The Centre for Internet and Society
https://cis-india.org
These are the search results for the query, showing results 61 to 75.
Procuring books in Indian libraries
https://cis-india.org/news/procuring-books
<b>Campaign to legalise parallel imports gathers steam.</b>
<p>In a move to advocate the cause of libraries and book readers throughout India, campaigners are telling Kapil Sibal, the Minister of Human Resources Development (HRD), why it is important to legalise parallel imports in India. This move is supported by the International Federation of Library Associations in developing countries.</p>
<p>Among the proposed amendments to the Copyright Act is a proposal to legalise parallel importation of books into India. This provision is now under threat because a publishers’ association convinced the HRD Minister (who is in charge of copyright law) that no one is calling for parallel importation. If parallel importing is not legalised in developing countries, it becomes impossible for libraries in India to even procure books from Amazon (for instance), especially the ones which have not yet released in India.</p>
<p>Parallel importation allows books that are (legally) bought overseas to be imported into India without asking the copyright owners permission. Without parallel importation being allowed, purchases made by libraries from foreign sellers (for instance on the Internet) are rendered illegal. International organisations like the International Federation of Library Associations (IFLA), Electronic Information for Libraries (eIFL), and Consumers International all support parallel importation, especially in developing countries.</p>
<p>For more on the need for parallel importation, see this<a href="https://cis-india.org/advocacy/ipr/blog/parallel-importation-of-books/" class="external-link"> write up</a> by Pranesh Prakash from the Centre for Internet and Society, Bangalore.</p>
<p>For the campaign letter sent to Kapil Sibal by February 1st 2011, see below:</p>
<p>To<br />Minister for Human Resource Development<br />Room No 301<br />Shastri Bhawan<br />Dr. Rajendra Prasad Road<br />New Delhi – 110 001</p>
<p>Date: Tuesday, February 1, 2011</p>
<p>Dear Shri Sibal,</p>
<p>Subject: Parallel Importation of Books</p>
<p>We write to you as an organisation interested in the availability of books for libraries. Recently, a publishers’ association has made public statements that there are no groups that are demanding parallel importation, and that they themselves will be harmed by allowing for parallel importation.</p>
<p>We wish to inform you that this is not true. We believe that being able to legally purchase a book outside of India and import in into India is crucial for libraries. Many books that we wish to provide for our users—faculties, students, and others—are not available in India and have to be imported from abroad.</p>
<p>Currently the exception contained in s.51(b) proviso is applicable only to individuals for “private and domestic use” and does not cover libraries. Thus, if parallel importation is prohibited, then we will be unable to buy foreign books directly from foreign sellers. We often have to make purchases on online bookstores such as Amazon and Alibris, and these will be construed to be illegal without parallel importation being legal. We will be left at the mercy of what books are offered by sellers in India, instead of being able to buy what is required by our readers.</p>
<p>Parallel importation is allowed by the TRIPS agreement (Article 6, “Exhaustion”) as well as by the WIPO Copyright treaty (Article 6, “Right of Distribution”). We hope you will keep our concerns in mind.</p>
<p>Yours sincerely,<br />Centre for Internet and Society, Bangalore</p>
<p>Read the original <a class="external-link" href="http://blog.hrisouthasian.org/2011/02/04/procuring-books-in-indian-libraries/">here</a></p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='https://cis-india.org/news/procuring-books'>https://cis-india.org/news/procuring-books</a>
</p>
No publisherpraskrishnaIntellectual Property Rights2011-04-01T16:27:28ZNews ItemProblems Remain with Standing Committee's Report on Copyright Amendments
https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/sc-report-on-amendments
<b>The Rajya Sabha Standing Committee on Human Resource Development (under which ministry copyright falls) recently tabled their report on the Copyright (Amendment) Bill, 2010 before Parliament. There is much to be applauded in the report, including the progressive stand that the Committee has taken on the issue of providing access by persons with disabilities. This post, however, will concern itself with highlighting some of the problems with that report, along with some very important considerations that got missed out of the entire amendment debate.</b>
<h2 id="internal-source-marker_0.7517305351026772">Fair Dealings and Intermediary Liability</h2>
<p>The
amendments make a number of changes to s.52(1) of the Act, including to
the fair dealing provisions under s.52(1)(a), and introduction of two
new sub-sections (s.52(1)(b) and (c)) with s.52(1)(c) introducing a
modicum of protection for intermediaries involved in "transient and
incidental storage for the purpose of providing electronic links, access
or integration" (but only if the copyright holder has not expressed any
objections, and if the intermediary believes it to be non-infringing).
The provision allows the intermediary to ask the person complaining
against it to provide a court order within 14 days, since the
intermediary is in no position to determine the judicial question of
whether the copyright holder holds copyright and if the third party has
violated that copyright. However this provision was opposed tooth and
nail by the copyright holders' associations that dominated the
representations, while intermediaries and consumers remained woefully
under-represented before the Standing Committee.</p>
<p>Predictably,
the Standing Committee dealt a blow against intermediaries and
consumers by asking the government to review the "viability of the
duration of 14 days... by way of balancing the views of the stakeholders
as well as the legal requirement in the matter". They recommended a
relatively minor change of changing the phrase "transient and
incidental" to "transient or incidental". By doing this, they failed to
address the concerns raised by Yahoo India, Google India, and also
failed to acknowledge the submissions made by 22 civil society
organizations (available here:
http://cis-india.org/advocacy/ipr/upload/copyright-bill-submission).</p>
<p> </p>
<h2>Technological Protection Measures and Rights Management Information Provision</h2>
<p>The
amendments aim to bring about two new criminal provisions, and seek to
make circumvention of technological protection measures (digital locks)
and alteration of rights management information (which are embedded into
digital files and signals) illegal.</p>
<p>The Standing Committee heard a number of organizations on technological protection measures, which <a href="https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/tpm-copyright-amendment">we had argued</a>
are harmful as they a) cannot distinguish between fair dealing and
infringement, and b) are harmful even if a legal right to circumvent for
fair dealings is provided because the technological means to circumvent
doesn't necessarily exist. (Imagine a law that says that breaking a
lock using lock-breaking implements isn't a crime if it is done to enter
into your own house. Such a law doesn't help you if you can't get your
hands on the lock-breaking implements in the first place.) The Indian
Broadcasting Federation, the Business Software Alliance, and the Motion
Picture Association (which represents six studios, all American), the
Indian Music Industry, and the Indian Performing Right Society Limited
all felt that this provision did not go far enough. The Motion Picture
Association, for instance, wants not just controls over that which
copyright covers</p>
<p>Yahoo
India and Google India on the other hand thought that provision went
too far. Google made it clear that they thought having criminal
repercussions for circumvention was clearly disproportionate. Thus, a
clearer split is established between old media companies; the old media
companies clutching on to straws that they feel will save them from
adapting their business practices to the digital environment, and online
companies that understand the digital environment better having a
markedly different idea.</p>
<p>Currently
section 65B (read with the definition of "Rights Management
Information" in section 2(xa)) of the proposed amendments ensures that
Rights Management Information cannot be used to spy on users. The Indian
Reprographic Rights Organization however believes that this is wrong:
it believes that copyright owners should have the ability to track users
without their consent. Yahoo India, on the other hand, believes that
this is a harmful provision, and state that "the imposition of criminal
and monetary liability could adversely affect consumers", and cites the
instance of difficulties that would be faced by "entities engaged in
creating copies of any copyright material into a format specially
designed for persons suffering from disability" because of the language
of the provision that requires knowledge instead of intention. The
committee responds to this by summing up with a tautology, stating:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The
Committee is of the view that the parties responsible for distribution
or broadcasting or communication to the public through authorized
licence from the author or rights holder and who do not remove any
rights management information deliberately for making unauthorized
copies need not worry about this provision as long as their act is as
per the framework of this provision.</p>
</blockquote>
<h2><br /></h2>
<h2>Implications of Standing Committee's Report Unclear</h2>
<p>Many of the comments made by the Standing Committee are unclear. On compulsory licensing, the committee states:</p>
<blockquote>The
Committee also takes note of the proposed amendments in section 31 A
relating to compulsory licence in unpublished Indian works. The
provision of compulsory licence for orphaned works available under this
section is proposed to be extended to published works as well. Like in
the case of section 31, extension of applicability to all foreign works
(including film, DVDs, etc.) could be violative of Berne Convention and
TRIPS Agreement and seem to fall short of the minimum obligations
imposed by such instruments. The Committee is of the view that future
implication of proposed amendment in Section 31A vis-à-vis India's
commitment to international agreement needs to be free from any
ambiguity so as to prevent any negative fallout.<br /></blockquote>
<p>However,
the usage of the phrase "could be violative" leaves it unclear whether
the Standing Committee believes the proposed amendments to be violative
of the TRIPS Agreement or not. All that the Standing Committee says is
that the provision needs to be unambiguous, and that TRIPS compliance
must be ensured. That word of caution does not directly rebut the
government's contention that the proposed amendment is TRIPS-compliant.</p>
<p>Similarly,
the Committee's views on increase of copyright term for cinematograph
films is unclear. While commenting on the clause that introduces the
term increase (as part of the proposal to include the principal director
as an author of the film along with the producer), the Committee
states:</p>
<blockquote>It,
therefore, recommends that the proposal to include principal director
as author of the film along with producer may be dropped altogether.<br /></blockquote>
<p>While
this presumably means that the proposal to increase term is also being
rejected, that is not made clear by the Committee's comments.</p>
<h2><br /></h2>
<h2>Increased Copyright Duration, Expansive Moral Rights and Other Negative Changes</h2>
<p>In
the submission of CIS and twenty-one other civil society organizations
to the Standing Committee, we highlighted all of the below concerns.
However, our submission was not tabled before the Standing Committee
for reasons unknown to us.</p>
<ul><li><strong>WCT
and WPPT compliance</strong>: India has not signed either of these two treaties,
which impose TRIPS-plus copyright protection, but without any
corresponding increase in fair dealing / fair use rights. Given that
the Standing Committee has recommended against some aspects of WCT
compliance (such as the move to change "hire" to "commercial rental")
and that without such changes India cannot be a signatory to the WCT, it
is unclear why other forms of WCT compliance (such as TPMs) should be
implemented.</li><li><strong>Increase
in duration of copyright</strong>: The duration of copyright of photographs and
video recordings is sought to be increased. The term of copyright for photographs is being increased from sixty years from creation to sixty years from death of the photographer. This will
significantly reduce the public domain, which India has been arguing for
internationally, especially through its push for the Development Agenda at the World Intellectual Property Organization.<br /></li><li><strong>Moral
rights</strong>: Changes have been made to author’s moral rights (and
performer’s moral rights have been introduced) but these have been made
without requisite safeguards.</li><li><strong>Version
recordings</strong>: The amendments make cover version much more difficult to
produce, and while the Standing Committee has addressed the concerns of
some in the music industry, it hasn't addressed the concerns of artists
and consumers.</li></ul>
<h2><br /></h2>
<h2>Criminal Provisions, Government Works, and Other Missed Opportunities</h2>
<p>The
following important changes should have been made by the government,
but haven't. While on some issues the Standing Committee has gone
beyond the proposed amendments, it hasn't touched upon any of the
following, which we believe are very important changes that are required
to be made.</p>
<ul><li><strong>Criminal
provisions</strong>: Our law still criminalises individual, non-commercial
copyright infringement. This has now been extended to the proposal for
circumvention of Technological Protection Measures and removal of Rights
Management Information also.</li><li><strong>Government
works:</strong> Taxpayers are still not free to use works that were paid for by
them. This goes against the direction that India has elected to march
towards with the Right to Information Act. A simple amendment of
s.52(1)(q) would suffice. The amended subsection would except "the
reproduction, communication to the public, or publication of any
government work" as being non-infringing uses.</li><li><strong>Copyright
terms</strong>: The duration of all copyrights are above the minimum required by
our international obligations, thus decreasing the public domain which
is crucial for all scientific and cultural progress.</li><li><strong>Educational exceptions</strong>: The exceptions for education still do not fully embrace distance and digital education.</li><li><strong>Communication
to the public</strong>: No clear definition is given of what constitute a
‘public’, and no distinction is drawn between commercial and
non-commercial ‘public’ communication.</li><li><strong>Internet
intermediaries</strong>: More protections are required to be granted to Internet
intermediaries to ensure that non-market based peer-production projects
such as Wikipedia, and other forms of social media and grassroots
innovation are not stifled.</li><li><strong>Fair
dealing and fair use</strong>: We would benefit greatly if, apart from the
specific exceptions provided for in the Act, more general guidelines
were also provided as to what do not constitute infringement. This would
not take away from the existing exceptions.</li></ul>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/sc-report-on-amendments'>https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/sc-report-on-amendments</a>
</p>
No publisherpraneshAccess to KnowledgeCopyrightIntellectual Property RightsIntermediary LiabilityTechnological Protection Measures2011-09-06T07:50:12ZBlog EntryPrivacy and the Indian Copyright Act, 1857 as Amended in 2010
https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/copyright-privacy
<b>In this post the author examines the issue of privacy in light of the Indian Copyright Act, 1857 as amended by the Copyright Amendment Bill in 2010. Four key questions are examined in detail and the author gives suitable recommendations for each of the questions that arise.</b>
<p>India's Copyright Act was established in 1857 and was most recently amended in 2010. Although India at present is not a member of WIPO, the provisions in the proposed Bill will work to make the Act WIPO compliant. When looking at privacy in the context of copyright, four key questions arise:</p>
<h2>How do DRM technologies undermine privacy and what safeguards are present in the Indian Law to protect citizens’ right to privacy?</h2>
<p>Technologies such as digital rights management technologies were developed to be used by hardware manufacturers, publishers, copyright holders and individuals to impose limitations on the usage of digital content and devices. DRM technologies pose as a privacy threat, because in their ability to monitor what is happening to a copyrighted work, they are also able to collect personal information and send it back to a host without knowledge of the user. The host is then able to use that data for marketing or commercial purposes. In the Copyright Act, 1957 there are no current provisions against DRM circumvention. In the proposed Copyright Bill 2010 there are two proposed provisions to prevent anti circumvention of DMR technologies, and one provision that clarifies what is a DMR technology. </p>
<h3>Proposed Legislation</h3>
<p><em>Section 2 (xa)</em>: Defines Rights Management information. <br /><em>Section 65A</em> : Protection of Technological Measures - Any person who knowingly makes or has in his possession any plate for the purpose of making infringing copies of any work in which copyright subsists shall be punishable with imprisonment which may extend to two years. The section includes that any person facilitating circumvention by another person of a technological measure, shall maintain a complete record of such other persons including his name, address and all relevant particulars necessary to identify him. <br />Section 65B: Protection of Rights Management Information – Any person who removes or distributes, copies or broadcasts any rights management information without authority shall be by punishable with imprisonment. </p>
<h3>Recommendation</h3>
<p>We find that in this provision the privacy of an individual is brought into question, because there are no safeguards against the commercialization of information, and no formal process of redress if an individual discovers that his information is being used without his consent/prior knowledge. We would recommend that it be clearly articulated in the provision that the collection and commercialization of information and personal data is prohibited by DRM technologies and host companies, and a method of redress be put in place. </p>
<h2>Under the present copyright does a person have the ability to expose privacy infringement?</h2>
<p>Because DRM technologies often employ the use of spy-ware, it is important that an individual has the ability to know if spy-ware is being used on their computer systems. Currently reverse engineering is permitted under provision 52 (ac). The amended version of provision 52 is less clear on if reverse engineering would be allowed. </p>
<h3>Current Legislation</h3>
<p><em>Provision 52 (ac)</em>: Certain acts not to be in infringement of copyright include the observation, study or test of functioning of the computer programs in order to determine the ideas and principles which underlie any elements of the program while performing such acts necessary for the functions for which the computer program was supplied. The following acts shall not constitute in infringement of copyright, namely:</p>
<h3>Proposed</h3>
<p>The proposed amendment reads:</p>
<p class="discreet"> 52 (1) The following acts shall not constitute an infringement of copyrights, namely: </p>
<p class="discreet">(i) (a) a fair dealing with a literary, dramatic, musical or artistic work not being a computer program for the purposes of:</p>
<p class="discreet">(ii) private use, including research</p>
<p class="discreet">(iii) Criticism or review, whether of that work or of any other work.</p>
<p>The exclusion of computer program in the proposed bill makes it unclear under what circumstances reverse engineering would be allowed.</p>
<h3>Recommendation</h3>
<p>We would recommend that for clarity purposes a specific clause be added to the act that details under what circumstances a person is allowed to reverse engineer a product for protection of their own privacy. </p>
<h2>How does the proposed exception for the disabled undermine privacy? <br /></h2>
<p>In India under the current Copyright Act, 1957 there are no provisions for the benefit of disabled persons, thus currently permission from copyright holders needs to be exclusively sought every time the visually challenged person requires access. Under the Constitution of India and the Berne Convention, India has committed to enshrining the rights of the disabled. </p>
<h3>Proposed Legislation</h3>
<p>The proposed amendment of the Act will grant compulsory license in respect of publication of any copyrighted works not covered by the exception under section 52 (1) (zb).</p>
<p>The Bill also proposes a board that would establish the credentials of the applicant and satisfy itself that the application has been made in good faith. This compromises the anonymity that most individuals enjoy when a disabled person tries to access a digital library.</p>
<h3>Recommendation<br /></h3>
<p>We recommend that the proposed Bill limits the authentication process a disabled person must go through when accessing digital libraries, etc, and the extent to which records are to be kept of transaction This will serve to protect the anonymity and privacy of disabled persons.</p>
<h2>What is On the horizon?</h2>
<p>As copyright and IP is a constantly evolving issue, countries are consistently amending and changing their laws. With the flow of peoples across borders increasing, Indians will be affected by different international policies that could pose to infringe upon their privacy, for example, cross border checks or three strike regimes. </p>
<h3>Examples of Proposed Legislation: The Anti- Counterfeiting Trade Agreement</h3>
<p>ACTA is a proposed legislation with the objective to combat counterfeiting and piracy. Partners in the negotiations include the United States, Australia, Canada, the European Union, Japan, Mexico, Morocco, New Zealand, Singapore, South Korea and Switzerland. The treaty will oblige each Contracting Party to adopt, in accordance with its legal system, the measures necessary to ensure the application of the treaty. Though ACTA has not been enacted, many worry that ACTA would facilitate privacy violations by trademark and copyright holders against private citizens suspected of infringement activities without any sort of legal due process. The Act would allow for random searches of laptops, MP3 players, and cellular phones for illegally downloaded or ripped music and movies. </p>
<h3>Recommendation</h3>
<p>We find that copyright infringement does not appear to justify a three strike regime or cross border searches. ACTA and other international treaties raise the question that if India became compliant with certain international standards, the standards would be too stringent without safeguards, and pose as a risk to a person’s privacy.</p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/copyright-privacy'>https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/copyright-privacy</a>
</p>
