unlock feature may have infringed upon SensibleVision’s face recognition patents

Update

Analysis from a patent and IP expert

January 2018 Newsletter

Fifth International IPR Conference (GIPC 2013)

Global Congress On IP and Public Interest Adopts Principles for Negotiations

Statement on Global Fund IP Policy and Generics

Open A.I.R.

Other Highlights

The Struggle for Balance

Hacking, Modding & Making

Resources

PUPFIP

News-related/General Coverage

Scientific Culture

Analytical Pieces

Bayh-Dole

Technology Transfer

Scientific Culture

Evaluative Pieces

General Resources

IP Alternatives

Arguments Against the PUPFIP Bill

Summary

How is the legislation unnecessary?

How is the legislation harmful?

Additional resources

Arguments

How is the legislation unnecessary?

1) The Indian government does not have vast reserves of underutilized patents, as the U.S. did in 1980.

2) Technology transfer is very important, but pushing IPRs aggressively is not the best way of ensuring technology transfer.

How is the legislation harmful?

1) Excessive patenting lead to gridlocks and retard innovation.

2) The legislation makes mandatory that which is optional now, and is anyway being followed in many institutions.

3) Copyright, trademark, etc., seem to be covered under the definition of "public funded IP".

4) It will result in a form of double taxation for research, and will increase the consumer cost of all products based on publicly-funded research.

5) It could have unintended consequences of varied kinds, including discouraging fundamental research as well as discouraging industrial research.

6) Non-disclosure requirements in the Bill restricts the dissemination of research within the academic community, and curtails freedom of speech.

7) Exclusive licensing enables restriction on the dissemination of academic research in the marketplace, and increase in cost of products based on public-funded research.

Additional Resources

On the PUPFIP Bill

On Bayh-Dole