The Centre for Internet and Society
https://cis-india.org
These are the search results for the query, showing results 201 to 215.
Super Cassettes v. MySpace
https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/super-cassettes-v-my-space
<b>The Delhi High Court’s judgment in Super Cassettes v. MySpace last July is worrying for a number of reasons. The court failed to appreciate the working of intermediaries online and disregard all pragmatic considerations involved. The consequences for free expression and particularly for file sharing by users of services online are especially unfavourable. </b>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The judgment<a href="#fn*" name="fr*">[*]</a>is extremely worrying since it holds MySpace liable for copyright infringement, <b>despite</b> it having shown that it did not know, and could not have known, about each instance of infringement; that it removed each instance of alleged infringement upon mere complaint; that it asked Super Cassettes to submit their songs to their song identification database and Super Cassettes didn't.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">This, in essence, means, that all 'social media services' in which there is even a <b>potential</b> for copyright infringement (such as YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, etc.) are now faced with a choice of either braving lawsuits for activities of their users that they have no control over — they can at best respond to takedown requests after the infringing material has already been put up — or to wind down their operations in India.</p>
<h2 style="text-align: justify; ">The Facts</h2>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Aside from social networking, MySpace facilitates the sharing of content between its users. This case concerns content (whose copyright vested in T-Series) was uploaded by users to MySpace’s website. It appears that tensions between MySpace and T-Series arose in 2007, when T-Series entered into talks with MySpace to grant it licenses in its copyrighted content, while MySpace asked instead that T-Series register with its rights management programme. Neither the license nor the registration came about, and the infringing material continued to be available on the MySpace website.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Specifically, T-Series alleged that cases for primary infringement under section 51(a)(i) of the Copyright Act as well as secondary infringement under section 51 (a) (ii) could be made out. Alleging that MySpace had infringed its copyrights and so affected its earnings in royalties, T-Series approached the Delhi High Court and filed a suit seeking injunctive relief and damages. In proceedings for interim relief while the suit was pending, the court granted an injunction, but, in an appeal by MySpace, added the qualification that the content would have to be taken down only on receipt of a specific catalogue of infringing works available on MySpace, rather than a general list of works in which T-Series held a copyright.</p>
<h2 style="text-align: justify; ">The Defence</h2>
<p>While other arguments such as one around the jurisdiction of the court were also raised, the central issues are listed below:</p>
<ol>
<li style="text-align: justify; ">Non-Specificity of Prayer<br />T-Series’ claim in the suit is for a blanket injunction on copyrighted content on the MySpace website. This imposes a clearly untenable, even impossible, burden for intermediaries to comply with.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify; ">Knowledge<br />MySpace argued that no liability could accrue to it on two counts. The first was that it had no actual or direct knowledge or role in the selection of the content, while the second was that no control was exercised, or was exercisable over the uploading of the content. Additionally, there was no possible means by which it could have identified the offending content and segregated it from lawful content, or monitored all of the content that it serves as a platform for.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify; ">Intermediary status and Safe Harbour Protection<br />In relation to its status as an intermediary, MySpace raised several arguments. First, it argued that it had immunity under section 79 of the IT Act and under the US Digital Millennium Copyright Act (US DMCA). Another argument restated what is arguably the most basic tenet of intermediary liability that merely providing the platform by which infringement could occur cannot amount to infringement. In other words, the mere act of facilitating expression over internet does not amount to infringement. It then made reference to its terms of use and its institution of safeguards (in the form of a hash filter, a rights management tool and a system of take-down–stay-down), which it argued clearly reflect an intention to discourage or else address cases of infringement as they arise. MySpace also emphasized that a US DMCA compliant procedure was in place, although T-Series countered that the notice and take down system would not mitigate the infringement.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify; ">Relationship between MySpace and its Users<br />Taking from previous arguments about a lack of control and its status as an intermediary, MySpace argued that it was simply a licensee of users who uploaded content. The license is limited, in that MySpace is only allowed to alter user-generated content so as to make it viewable.</li>
</ol>
<h2 style="text-align: justify; ">Outcomes</h2>
<ol>