No publisherpraskrishnaIntellectual Property RightsCopyrightAccess to Knowledge2011-08-23T03:25:02ZBlog EntryPre-Budget Consultation 2016 - Submission to the IT Group of the Ministry of Finance
https://cis-india.org/openness/pre-budget-consultation-2016-submission-to-the-ministry-of-finance
<b>The Ministry of Finance has recently held pre-budget consultations with different stakeholder groups in connection with the Union Budget 2016-17. We were invited to take part in the consultation for the IT (hardware and software) group organised on January 07, 2016, and submit a suggestion note. We are sharing the note below. It was prepared and presented by Sumandro Chattapadhyay, with contributions from Rohini Lakshané, Anubha Sinha, and other members of CIS.</b>
<p> </p>
<p>It is our distinct honour to be invited to submit this note for consideration by the IT Group of the Ministry of Finance, Government of India, as part of the pre-budget consultation for 2016-17.</p>
<p>The Centre for Internet and Society is (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 diverse abilities, 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. We receive financial support from Kusuma Trust, Wikimedia Foundation, MacArthur Foundation, IDRC, and other donors.</p>
<p>We have divided our suggestions into the different topics that our organisation has been researching in the recent years.</p>
<p> </p>
<h3>Free/Libre and Open Source Software (FLOSS) is the Basis for Digital India</h3>
<p> </p>
<p>We congratulate the policies introduced by the government to promote use of free/libre and open source software and that of open APIs for all e-governance projects and systems. This is not only crucial for the government to avoid vendor lock-in when it comes to critical software systems for governance, but also to ensure that the source code of such systems is available for public scrutiny and do not contain any security flaws.</p>
<p>We request the government to empower the implementation of these policies by making open sharing of source code a necessity for all software vendors hired by government agencies a necessary condition for awarding of tenders. The 2016-17 budget should include special support to make all government agencies aware and capable of implementing these policies, as well as to build and operate agency-level software repositories (with version controlling system) to host the source codes. These repositories may function to manage the development and maintenance of software used in e-governance projects, as well as to seek comments from the public regarding the quality of the software.</p>
<p>Use of FLOSS is not only important from the security or the cost-saving perspectives, it is also crucial to develop a robust industry of software development firms that specialise in FLOSS-based solutions, as opposed to being restricted to doing local implementation of global software vendors. A holistic support for FLOSS, especially with the government functioning as the dominant client, will immensely help creation of domestic jobs in the software industry, as well as encouraging Indian programmers to contribute to development of FLOSS projects.</p>
<p>An effective compliance monitoring and enforcement system needs to be created to ensure that all government agencies are Strong enforcement of the 2011 policy to use open source software in governance, including an enforcement task force that checks whether government departments have complied with this or not.</p>
<p> </p>
<h3>Open Data is a Key Instrument for Transparent Decision Making</h3>
<p> </p>
<p>With a wider set of governance activities being carried out using information systems, the government is increasingly acquiring a substantial amount of data about governance processes and status of projects that needs to be effectively fed back into the decision making process for the same projects. Opening up such data not only allows for public transparency, but also for easier sharing of data across government agencies, which reduces process delays and possibilities of duplication of data collection efforts.</p>
<p>We request the 2016-17 budget to foreground the National Data Sharing and Accessibility Policy and the Open Government Data Platform of India as two key enablers of the Digital India agenda, and accordingly budget for modernisation and reconfiguration of data collection and management processes across government agencies, so that those processes are made automatic and open-by-default. Automatic data management processes minimise the possibility of data loss by directly archiving the collected data, which is increasingly becoming digital in nature. Open-by-default processes of data management means that all data collected by an agency, once pre-recognised as shareable data (that is non-sensitive and anonymised), will be proactively disclosed as a rule.</p>
<p>Implementation of the National Data Sharing and Accessibility Policy has been hindered, so far, by the lack of preparation of a public inventory of data assets, along with the information of their collection cycles, modes of collection and storage, etc., by each union government agency. Specific budgetary allocation to develop these inventories will be crucial not only for the implementation of the Policy, but also for the government to get an extensive sense of data collected and maintained currently by various government agencies. Decisions to proactively publish, or otherwise, such data can then be taken based on established rules.</p>
<p>Availability of such open data, as mentioned above, creates a wider possibility for the public to know, learn, and understand the activities of the government, and is a cornerstone of transparent governance in the digital era. But making this a reality requires a systemic implementation of open government data practices, and various agencies would require targeted budget to undertake the required capacity development and work process re-engineering. Expenditure of such kind should not be seen as producing government data as a product, but as producing data as an infrastructure, which will be of continuous value for the years to come.</p>
<p>As being discussed globally, open government data has the potential to kickstart a vast market of data derivatives, analytics companies, and data-driven innovation. Encouraging civic innovations, empowered by open government data - from climate data to transport data - can also be one of the unique initiatives of budget 2016-17.</p>
<p>For maximising impact of opened up government data, we request the government to publish data that either has a high demand already (such as, geospatial data, and transport data), or is related to high-net-worth activities of the government (such as, data related to monitoring of major programmes, and budget and expenditure data for union and state governments).</p>
<p> </p>
<h3>Promotion of Start-ups and MSMEs in Electronics and IT Hardware Manufacturing</h3>
<p> </p>
<p>In line with the Make in India and Digital India initiatives, to enable India to be one of the global hubs of design, manufacturing, and exporting of electronics and IT hardware, we request that the budget 2016-17 focus on increasing flow of fund to start-ups and Medium and Small-Scale Manufacturing Enterprises (MSMEs) in the form of research and development grants (ideally connected to government, especially defense-related, spending on IT hardware innovation), seed capital, and venture capital.</p>
<p>Generation of awareness and industry-specific strategies to develop intellectual property regimes and practices favourable for manufacturers of electronics and IT hardware in India is an absolutely crucial part of promotion of the same, especially in the current global scenario. Start-ups and MSMEs must be made thoroughly aware of intellectual property concerns and possibilities, including limitations and exceptions, flexibilities, and alternative models such as open innovation.</p>
<p>We request the budget 2016-17 to give special emphasis to facilitation of technology licensing and transfer, through voluntary mechanisms as well as government intervention, such as compulsory licensing and government enforced patent pools.</p>
<p> </p>
<h3>Applied Mathematics Research is Fundamental for Cybersecurity</h3>
<p> </p>
<p>Recent global reports have revealed that some national governments have been actively involved in sponsoring distortion in applied mathematics research so as to introduce weaknesses in encryption standards used in for online communication. Instead of trying to regulate key-length or mandating pre-registration of devices using encryption, as suggested by the withdrawn National Encryption Policy draft, would not be able to address this core emerging problem of weak cybersecurity standards.</p>
<p>For effective and sustainable cybersecurity strategy, we must develop significant expertise in applied mathematical research, which is the very basis of cybersecurity standards development. We request the budget 2016-17 to give this topic the much-needed focus, especially in the context of the Digital India initiative and the upcoming National Encryption Policy.</p>
<p>Along with developing domestic research capacity, a more immediately important step for the government is to ensure high quality Indian participation in global standard setting organisations, and hence to contribute to global standards making processes. We humbly suggest that categorical support for such participation and contribution is provided through the budget 2016-17, perhaps by partially channeling the revenues obtained from spectrum auctions.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='https://cis-india.org/openness/pre-budget-consultation-2016-submission-to-the-ministry-of-finance'>https://cis-india.org/openness/pre-budget-consultation-2016-submission-to-the-ministry-of-finance</a>
</p>
No publishersumandroOpen StandardsOpen SourceCybersecurityOpen DataIntellectual Property RightsOpen Government DataFeaturedPatentsOpennessOpen InnovationEncryption Policy2016-01-12T13:34:41ZBlog EntryPranesh Prakash: Influencing India's IP Laws
https://cis-india.org/news/forbes-india-february-15-2014-samar-srivastava-pranesh-prakash-influencing-indias-ip-laws
<b>Pranesh Prakash believes intellectual property laws need to evolve and change with time.</b>
<hr />
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Samar Srivastava's article was <a class="external-link" href="http://forbesindia.com/article/30-under-30/pranesh-prakash-influencing-indias-ip-laws/37177/1">published in Forbes India Magazine</a> on February 15, 2014.</p>
<hr />
<p style="text-align: justify; ">At an age where his contemporaries are still junior litigators and aspiring lawyers, Pranesh Prakash, 28, is already a recognisable name in the filed of legal activism.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">In 2013 he worked with the World Intellectual Property Organization to draft a treaty for the blind. It provides for an exception to copyright laws so that books can be converted into accessible formats for the blind and visually impaired, and exchanged across borders.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">For Prakash the treaty capped a signal achievement in intellectual property and copyright—an area he has been working in since graduating from the National Law School, Bangalore. In his closing speech at the diplomatic conference at Marrakesh, Morocco, Prakash said: “When copyright doesn’t serve public welfare, states must intervene... Importantly, markets alone cannot be relied upon to achieve a just allocation of informational resources, as we have seen clearly from the book famine that the blind are experiencing.”</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Prakash’s work on intellectual property has brought him recognition through affiliations: He is an Access to Knowledge Fellow at the Information Society Project at Yale Law School. In 2012, he was selected as an Internet Freedom Fellow by the US State Department.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">“I was always interested in doing public interest work,” says Prakash. An internship with activist lawyer Rajeev Dhawan cemented his desire. Prakash is now prominent in a line of thinkers working in the area of freedom of expression, internet governance and intellectual property.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">It is clear that existing laws in these areas are inadequate and a new jurisprudential setup needs to evolve. For example, the same standards often apply to print and internet media; they fail to recognise that, say, tweets have a different impact than newspapers headlines.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Prakash’s criticism of governments blocking websites stood out, but his recommendations were not accepted. He proposed that all intermediaries, like the ISP and the domain host, not be bunched, and separate standards be imposed on them, based on their editorial role in content creation.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">“What distinguishes his work is the impact it has on the public at large,” says Gautam John, head, Karnataka Learning Partnership at the Akshara Foundation. “His work in the area is cutting edge. There is no one doing that work.”</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Then there is his work with Section 66A of the IT Act. Under the section, anyone who sends false, offensive or inappropriate content by a computer or communication device can be punished with three years of imprisonment. This section has been misused by the police. Prakash has long argued that the law must be more specific in what it defines as offensive, and that the government needs to engage more with civil society and industry to end the antagonistic and selective manner in which the law is imposed.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Efforts of the Centre for Internet and Society (CIS), Bangalore, where Prakash is policy director, have resulted in rules being amended. Now, only officers of the rank of DCP and above can make an arrest. CIS, set up in 2008, has also made representations on the copyright law to Parliamentary Standing Committees.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Prakash’s activism has had another significant effect on intellectual property in India. By a 2008 Bill, the government had tried to privatise publicly-funded intellectual property. Prakash was part of a sustained campaign against the Bill, and in 2011 it was shelved.</p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='https://cis-india.org/news/forbes-india-february-15-2014-samar-srivastava-pranesh-prakash-influencing-indias-ip-laws'>https://cis-india.org/news/forbes-india-february-15-2014-samar-srivastava-pranesh-prakash-influencing-indias-ip-laws</a>
</p>
No publisherpraskrishnaIntellectual Property RightsCopyrightAccess to Knowledge2014-02-25T06:20:31ZNews ItemPirates, Plagiarisers, Publishers
https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/plagiarism-in-indian-academia
<b>This article attempts to rescue not by denying the charges of plagiarism, but by charting an alternative trajectory of plagiarism so that each successive instance does not amplify our sense of embarrassment and crisis in the academy. The article by Prashant Iyengar was published in the Economic & Political Weekly, February 26, 2011, Vol XLVI No 9.</b>
<p>"Copying one book is plagiarism; copying several is research." Unknown <a href="#1">1</a></p>
<p>Someone must have slandered Indian academia, for, without having done anything new or different, allegations of plagiarism have suddenly been tumbling out of India’s ‘top’ universities in these past few years.</p>
<p>In October 2002, a group of physicists from Stanford University, including three Nobel laureates, addressed a letter to the (then) President Abdul Kalam complaining of plagiarism by the Vice Chancellor of Kumaon University.<a href="#2">2</a> In January 2006, a professor from IIM Bangalore was dismissed for plagiarism.<a href="#3">3</a> In February 2008, a professor from the Sri Venkateswara University in Tirupathi was accused of having plagiarized up to 70 papers between 2004 and 2007.<a href="#4">4</a> In October 2010, IIT Kharagpur was forced to set up a committee to investigate allegations of plagiarism by one of its professors and three doctoral candidates.<a href="#5">5</a></p>
<p>And so on. It seems Benjamin Franklin’s adage about originality being “the art of concealing your sources” thrives today in Indian academia. Something is rotten in the State of academic research. Evidently, we even know exactly what it is: Some years ago, the Association of Indian Universities invited students to a research contest. The pamphlet advertising the contest contained a remarkably prolix account of the causes of the general decline in academic research:</p>
<p>Of late, <b>research has become a subservient component in the university</b> functioning. It is <b>not considered a lucrative career option</b>. Apart from this, <b>resource constraints, lack of commitment, lack of proper encouragement</b>, etc., are the impediments that are affecting the quality of research in our institutions of higher education. Another important factor for the deterioration of the quality of research is the <b>absence of adequate training and other capacity building</b> endeavour in our system, which has <b>restricted students’ creativity only to rote memory</b>. <a href="#6">6</a> (emphasis mine)</p>
<p>Similarly, we are periodically reminded, as in this instance, by the chief of the Defence Research and Development Organisation that “India lacks quality academic organisations and research and development institutions that breed inventions in technology. This is the major reason behind India's failure in breaking new ground in inventions and innovations.”<a href="#7">7</a> Other news reports bemoan the fact that “Indian patent filings lag behind global average" with the total “number of filings by residents being just three per million people in its population, compared with the world average of 250”<a href="#8">8</a></p>
<p>Accounts such as these, which abound in the press and journals, typically trace a “decline” hypothesis according to which the quality of academic research in India, once rigorous and upright, has fallen precipitously in recent times. Poor quality of academic research is then portrayed as a function of the impoverishment of the academy itself. Concealed within this auto-critique is an envy of putatively ideal systems in other countries which exhibit values that are an inversion of those identified as ours: i.e. they privilege research, are well-resourced, file the statistically approved average number of patents, allow students’ creativity free rein, and do not restrict their creativity only to rote memory. Lurking underneath these criticisms is also the anxiety that the arrival of the internet has, far from invigorating indigenous research in India, facilitated plagiarism on a wider scale than previously imaginable. What do we make of all this self-slander?</p>
<p>In this essay I will attempt to rescue Indian academic research, not by denying the charges of plagiarism, but by charting an alternative trajectory of plagiarism so that each successive instance does not amplify our sense of embarrassment and crisis in the academy.</p>
<p>I begin by drawing on my own prior study on student research in law universities in India<a href="#9">9</a> to provide a rough account of how law students approach research. However inappropriate, I use some of my observations in the course of that study as a microcosmic model for how research is conducted by students across the country today.</p>
<p>Next, I will attempt to show how the charge of plagiarism only acquires its pungency after the installation of a particularly western ‘Romantic’ conception of creativity that is hinged on the ‘genius’ figure. My point here is not one of cultural difference – we may or may not have conflicting traditions of (literary) creativity in India - but of heterogeneity of possible standpoints from which creativity can be judged, which have been deprecated or forgotten since this modern conception took root. While this idea is itself not ‘original’, having been made by numerous authors on whose work I draw upon here<a href="#10">10</a> , I am interested here in how it can inform our reaction to quotidian reports of plagiarism in the contemporary. Specifically, I think our understanding of 'originality-as-genius’ is a relatively recent historical product, and is definitely not the 'natural' or universal parameter by which literature and arts have been judged. I would assert that contemporary practices on the Internet restore us to (or renew the salience of) some of these pre-modern practices of authorship where originality in its Cartesian sense may not necessarily be determinative of value.</p>
<p>I would however hasten to add that this does not lead us inexorably to the conclusion that our traditional understanding of plagiarism has to abandoned. In the case of academic writing, 'Romantic' standards of originality have been rigorously upheld and policed by the spectral might of the University. Here, the ritual demonstration of cartesian orginality is not only a condition of success, but a minimum qualification for survival and advancement in this domain. With the stakes being so high, the temptation to pass off others' works as one's own is great, in contrast to the risks of being caught. This does not mean that everyone resorts to it, only that there are structural factors in the academy that make practices of plagiarism more 'rational' than, perhaps, in other domains<a href="#11">11</a> .</p>
<p>To begin, then with my conclusions, I think that dulling the keenness of ‘cartesian originality’ in the University could be an important component in the serious task of educational reform. Equally, I aim, in this article to rehabilitate the term plagiarism so as to diminish the sense of embarrassment that seems to come naturally to us when we speak of Indian research.</p>
<h3>Student ‘research’ in Law Schools in India</h3>
<p>The content and observations in this section draw from a study that I had conducted in 2006 on student research in national law universities in India. During the study I had interviewed 40 students and eleven faculty members across three National Law Universities. <a href="#12">12</a> I will focus here on the themes from those surveys that directly address the issue of research and plagiarism.</p>
<p>By way of background, in a typical national law university following a semester model, a student must submit up to 5 research papers (of lengths varying from 20 to 50 pages) a semester – or ten papers a year. In the duration of her five year legal education, a student from a national law university in India would have submitted anywhere between 48 (NALSAR) to 70 (NLIU Jodhpur) research papers of varying lengths. Given an average class-size of 80, and 5 batches in every university, a guesstimate indicates an average output of about 4000 papers of varying quality from every national law university annually. The table below contains a rough back-of-envelope enumeration of the research output of five national law universities in India, drawn from respective university prospectuses and websites.</p>
<table class="plain">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td><br /></td>
<td><b>NALSAR</b></td>
<td><b>NLSIU</b></td>
<td><b>NLIU</b></td>
<td><b>NLU</b></td>
<td><b>GNLU</b></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Intake</td>
<td><b>80</b></td>
<td><b>80</b></td>
<td><b>80</b></td>
<td><b>80</b></td>
<td><b>160</b></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Max Strength</td>
<td><b>400</b></td>
<td><b>400</b></td>
<td><b>400</b></td>
<td><b>400</b></td>
<td><b>800</b></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Academic Unit</td>
<td><b>Semester</b></td>
<td><b>Trisemester</b></td>
<td><b>Trisemester</b></td>