<li style="text-align: justify; ">Infringement by Facilitation<br />The court concluded that infringement in terms of section 51 (a) (ii) had occurred in this case, since web space is a “place” in the terms required by the section and there were monetary gains in the form of ad revenue. The argument as to a lack of knowledge of infringement was also rejected on the ground that MySpace’s provision for safeguards against infringement clearly established a reason to believe that infringement will occur. Also referenced as evidence of knowledge, or at least a reason to believe infringement would occur, is the fact that MySpace modifies the format of the content before making it available on its website. It also tested for infringement by authorization in terms of section 14 read with section 51 (a) (i), but concluded that this did not arise here.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify; ">Reading away section 79?<br />The court accepted the argument made by T-Series to the effect that sections 79 and 81 of the IT Act must be read together. Since section 79 would be overridden by section 81’s non-obstante, the effect would be that rights holders’ interests under the Copyright Act will erode intermediaries’ immunity under section 79. </li>
<li style="text-align: justify; ">Due Diligence<br />The court rejected the argument that the provision of due diligence or curative measures post-infringement would be sufficient. Specifically, the contention that the quantum of content being uploaded precludes close scrutiny, given the amount of labour that would be involved, was rejected. Content should not immediately be made available but must be subject to enquiries as to its title or to authentication of its proprietor before it is made available. In fact, it holds that, “there is no reason to axiomatically make each and every work available to the public solely because user has supplied them unless the defendants are so sure that it is not infringement.” (Paragraph 88).</li>
</ol> <ol> </ol>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">There is also an attempt to distinguish the Indian framework from the DMCA. While that law calls for post-infringement measures, it is argued that in India, on reading section 51 with section 55, the focus is on preventing infringement at the threshold. In response to the case that it would be impossible to do so, the court held that since the process here requires MySpace to modify the format of content uploaded to it to make it viewable, it will have a reasonable opportunity to test for infringement.</p>
<h2 style="text-align: justify; ">Analysis</h2>
<h3>Accounting for the Medium of Communication</h3>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The court’s analysis of the issues begins with a predictable emphasis on how the law of copyright would operate in the context of what is termed “internet computing”, peppered with trite statements about “the virtual world of internet” creating “complexit[ies]” for copyright law. The court appears to have entered into this discussion to establish that the notion of place in section 51 (a) (ii) should extend to “web space” but the statements made here only serve to contrast starkly against its subsequent failure to account for the peculiarities of form and function of intermediaries online. Had this line of argument been taken to its logical conclusion, after the character of the medium had been appreciated, the court’s final conclusion, that MySpace is liable for copyright infringement, would have been an impossible one to arrive at.</p>
<h3 style="text-align: justify; ">And What of Free Speech?</h3>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">As it had argued before the court, intermediaries such as MySpace have no means by which to determine whether content is illegal (whether by reason of amounting to a violation of copyright, or otherwise) until content is uploaded. In other words, there is no existing mechanism by which this determination can be made at the threshold, before posting.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The court does not engage with the larger consequences for such a scheme of penalizing intermediaries. Censoring patent illegalities at the threshold, even if that were possible is one thing. The precedent that the court creates here is quite another. Given the general difficulty in conclusively establishing whether there is an infringement at all due to the complexities in applying the exceptions contained under section 52, it should not be for ordinary private or commercial interests such as intermediaries to sit in judgment over whether content is or is not published at all. In order to minimize its own liability, the likelihood of legitimate content being censored by the intermediary prior to posting is high.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The consequences for civil liberties, and free speech and expression online in particular, appear to have been completely ignored in favour of rights holders’ commercial interests.</p>
<h3 style="text-align: justify; ">Consequences for Intermediary Liability and Safe Harbour Protection</h3>
<blockquote class="pullquote" style="text-align: justify; ">Even if every instance in question did amount to an infringement of copyright and a mechanism did exist allowing for removal of content, the effect of this judgment is to create a strict liability regime for intermediaries.</blockquote>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">In other words, the court’s ruling will have the effect that courts’ determination of intermediaries’ liability will become detached from whether or not any fault can be attributed to them. MySpace did make this argument, even going as far as to suggest that doing so would impose strict liability on intermediaries. This would lead to an unprecedented and entirely unjustifiable result. In spite the fact that a given intermediary did apply all available means to prevent the publication of potentially infringing content, it would remain potentially liable for any illegality in the content, even though the illegality could not have been detected or addressed.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">What is perhaps even more worrying is that MySpace’s attempt at proactively and in good faith preventing copyright infringement through its terms of use and in addressing them through its post-infringement measures was explicitly cited as evidence of knowledge of and control over the uploading of copyrighted material, at the threshold rather than ex post. This creates perverse incentives for the intermediary to ignore infringement, to the detriment of rights holders, rather than act proactively to minimize its incidence.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">A final observation is that the court’s use, while pronouncing on relief, of the fact that MySpace makes a “copy” of the uploaded content by converting it into a format that could subsequently be hosted on the site and made accessible to show evidence of infringement and impose liability upon MySpace in itself is a glaring instance of the disingenuous reasoning the court employs throughout the case. There is another problem with the amended section 79, which waives immunity where the intermediary “modifies” material. That term is vague and overreaches, as it does here: altering formats to make content compatible with a given platform is not comparable to choices as to the content of speech or expression, but the reading is tenable under section 79 as it stands.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The result of all of this is to dislodge the section 79 immunity that accrues to intermediaries and replace that with a presumption that they are liable, rather than not, for any illegality in the content that they passively host.</p>
<h3 style="text-align: justify; ">Effect of the Copyright (Amendment) Act, 2012</h3>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Since the judgment in the MySpace case, the Copyright Act has been amended to include some provisions that would bear on online service providers and on intermediaries’ liability for hosting infringing content, in particular. Section 52 (1) (b) of the amended Act provides that “transient or incidental storage of a work or performance purely in the technical process of electronic transmission or communication to the public” would not infringe copyright. The other material provision is section 52 (1) (c) which provides that “transient or incidental storage of a work or performance for the purpose of providing electronic links, access or integration, where such links, access or integration has not been expressly prohibited by the right holder, unless the person responsible is aware or has reasonable grounds for believing that such storage is of an infringing copy” will not constitute an infringement of copyright. The latter provision appears to institute a rather rudimentary, and very arguably incomplete, system of notice and takedown by way of a proviso. This requires intermediaries to takedown content on written complaint from copyright owners for a period of 21 days or until a competent rules on the matter whichever is sooner, and restore access to the content once that time period lapses, if there is no court order to sustain it beyond that period.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">This post does not account for the effect that these provisions could have had on the case, but it is already clear, from the sloppy drafting of section 52 (1) (c) and its proviso that they are not entirely salutary even at the outset. At any rate, there appears to be nothing that *<i>determinatively*</i> affects intermediaries’ secondary liability, <i>i.e.</i>, their liability for users’ infringing acts.</p>
<hr />
<p style="text-align: justify; "><i>Disclosure: CIS is now a party to these proceedings at the Delhi High Court. This is a purely academic critique, and should not be seen to have any prejudice to the arguments we will make there.</i></p>
<hr />
<p>[<a href="#fr*" name="fn*">*</a>]. Super Cassettes Industries Ltd. v. MySpace Inc. and Another, on 29 July, 2011, Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law. See<a class="external-link" href="http://bit.ly/quj6JW"> http://bit.ly/quj6JW</a>, last accessed on October 31, 2012.</p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/super-cassettes-v-my-space'>https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/super-cassettes-v-my-space</a>
</p>
No publisherujwalaAccess to KnowledgeCopyrightIntellectual Property RightsIntermediary LiabilityFeatured2012-10-31T10:27:36ZBlog EntryThe Supreme Court Delivers
https://cis-india.org/telecom/blog/organizing-india-blogspot-october-11-2012-shyam-ponappa-the-supreme-court-delivers
<b>Now, the spectrum and licence issues need resolution. On September 27, 2012, the Supreme Court of India delivered the opinion of a bench comprising five Judges on the Presidential Reference regarding the auction of 2G spectrum.</b>
<hr />
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Published in <a class="external-link" href="http://organizing-india.blogspot.in/2012/10/the-supreme-court-delivers.html">Organizing India Blogspot</a> on October 11, 2012 and in <a class="external-link" href="http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/shyam-ponappasupreme-court-delivers/488420/">Business Standard</a> on October 4, 2012.</p>
<hr />
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The Supreme Court’s opinion on the Presidential reference<a href="#fn*" name="fr*">[*]</a>dismissed two preposterous claims. One is that it is beyond the ambit of Parliament and the government to formulate economic policies. The second is that the government must allocate resources only through auctions. It’s like the end of a self-destructive nightmare. True, our heedless kleptocracy as a society of rogue politicians, bureaucrats, defence personnel, and complicit citizens, led to this pass. Even so, the anarchic “destructionism” of these claims is as reprehensible as the kleptocracy they seek to tear down. Fortunately, the Supreme Court opinion rose above the populist clamour.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">There’s still a mess to clear. The big picture is that the Supreme Court left its decision on spectrum auctions unaddressed. In matters of detail, some points need resolution based on facts. These are discussed below to dispel prevalent myths.</p>
<h3 style="text-align: justify; ">Myth 1: Auctions maximise govt revenues</h3>