<td><b>Semester</b></td>
<td><b>Semester</b></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Law Courses</td>
<td><b>40</b></td>
<td><b>51</b></td>
<td><b>48</b></td>
<td><b>54</b></td>
<td><b>51</b></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Non-Law Courses</td>
<td><b>10</b></td>
<td><b>10</b></td>
<td><b>26</b></td>
<td><b>8</b></td>
<td><b>9</b></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Number of research papers<br />per student through the <br />duration of the 5 year course</td>
<td><b>18</b></td>
<td><b>50-60</b></td>
<td><b>65-74</b></td>
<td><b>55-62</b></td>
<td><b>55-60</b></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Max number of research <br />papers per semester / trisemester</td>
<td><b>1900</b></td>
<td><b>1400</b></td>
<td><b>2000</b></td>
<td><b>2200</b></td>
<td><b>4000</b></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Number of student<br />research papers per year<br />(approx)</td>
<td><b>3800</b></td>
<td><b>4200</b></td>
<td><b>6000</b></td>
<td><b>4400</b></td>
<td><b>8000</b></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p>By any estimate, this volume of research is staggering and should ordinarily be a cause for pride. However law universities are also beset with the same anxieties of poor research ‘quality’ and plagiarism that characterize the broader academy. While my previous study contains a fuller discussion on the causes of poor legal research at these universities, I would like, here, to only reproduce some of my survey conclusions from that study that would feed the discussion for the later sections of this paper.</p>
<ul>
<li>From my surveys it appeared that both students and faculty shared a sense that the research burden on students in these universities was excessive and too onerous to facilitate high quality research.</li>
<li>Students respond to the high research load by budgeting their efforts – working more intensely on some research assignments while neglecting others. This accorded with the responses from faculty members who reported an extremely low number of high quality research papers turned in. Responses from faculty indicate that a high percentage of papers received fall under a median category between ‘high quality’ and ‘abjectly low quality’ – i.e. there are a large number of papers which, while offering a cogent account of the topic do not add any insight of their own.</li>
<li>Both students and faculty reported generally, the existence of a high degree of plagiarism (defined as the inclusion of extrinsic material without attributing sources) sourced both from amongst their peers as well as from extrinsic sources. Although most students (78%) claimed never to have directly copied from other students’ papers, many (67%) admitted to having shared their papers with other students either for ‘reference’, or more commonly, for adaptation/reuse in their assignments. The responses to whether they had any reservations against the practice were diverse with more students in favour of the practice of plagiarism (47%) than against (30%). Without admitting to participating it in themselves, 60% of respondents characterised the prevalence of ‘copy/paste’ plagiarism in research on their campus as ‘Rampant’ or ‘High’. Many reasons were forthcoming for the prevalence of this practice among which the more frequently stated included: ‘High work pressure’, ‘lack of time’ ‘lack of incentive to do high quality research’, ‘lack of emphasis by evaluators on high quality academic work’, ‘pointlessness of repeating identical research from scratch’. Other less common reasons offered were ‘emphasis on sheer volume to the neglect of quality of analysis’ and ‘disingenuousness of topics’ and ‘Laziness’.</li>
<li>Over half the students surveyed had never published their research in journals. This despite the fact that 75% of respondents reported that at least 1 of their research papers was either publishable immediately or with modifications. More than half the respondents reported upwards of three papers that they themselves regarded as ‘publishable’.</li>
<li>One of the common reasons that the faculty identified for the incidence of plagiarism was that students had begun to stereotype teachers who were unlikely to check or be able to check for plagiarism and would submit entirely plagiarised papers to them. Other reasons included the difficulty of checking the huge number of papers they received individually for plagiarism and also the fact that students had an unreasonably high workload coupled with the lack of enough incentive to do thorough research. <br /><br />“Intuition” and “checking the number of sources” was still the common mode of detecting plagiarism although some faculty made creative use of the internet – particularly Google.</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>Faculty was asked if a paper that appeared plagiarized to a high degree, but also indicated that the student had put in an intelligent compilation of materials, would be acceptable by them. The response to this was largely affirmative with some faculty members saying that most papers would correspond to that category and this standard was imperative for a majority of students to pass! Most faculty required that the source material at least be acknowledged.</li>
<li>With regard to their research sources, there was a clear bias in favour of online sources almost to the exclusion of other sources. One respondent even rated online sources as being “more important than libraries”, and even claimed that she always began her legal research on the internet.</li>
</ul>
<p>It is evident then from the foregoing account that the law universities are poor representatives of ‘original’ scholarship. The career of students through the law school seems to be marked by a blithe collaboration with faculty in which a Nelson’s eye is turned to their less-obvious plagiarisms. Although it is possible to adopt a high moralistic tone and condemn these practices, in the remainder of this paper I would like to marshal resources that would lend some dignity to them. In the section that follows, I will argue firstly, that there are rival conceptions of originality which privilege the recombination of existing information, rather than being fixated on ivory-towered ex nihilo originality.<br />Under this conception, even the pastiche works by lazy law students emerge as eminently ‘original’. Secondly, I argue that slavish imitation is never always only that, and have long been recognized as an integral aspect of the creative process itself.</p>
<h3>‘Originality’ is only a special effect of reception</h3>
<p>In his fascinating book Original Copy, Robert Macfarlane draws on George Steiner’s vocabulary to contrast two different narratives of literary creation – The first, creatio, espouses “a hallowed vision of creation as generation” which “connotes some brief, noumenal moment of afflatus or inspiration’ during which the author composes her work.</p>
<blockquote class="webkit-indent-blockquote">
<div>..the creative urge is dramatized as pulsing deep within the fastness of the individual self, and the solitary writer is seen to conjure ideas into the influence proofed chamber of his or her imagination. <a href="#13">13</a></div>
</blockquote>
<p>By contrast, the second conception of literary creativity, inventio, which is commonly found both in literary postmodernism and Augustan aesthetics, conceives of “creation as rearrangement” and “refuse[s] to believe in the possibility of creation out of nothing, or in the uninfluenced literary work”.<a href="#14">14</a> Instead this view “privileges the act of making out of extant material”. According to these “recombinative theories”, the creating mind is conceived</p>
<blockquote class="webkit-indent-blockquote">
<div>“as a lumber-room in which are stored innumerable verbal odds and ends. The supposedly ‘original’ writer in fact works with ‘inherited lexical, grammatical, and semantic counters, combining and recombining them into expressive executive sequences’. <a href="#15">15</a></div>
</blockquote>
<p>As an instance of this latter view, Macfarlane cites the example of Derrida who coined the term itérabilité to describe “the semantic drift which inevitably occurs between consecutive uses of the same text”. Derived from a combination of the Latin verb iterare (meaning ‘to repeat’) and the Sanskrit word itara (meaning ‘other’), the word “valuably emphasizes ‘the logic which links repetition to alterity’. For Derrida, the repetition of a text inescapably involves its alteration: you can never step twice in the same poem, paragraph, or word.”</p>
<p>I find this latter conception, especially Derrida’s concept of itérabilité to be a valuable tool with which to think through the practices of the law students I interviewed. While being derived from a plurality of (frequently unacknowledged sources), their papers were never mere ‘slavish’ repetitions, but always contained an element of alterity.</p>
<p>Paradoxically, the networked information age that we inhabit both facilitates and preempts the flourishing of ‘recombinative creativity’. On the one hand, the abundance of informational resources that the internet puts at a researcher’s disposal, as well as the ease of word-processing makes it easy to rapidly refashion materials into a pastiche of one’s own. On the other hand, the illusion of novelty that such work may produce is capable of being dispelled equally swiftly, and more efficiently than ever before through the use of special applications designed to detect plagiarism. If, as MacFarlane suggests, originality is not “an indwelling quality of writerly production, but instead a function of readerly perception, or more precisely readerly ignorance (the failure to discern a writer’s sources)”, then the emergence of the internet has nearly made this form of originality impossible, by making this reader ignorance extremely evanescent (lasting only until the reader’s next Google search). The ability of students to pass off plagiarised material as their own will hinge increasingly on their ability to alter it unrecognizably, at which point the output is no longer a mere slavish imitation, but something new altogether – ‘quality research’.</p>
<div>
<p>In an essay on pre-print culture<a href="#16">16</a> , Lawrence Liang demonstrates that the notion that prior to print technology, the task of writing was reduced to that of slavish copying by scribes is false. As Liang notes, the real story is slightly more complicated.</p>
</div>
<blockquote class="webkit-indent-blockquote">
<div>
<div>Acting as annotators, compilers, and correctors, medieval bookowners and scribes actively shaped the texts they read. For instance, they might choose to leave out some of the Canterbury Tales, or contribute one of their own. They might correct Chaucer’s versification every now and then. They might produce whole new drafts of Chaucer by combining one or more of his published versions with others.<a href="#17">17</a></div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div>
<p>With the arrival of print technology, however, a fundamental transformation occurs in the way the activities of writing and reading. Liang quotes an extended passage from Rebecca Lynn’s study of reading and writing practices in medieval England<a href="#18">18</a> that captures this change:</p>
</div>
<blockquote class="webkit-indent-blockquote">
<div>
<div>
<div>the benefits readers derived from the press, in terms of better access to authorized texts, were countered by a profound loss of opportunity for inventive forms of reception. They were free to take with the texts they recopied. Manuscript culture encouraged readers to edit or adapt freely any text they wrote out, or to re-shape the texts they read with annotations that would take the same form as the scribe's initial work on the manuscript. <i>The assumption that texts are mutable and available for adaptation by anyone is the basis, not only for this quotidian functioning of the average reader, but also for the composition of the great canonical works of the period</i>.<a href="#19">19</a></div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div>
<p>Is it possible, in the light of this insight about the creative element of copying in pre-print days, to revise our pathological accounts of contemporary plagiarism? <a href="#20">20</a> Can we view plagiarism not as an offence against the ‘author’ity of knowledge, but in a sense as a reversion to a more primordial tradition in which the availability of a text presumes and is premised upon its availability for adaptation. As described previously, responses from interviews with faculty indicates a grudging tolerance of plagiarism in student research.</p>
<p>This tolerance, stemming from an acknowledgement that even acts of compilation are not wholly without a creative element, seems to restore us to such an understanding of ‘creative’ reading akin to what has been described above.</p>
<h3>Conclusion</h3>
<p>Few years ago, a famous author of textbooks on Intellectual Property law in India was discovered to have plagiarised close to two hundred pages of his new book on the Right to Information. The pages had been lifted verbatim from the manuscript sent by a famous law professor to the same publisher. When the matter came to light, the first author pleaded ignorance. After an ugly out-of-court tussle between the professor and the publisher (who happen to be one of India’s more powerful legal-publishing houses), a compromise was reached wherein the professor’s book would be published with a note inserted stating that 200 of his pages had been included in the other ‘author’s’ book.</p>
<p>I conclude this essay with this piece of copyright ‘gossip’ in order to highlight a couple of ironies that it animates. The first is, of course, the delicious irony that a famous author, of IP books no less, would stoop to such lows. (Could academic writing in any discipline be above suspicion now that academic writing in IP, that guardian discipline of genius ‘originality’, has proven susceptible to plagiarism?) The second irony is that this person’s reputation as the ‘author’ of a book, and of a genre of books survives despite the fact that he may not have penned even a single word of his book – which prompts us to ponder what function the author truly serves here. Lastly, I find the fact curious that both books continue to be displayed – and sold - in various legal bookstores, frequently side-by- side. The ‘fact’ of the plagiarism seems not to have significantly impacted sales of either author’s tome.</p>
<p>Tempting as it may be, one must resist treating this example as either exceptional or paradigmatic. Publishers in India in many cases do lead authors by their nose, and this is particularly so in the case of text-book publishing. However, this does not mean that original – in the Cartesian sense - academic writing does not continue to be produced in India. I feel this instance points us to the limits of the argument I have made in the preceding section. As well as it may be to celebrate ‘recombinative’ accounts of creativity in students, wholesale plagiarism with impunity by big name authors backed by large publishing houses cannot be easy to endure. In our acceptance of a combinatorial ‘inventio’ theory of creativity, it would be unwise too hastily to jettison the more austere creatio theory. As Macfarlane points out, popular attitudes to originality and plagiarism have moved between the two narratives of originality in a dialectical fashion so that they can best be thought of as “enmeshed .., or existing in a kind of helical wrap: each requiring the other for its support, counter-definition, and continued existence. Neither ever obliterates the other.”<a href="#21">21</a></p>
<p>However they may have been produced, we regard our ‘works’ not merely as our property but also relationally through ethics of propriety. In other words, what we write is our “own” not in the way that our shoe is our own, but in the sense that our friends are our own. Plagiarism in this context most closely approaches its original Latin roots – plaga: to convert a freeman into a slave22. – as the unjust enslavement or capture of our work by someone else.<br />What role has the internet played in this crisis of plagiarism? Despite the inherent promiscuity of the medium, I think that the arrival of the internet has not actually changed our practices in relation to plagiarism. So the fact that I may blithely pirate movies and music on the internet does not mean, automatically, that I adopt 'piracy' as my research methodology for academic writing. Our choices remain as they were – to acknowledge or not, with the latter being increasingly more risky in an age when exposure is only a google search away.</p>
<p>Finally, how does all of this relate to the question I posed at the start viz: what do we make of this self-slander? I think it will not do to simply declare ourselves innocent of the charge of plagiarism. (As Josef K’s prison chaplain says, that is what the guilty usually do.) But equally we must be careful, to continue with a Kafkaesque metaphor, not to see the gallows being constructed in the distance and hang ourselves on the presumption they are being erected solely for us. Kafka alone, of course, does not supply good grist for policy decisions. A possible way forward would be to import the cinematic notion of plagiarism into academic writing: Not all that is unacknowledged is unoriginal (as my <br />example from student research at law universities shows), but this does not extend to a license to appropriate all as one's own (the example of the famous IP author who plagiarised 200 pages from a professor). The former is a function of the dominant, awkward alien aesthetic imposed by the University, which requires academic writing to be dully impersonal and abstract. Finding it too taxing, most students resort to a clumsy pastiche rather than, for instance, shifting to a more narrative style which they may be more comfortable with. The internet allows their pastiche to be more colorful than before.</p>
<p>The latter is plainly an ethical failing by someone who believes they can get away with impunity. The internet does not impact them in any way except that their 'crime' once discovered circulates endlessly on the internet (As this IP author discovered to his dismay).</p>
<p>In deciding what is to be done, however, I would advise our policy makers to make haste, only slowly.</p>
</div>
<h2>Notes</h2>
<div>
<p class="discreet"><a name="1">Lindey, A., 1952. <i>Plagiarism and originality</i>, Harper., New York, P.2</a></p>
<p class="discreet"><a name="2">Chu, S. et al., 2002. Letter from the group of Professors of Physics of Stanford University to the President of India. Available at: </a><a class="external-link" href="http://www.stanford.edu/dept/physics/publications/PDFfiles/india.pdf">http://www.stanford.edu/dept/physics/publications/PDFfiles/india.pdf</a> [Accessed December 22, 2010].</p>
<p class="discreet"><a name="3">Seethalakshmi, S., 2006. IIM-B prof held violating copyright. The Times of India. Available at: </a><a class="external-link" href="http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2006-01-05/bangalore/27803993_1_iim-b-p-g-apte-copyright-violation">http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/bangalore/IIM-B-prof-held-violatingcopyright/ articleshow/1359149.cms?curpg=2</a> [Accessed December 21, 2010].</p>
<p class="discreet"><a name="4">Tewari, M., 2008. Indian professor guilty of plagiarism. DNA India. Available at: </a><a class="external-link" href="http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_indian-professor-guilty-of-plagiarism_1152417">http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_indian-professor-guilty-of-plagiarism_1152417</a> [Accessed December 21, 2010].</p>
<p class="discreet"><a name="5">Singh, K., 2010. IIT-K sets up panel to probe plagiarism charges. Indian Express. Available at: </a><a class="external-link" href="http://www.expressindia.com/latest-news/iitk-sets-up-panel-to-probe-plagiarism-charges/695196/">http://www.expressindia.com/latest-news/iitk-sets-up-panel-to-probe-plagiarism-charges/695196/</a> [Accessed December 21, 2010].</p>
<p class="discreet"><a name="6">"Anveshan: Student Research Convention." Association of Indian Universities. Apr 2008. Research Division. 30 Apr 2008 <http://www.aiuweb.org/Research/research.asp>.</a></p>
<p class="discreet"><a name="7">Josy Joseph , ‘India lacks R&D base, laments DRDO chief ‘, (2000), [Internet], Available from: <</a><a class="external-link" href="http://www.rediff.com/news/2000/aug/11josy1.htm">http://www.rediff.com/news/2000/aug/11josy1.htm</a>> [Accessed 21 April 2008]</p>
<p class="discreet"><a name="8">‘Indian patent filings lag behind global average’, [Internet], Available from: <</a><a class="external-link" href="http://www.eetimes.com/electronics-news/4075557/Indian-patent-filings-lag-behind-global-average">http://www.eetimes.com/news/latest/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=204702703</a>> [Accessed 21 April 2008]</p>
<p class="discreet"><a name="9">Iyengar, P., 2008. Open Information Policy for Student Research in Law Universities. SSRN eLibrary. <br />Available at:</a><a class="external-link" href="http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1555689"> http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1555689</a> [Accessed December 24, 2010].</p>
<p class="discreet"><a name="10">See for instance, Rose, M., 1993. <i>Authors and Owners: The Invention of Copyright</i>, Cambridge, Mass: <br />Harvard University Press. Woodmansee, M., 1984. The Genius and the Copyright: Economic and Legal<br />Conditions of the Emergence of the 'Author'. <i>Eighteenth-Century Studies</i>, 17(4), 425-448.</a></p>
<p class="discreet"><a name="11">For instance, the charge of plagiarism in the domain of cinema seems to have a significantly diluted charge. Bollywood has been accused frequently of aping Hollywood, although this does not stand in the way of it immense popularity and renown. Ramesh Sippy's Sholay is regarded as having been influenced by John Sturges' The Magnificent Seven, itself being similarly 'influenced' by Akira Kurosawa's The Seven Samurai. On the modern definition of originality which requires us all to be 'perfectly uninfluenced', this qualifies as plagiarism. This definition however did not stand in the way of Sholay becoming an iconic film for Indian cinema.</a></p>
<p class="discreet"><a name="12">Respectively The National Academy of Legal Studies and Research (NALSAR), the National Law School of India University (NLSIU) and the National University of Juridical Sciences (NUJS).Although this sample is not sufficiently representative to make statistically kosher extrapolations – indeed, I make no such claim - I think the responses I received affirmed certain interesting observable trends about student research, that would seem commonsensical to anyone who teaches in India. To that extent, I think this data yields some interesting starting points for the theme of the current paper.</a></p>
<p class="discreet"><a name="13">Macfarlane, R., 2007. Original Copy: Plagiarism and Originality in Nineteenth-Century Literature, Oxford: Oxford University Press. p.2</a></p>
<p class="discreet"><a name="14">Ibid, p.4</a></p>
<p class="discreet"><a name="15">Ibid</a></p>
<p class="discreet"><a name="16">Liang, L., 2009. A Brief History of the Internet from the 15th to the 18th Century. In N. Rajan, ed. <i>The Digitized Imagination</i>. Routledge India, pp. 15-36.</a></p>
<p class="discreet"><a name="17">Ibid</a></p>
<p class="discreet"><a name="18">Schoff, R.L., 2004. Freedom from the Press: Reading and Writing in Late Medieval England. Harvard University. Available at: </a><a class="external-link" href="http://sunzi.lib.hku.hk/ER/detail/hkul/3516592">http://sunzi.lib.hku.hk/ER/detail/hkul/3516592</a>. cited in Liang, L., 2009. A Brief History of the Internet from the 15th to the 18th Century. In N. Rajan, ed. The Digitized Imagination. Routledge India, pp. 15-36.</p>
<p class="discreet"><a name="19">Ibid</a></p>
<p class="discreet"><a name="20">For instance the ‘epidemic of plagiarism’ language typified in this BBC article Precey, Matt. “Study shows 'plagiarism epidemic'.” BBC 17 Jan 2008. 13 May 2008 <</a><a class="external-link" href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/cambridgeshire/7194850.stm">http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/cambridgeshire/7194850.stm</a>>.</p>
<p class="discreet"><a name="21">Supra n. 12, at p. 17</a></p>
<p class="discreet"><a name="22">See Voltaire, 1824. <i>A philosophical dictionary: from the French</i>, J. and H. L. Hunt. (Accessed from Google Books)</a></p>
</div>
<h2><span class="Apple-style-span">Also see these:</span></h2>
<div>
<div>
<ul>
<li><a class="external-link" href="http://epw.in/epw/uploads/articles/15759.pdf">Economic and Political WEEKLY</a></li>
<li><a class="external-link" href="http://originalfakes.wordpress.com/2011/03/03/epw-article-on-plagiarism/">Originalfakes</a></li>
<li><a class="external-link" href="http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1775582">Social Science Research Network</a></li>
</ul>
</div>
</div>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/plagiarism-in-indian-academia'>https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/plagiarism-in-indian-academia</a>
</p>
No publisherprashantIntellectual Property RightsCopyrightAccess to Knowledge2014-05-29T05:55:27ZBlog EntryPiracy Studies in India
https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/piracy-studies-india
<b>The word ‘piracy’ assumes negative connotations. In the imagination of an ordinary middle class urban Indian it is linked directly to the informal economy, crime and even terrorism. But the ‘pirated good’, that is, the ‘optical disc’ is not seen with a similar perception. The ‘CD’ is the access key to the cultural wealth of music, cinema and software contained inside. This paradox is created in the sphere of information and knowledge that is created by anti-piracy agencies using extensive reports and statistics that are published every year. These statistics often have a tendency to create a feeling of ‘shock and awe’ for the readers that see these numbers splashed across headlines of news and media reports. Till 2004, the creation of numbers conjuring losses up to millions was mostly the domain of the International Intellectual Property Alliance (IIPA), which is now supplemented by reports commissioned to consultancy groups like McKinsey, PWC, and Ernst & Young. This article by Siddharth Chadha traces a few reports that have come to become popular benchmarks of piracy in the past few years. </b>
<h3>Special ‘301’ Reports</h3>
<p>The ‘Special 301 Reports’ are published annually by the office of the <a class="external-link" href="http://www.ustr.gov/">United States Trade Representative</a> (USTR) to examine ‘in detail the adequacy and effectiveness of intellectual property rights protection’ in countries around the globe. Sections 301-310 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended by the Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988, empower the USTR ‘to identify foreign countries that deny adequate and effective protection of intellectual property rights or fair and equitable market access for U.S. persons that rely on intellectual property protection.’ </p>
<p>India has faced considerable pressure to amend and enforce its copyright laws, more to the needs of the United States rather than reflecting the needs of its population, businesses and innovation. The 301 reports over the last decade have been largely concerned with the general problems of counterfeit and piracy in India, unlike China where specific laws adopted and enforced by the state have been critiqued. Over the course of the decade, according to the reports, the United States has been concerned with a large number of subjects including the backlog and inadequacy of India’s legal system, lack of enforcement of IP protections for media oriented products like ‘motion pictures, music, software, books and video games’, need for stronger protection of copyrights, trademarks and patents, optical media and procedural inadequacies. In 2004 the USTR reported, ‘copyright piracy is rampant, and the U.S. copyright industry estimates that lost sales resulting from piracy in India of U.S. motion pictures, sound recordings, musical compositions, computer programmes, and books totaled approximately $500 million in 2004.’</p>
<p>The United States articulates the reasons for concern in India – the challenge posed by Indian pirated and counterfeit goods entering American markets. It expresses its concern for lack of piracy enforcement as ‘‘growing concern for U.S. copyright industries, especially given the <a class="external-link" href="http://ustraderep.gov/assets/Document_Library/Reports_Publications/2002/2002_Special_301_Report/asset_upload_file567_6367.pdf">pirated imports are entering the market from Southeast Asia</a>.</p>
<p>Over the past few years, it has also included suggestions of taking criminal action against those engaging in copyright infringement. India’s supposed ‘weak’ criminal system is mentioned in the 2008 reports, focused specifically on the need for a greater police presence enforcing <a class="external-link" href="http://www.ustr.gov/sites/default/files/asset_upload_file553_14869.pdf">IPR infringements</a> through criminal means and ‘stronger’ border control.</p>
<h3>The Effects of Counterfeiting and Piracy on India’s Entertainment Industry</h3>
<p>Published in March 2009 by <a class="external-link" href="http://www.usibc.com/usibc/default">United States-India Business Council</a> (USIBC) and prepared by Ernst and Young India, claims that as much as Rs.16, 000 crores are lost due to piracy. Alongside, as many as 80,000 jobs are lost directly as a result of theft and piracy, afflicting India’s entertainment industry. This report was commissioned as a part of the USIBC–FICCI Bollywood–Hollywood initiative and covered film, music, television and video games. It was funded by the <a class="external-link" href="http://www.theglobalipcenter.com/">Global Intellectual Property Center of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce</a>. The spectacular press launch meeting was organized in Mumbai and also attended by Yash Chopra, chairman of <a class="external-link" href="http://www.ficci-frames.com/">FICCI Frames</a> and Ramesh Sippy, the famed director who commented on the occasion, “I know first hand the importance of fighting piracy to support the growth of Bollywood. I commend the USIBC–FICCI initiative for enlisting all elements of the entertainment industry against piracy.” The President of USIBC, Ron Summers used the opportunity to suggest stronger legal means to tackle piracy. He said, “We strongly support passage by India of optical disc legislation that will thwart piracy in this important industry. We are pleased to stand shoulder to shoulder with counterparts in India to help protect jobs and revenues that are now being needlessly lost to piracy.”</p>
<h3>Sixth Annual BSA and IDC Global Software Piracy Study</h3>
<p>Business Software Alliance, in partnership with a market analysis firm IDC, published their annual study on global trends in software piracy in May 2009. Sixth in its annual series, the report critically blames the Asia Pacific region, especially India and China, for the growing levels in piracy, despite countries bringing down their piracy rates. The report says, ‘In 2008, the rate of PC software piracy dropped in slightly more than half (57) of the 110 countries studied, remained the same in nearly one third (36), and rose in just 16. However, the worldwide PC software piracy rate rose for the second year in a row, from 38 per cent to 41 per cent, mainly because <a class="external-link" href="http://global.bsa.org/globalpiracy2008/pr/pr_asia.pdf">PC shipments grew fastest in high-piracy countries such as China and India, overwhelming progress in these and other countries</a>.’</p>
<p>In addition, it also makes an India specific point by highlighting India’s piracy trends,<br /><br />‘India’s rate has dropped six points in five years, despite its sprawling PC market, of which consumers and small businesses account for 65 per cent. <a class="external-link" href="http://global.bsa.org/globalpiracy2008/pr/pr_asia.pdf">While consumer PC shipments grew more than 10 per cent last year, shipments to other categories dropped 7 per cent</a>.’</p>
<h3>Motion Pictures Distributors Association’s Internet Piracy Studies</h3>
<p>Earlier this month, the MPA Office in India named Motion Pictures Distributors Association, along with a DtecNet a global anti-piracy company, released a study on the Internet piracy trends in India. This report places India as the fourth largest global hub of online film piracy, behind United States, Britain and Canada, with Delhi, Bangalore and Mumbai accounting for the major share of illegal downloads. It estimates that Vishal Bhardwaj’s Kaminey, was downloaded 350, 000 times on Bit Torrent with about 2/3rds of downloaders being from India. MPDA also links this study to another consultancy, Envisional’s similar suggestions, while MPDA’s managing director, Rajiv Dalal pushed for strong laws to support copyright, strong enforcement and stiff sentences for people who violate laws, on the basis of these <a class="external-link" href="http://www.dtecnet.com/EN/Press.aspx">reports</a>.</p>
<p>Despite the availability of a large number of critiques available in the academic world, the media – both broadcast and print, reports shock inducing statistics verbatim, treating them as expert evidence without engaging in any analysis of the published material. Most of the piracy studies are quantitative in nature and do not provide any social class or demographic break up either of those who engage in piracy or those who buy pirated goods. It has also been pointed out by scholars like Shujen Wang that it is unreasonable to assume that every pirated copy could be counted as a lost sale, and thus a loss. In absence of research on the cultural aspects of piracy and the subsequent circulation, these reports have been successful in creating a fear psychosis in the civil society.</p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/piracy-studies-india'>https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/piracy-studies-india</a>
</p>
No publisherpraskrishnaPiracyIntellectual Property Rights2011-08-04T04:35:42ZBlog EntryPiracy Boils Down to Convenience
https://cis-india.org/news/piracy-boils-down-to-convenience
<b>Commercial Piracy is on the rise. But how big a role does money have to play in the piracy game was the question we asked those seated on either side of the proverbial fence.
</b>
<p>“What started out as cassette piracy, several decades ago, has now become a flourishing business, thanks to the invention of CDs and DVDs,” says Mohan Chabria, proprietor, Anand Audio who goes on to add that piracy has drastically increased over the past few years.</p>
<p>“In the earlier days, conducting a raid was easy. There were some professional pirates who could be easily tracked down. Now, the numbers are vast, and it seems like a no-win situation for us. This results in a tremendous loss for the companies,” adds Mohan.</p>
<p> Advertising professional and author Milan Vohra believes that piracy boils down to convenience. “Piracy is about making life easier, especially when it comes to downloading stuff off the net. Personally, I don’t think I have done anything wrong when I download songs from a public site on the Internet and then transfer it onto another portable device.”</p>
<p>Piracy has more to do with economics than convenience for Sunil Abraham, Executive Director, Centre for Internet and Society. “We must remember that the problem came about mainly because the originals were far too expensive for the average person. The common practice today is to download everything and it is tough to eradicate that mindset. Most are not even aware of the laws surrounding piracy,” says Sunil. “It’s not the law,” disagrees Mohan, adding, “My problem is only with commercial piracy. What people do on the net does not affect us too much. It’s those living in rural areas and small towns, who aren’t even aware that they are buying pirated copies that matter. Most of our revenue comes from them,” he elaborates.</p>
<p>Milan and Sunil both agree that original copies must be made affordable and only then can commercial piracy decrease. Though, Mohan feels that audio companies are doing their best in terms of making copies affordable for the public. “We compiled a CD comprising 50 songs of a famous actor which we priced at Rs.35 per copy. Despite this, people went ahead and bought pirated copies for Rs.50. It was only later that we found out that these copies had 150 songs of the same actor, which is why they got preference over ours,” recollects Mohan and adds that there is no support from law enforcers as well. Sunil responds to this by saying that law enforcers are under constant pressure by other companies, whether legal or illegal, and hence they do not support copyright laws, mainly because they get caught in the constant tug-of-war. </p>
<p>So, is there any solution to eradicate or, at the very least, to control commercial piracy in India? Milan opines that the government needs to adopt a vigilante approach. Like, for instance, by providing a toll free number where people can call when they come across an instance of commercial piracy. “The only way to deal with the matter is to convince a consumer of piracy that there is no end-value to what he’s getting. The aim of copyright owners must be to ensure that copies are available to a larger mass and across different forms of technology,” she says. Mohan echoes the sentiment saying, “We request the government to provide us with a separate court and law enforcement officers who have specialised knowledge. Else, we need to start a thought-provoking campaign among both rural and urban consumers to convince them.”</p>
<p>“I would aim for a more sustainable product. Instead of a thought-provoking campaign, there should be some sort of collaboration. For a consumer, a pirate is a friend and both the copyright owner as well as the consumer needs to be kept happy. In order for that to happen, business holders must stop looking at ancient methods to curb the menace and instead try to get revenues from the new technology,” concludes Sunil.</p>
<p> <img src="https://cis-india.org/news/copy_of_scancolor2008.jpg/image_preview" title="Piracy" height="395" width="400" alt="Piracy" class="image-inline" /></p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='https://cis-india.org/news/piracy-boils-down-to-convenience'>https://cis-india.org/news/piracy-boils-down-to-convenience</a>
</p>
No publisherradhaIntellectual Property Rights2011-04-02T15:15:27ZNews ItemPhotocopying the past
https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/photocopying-the-past
<b>There is no single correct position when it comes to intellectual property or IP. In fact, there are at least five correct positions that you could possibly adopt based on who you are — a pro-creator position, a pro-entrepreneur position, a pro-government position, a pro-consumer position and a public interest position.</b>
<p>Therefore, before you progress any further, dear reader, you have to first decide which of the above you are. If you are an average Indian, then you are almost certainly a consumer or a member of the general public. Next, it would only be fair for me to tell you when I am coming from: I work for a policy research organisation that focuses on protecting consumer and public interest in the digital era. Before I proceed any further, also note that not all creators prefer profits to public adulation and therefore creators’ interests are not necessarily always opposed to consumer and public interest.</p>
<p>At this point, popular imagination is captivated by meta-regulation, issues of corruption and transparency. Few seem interested in the configuration details of property regimes that we are all implicated in: tangible property, capital and, in our increasingly dematerialised world, intangible property such as IP or spectrum. Unfortunately the complications of spectrum, banking and IP make our eyes glaze over and there is almost zero attention being paid to the copyright act amendment to be discussed in Parliament this week.</p>
<p>For the government, achieving a compromise is the primary objective, and then, perhaps a distant second, raising taxes. This is not a static compromise, since each generation of new technologies precipitates a new round of negotiations between the stakeholders. So while it is easy to be Anna Hazare, it is difficult to be Kapil Sibal. An optimal compromise position as in the world of capital and tangible property protects the production, circulation and consumption of IP. A sub-optimal position results in practices that are in conflict with policy — anti-competitive behaviour or infringement.</p>
<p>Unfortunately when it comes to evidence-based policy-making, there is little funding for public interest IP research in India and the pockets of the lobbyists of rights-holders are deep. The funded research that they tout claims that government loses significant taxes because of piracy or non-maximalist IP policies. Yet rights-holders, especially multinationals in the software business, are experts at tax avoidance through techniques with names like the “Double Irish” and the “Dutch Sandwich”.</p>
<p>Like any compromise, the latest amendment is a mixed bag for consumers and the general public. With regard to “digital rights management,” — or what consumers’ advocates refer to as “digital restrictions management” — the government has yielded to the TRIPS-plus agenda even though it is not a signatory to the WIPO Internet treaties. And with regard to the exception for the disabled, the Indian exception is both disability- and works-neutral making it much more robust when compared to the treaty for the visually impaired currently being discussed at the WIPO.</p>
<p>However, one particular compromise — the volte-face on Section 2 (m) on parallel imports of books — is particularly distressing for book-lovers and students. As part of the latest amendment, this new section was introduced in 2009. The standing committee report gave the section a thumbs-up, but strangely it has gone missing in the latest version of the bill circulated to the MPs in preparation for the Rajya Sabha debate this Friday.</p>
<p>Section 2 (m) is a provision that would have saved us from the uncertainty created by what some consider flawed jurisprudence around parallel importation of copyrighted works. As the standing committee report on the copyright amendment puts it, “nobody can deny the fact that the interests of students will be best protected if they have access to the latest editions of the books.” To date, I have never met an IIT or IIM graduate untainted by photocopied books. I would claim that the lack of quality education in our country is still at the level of an epidemic. The indigenous publication industry has benefited from our progressive copyright regime.</p>
<p>Wouldn’t it be appropriate to afford them maximum flexibility in a future rife with technological shifts? Are all the books that you wish to read available in the libraries and book shops you have access to? Have you ever been forced to photocopy a book because of time constraints? Would you like to see greater choice via increased free-market competition, and reduced state-sanctioned monopolies and enforcement? Does your definition of human rights include the “right to education” and the the “right to entertainment”? Shouldn’t the disabled in India benefit from the $500 million spent each year making books accessible in the US? And finally, shouldn’t a nation providing leadership to the development agenda at WIPO, walk the talk at home? If your answer to any of these questions is yes, you should demand that people are placed before the profits of foreign publishers.</p>
<p>This article by Sunil Abraham, Executive Director, Centre for Internet and Society was published in the Indian Express on 2 September 2011 in the Indian Express. Please read the original article <a class="external-link" href="http://www.indianexpress.com/news/photocopying-the-past/840461/1">here</a>.</p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/photocopying-the-past'>https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/photocopying-the-past</a>
</p>
No publishersunilIntellectual Property RightsAccess to Knowledge2011-09-25T20:06:50ZBlog EntryPervasive Technologies: Patent Pools
https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/patent-pools
<b>In this research paper, Nehaa Chaudhari gives an analysis of patent pools. She discusses the working of a patent pool, study patent pool in other areas of technology, and patenting in telecom and related technology.</b>
<hr />
<p><b><a href="https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/pervasive-technologies-patent-pools.pdf" class="internal-link">Click to download the full research paper here</a></b> (PDF, 475 Kb)</p>
<hr />
<h2>Introduction</h2>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The network landscape over the past few years has been characterized by several battles of supremacy between two or more rival technologies. <a href="#fn1" name="fr1">[1]</a> These battles have included, <i>inter alia, </i>the constant efforts at besting rivals in the arena of patenting innovations in technology, often as a result characterised by the imposition of high royalties on rivals, for the use of one’s patents. However, having realised that such efforts at besting the other could prove detrimental for all parties concerned in the long run, and stall technological advancements which would in turn translate into lower business revenue, mechanisms were devised to ensure a relatively equitable utilization of patents in the market place. One such mechanism that has been developed is that of patent pools.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Patent pools have been developed around most areas of high end technology and research and development. Over the course of this paper, the author has confined herself to a study on patent pools in the area of telecommunications, and the issues to be addressed therein. Specifically, the author will be dealing with patent pools around 3G, 4G, LTE, TD-SCDMA and TD-LTE technologies. Within this framework, the author seeks to examine what are patent pools, whether and what kind of patent pools exist, their associated costs, their licensing arrangements and the structure of the payment of royalty, and the feasibility of these patent pools.</p>
<h2 style="text-align: justify; ">Understanding Patent Pools</h2>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Patent pools are agreements among patent owners through which patent owners combine their patents, waiving their exclusive rights to the patent to enable others, or themselves, to obtain rights to license the pooled patents.<a href="#fn2" name="fr2">[2]</a> Therefore, such pools may be focussed either on cross licensing, that is companies mutually making their patents available to each other, or on out licensing, that is, a group of companies making a collection of patents available to companies that do not or might not have patents of their own to contribute to the pool.<a href="#fn3" name="fr3">[3]</a> Typically, modern patent pools combine patents of various companies and are around inventions that are required to implement an established industry standard, are licensed as a whole (on an <i>all or nothing basis) </i>and not as individual licenses for patents owned by various companies within that pool, and are available to any non member for licensing.<a href="#fn4" name="fr4">[4] </a>Such licensing is done under a standard agreement and royalty rates, on a non discriminatory basis. The exception to this rule is that if certain members have contributed patents to the pool, they may receive more favourable terms, in recognition of their cross licensing relationship to the pool.<a href="#fn5" name="fr5">[5] </a>When viewed from a law and economics perspective, patent pools are seen to be an efficient institutional solution to various problems that arise when companies have complementary intellectual property rights, and these rights are essential to new technologies being used and employed. <a href="#fn6" name="fr6">[6] </a>However, this perspective also warns about the antitrust risks that may arise when competitors or potential competitors are involved in the coordination of their intellectual property. For instance, such pools may be used to allocate markets or otherwise chill competition. <a href="#fn7" name="fr7">[7]</a></p>
<h2 style="text-align: justify; ">The Working of a Patent Pool</h2>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Generally, a patent pool may be administered in one of two ways- it may either have an administrative entity, or may also just be a system of cross licensing between two firms.<a href="#fn8" name="fr8">[8]</a> In case of the former, the licensing agency may be one of the patent holders, <a href="#fn9" name="fr9">[9]</a> or may be an independent licensing company (e.g. MPEG).<a href="#fn10" name="fr10">[10]</a></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The ownership of patents within the pool is retained by the owners, who then license them to the operator/administrator on a non exclusive basis, with sub licensing rights. This means that the owners are free to continue to license their patents on an individual basis, and the administrator also has the right to further license the patents to any party who is interested in licensing from the patent pool.<a href="#fn11" name="fr11">[11]</a> The responsibility of managing licensing and licenses is vested in the operator/administrator of the patent pool. Licensees are required to report sales and pay royalties to the pool administrator, who in turn would enforce the conditions of the license.<a href="#fn12" name="fr12">[12] </a>The distribution of royalties between the members of the pool is on the basis of a formula which may, or may not be transparent to non member licensees, with the pool operator retaining a management fee.<a href="#fn13" name="fr13">[13] </a>Typically, pool licenses are also structured in a manner so as to render difficult early termination by the licensee. The nature of the contract, once signed by a licensee, is typically binding in nature. Therefore, this would mean that the administrator of the patent pool could sue the licensee for non performance of the contract.<a href="#fn14" name="fr14">[14]</a> However, unless a pool operator is a member of the pool itself, it cannot sue for the infringement of patents. <a href="#fn15" name="fr15">[15]</a> Therefore, in the event that a patented technology were to be utilised without having taken a license, one or more of the individual patent owners would be required to take legal action. The involvement of the pool operator would be limited to being a part of any settlement discussions, if they were to occur, since one of the options for the alleged infringer could be to obtain a license for the patent pool.<a href="#fn16" name="fr16">[16]</a></p>
<h2 style="text-align: justify; ">Drawing Parallels with Other Patent Pools</h2>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">In this section of the paper, the author seeks to study patent pools in other areas of technology in order to better understand the structure and pricing of patent pools.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><b>The ‘3C DVD’ Patent Pool </b><br />Established in 1998, the <i>3C DVD Patent Pool</i> was the brainchild of <i>Philips</i>, <i>Sony</i> and <i>Pioneer</i>, and <i>L.G.</i> was subsequently inducted as a member. <i>Philips</i> acts as a licensing administrator for patents held by all the companies, which are over two hundred in number. These patents include those for the manufacture of the DVD players, and for the manufacture of the DVD disks themselves. <a href="#fn17" name="fr17">[17]</a> The player license per unit royalty was set as 3.5% of the net selling price of each player sold. This was subject to a minimum fee of $7 per unit, which after January 1, 2000 became $5 per unit. The disc license royalty was set as $0.05 per disc sold.<a href="#fn18" name="fr18">[18]</a></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><b>The ‘DVD- 6C’ Patent Pool</b><br />Established in June 1999, the members of this pool at the time of its inception were <i>Hitachi</i>, <i>Matsushita</i>, <i>Mitsubishi</i>, <i>Time</i> <i>Warner</i>, <i>Toshiba</i>, and <i>JVC</i>. This pool was also for the DVD-ROM and the DVD- Video formats, with <i>Toshiba </i>acting as the administrator. <a href="#fn19" name="fr19">[19] </a>The royalties were set at $.075 per DVD Disc and 4% of the net sales price of DVD players and DVD decoders, with a minimum royalty of $4.00 per player or decoder, which saw a substantial reduction in 2003.<a href="#fn20" name="fr20">[20]</a> Subsequently, there were various changes that were made to this group, including the inclusion of newer standards, the joining and subsequent departure of IBM and other organizations as a member etc. <i>Hitachi</i> and <i>Panasonic</i> also act as regional agents in certain regions of the world.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><b>The MPEG LA pool<br /></b>The MPEG-2 is a standard for describing the coding of data <i>inter alia, </i>on DVD discs. For MPEG-2, a patent pool has been established, where the administrator is an independent, external organization known as the MPEG Licensing Authority, that set itself the aim to develop a patent pool for this standard.<b> </b> <a href="#fn21" name="fr21">[21]</a> The MPEG LA invited parties that thought they owned patents essential to this standard to join the program, which took off in 1997. At present, the pool has over a hundred patents and thousands of licensees.<a href="#fn22" name="fr22">[22]</a></p>
<h2 style="text-align: justify; ">Patenting in Telecom and Related Technology</h2>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">In this section of the paper, the author examines the working of patenting and patent pools in the telecommunications sector and in areas of related technology.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><b>Early Developments and the Emergence of GSM<br /></b>Patent pools are slowly developing into a key component of the telecommunications and the technological industry. The technology industry has been said to be an <i>ecosystem</i>, wherein there is a complex correlation between those who develop the technology and those who implement it in the creation and development of products.<a href="#fn23" name="fr23">[23]</a> In the telecommunications industry for instance, each handset manufacturer has declared only a small percentage of the various types of intellectual property assets that are necessary to implement a 3G compatible cellular phone. Therefore, the working in such a context is that various companies develop different technologies, and the same is shared by various manufacturers that seek to make use of this technology.<a href="#fn24" name="fr24">[24]</a></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The revival of patenting in the sector of telecommunications, post a period of decline in the decades of the 19540s to the 1980s, is attributed to the advent of the GSM standard for mobile communications in Europe.<a href="#fn25" name="fr25">[25] </a>In 1988, the main European operators invited equipment suppliers and developed a procedure wherein manufacturers would have to give up their intellectual property rights and to provide free world wide licenses for essential patents.<a href="#fn26" name="fr26">[26]</a> After opposition from the manufacturers, the approach was modified to one wherein the operators required the suppliers to sign a declaration agreeing to serve all of the GSM community on fair, reasonable and non discriminatory conditions.<a href="#fn27" name="fr27">[27]</a> In the early 1990s, Motorola by refusing to grant non discriminatory licenses for its substantial portfolio of essential patents and only agreeing to enter into cross license agreements further intensified the debate over IPRs in telecommunications. The company only lifted these restrictions after various countries across the world expressed a preference for this standard. The experience in this standard has demonstrated that it would not be accurate to expect that all parties holding essential patents would be willing to license them to all interested parties.<a href="#fn28" name="fr28">[28]</a> Companies were only willing to relax their licensing conditions once revenue generating opportunities increased.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><b>The 3G3P and the UMTS<br /></b>In July 2000 the 3G Patent Platform Partnership (3G3P) and its 18 partners notified various agreements to the end of establishing a worldwide patent platform. The purpose behind this was disclosed to be that of providing a voluntary and cost effective mechanism to evaluate, verify and license patents that were essential for third generation (3G) mobile communication systems.<a href="#fn29" name="fr29">[29] </a>It was also claimed that the said agreements would have pro competitive effects and that the purpose behind this Platform was the facilitation of access to technology and consequent entry into the markets.<a href="#fn30" name="fr30">[30]</a> On the intellectual property front, the purpose was to reduce cost uncertainties and the delays that were accompaniments of licensing numerous essential patents for complex technologies.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">While it has often been considered to be a patent pool, this arrangement has been said to be only similar to a patent pool.<a href="#fn31" name="fr31">[31]</a> The 3G3P itself has argued that since it was a mere facilitator of transactions between patent holders and licensees, and that membership was open to both licensors and licensees as opposed to only licensors as in the case of patent pools, it would be fallacious to classify the Platform as a patent pool. Further, it has also been argued that licensing by members is not restricted to the Platform and that there was no bundling or real pooling of the patents <i>per</i> <i>se</i> and those licensees have the opportunity to pick and choose between patents with the licensing being carried out on a bilateral basis. Additionally, unlike in a patent pool, there is no single license between the patent holders as a collective and the licensee, and the parties have a choice between the Standard License of the Platform, and a negotiable individual license.<a href="#fn32" name="fr32">[32]</a> A Standard License provides for Standard Royalty Rate, a Maximum Cumulative Royalty Rate and a Cumulative Royalty Rate.<a href="#fn33" name="fr33">[33] </a>Bilateral transactions on the other hand, are negotiated between the parties where the consideration is to be determined on <i>fair and equitable</i> terms.<a href="#fn34" name="fr34">[34]</a> This Platform also provides for a price cap, which, instead of being absolute and set at a pre-determined royalty rate, is a <i>default five percent maximum (not minimum) cumulative royalty rate for potential licensees per product category.</i><a href="#fn35" name="fr35">[35]</a> The royalty rate for each individual patent will differ for each of the licensees and this depends on the patent portfolio under each product category that the licensee has chosen.<a href="#fn36" name="fr36">[36]</a></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The concerns and challenges of the GSM experience were well perceived during the determination of the course of action for UMTS. European actors were especially wary of <i>Qualcomm</i> and expected the firm to demand high license fees, with some even fearing them to be in excess of 10%.<a href="#fn37" name="fr37">[37]</a> Subsequently, various attempts at developing licensing schemes failed, until 2004 and the establishment of the W-CDMA Patent Licensing Programme for UMTS FDD patents.<a href="#fn38" name="fr38">[38] </a>At the outset, seven licensors offered their patents as a bundle to prospective licensors, a number which decreased over time.<a href="#fn39" name="fr39">[39]</a></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><b>The Development of LTE Patent Pools<br /></b>The next stage in the process of innovation in the realm of telecommunications was the development of the Long Term Evolution (LTE) Standard, which while being essential to 4G technology has also seen application in the realm of 3G. Consequently, patent pools or similar structures have been developed in these areas. LTE patents are being viewed as among the most valuable intellectual property resource in the mobile telecommunications industry, with most operators around the world building LTE networks.<a href="#fn40" name="fr40">[40]</a></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">As per in a study conducted in 2011, 23% of the patents about this technology were owned by <i>L.G. Electronics</i>, with <i>Qualcomm</i> coming in second with 21%. <i>Motorola Mobility, InterDigital, Nokia</i> and <i>Samsung</i> each owned 9%, China’s <i>ZTE</i> owned about 6%<a href="#fn41" name="fr41">[41]</a> and <i>Nortel</i> owned 4%, which were later sold to a consortium of <i>Apple, EMC, Ericsson, Microsoft, Research in Motion (RIM)</i> and <i>Sony</i>, after <i>Nortel</i> filed for bankruptcy in 2009.<a href="#fn42" name="fr42">[42]</a> <i>Ericsson</i> also independently owns 2% of the patent pool and <i>RIM</i> owns 1%.<a href="#fn43" name="fr43">[43]</a> However, another analysis<a href="#fn44" name="fr44">[44]</a> of IP databases conducted by <i>ZTE</i> in 2011 revealed differing results. As per this analysis, <i>InterDigital </i>was the leader, with its Patent Holdings arm controlling 13% and the Technology arm controlling 11% of LTE essential patents. <i>Qualcomm</i> controlled 13%, <i>Nokia</i> and <i>Samsung</i> 9% each, <i>Ericsson</i> controlled 8%, as did <i>Huawei</i>, <i>ZTE</i> controlled 7%, <i>L.G</i>. controlled 6% and <i>NTT</i> <i>DoCoMo</i> brought up the rear with 5%. The remaining 11% was held by various other firms.<a href="#fn45" name="fr45">[45]</a> It is to be realized that these studies have often come under criticism from different companies, with each of them eager to portray themselves as the market leader.<a href="#fn46" name="fr46">[46]</a> Setting aside criticism driven by corporate egos, the principle of it, that is, the difficulty in assessing and valuing patents cannot be disputed. Valuing patents is far from merely counting the number of patents owned by a company. The complications are especially evident when it comes to determining which of these patents are essential and which of them aren’t. Additionally, the worth of these patents varies depending on the existence or the absence of certain conditions, including transfer restrictions, cross licensing arrangements, ownership and market conditions.<a href="#fn47" name="fr47">[47]</a></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The aforesaid discussion reveals the complexity and the fragmentation of the LTE environment, which further underscored the need to have patent pools in this field. Although the need for a patent pool was realized in 2009-2010, given that the WCDMA patent pool had been met with very limited success,<a href="#fn48" name="fr48">[48]</a> industry watchers were reluctant to be optimistic. This was in part fuelled by the understanding of the attitude of dominant players, wherein they continued to believe that they could derive more monetary, cross licensing and litigation defence value if they did not pool their patents.<a href="#fn49" name="fr49">[49]</a></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The development of LTE patent pools can be traced back to 2009, and the response of <i>Via Licensing</i>¸<i> Sisvel</i> and <i>MPEG LA</i> to a Request for Information on forming such a patent pool by the <i>Next Generation Mobile Network Alliance (NGMN).</i><a href="#fn50" name="fr50">[50]</a> <i>Sisvel’s</i> proposal, which it subsequently made at a public conference in 2010 sought to demonstrate that patent pools could prevent excessive costs from royalty stacking.<a href="#fn51" name="fr51">[51] </a>Among various other examples, <i>Roberto Dini</i>, the founder of <i>Sisvel</i> suggested that if patents were to be licensed individually, for instance, 85 patents for MPEG video at 50 cents apiece would cost $42.50. As opposed to this, the patent pool charged $2.50.<a href="#fn52" name="fr52">[52]</a> In 2011, the <i>NGMN</i> reiterated its recommendation to all stakeholders in the mobile industry that were interested in developing patent pools to hasten their development process to avoid further delays in LTE licensing.<a href="#fn53" name="fr53">[53]</a> The <i>NGMN</i> also went on to state that it would be ideal if all the parties were to agree on a single patent pool that promoted reasonable royalties, offered certainty on the availability of the licenses for patents and created a framework for evaluation of their essentiality, where the value of the patents essential to the pool would be established by the industry.<a href="#fn54" name="fr54">[54]</a> These recommendations were not without their fair share of criticism, both, from industry watchers<a href="#fn55" name="fr55">[55]</a> and from vendors.<a href="#fn56" name="fr56">[56]</a> Notwithstanding these reservations, both, <i>Sisvel</i><a href="#fn57" name="fr57">[57]</a> and <i>Via</i> <i>Licensing</i> have gone on to issue calls for patents for the purposes of creating patent pools in the LTE marketplace.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The <i>Sisvel </i>LTE Patent Pool materialized in late 2012, wherein licenses were offered under a portfolio of patents essential to LTE.<a href="#fn58" name="fr58">[58]</a> The pool includes patents owned by <i>Cassidian</i>, the <i>China Academy of Telecommunication Technology, the Electronics and Telecommunications Research Institute, France Telecom, TDF</i>, and <i>KPN</i>, in addition to some patents that had been originally filed by <i>Nokia </i>but were acquired by <i>Sisvel </i>in 2011.<a href="#fn59" name="fr59">[59]</a> The pool is also open to other organizations that have patents essential to LTE. At present, the current portfolio of these patents is available under standard terms and conditions. The running royalty rate is 0.99 Euros per device.<a href="#fn60" name="fr60">[60]</a></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Having promised a launch within a few months in June, 2012<a href="#fn61" name="fr61">[61]</a> <i>Via Licensing </i>has also developed its own LTE Patent Pool, with the initial companies in this pool being <i>AT&T, </i><i>Clearwire Corporation, DTVG Licensing, HP, KDDI Corporation, MTT DoCoMo, SK Telecom, Telecom Italia, Telefónica</i> and <i>ZTE.</i><a href="#fn62" name="fr62">[62]</a> Like <i>Sisvel’s</i> Patent Pool, this pool is also open to other organizations that believe they possess essential LTE patents, and they are encouraged to submit the same for evaluation.<a href="#fn63" name="fr63">[63]</a> The patent pool floated by <i>Via</i> leans heavily towards service providers, but some of the big players in the industry including <i>Nokia, Ericsson, Huawei Technologies</i> and <i>Samsung</i> <i>Electronics</i> are conspicuous by their absence.<a href="#fn64" name="fr64">[64]</a> This absence is felt even in <i>Sisvel’s</i> patent pool, with the reasoning being proposed<a href="#fn65" name="fr65">[65]</a> that these key patent holders may prefer private licensing and subsequent litigation over pooled resources in patent pools.<a href="#fn66" name="fr66">[66]</a> Understandably, the launch of the LTE Patent Pools has been met with approval by the <i>NGMN</i><a href="#fn67" name="fr67">[67]</a> but given the nascent stages in which both of these pools find themselves, it would be premature to comment (without first observing for a few months) the likelihood of their success or failure and how they would play out against each other.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><b>The TD-SCDMA and the TD-LTE<br /></b>Reportedly, China has spent several billion dollars on the import of analog and GSM technology,<a href="#fn68" name="fr68">[68]</a> and the country’s mobile communications industry continues to be dominated by foreign players.<a href="#fn69" name="fr69">[69]</a> Therefore, in continuation of a purportedly <i>growing trend</i><a href="#fn70" name="fr70">[70]</a> in the area of telecommunications as well, domestically developed systems are being preferred and developed over standardized technologies that enjoy strong patent protection outside China.<a href="#fn71" name="fr71">[71]</a> Besides the avoidance of paying royalties to foreigners, the idea is also to use China’s strong market presence and have more participants in China’s home grown technology.<a href="#fn72" name="fr72">[72]</a></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Time Divisional- Synchronous Code Division Multiple Access (TD-SCDMA), developed by the <i>China Academy of Telecommunications Technology (CATT)</i>, in collaboration with <i>Datang </i>and<i> Siemens</i><a href="#fn73" name="fr73">[73]</a> is a Chinese indigenously developed 3G technology standard developed by China to reduce its dependence on western standards.<a href="#fn74" name="fr74">[74]</a> Interestingly however, it has been reported that the Chinese hold core patent technology only about 7% whereas most of the rest of it is taken by other foreign organizations.<a href="#fn75" name="fr75">[75]</a> In 2000, an industry consortium, the TD-SCDMA forum was established. The participants were <i>China</i> <i>Mobile, China Telecom, China Unicom, Huawei, Motorola, Nortel, </i>and<i> Siemens</i>, with the objective of developing and supporting this technology. Government support was received in 2002, following which the <i>TD-SCDMA Industry Alliance </i>was founded by well known market players including <i>Datang</i>, <i>SOUTEC</i>, <i>Holley</i>, <i>Huawei</i>, <i>LENOVO, ZTE, CEC</i> and <i>China</i> <i>Putian</i>. There has also been the creation of various joint ventures with international giants such as <i>Alcatel</i>, <i>Ericsson</i>, <i>Nokia</i>, (erstwhile) <i>Nortel</i>, <i>Philips</i>, <i>Samsung</i> and <i>Siemens</i> have also been created.<a href="#fn76" name="fr76">[76]</a></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Information about the existence of patent pools in this technology has been hard to come by. One of the few to write about patent pools in his 2008 paper,<a href="#fn77" name="fr77">[77]</a> <i>Dazheng Wang</i> proposes patent pools as a solution to the problem of commercialization of TD-SCDMA. He suggests that the framework of this patent pool should be on the industry principles of fair, reasonable and non discriminatory licensing terms for essential patents, with the end result being one of increased innovation and competition and an overall increase in market presence. Interestingly, a few articles<a href="#fn78" name="fr78">[78]</a> on blog posts on the internet speak about the existence of patent pools and their apparent misuse<a href="#fn79" name="fr79">[79]</a> as well.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">It is submitted that these inconsistencies regarding the division of patents between various patent holders, where the percentage of patents held by each company have been pegged differently,<a href="#fn80" name="fr80">[80]</a> and about the existence of a patent pool or not raise pressing concerns about the payment of royalties and how licensing works in such a situation. On a very basic level, in order to be able to pay royalties and enter into licensing agreements, the existence of an identified, non disputed patent holder would be the <i>sine qua non, </i>which seems to be missing in the case of patents for TD-SCDMA. This problem is only further compounded by the lack of clarity on the very existence of patent pools. Had there been specified patent pools, the issues of determination of essential patents and the setting of royalties and licensing fees would have been standardized, a situation that cannot be invoked, without dispute, in the present Chinese context.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">It is further submitted that despite China being the world’s largest market for mobile communications, and its progress from a mere importer to a developer of some parts of technology,<a href="#fn81" name="fr81">[81]</a> the Chinese experiment with TD-SCDMA seems to have met with limited success, in comparison to what was envisaged. For instance, while an agency had forecast that the number of TD-SCDMA subscribers in 2010 would be 34 million, by April, 2010 there were only 8 million or (even lower) subscribers.<a href="#fn82" name="fr82">[82]</a> One of the reasons for preferring other standards, for instance, the W-CDMA is the number of handsets compatible with the same and the consequent variety that is available to the consumer. To illustrate, one could look at the figures from June, 2010. At this point of time <i>China Unicom</i> had 94 models for W-CDMA from twenty four manufacturers including nine foreign ones, whereas <i>China Mobile</i> had only twenty eight models that were compatible with TD-SCDMA.<a href="#fn83" name="fr83">[83]</a> Interestingly, if one were to measure popularity in terms of sheer numbers, TD-SCDMA would emerge the winner over W-CDMA by a couple of million subscribers, but if the growth rate were to be considered, W-CDMA would come out on top. While TD-SCDMA grew only by 24%, W-CDMA has grown at 32% monthly since the start of its service is October, 2009.<a href="#fn84" name="fr84">[84]</a></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">China’s experiments with creating its home grown telecommunication standards have not stopped with the development of the TD-SCDMA, with the country being on track in the development of the TD-LTE. Reports suggest that although the systems are in ‘trial’ mode officially, the 4G spectrum situation remains uncertain.<a href="#fn85" name="fr85">[85]</a> It is submitted that although this is in the nascent stages as compared to the TD-SCDMA, the concerns expressed earlier about TD-SCDMA and the suggestions made therein for the technology to realise its full potential would be equally applicable in this scenario as well.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Therefore, in light of this discussion it would not be fallacious to conclude that while the TD-SCDMA, and now more recently the TD-LTE standard might still be in its nascent stages, on a fundamental level it seems to have not fulfilled the objectives with which it was developed, especially given that a sizeable portion of its patents continue to be owned by foreign corporations. In addition to the challenges of attracting subscribers, it would also need to streamline its system of patents, royalties and licensing, if it wants to have a truly global or even national presence. To this end perhaps patent pools structured along the lines of those being developed or in place for other mobile communication technologies might provide a viable solution meriting consideration.</p>
<h2 style="text-align: justify; ">Concluding Observations</h2>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">One of the fundamental concerns that plague most downstream organizations in the mobile communications sector is the prevalence of high licensing fees that need to be paid on essential patents, the cost of which often trickles down to the customers. A study on the licensing arrangements prevalent at the moment<a href="#fn86" name="fr86">[86]</a> reveals that as of the moment, the result of royalty rate caps is that they save money for downstream manufacturers, but this is at the expense of upstream licensors. The most significant savers are the ones downstream with no IP to trade, and vertically integrated companies while losing some revenue, are able to save significantly more in reduced expenses.<a href="#fn87" name="fr87">[87]</a></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Therefore, it comes as no surprise that efforts at limiting aggregate licensing fees have been at the forefront over the past couple of years. It is in this scenario that patent pools have developed, with operators such as <i>Via Licensing</i> and <i>Sisvel</i> even promoting themselves as being able to put together patent pools that would greatly limit licensing fees.<a href="#fn88" name="fr88">[88] </a>However, some owners of intellectual property continue to find bilateral licensing and cross licensing to be more profitable as opposed to patent pools.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">One of the key concerns when it comes to fore when dealing with how patent pools are structured is about the distribution of income received from royalties within the members of the pool, which ties in with the bigger question of classifying patents as essential and non essential. More often than not, patent pools also have to grapple with the problem of members having conflicting interests. For instance, manufacturers have the incentive to cap aggregate royalties of certain essential patents that they would use in manufacturing, in order to reduce their licensing costs. However, these manufacturers could have also brought their own essential patents to the pool, perhaps of a new way of doing things, and would certainly be averse of having caps imposed on these royalties.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">One of the key other considerations that patent pools need to take into account include the royalty rates affixed. In an interview some time ago, the founder of <i>Sisvel</i>, went on to state that while affixing these royalty rates, there could be no discrimination against licensees, since that would be a sure fire way of ensuring the collapse of the patent pool.<a href="#fn89" name="fr89">[89]</a> Additionally, patent pools also need to account for the difference in regulatory mechanism and their execution that exists across jurisdictions. For instance, customs officials in France pay a lot more attention to counterfeit goods than they would to patent infringing products, whereas those in Germany would have a keen eye on the latter.<a href="#fn90" name="fr90">[90]</a></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Various other concerns have also been identified with regard to patent pools over time. One of these is that they could potentially eliminate competition that comes from outside of patent pools.<a href="#fn91" name="fr91">[91]</a></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Additionally, patent pools are not all inclusive, since participation is entirely voluntary. Therefore, patent pools would not even be reasonably expected to cover all essential patents required to make a standardised product. This problem is rendered even more complex as a result of the presence of multiple patent pools around the same technology, as in the case of DVDs and more recently, LTE technology.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">In sum, while portfolio cross licenses and patent pools can be helpful in resolving issues created by patent thickets by reducing transaction costs for licensees, while preserving to a definitive extent financial incentives for inventors to commercialize their existing inventions and undertake new research, the significant shortcomings of these pools also need to be taken into account before they can be heralded as the solution to problems presented by complex patent landscapes. While voluntary patent pools might have proved to be beneficial in some respects, the imposition of patent pools would be a fallacious approach to undertake.</p>
<hr />
<p>[<a href="#fr1" name="fn1">1</a>]. Hui Yan, <i>The 3G Standard Setting Strategy and Indigenous Innovation Policy in China: Is TD-SCDMA a Flagship?, </i>DRUID Working Paper No 07-01, available at http://www2.druid.dk/conferences/viewpaper.php?id=1454&cf=9 (last accessed 07 12 2012)</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr2" name="fn2">2</a>]. Josh Lerner and Jean Tirole, <i>Efficient Patent Pools,</i> 4 Am. Econ. Rev. 691, 691 (2004)</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr3" name="fn3">3</a>]. <i>Patent Pools- Some Not So Frequently Answered Questions, </i>available at <a href="http://blog.patentology.com.au/2012/11/patent-pools-some-not-so-frequently.html">http://blog.patentology.com.au/2012/11/patent-pools-some-not-so-frequently.html</a> (last accessed 10 December, 2012)</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr4" name="fn4">4</a>]. <i>Id.</i></p>
<p>[<a href="#fr5" name="fn5">5</a>]. <i>Id.</i></p>
<p>[<a href="#fr6" name="fn6">6</a>]. Philip B. Nelson, <i>Patent Pools: An Economic Assessment of Current Law and Policy, </i>Rutgers Law Journal, Volume 38:539, 559 (2007)</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr7" name="fn7">7</a>].</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr8" name="fn8">8</a>]. Roger B. Andewelt, Analysis of Patent Pools Under the Antitrust Laws, 53 ANTITRUST L.J. 611, 611 (1984).</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr9" name="fn9">9</a>]. Philips has been known to have been the licensing agency for patent pools where it was a member</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr10" name="fn10">10</a>]. <i>Supra </i>note 3</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr11" name="fn11">11</a>]. <i>Supra </i>note 3</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr12" name="fn12">12</a>]. <i>Supra </i>note 3</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr13" name="fn13">13</a>]. <i>Supra </i>note 3</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr14" name="fn14">14</a>]. <i>Supra </i>note 3</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr15" name="fn15">15</a>]. <i>Supra </i>note 3</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr16" name="fn16">16</a>]. <i>Supra </i>note 3</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr17" name="fn17">17</a>]. Rudi Bekkers et. al., <i>Patent Pools and Non Assertion Agreements: Coordination Mechanisms for Multi Party IPR Holders in Standardization</i>, available at <a href="http://www-i4.informatik.rwth-aachen.de/Interest/EASST_Bekkers_Iversen_Blind.pdf">http://www-i4.informatik.rwth-aachen.de/Interest/EASST_Bekkers_Iversen_Blind.pdf</a> 22 (last accessed 09 December, 2012)</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr18" name="fn18">18</a>]. <i>Id.</i></p>
<p>[<a href="#fr19" name="fn19">19</a>]. <i>Id.</i></p>
<p>[<a href="#fr20" name="fn20">20</a>]. <i>Id.</i></p>
<p>[<a href="#fr21" name="fn21">21</a>]. <i>Supra</i> note 17 at 23.</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr22" name="fn22">22</a>]. <i>Supra</i> note 17 at 23.</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr23" name="fn23">23</a>]. Keith Mallinson, <i>Fixing IP Prices with Royalty Rate Caps and Patent Pools, </i>available at <a href="http://ipfinance.blogspot.in/2011/07/fixing-ip-prices-with-royalty-rate-caps.html">http://ipfinance.blogspot.in/2011/07/fixing-ip-prices-with-royalty-rate-caps.html</a> (last accessed 10 December, 2012)</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr24" name="fn24">24</a>]. <i>Id.</i> See Appendix 1 for a graphical representation of declared intellectual property assets in 2009.</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr25" name="fn25">25</a>]. <i>Supra</i> note 17 at 25</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr26" name="fn26">26</a>]. <i>Supra</i> note 17 at 27</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr27" name="fn27">27</a>]. <i>Supra</i> note 17 at 27</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr28" name="fn28">28</a>]. <i>Supra</i> note 17 at 28</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr29" name="fn29">29</a>]. Dessy Choumelova, <i>Competition Law Analysis of Patent Licensing Agreements- the Particular Case of 3G3P, </i>available at <a href="http://ec.europa.eu/competition/publications/cpn/2003_1_41.pdf-">http://ec.europa.eu/competition/publications/cpn/2003_1_41.pdf-</a> 41 (last accessed 10 December, 2012)</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr30" name="fn30">30</a>]. <i>Id.</i></p>
<p>[<a href="#fr31" name="fn31">31</a>]. <i>Id.</i></p>
<p>[<a href="#fr32" name="fn32">32</a>]. <i>Id.</i></p>
<p>[<a href="#fr33" name="fn33">33</a>]. <i>Id </i>at 42.</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr34" name="fn34">34</a>]. <i>Id </i>at 42.</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr35" name="fn35">35</a>]. <i>Id </i>at 42-43.</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr36" name="fn36">36</a>]. <i>Id</i> at 43.</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr37" name="fn37">37</a>]. <i>Supra</i> note 17 at 29.</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr38" name="fn38">38</a>]. <i>Supra</i> note 17 at 39.</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr39" name="fn39">39</a>]. <i>Supra</i> note 17 at 39.</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr40" name="fn40">40</a>]. Elizabeth Woyke,<i> Identifying the Tech Leaders in LTE Wireless Patents, </i>available at <a href="http://www.forbes.com/sites/elizabethwoyke/2011/09/21/identifying-the-tech-leaders-in-lte-wireless-patents/">http://www.forbes.com/sites/elizabethwoyke/2011/09/21/identifying-the-tech-leaders-in-lte-wireless-patents/</a> (last accessed 08 December, 2012)</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr41" name="fn41">41</a>]. <i>Id.</i></p>
<p>[<a href="#fr42" name="fn42">42</a>]. <i>Id.</i></p>
<p>[<a href="#fr43" name="fn43">43</a>]. <i>Id.</i></p>
<p>[<a href="#fr44" name="fn44">44</a>]. Caroline Gabriel, <i>ZTE Claims 7% of LTE Essential Patents, </i>available at <a href="http://www.rethink-wireless.com/2011/01/11/zte-claims-7-lte-essential-patents.htm">http://www.rethink-wireless.com/2011/01/11/zte-claims-7-lte-essential-patents.htm</a> (last accessed 09 December, 2012)</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr45" name="fn45">45</a>]. <i>Id.</i></p>
<p>[<a href="#fr46" name="fn46">46</a>]. <i>Id.</i></p>
<p>[<a href="#fr47" name="fn47">47</a>]. <i>Supra</i> note 40.</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr48" name="fn48">48</a>]. Keith Mallinson, <i>Mallinson: Uncertain Futures in LTE Patent Pool Licensing, </i>available at <a href="http://www.fiercewireless.com/europe/story/mallinson-uncertain-outlook-patent-pool-licensing/2010-08-25">http://www.fiercewireless.com/europe/story/mallinson-uncertain-outlook-patent-pool-licensing/2010-08-25</a> (last accessed 10 December, 2012)</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr49" name="fn49">49</a>]. <i>Id.</i></p>
<p>[<a href="#fr50" name="fn50">50</a>]. <i>Id.</i></p>
<p>[<a href="#fr51" name="fn51">51</a>]. <i>Id.</i></p>
<p>[<a href="#fr52" name="fn52">52</a>]. <i>Id.</i></p>
<p style="text-align: left; ">[<a href="#fr53" name="fn53">53</a>]. <i>NGMN Board Recommendation on LTE Patent Pool, </i>available at <a href="http://4g-portal.com/ngmn-board-recommendation-on-lte-patent-pool">http://4g-portal.com/ngmn-board-recommendation-on-lte-patent-pool</a> (last accessed 10 December, 2012)</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr54" name="fn54">54</a>]. <i>Id.</i></p>
<p>[<a href="#fr55" name="fn55">55</a>]. Caroline Gabriel, <i>NGMN’s Calls for an LTE Patent Pool Will be Futile in the Current IPR Climate</i>, available at <a href="http://www.4gtrends.com/articles/53511/ngmns-calls-for-an-lte-patent-pool-will-be-futile-/">http://www.4gtrends.com/articles/53511/ngmns-calls-for-an-lte-patent-pool-will-be-futile-/</a> (last accessed 11 December, 2012)</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr56" name="fn56">56</a>]. Michelle Donegan, <i>Vendors Balk at LTE Patent Pool Proposal, </i>available at <a href="http://www.lightreading.com/document.asp?doc_id=212362">http://www.lightreading.com/document.asp?doc_id=212362</a> (last accessed 11 December, 2012).</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr57" name="fn57">57</a>]. <i>SISVEL: Patent Pool for 3G Long Term Evolution (LTE), </i>available at <a href="http://www.thefreelibrary.com/SISVEL%3A+Patent+Pool+for+3G+Long+Term+Evolution+(LTE).-a0199544458">http://www.thefreelibrary.com/SISVEL%3A+Patent+Pool+for+3G+Long+Term+Evolution+(LTE).-a0199544458</a> (last accessed 08 December, 2012)</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr58" name="fn58">58</a>]. <i>LTE Patent Pool from Sisvel</i>, available at <a href="http://4g-portal.com/lte-patent-pool-from-sisvel">http://4g-portal.com/lte-patent-pool-from-sisvel</a> (last accessed 09 December, 2012)</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr59" name="fn59">59</a>]. <i>Id.</i></p>
<p>[<a href="#fr60" name="fn60">60</a>]. <i>Id.</i></p>
<p>[<a href="#fr61" name="fn61">61</a>]. Mike Dano, <i>Via Promises LTE Patent Pool Launch Within Months, </i>available at <a href="http://www.fiercewireless.com/story/licensing-promises-lte-patent-pool-launch-within-months/2012-06-15">http://www.fiercewireless.com/story/licensing-promises-lte-patent-pool-launch-within-months/2012-06-15</a> (last accessed 07 December, 2012)</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr62" name="fn62">62</a>]. <i>LTE Patent Pool Available Through Via’s Licensing Program, </i>available at <a href="http://4g-portal.com/lte-patent-pool-available-through-vias-licensing-program">http://4g-portal.com/lte-patent-pool-available-through-vias-licensing-program</a> (last accessed 10 December, 2012).</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr63" name="fn63">63</a>]. <i>Id.</i></p>
<p>[<a href="#fr64" name="fn64">64</a>]. Stephen Lawson, <i>Lte Patent Pool Brings Together Technologies From At&T, Zte, Hp And Others, </i>available at <a href="http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9232043/LTE_patent_pool_brings_together_technologies_from_AT_amp_T_ZTE_HP_and_others">http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9232043/LTE_patent_pool_brings_together_technologies_from_AT_amp_T_ZTE_HP_and_others</a> (last accessed 09 December, 2012)</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr65" name="fn65">65</a>]. Peter White, <i>Sisvel LTE Patent Pool Emerges After All- Majors Still Hold Back from Committing, </i>available at <a href="http://www.rethink-wireless.com/2012/11/05/sisvel-lte-patent-pool-emerges-all-majors-hold-committing.htm">http://www.rethink-wireless.com/2012/11/05/sisvel-lte-patent-pool-emerges-all-majors-hold-committing.htm</a> (last accessed 09 December, 2012)</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr66" name="fn66">66</a>]. Shankar Pandiath, <i>Sisvel Launches Patent Pool for 3G Long Term Evolution (LTE), </i>available at <a href="http://next-generation-communications.tmcnet.com/topics/nextgen-voice/articles/314957-sisvel-launches-patent-pool-3g-long-term-evolution.htm">http://next-generation-communications.tmcnet.com/topics/nextgen-voice/articles/314957-sisvel-launches-patent-pool-3g-long-term-evolution.htm</a> (last accessed 09 December, 2012).</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr67" name="fn67">67</a>].<i>NGMN Board Welcomes Launch of LTE Patent Pool, </i>available at <a href="http://4g-portal.com/ngmn-board-welcomes-launch-of-lte-patent-pool">http://4g-portal.com/ngmn-board-welcomes-launch-of-lte-patent-pool</a> (last accessed 09 December, 2012).</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr68" name="fn68">68</a>]. ELSPETH THOMSON AND JON SIGURDSON (EDS.), CHINA’S SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY SECTOR AND THE FORCES OF GLOBALIZATION 17 (2008, World Scientific Publishing Company, Singapore).</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr69" name="fn69">69</a>]. Cong Cao, <i>Challenges for Technological Development in China’s Industry, </i>available at <a href="http://chinaperspectives.revues.org/924">http://chinaperspectives.revues.org/924</a> (last accessed 11 December, 2012)</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr70" name="fn70">70</a>]. Peter Zura, <i>China Launches TD-SCDMA Telecom Standard</i>¸ available at <a href="http://271patent.blogspot.in/2006/01/china-launches-td-scdma-telecom.html">http://271patent.blogspot.in/2006/01/china-launches-td-scdma-telecom.html</a> (last accessed 10 December, 2012)</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr71" name="fn71">71</a>]. <i>Id.</i></p>
<p>[<a href="#fr72" name="fn72">72</a>]. <i>Id.</i></p>
<p>[<a href="#fr73" name="fn73">73</a>]. <i>TD-SCDMA (time division synchronous code division multiple access)</i>, available at <a href="http://searchmobilecomputing.techtarget.com/definition/TD-SCDMA">http://searchmobilecomputing.techtarget.com/definition/TD-SCDMA</a> (last accessed 07 December, 2012).</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr74" name="fn74">74</a>]. SHAHD AKHTAR AND PATRICIA ARINTO (EDS.), DIGITAL REVIEW OF ASIA PACIFIC : 2009-2010 8 (2010, Sage Publications, New Delhi).</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr75" name="fn75">75</a>]. <i>Supra </i>note 1 at 2. See Appendix 2 for the breakup of patent holding. However, see details on <i>Infra</i> note 78 for a contradictory view, wherein China claims to own 30% of all TD-SCDMA patents.</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr76" name="fn76">76</a>]. Pierre Vialle, <i>On the relevance of Indigenous Standard Setting Policy: the Case of TD-SCDMA in China, </i>2<sup>nd</sup> International Conference on Economics, Trade and Development, (2012) 36 IPEDR 184-185 (IACSIT Press, Singapore).</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr77" name="fn77">77</a>]. Dazheng Wang, Patent Pool: <i>A Solution to the Problem of TD-SCDMA’s Commercialization</i>, <a href="http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/login.jsp?tp=&arnumber=5076744&url=http%3A%2F%2Fieeexplore.ieee.org%2Fiel5%2F5076660%2F5076661%2F05076744.pdf%3Farnumber%3D5076744">http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/login.jsp?tp=&arnumber=5076744&url=http%3A%2F%2Fieeexplore.ieee.org%2Fiel5%2F5076660%2F5076661%2F05076744.pdf%3Farnumber%3D5076744</a> (last accessed 11 December, 2012).</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr78" name="fn78">78</a>]. <i>China Owns 30% of TD-SCDMA Related Patents, </i>available at <a href="http://www.cn-c114.net/582/a310685.html">http://www.cn-c114.net/582/a310685.html</a> (last accessed 11 December, 2012).</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr79" name="fn79">79</a>]. <i>The Legal Regulation on Patent Pool Misuse, </i>available at <a href="http://www.socpaper.com/the-legal-regulation-on-patent-pool-misuse.html">http://www.socpaper.com/the-legal-regulation-on-patent-pool-misuse.html</a> (last accessed 11 December, 2012).</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr80" name="fn80">80</a>]. <i>Supra </i>notes 75 and 78.</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr81" name="fn81">81</a>]. Tomoo Marukawa, <i>Chinese Innovations in Mobile Telecommunications: Third Generation vs. “Guerrilla Handsets”, </i>Paper presented at the IGCC Conference: Chinese Approaches to National Innovation, La Jolla, California, June 28-29, 2010 at 1.</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr82" name="fn82">82</a>]. <i>Id </i>at 8.</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr83" name="fn83">83</a>]. <i>Id </i>at 9.</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr84" name="fn84">84</a>]. <i>Id</i> at 9.</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr85" name="fn85">85</a>]. <i>China to Speed Up TD-LTE Process, </i>available at <a href="http://www.tdscdma-forum.org/en/news/see.asp?id=11998&uptime=2012-11-29">http://www.tdscdma-forum.org/en/news/see.asp?id=11998&uptime=2012-11-29</a> (last accessed 08 December, 2012)</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr86" name="fn86">86</a>]. <i>Supra</i> note 23.</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr87" name="fn87">87</a>]. <i>Id.</i></p>
<p>[<a href="#fr88" name="fn88">88</a>]. <i>Supra</i> note 23.</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr89" name="fn89">89</a>]. <i>Sisvel’s Patent Strategy, </i>available at <a href="http://www.managingip.com/Article/2400452/Sisvels-patent-strategy.html">http://www.managingip.com/Article/2400452/Sisvels-patent-strategy.html</a> (last accessed 12 December, 2012).</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr90" name="fn90">90</a>]. <i>Id.</i></p>
<p>[<a href="#fr91" name="fn91">91</a>]. <i>Supra</i> note 23.</p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/patent-pools'>https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/patent-pools</a>
</p>
No publishernehaaIntellectual Property RightsPublicationsAccess to KnowledgePervasive Technologies2013-07-03T06:57:59ZBlog EntryPERVASIVE TECHNOLOGIES PROJECT WORKING DOCUMENT SERIES: DOCUMENT 1 - RESEARCH METHODOLOGY FOR A PAPER ON COMPETITION LAW + IPR + ACCESS TO < $100 MOBILE DEVICES
https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/methodology-sub-hundred-dollar-mobile-devices-and-competition-law
<b>This blog post is the research methodology for my research paper under the Pervasive Technologies Project. This is a work in progress and is likely to be modified from time to time.</b>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">See a subsequent version titled <a class="external-link" href="http://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/pervasive-technologies-working-document-series-research-questions-and-a-literature-review-on-actor-network-theory">Pervasive Technologies: Working Document Series - Research Questions and a Literature Review on the Actor-Network Theory</a></p>
<hr />
<h2 style="text-align: justify; "></h2>
<h3 style="text-align: justify; "><b>Preliminary</b></h3>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The realization of the promise of the sub hundred dollar mobile device as a facilitator of access to knowledge is contingent <i>inter alia </i>on its availability in the market place. In turn, the market availability of the sub hundred dollar mobile device is influenced by the existence of an enabling environment for producers to produce, and consumers to consume. From a regulatory perspective, the enabling environment itself is a function of existing laws and policies, and the 'developmental effects' of certain laws and policies (Saraswati, 2012).</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">This research paper under the <i>Pervasive Technologies: Access to Knowledge in the Market Place</i> Project (<b>"PT Project"</b>) examines one such legal and policy lever and the role of a regulator in the development of an enabling environment for access to sub hundred dollar mobile devices. This paper is founded on four assumptions: <i>first, </i>that access to sub hundred dollar mobile devices is influenced by their price; <i>second, </i>that the question of access necessitates conversation between the intellectual property regime and several other actors, sites and tools; <i>third</i>, that one of the fundamental goals of regulatory reform is the creation of a 'stable, open and future- proof environment' (Guermazi and Satola, 2005) that encourages access to these devices; and <i>fourth,</i> that there exist public law implications of intellectual property that justify the involvement of State actors and regulators in matters that may arise out of private transactions.</p>
<h3><b>Research Questions</b></h3>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">This research paper will examine whether there is a role to be played by one regulator, that is, the Competition Commission of India (“CCI”), in this narrative of innovation, intellectual property and access to sub hundred dollar mobile devices. Specifically, the following research questions will be addressed:</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">First, what is the relationship between intellectual property and competition law? Second, what are the competition law/antitrust concerns that arise around the licensing of intellectual property (standard essential patents)? Third, can existing mechanisms in competition law address concerns around the licensing of standard essential patents on sub hundred dollar devices, and is competition law a viable solution to address this issue? If so, which ones? Fourth, given the frequency of these litigations, is there a role to be played by an <i>ex-post</i> regulator, such as the CCI, or is there a need for <i>ex-ante</i> regulation?</p>
<h3><b>Research Objects</b></h3>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">In an attempt to address these research questions, this paper will examine the role of the Competition Commission of India and the Indian Judiciary. This paper will also examine the role of similarly placed institutions in the United States of America as well as some member states of the European Union.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">This research paper will also examine select tools and sites sought to be used to create an enabling environment to facilitate access to these sub hundred dollar mobile devices: first, principles, legal frameworks and provisions of competition law/antitrust law; second, all relevant judicial decisions.</p>
<h3><b>Research Method</b></h3>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">First , this research paper will begin with establishing the case for the intervention of the regulator and/or the judiciary in the sub hundred dollar mobile device market by undertaking a review of primary and secondary literature<a name="_ftnref1"></a><a href="#_ftn1">[1]</a>("literature"). Second, also through a literature review, the research will be contextualized to India in terms of the market, the actors involved and the legal framework. Third, a cross jurisdictional comparative legal search will be undertaken to understand the potential areas of intervention for the judiciary and the Competition Commission of India based on existing legal disputes in other jurisdictions; and the possible challenges that might ensue. Fourth, in a scenario building exercise, an attempt will be made to outline the role that the judiciary and the regulator might play in India, in order to ensure access to sub hundred dollar mobile devices is not impeded by litigation around standard essential patents.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Generally, in the writing of this paper, inputs will be sought from experts including MHRD Chair Professors, legal practitioners in India, academics in India and abroad and members of relevant departments of the Indian Government.</p>
<h3><b>Research Communication</b></h3>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">This research will be communicated through a series of blog posts- one every month from December, 2014 to December, 2015. A preliminary draft of a research paper will be produced by December, 2015, tentatively to be presented at the 4th Global Congress on Intellectual Property and the Public Interest, New Delhi. The final output will be a research paper.</p>
<h3><b>References</b></h3>
<ol>
<li>Bouthenia Guermazi and David Satola, Creating the "Right" Enabling Environment for ICT, in Robert Schware (ed.), E-development: From Excitement to Effectiveness (2005, World Bank Publications).</li>
<li>Jyoti Saraswati, Dot. Compradors- Power and Policy in the Development of the Indian Software Industry (2012, Pluto Press)</li>
</ol>
<div style="text-align: justify; ">
<hr align="left" size="1" width="100%" />
</div>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><a name="_ftn1"></a><a href="#_ftnref1">[1]</a> Unless otherwise specified, for the purposes of this document, primary and secondary literature includes academic articles and books, newspaper articles and opinion pieces, blog posts, case law and other legal provisions.</p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/methodology-sub-hundred-dollar-mobile-devices-and-competition-law'>https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/methodology-sub-hundred-dollar-mobile-devices-and-competition-law</a>
</p>
No publishernehaaIntellectual Property RightsAccess to KnowledgePervasive Technologies2015-10-04T02:51:06ZBlog EntryPatents and Mobile Devices in India: An Empirical Survey
https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/patents-and-mobile-devices-in-india-an-empirical-survey
<b>Though India has the second-largest wireless subscriber base in the world, with more than 150 mobile device vendors, it has, until recently, remained relatively unaffected by the global smartphone wars. Over the past three years, however, a growing number of patent enforcement actions have been brought by multinational firms against domestic Indian producers. These actions, which have largely resulted in judgments favoring foreign patent holders, have given rise to a variety of proposals for addressing this situation.
</b>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">In order to assess the potential impact of patents on the mobile device market in India, and to assist policy makers in formulating and implementing regulations affecting this market, we have conducted a comprehensive patent landscape analysis of the mobile device sector in India using public data relating to Indian patent ownership by technology type, nationality, and industry classification. Our results illuminate a number of important features of the Indian mobile device market, including the overwhelming prevalence of foreign patent holders, the rate at which foreign and domestic firms are obtaining patents, and how these patent holdings are likely to shape industrial dynamics in the Indian market for mobile devices, as well as the availability of low-cost mobile devices that can significantly enhance public health, agriculture, safety and economic development throughout India.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><b><a href="https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/SSRN-id2756486.pdf/view" class="external-link">Download the full paper here</a></b></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><b><i>This paper was <a class="external-link" href="https://www.vanderbilt.edu/jotl/2017/02/patents-and-mobile-devices-in-india-an-empirical-survey/">published by the Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law </a>on February 9, 2017.</i><br /></b></p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/patents-and-mobile-devices-in-india-an-empirical-survey'>https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/patents-and-mobile-devices-in-india-an-empirical-survey</a>
</p>
No publisherrohiniIntellectual Property RightsAccess to KnowledgePervasive Technologies2017-03-29T04:03:03ZBlog EntryOpen Letter to the Vatican: Request for Holy See to Comment on IPR
https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/open-letter-to-the-vatican-request-for-holy-see-to-comment-on-ipr
<b>Due to the Holy See’s demonstrated pro-access position to medicines and published materials for persons with disabilities, the Centre for Internet and Society (CIS) requested for His Excellency, Archbishop Silvano M. Tomasi, to also consider copyrights, patents or IPR more generally, as the Holy See’s Permanent Observer at WIPO. We strongly encourage other organizations and civil society groups to modify this letter, as needed, and to contact the Holy See Mission to the United Nations (and WIPO) in Geneva in order to help us prompt His Excellency to contribute to the international dialogue on IPR.</b>
<hr />
<p>You may view the original letter sent by CIS <a href="https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/cis-original-open-letter-to-the-vatican-request-for-holy-see-to-comment-on-ipr" class="internal-link">here</a>.</p>
<hr />
<p>His Excellency, Archbishop Silvano M. Tomasi, Apostolic Nuncio<br />Holy See Mission to the United Nations in Geneva<br />P.O. Box 28<br />1292 Chambésy<br />Geneva, Switzerland<br />mission.holy-see@ties.itu.int<br />+41 22 758 98 20</p>
<p><strong>Friday, January 24, 2014<br /><br /></strong></p>
<p align="justify">Your Excellency Archbishop Silvano M. Tomasi,</p>
<p align="justify"><strong>Subject: Call for the Holy See’s comment on Intellectual Property Rights</strong></p>
<p><strong> </strong></p>
<p align="justify">On behalf of the Centre for Internet and Society (CIS), Bangalore, India, I, Samantha Cassar, write to Your Excellency’s opinion on copyrights, patents and intellectual property rights.</p>
<p align="justify">We are a not-for-profit, non-governmental research organization that works on addressing policy issues related to access to knowledge and intellectual property law reform (http://cis-india.org/a2k), and accessibility for persons with disabilities (http://cis-india.org/accessibility) among other areas related to internet and information and communication technologies.</p>
<p align="justify">CIS is an accredited organization with the World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO) and a regular participant at the meetings of the Standing Committee on Copyrights and Related Rights (SCCR), the Standing Committee on the Law of Patents (SCP), as well as the Committee on Development and Intellectual Property.</p>
<p align="justify">At the outset, we commend Your Excellency for signing the Marrakesh Treaty to Facilitate Access to Published Works for Persons Who Are Blind, Visually Impaired, or Otherwise Print Disabled. As one of the contributors to this treaty, we appreciate the concern of the Holy See for those who are marginalised within our information society by their disabilities.</p>
<p align="justify">As Pranesh Prakash, Policy Director from CIS noted at Marrakesh during the adoption of this treaty, “When copyright doesn't serve public welfare, states must intervene, and the law must change to promote human rights, the freedom of expression and to receive and impart information, and to protect authors and consumers.” We are happy to see this being done through a treaty as such.</p>
<p align="justify">Also said by Your Excellency, within the Holy See’s statement at the 9th Ministerial Conference of the World Trade Organization (WTO), “Among the most damaging concessions developing countries make in regional and bilateral agreements are those enhancing the monopolies on life-saving medicines, which reduce access and affordability and those that provide excessive legal rights to foreign investors, limiting the policy space for nations to promote sustainable and inclusive development.”</p>
<p align="justify">Given the Holy See’s demonstrated standpoint on the accessing of medicines and published works, we at the Centre for Internet and Society would like to request Your Excellency to also consider <strong>copyrights, patents or more generally, intellectual property rights (IPR)</strong>, as Permanent Observer of the Holy See to the United Nations and Other International Organizations in Geneva.</p>
<p align="justify">On behalf of CIS, I am honoured to be writing to Your Excellency and for this request to be considered. Due to the ability of copyright and other forms of IPR to obstruct the access of one’s own human rights and even the sustainable development of one’s country, we feel this area must be crucially considered within an international dialogue—not only from a place of political strategy but also from principles of mercy and compassion.</p>
<p align="justify">With meetings approaching for both <strong>WIPO’s Standing Committee on the Law of Patents</strong> (January 27-31, 2014) and <strong>WIPO’s Committee on Development and Intellectual Property</strong> (May 19-23, 2014), we are very excited at the possibility of the Holy See enriching this discussion, and hope for such a contribution to take place when the international community is listening—at these meetings, or in any other form.<br /><br /></p>
<p>With Every Best Wish,<br />Sincerely Yours,</p>
<p><br />Samantha Cassar<br /><br />Programme Associate<br />The Centre for Internet & Society</p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/open-letter-to-the-vatican-request-for-holy-see-to-comment-on-ipr'>https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/open-letter-to-the-vatican-request-for-holy-see-to-comment-on-ipr</a>
</p>
No publishersamanthaAccess to KnowledgeCopyrightPublic AccountabilityIntellectual Property RightsOpen Content2014-01-31T07:14:07ZBlog EntryOpen Letter to PM Modi on Intellectual Property Rights issues on His Visit to the United States of America in September, 2015
https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/open-letter-on-intellectual-property-rights-issues-during-your-visit-to-the-united-states-of-america-in-september-2015
<b>This is an open letter by CIS to the Prime Minister, Shri Narendra Modi in light of his impending visit to the USA. This letter asks the Prime Minister to urge the USA to ratify the Marrakesh Treaty; and asks that India not be a party to TPP negotiations, in light of recent reports on a study encouraging India to join the TPP.
</b>
<p> </p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Shri Narendra Damodardas Modi<br />Hon’ble Prime Minister of India<br />152, South Block, Raisina Hill<br />New Delhi-110011</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">22 September, 2015</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Dear Sir,</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">We write on behalf of the Centre for Internet and Society, India <a name="_ftnref1" href="#_ftn1">[1]</a>, a Bangalore and New Delhi based not-for-profit organization engaging in research on among others, accessibility for persons with disabilities, intellectual property rights, openness and access to knowledge. Over the past fifteen months, we have welcomed and support certain initiatives of our government as being in line with some of our research interests, specifically, the "Make in India" and "Digital India" initiatives, and your vision of a digitally empowered India, as we have noted in an earlier open letter to you. <a name="_ftnref2" href="#_ftn2">[2]</a></p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">This letter is in light of your visit to the United States of America (“USA”) this month, to articulate a two-fold request:<em> first, </em>that during the course of your visit you request the government of the USA to ratify the Marrakesh Treaty for visually impaired persons (“Marrakesh Treaty”); <a name="_ftnref3" href="#_ftn3">[3]</a> and <em>second, </em>that the Indian government not enter into any negotiations around the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade agreement (“the TPP”).</p>
<h3>On the Marrakesh Treaty</h3>
<p style="text-align: justify;">According to figures by the World Blind Union, approximately 90% of all published material is not accessible to blind or print disabled people. <a name="_ftnref4" href="#_ftn4">[4]</a> The severity of the ‘book famine’ experienced by the world’s estimated 300 million blind or otherwise print or visually disabled people (of which an estimated 63 million are in India) was highlighted by India in its Closing Statement at the Diplomatic Conference convened to conclude the Marrakesh Treaty. <a name="_ftnref5" href="#_ftn5">[5]</a> India has historically been a strong advocate of the spirit of the Marrakesh Treaty, becoming the first country to ratify it in June, 2014. <a name="_ftnref6" href="#_ftn6">[6]</a> Amendments in 2012 to India’s copyright law predated the signature to the Marrakesh Treaty. These amendments created disability and works neutral exceptions to our copyright law, well beyond the mandate of the Marrakesh Treaty.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">The true realization of the promise of the Marrakesh Treaty however will remain a distant dream until the treaty comes into effect (three months) after 20 Member States have ratified it or acceded to it. <a name="_ftnref7" href="#_ftn7">[7]</a> According to information available from the World Intellectual Property Organization <a name="_ftnref8" href="#_ftn8">[8]</a>, this number is currently only 9, and the USA is not one of the countries to have done so. The USA is home <a name="_ftnref9" href="#_ftn9">[9]</a> to some of the largest publishers of both academic and other/leisure material including Penguin Random House, Harper Collins, John Wiley & Sons, the RELX Group, McGraw-Hill Education, Scholastic and Cengage Learning to name a few. It accounts for a large volume of the world’s book and other print material export. The active participation of the USA through the ratification of the Marrakesh treaty is critical if the treaty is to be truly effective.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">During your visit, we urge you request the government of the United States of America to ratify the Marrakesh Treaty at the earliest. This will bring us one important step closer to eradicating the book famine.</p>
<h3>On the TPP</h3>
<p style="text-align: justify;">We are concerned after reports <a name="_ftnref10" href="#_ftn10">[10]</a> of a recent study authored by C Fred Bergsten that encourages India to join the TPP. On this front, we are in complete agreement with the reported statement of the Hon’ble Ambassador Shri Arun K. Singh, where he disagrees with some of the findings and analysis of this recent report. <a name="_ftnref11" href="#_ftn11">[11]</a></p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">The TPP has come into severe criticism <a name="_ftnref12" href="#_ftn12">[12]</a> over the years <a name="_ftnref13" href="#_ftn13">[13]</a> from a vast multitude <a name="_ftnref14" href="#_ftn14">[14]</a> of sources <a name="_ftnref15" href="#_ftn15">[15]</a> (including a group of 30 law professors in 2012) <a name="_ftnref16" href="#_ftn16">[16]</a> across the various countries that are a party to the negotiations. Among others and most relevant to us as an organization is the criticism around the secrecy of negotiations <a name="_ftnref17" href="#_ftn17">[17]</a> as well as the content of the chapter on intellectual property in the TPP. It is our belief that eventually, India stands to lose as a result of the TPP <a name="_ftnref18" href="#_ftn18">[18]</a> with its possible adverse impact on our economy. <a name="_ftnref19" href="#_ftn19">[19]</a></p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">The rigid intellectual property protections (including criminal penalties for unintentional copying) <a name="_ftnref20" href="#_ftn20">[20]</a> sought to be enforced through the TPP would benefit only US pharmaceutical and entertainment industries. <a name="_ftnref21" href="#_ftn21">[21]</a> These provisions (among others) mandate the inclusion of TRIPS plus provisions in national laws, envisage possible extensions in term of protection on patents, restrict copyright exceptions and limitations, extend copyright protection terms and impose a higher liability on intermediaries; <a name="_ftnref22" href="#_ftn22">[22]</a>all of which would be disastrous for an emerging economy such as India’s, which is a heavy user of intellectual property and not a heavy producer of the same.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Historically, India has been a supporter of a transparent, multilateral decision making process, a commitment to which was also reiterated recently by the Hon’ble Minister of State for Commerce and Industry, Smt. Nirmala Sitharaman. <a name="_ftnref23" href="#_ftn23">[23]</a>India has also raised many of its concerns (on the secrecy of the negotiations as well as substantive provisions themselves) around the TPP and its close cousin, the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (“ACTA”) in 2011 <a name="_ftnref24" href="#_ftn24">[24]</a> and 2012 <a name="_ftnref25" href="#_ftn25">[25]</a> at the World Trade Organization (“WTO”) TRIPS Council and on the ACTA in 2010, also at the WTO Trips Council. <a name="_ftnref26" href="#_ftn26">[26]</a></p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">In light of the above, we strongly urge the Indian government to not engage in negotiations on the TPP. At a minimum, we would request that any engagement in TPP negotiations be preceded by national consultations on the same, soliciting input from various stakeholders with diverging interests, including academia, civil society, industry associations, large Indian corporations, small and medium enterprises and multi- national corporations, rights holders associations and other interest groups.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">We thank you for the opportunity to present these views to you. We do hope that you will consider these suggestions favourably, in the interests of India’s economic and social development. We welcome any opportunity to assist you with any queries you may have with regard to these submissions.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Thank you.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Yours truly</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">(For the Centre for Internet and Society, India)</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Pranesh Prakash, Policy Director<br />Nehaa Chaudhari, Programme Officer</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Copies to:</p>
<ol style="text-align: justify;" type="1">
<li>Smt. Smriti Zubin Irani, Minister for Human Resource Development, Government of India.</li>
<li>Prof. (Dr.) Ram Shankar Katheria, Minister of State for Human Resource Development (Higher Education), Government of India.</li>
<li>Smt. Nirmala Sitharaman, Minister of State for Commerce and Industry, Government of India.</li>
<li>Shri Vinay Sheel Oberoi, Secretary (Department of Higher Education), Ministry of Human Resources Development, Government of India, Government of India.</li>
<li>Shri Amitabh Kant, Secretary (Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion), Ministry of Commerce and Industry, Government of India.</li></ol>
<p> <br /><br />(Edit - 25 September, 2015) - The following people have reached out to us in support of this letter and have expressed a desire to have their signatures placed on record as support. We wish to acknowledge the same. </p>
<ol><li>Prof. Dinesh Abrol - Convenor, National Working Group on Patent Laws and WTO<br /></li><li>Dr. B. Ekbal - President, Democratic Alliance for Knowledge Freedom, Kerala</li><li>T.C. James - President, NIPO</li><li>Dr. Suman Sahai - Chairperson, Gene Campaign</li><li>Dr. Biswajit Dhar - Professor, Centre for Economic Studies and Planning, School of Social Sciences, Jawaharlal Nehru University</li></ol>
<div> </div>
<p> </p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><a name="_ftn1" href="#_ftnref1">[1]</a>See generally <a href="http://cis-india.org/">http://cis-india.org/</a> (last accessed 22 September, 2015).</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><a name="_ftn2" href="#_ftnref2">[2]</a>Rohini Lakshane, Open Letter to Prime Minister Modi, available at <a href="http://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/open-letter-to-prime-minister-modi">http://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/open-letter-to-prime-minister-modi</a> (last accessed 22 September, 2015); Centre for Internet and Society/Rohini Lakshane, Digital India & Make in India : Form a patent pool of critical mobile technologies – CIS India, available at <a href="http://www.medianama.com/2015/03/223-digital-india-make-in-india-form-a-patent-pool-of-critical-mobile-technologies-cis-india/" rel="noreferrer">http://www.medianama.com/2015/03/223-digital-india-make-in-india-form-a-patent-pool-of-critical-mobile-technologies-cis-india/</a> (last accessed 22 September, 2015).</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><a name="_ftn3" href="#_ftnref3">[3]</a>The Marrakesh Treaty to Facilitate Access to Published Works by Visually Impaired Persons and Persons with Print Disabilities adopted on June 27, 2013. Treaty text and other official documentation available at <a href="http://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/ip/marrakesh/" rel="noreferrer">http://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/ip/marrakesh/</a> (last accessed 22 September, 2015).</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><a name="_ftn4" href="#_ftnref4">[4]</a>World Blind Union, Marrakesh Treaty – Right to Read Campaign, available at <a href="http://www.worldblindunion.org/English/our-work/our-priorities/Pages/right-2-read-campaign.aspx" rel="noreferrer">http://www.worldblindunion.org/English/our-work/our-priorities/Pages/right-2-read-campaign.aspx</a> (last accessed 22 September, 2015).</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><a name="_ftn5" href="#_ftnref5">[5]</a>Pranesh Prakash, India’s Closing Statement at Marrakesh on the Treaty for the Blind, available at <a href="http://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/india-closing-statement-marrakesh-treaty-for-the-blind">http://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/india-closing-statement-marrakesh-treaty-for-the-blind</a> (last accessed 22 September, 2015).</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><a name="_ftn6" href="#_ftnref6">[6]</a>Nehaa Chaudhari, India’s Ratification of the Marrakesh Treaty Celebrated; Accessible Books Consortium Launched, available at <a href="http://cis-india.org/accessibility/blog/indias-ratification-of-marrakesh-treaty-celebrated">http://cis-india.org/accessibility/blog/indias-ratification-of-marrakesh-treaty-celebrated</a> (last accessed 22 September, 2015).</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><a name="_ftn7" href="#_ftnref7">[7]</a>Article 18 of the Marrakesh Treaty.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><a name="_ftn8" href="#_ftnref8">[8]</a>World Intellectual Property Organization, WIPO Administered Treaties: Contracting Parties > Marrakesh VIP Treaty (Treaty not yet in force), available at <a href="http://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/ShowResults.jsp?lang=en&treaty_id=843" rel="noreferrer">http://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/ShowResults.jsp?lang=en&treaty_id=843</a> (last accessed 22 September, 2015).</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><a name="_ftn9" href="#_ftnref9">[9]</a>Publishers Weekly, The World’s 57 Largest Book Publishers, 2015, available at <a href="http://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/by-topic/international/international-book-news/article/67224-the-world-s-57-largest-book-publishers-2015.html" rel="noreferrer">http://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/by-topic/international/international-book-news/article/67224-the-world-s-57-largest-book-publishers-2015.html</a> (last accessed 22 September, 2015).</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><a name="_ftn10" href="#_ftnref10">[10]</a>S Rajagopalan, US Report Pushes India to Join the Trans-Pacific Partnership, available at <a href="http://www.dailypioneer.com/world/us-report-pushes-india-to-join-trans-pacific-partnership.html" rel="noreferrer">http://www.dailypioneer.com/world/us-report-pushes-india-to-join-trans-pacific-partnership.html</a> (last accessed 22 September, 2015); Indo-Asian News Service on NDTV, India Can Boost Exports by $500 Billion with Trade Liberalization: Study, available at <a href="http://www.ndtv.com/india-news/india-can-boost-exports-by-500-billion-with-trade-liberalization-study-1218887" rel="noreferrer">http://www.ndtv.com/india-news/india-can-boost-exports-by-500-billion-with-trade-liberalization-study-1218887</a> (last accessed 22 September, 2015); Raghavendra M., India can boost exports by $500 billion with trade liberalization: study, available at <a href="http://www.americanbazaaronline.com/2015/09/18/india-can-boost-exports-by-500-billion-with-trade-liberalization-study/" rel="noreferrer">http://www.americanbazaaronline.com/2015/09/18/india-can-boost-exports-by-500-billion-with-trade-liberalization-study/</a> (last accessed 22 September, 2015); Press Trust of India in the Business Standard, India can boost exports by USD 500 bn by joining the TPP: report, available at <a href="http://www.business-standard.com/article/pti-stories/india-can-boost-exports-by-usd-500-bn-by-joining-tpp-report-115091701149_1.html" rel="noreferrer">http://www.business-standard.com/article/pti-stories/india-can-boost-exports-by-usd-500-bn-by-joining-tpp-report-115091701149_1.html</a> (last accessed 22 September, 2015); Seema Sirohi, India must expand its trade before it gets left behind in the race, available at <a href="http://blogs.economictimes.indiatimes.com/letterfromwashington/india-must-expand-its-trade-before-it-gets-left-behind-in-the-race/" rel="noreferrer">http://blogs.economictimes.indiatimes.com/letterfromwashington/india-must-expand-its-trade-before-it-gets-left-behind-in-the-race/</a> (last accessed 22 September, 2015).</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><a name="_ftn11" href="#_ftnref11">[11]</a>S Rajagopalan, US Report Pushes India to Join the Trans-Pacific Partnership, available at <a href="http://www.dailypioneer.com/world/us-report-pushes-india-to-join-trans-pacific-partnership.html" rel="noreferrer">http://www.dailypioneer.com/world/us-report-pushes-india-to-join-trans-pacific-partnership.html</a> (last accessed 22 September, 2015)</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><a name="_ftn12" href="#_ftnref12">[12]</a>Natasha Lennard, Noam Chomsky: Trans-Pacific Partnership is a “neoliberal assault”, available at <a href="http://www.salon.com/2014/01/13/chomsky_tpp_is_a_neoliberal_assault/" rel="noreferrer">http://www.salon.com/2014/01/13/chomsky_tpp_is_a_neoliberal_assault/</a> (last accessed 22 September, 2015); Zach Carter and Ryan Grim, Noam Chomsky: Obama Trade Deal a ‘Neoliberal Assault’ to ‘Further Corporate Domination’, available at <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/13/noam-chomsky-obama-trans-pacific-partnership_n_4577495.html?ir=India&adsSiteOverride=in" rel="noreferrer">http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/13/noam-chomsky-obama-trans-pacific-partnership_n_4577495.html?ir=India&adsSiteOverride=in</a> (last accessed 22 September, 2015); Sean Flynn;, Margot E Kaminski, Brook K Baker and Jimmy H Koo., "Public Interest Analysis of the US TPP Proposal for an IP Chapter" (2011). PIJIP Research Paper Series. Paper 21. <a href="http://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/research/21" rel="noreferrer">http://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/research/21</a> (last accessed 22 September, 2015).</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><a name="_ftn13" href="#_ftnref13">[13]</a>BBC News, TPP: What is it and why does it matter?, available at <a href="http://www.bbc.com/news/business-21782080" rel="noreferrer">http://www.bbc.com/news/business-21782080</a> (last accessed 22 September, 2015);</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><a name="_ftn14" href="#_ftnref14">[14]</a>For a compilation on writing on the TPP <em>see</em> James Love, Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP also known as the TPPA), available at <a href="http://keionline.org/tpp" rel="noreferrer">http://keionline.org/tpp</a> (last accessed 22 September, 2015); <em>see also </em>American University Program on Information Justice and Intellectual Property, Trans-Pacific Partnership, available at <a href="http://infojustice.org/tpp" rel="noreferrer">http://infojustice.org/tpp</a> (last accessed 22 September, 2015).</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><a name="_ftn15" href="#_ftnref15">[15]</a>Zach Carter, Alan Grayson on Trans-Pacific Partnership: Obama Secrecy Hides ‘Assault on Democratic Government’, available at <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/18/alan-grayson-trans-pacific-partnership_n_3456167.html?ir=India&adsSiteOverride=in" rel="noreferrer">http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/18/alan-grayson-trans-pacific-partnership_n_3456167.html?ir=India&adsSiteOverride=in</a> (last accessed 22 September, 2015); James Love, KEI analysis of Wikileaks leak of TPP IPR text, from August 30, 2013, available at <a href="http://keionline.org/node/1825" rel="noreferrer">http://keionline.org/node/1825</a> (last accessed 22 September, 2015); Ian Verrender, The TPP has the potential for real harm, available at <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-03-16/verrender-the-tpp-has-the-potential-for-real-harm/6321538" rel="noreferrer">http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-03-16/verrender-the-tpp-has-the-potential-for-real-harm/6321538</a> (last accessed 22 September, 2015).</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><a name="_ftn16" href="#_ftnref16">[16]</a>Sean Flynn, Law Professors Call for Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) Transparency, available at <a href="http://infojustice.org/archives/21137" rel="noreferrer">http://infojustice.org/archives/21137</a> (last accessed 22 September, 2015).</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><a name="_ftn17" href="#_ftnref17">[17]</a>Sachie Mizohata, "The Trans-Pacific Partnership and Its Critics: An introduction and a petition," The Asia-Pacific Journal, Vol. 11, Issue 36, No. 3, available at <a href="http://japanfocus.org/-Sachie-MIZOHATA/3996/article.html" rel="noreferrer">http://japanfocus.org/-Sachie-MIZOHATA/3996/article.html</a> (last accessed 22 September, 2015).</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><a name="_ftn18" href="#_ftnref18">[18]</a>Vijay Rajamohan, Trans-Pacific Partnership – Should India Join this Mega Trade Deal?, available at <a href="http://swarajyamag.com/world/trans-pacific-partnership-should-india-join-this-mega-trade-deal/" rel="noreferrer">http://swarajyamag.com/world/trans-pacific-partnership-should-india-join-this-mega-trade-deal/</a> (last accessed 22 September, 2015).</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><a name="_ftn19" href="#_ftnref19">[19]</a>Sylvia Mishra, How will the Trans-Pacific Partnership affect India?, available at <a href="http://www.observerindia.com/cms/sites/orfonline/modules/analysis/AnalysisDetail.html?cmaid=85684&mmacmaid=85685" rel="noreferrer">http://www.observerindia.com/cms/sites/orfonline/modules/analysis/AnalysisDetail.html?cmaid=85684&mmacmaid=85685</a> (last accessed 22 September, 2015).</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><a name="_ftn20" href="#_ftnref20">[20]</a>Gabrielle Chan, Trans-Pacific Partnership: a guide to the most contentious issues, available at <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/dec/10/trans-pacific-partnership-a-guide-to-the-most-contentious-issues" rel="noreferrer">http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/dec/10/trans-pacific-partnership-a-guide-to-the-most-contentious-issues</a> (last accessed 22 September, 2015).</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><a name="_ftn21" href="#_ftnref21">[21]</a>James Love, New leak of TPP consolidated text on intellectual property provides details of pandering to drug companies and publishers, available at <a href="http://www.keionline.org/node/2108" rel="noreferrer">http://www.keionline.org/node/2108</a> (last accessed 22 September, 2015); Vijay Rajamohan, Trans-Pacific Partnership – Should India Join this Mega Trade Deal?, available at <a href="http://swarajyamag.com/world/trans-pacific-partnership-should-india-join-this-mega-trade-deal/" rel="noreferrer">http://swarajyamag.com/world/trans-pacific-partnership-should-india-join-this-mega-trade-deal/</a> (last accessed 22 September, 2015) referencing Paul Krugman.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><a name="_ftn22" href="#_ftnref22">[22]</a>William New, Leaked TPP Draft Reveals Extreme Rights Holder Position Of US, Japan, Outraged Observers Say, available at <a href="http://www.ip-watch.org/2014/10/17/leaked-tpp-draft-reveals-extreme-rights-holder-position-of-us-japan-outraged-observers-say/" rel="noreferrer">http://www.ip-watch.org/2014/10/17/leaked-tpp-draft-reveals-extreme-rights-holder-position-of-us-japan-outraged-observers-say/</a> (last accessed 22 September, 2015).</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><a name="_ftn23" href="#_ftnref23">[23]</a>Lalit K Jha, India not being left out of global trade pacts: Minister, available at <a href="http://www.thestatesman.com/news/business/india-not-being-left-out-of-global-trade-pacts-minister/91679.html" rel="noreferrer">http://www.thestatesman.com/news/business/india-not-being-left-out-of-global-trade-pacts-minister/91679.html</a> (last accessed 22 September, 2015).</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><a name="_ftn24" href="#_ftnref24">[24]</a>Thirukumaran Balasubramaniam, WTO TRIPS Council: India raises concerns on ACTA and TPPA on discussion of “Trends in the Enforcement of IPRs”, available at <a href="https://donttradeourlivesaway.wordpress.com/2011/10/29/wto-trips-council-india-raises-concerns-on-acta-and-tppa-on-discussion-of-trends-in-the-enforcement-of-iprs/" rel="noreferrer">https://donttradeourlivesaway.wordpress.com/2011/10/29/wto-trips-council-india-raises-concerns-on-acta-and-tppa-on-discussion-of-trends-in-the-enforcement-of-iprs/</a> (last accessed 22 September, 2015).</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><a name="_ftn25" href="#_ftnref25">[25]</a>Thirukumaran Balasubramaniam, 28 Feb 2012: Intervention delivered by India at WTO TRIPS Council on IP Enforcement Trends noting concerns with ACTA and TPPA, available at <a href="http://keionline.org/node/1376" rel="noreferrer">http://keionline.org/node/1376</a> (last accessed 22 September, 2015).</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><a name="_ftn26" href="#_ftnref26">[26]</a>Kanaga Raja, ACTA comes in for criticism at the TRIPS council, available at <a href="http://www.twn.my/title2/wto.info/2010/twninfo100606.htm" rel="noreferrer">http://www.twn.my/title2/wto.info/2010/twninfo100606.htm</a> (last accessed 22 September, 2015).</p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/open-letter-on-intellectual-property-rights-issues-during-your-visit-to-the-united-states-of-america-in-september-2015'>https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/open-letter-on-intellectual-property-rights-issues-during-your-visit-to-the-united-states-of-america-in-september-2015</a>
</p>
No publisherPranesh Prakash and Nehaa ChaudhariAccess to KnowledgeIntellectual Property RightsAccessibilityFeaturedHomepage2015-09-25T06:43:12ZBlog EntryOpen letter from CIS to PM Modi on Intellectual Property Rights issues on his Visit to US
https://cis-india.org/a2k/news/live-law-apoorva-mandhani-september-23-2015-open-letter-from-cis-to-pm-modi-on-intellectual-property-rights-issues-on-his-visit-to-us
<b>Centre for Internet and Society, through its Policy Director Mr. Pranesh Prakash and Programme Officer Nehaa Chaudhari has addressed an open letter to Prime Minister Narendra Modi on the intellectual property right issues concerning his visit to the United State of America in September, 2015.</b>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The article by Apoorva Mandhani was <a class="external-link" href="http://www.livelaw.in/open-letter-from-cis-to-pm-modi-on-intellectual-property-rights-issues-on-his-visit-to-us/">published by LiveLaw</a> on September 23, 2015. CIS Open Letter <a class="external-link" href="http://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/open-letter-on-intellectual-property-rights-issues-during-your-visit-to-the-united-states-of-america-in-september-2015">here</a>.</p>
<hr />
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The letter makes a two-fold request: first<i>, </i>that the Government of the USA be requested to ratify the Marrakesh Treaty for visually impaired persons and second,<i> </i>that the Indian Government should not enter into any negotiations around the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade agreement.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The letter relies on the statistics released by the <a href="http://www.worldblindunion.org/English/our-work/our-priorities/Pages/right-2-read-campaign.aspx">World Blind Union</a>, according to which 90% of all published material is not accessible to blind or print disabled people. The severity of the ‘book famine’, it says, was highlighted by India in its Closing Statement at the Diplomatic Conference convened to conclude the Marrakesh Treaty.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">India was the <a href="http://cis-india.org/accessibility/blog/indias-ratification-of-marrakesh-treaty-celebrated">first country</a> to ratify the Marrakesh Treaty in June, 2014. However, the Marrakesh Treaty will come into effect only after 20 Member States have ratified it or acceded to it. As per information available from the <a href="http://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/ShowResults.jsp?lang=en&treaty_id=843">World Intellectual Property Organization</a>, only 9 countries have ratified or acceded to the treaty and USA is not one of it. The letter therefore requests Mr. Modi to request USA ratify the Marrakesh Treaty at the earliest.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">It says, <i>“The USA is home to some of the largest publishers of both academic and other/leisure material including Penguin Random House, Harper Collins, John Wiley & Sons, the RELX Group, McGraw-Hill Education, Scholastic and Cengage Learning to name a few. It accounts for a large volume of the world’s book and other print material export. The active participation of the USA through the ratification of the Marrakesh treaty is critical if the treaty is to be truly effective.”</i></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">With regard to the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade agreement, the letter communicates its concern regarding the secrecy of negotiations as well as the content of the chapter on intellectual property in the TPP.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Provisions sought to be imposed through the TPP mandate the inclusion of TRIPS plus provisions in national laws, envisage possible extensions in term of protection on patents, restrict copyright exceptions and limitations, extend copyright protection terms and impose a higher liability on intermediaries. All these provisions, it says, <i>“would be disastrous for an emerging economy such as India’s, which is a heavy user of intellectual property and not a heavy producer of the same.”</i></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Highlighting CIS’s concerns, the letter requests that any engagement in TPP negotiations be preceded by national consultations on the same, soliciting input from various stakeholders with diverging interests, including academia, civil society, industry associations, large Indian corporations, small and medium enterprises and multi- national corporations, rights holders associations and other interest groups.</p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='https://cis-india.org/a2k/news/live-law-apoorva-mandhani-september-23-2015-open-letter-from-cis-to-pm-modi-on-intellectual-property-rights-issues-on-his-visit-to-us'>https://cis-india.org/a2k/news/live-law-apoorva-mandhani-september-23-2015-open-letter-from-cis-to-pm-modi-on-intellectual-property-rights-issues-on-his-visit-to-us</a>
</p>
No publisherpraskrishnaIntellectual Property RightsAccess to Knowledge2015-09-24T02:48:32ZNews Item