<p>"Auctions may be the best way of maximising revenue…": paragraph 116 of the opinion. This contravenes the evidence after the National Telecom Policy -99, that revenue-sharing maximises government revenues as well as public benefits. It also ignores the many auction failures.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Consider the evidence: auction revenues foregone were estimated at under Rs 20,000 crore for 1999-2007, because the sector was mired in losses and was unable to provide services effectively or pay those dues. By comparison, actual collections from revenue-sharing by March 2007 were more than double, at Rs 40,000 crore. Collections by March 2010 were Rs 80,000 crore. Current annual contributions to government revenues may be about Rs 18,000 crore on Adjusted Gross Revenues estimated at Rs 1,40,000 crore, plus taxes, amounting to perhaps Rs 36,000 crore.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Re public benefits, access to telephony grew from a few million users in 1999 to about 700 million today (excluding around 250 million shadow subscriptions).</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">An ameliorating caveat in paragraph 12 states: "…if the State arrives at the conclusion … that maximum revenue would be earned by auction of the natural resource in question, then that alone would be the process", and this is expanded in paragraph 119:<br /><br />"Where revenue maximisation is not the object of a policy of distribution, the question of auction would not arise. Revenue considerations may assume secondary consideration to developmental considerations."<br /><br />This has not prevented erroneous conclusions in the press that auctions are the only valid process, notwithstanding that the conditions stipulated in the order, eg, that government’s actions be “fair, reasonable, non-discriminatory”, were always operative, if not adhered to in instances of abuse, as in the 2G scam.</p>
<h3 style="text-align: justify; ">Myth 2: Maximum govt collections are in the public interest</h3>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Government collections as the public interest criterion may work for colonial powers extorting revenues from subject states, or possibly for utopias whose political economy is so balanced that such cross-subsidisation works. Developing economies like India presumably can and should seek the welfare of their people. The same populists crusading for maximum government collections accuse governments of corruption and waste. This doesn’t provide a coherent approach to infrastructure, where each capital-intensive sector is configured to deliver a specific service. For instance, the energy sector has to deliver power, while telecommunications must deliver communications services. Neither can be expected to deliver toilets or water. Yet, many well-intentioned people seem to nurture such irrational expectations.</p>
<h3 style="text-align: justify; ">The spectrum and broadband link</h3>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The first prerequisite for broadband is high-speed connectivity. The second is reasonably priced services. Our objectives are, therefore: (a) a broadband network, (b) available anywhere (c) at reasonable prices. Our networks are deficient, however, particularly in rural and semi-urban areas. A host of factors are responsible, ranging from limited public sector network rollout, combined with a private sector focus on the most lucrative urban centres, with incentives skewed to voice telephony. Applications need connectivity based on networks that require spectrum.</p>
<h3 style="text-align: justify; ">Problems and solutions</h3>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Consider an application like distance education. The need is for networks and services of high quality (followed by the additional requirement of content). What is apparent is that such applications cannot be effective without the connectivity. So we’re back to the need for networks, of fibre where feasible, and wireless elsewhere. This brings us back to the need for spectrum.</p>
<h3 style="text-align: justify; ">Reviewing facts</h3>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">As regards the facts relating to the 2G judgment deserving review:<br />The solution the Supreme Court has not considered is that operators need only to use spectrum, for which they can be charged a fee. The evidence of widely available Wi-fi shows that innovation and usage thrive if spectrum is available. The Supreme Court, the government, and the public need to recognise that allocating spectrum to operators is only one way to use spectrum.<br /><br />There need be no alienation of spectrum at all, if policies allow open access and charge fees. Then, spectrum could be used like any infrastructure network, eg, airports, highways, or rail, on payment of usage charges. The sharing could be in at least two ways. Operators could pool spectrum for collective use. For this, (i) regulations must allow pooling/active facilities sharing, and (ii) operators must agree on terms and procedures. Another way is for mandatory spectrum sharing using the database-driven systems being implemented in the US by Spectrum Bridge and Telcordia. Similar deployments are planned in the UK, the European Union, and in Singapore. The TV white space is shared because this range is available for sharing, and not because other bands cannot be shared.<br /><br />There are immense societal costs of duplication in capital investments in multiple networks, including the last-mile spectrum access, of operators using dedicated networks with limited passive facilities sharing (such as towers), compared with the benefits of open-access to common networks, if policies changed. These would employ active facilities sharing (equipment, and not just construction) to reduce capital equipment, construction costs, energy for towers, carbon emissions from a more limited physical network, possibly reduced radiation from a rationalised network with small cells with lower-powered equipment, and the multiplier effect on the finite available spectrum.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Enormous productivity benefits could accrue through ICT applications in infrastructure such as smart grids for energy, transportation, education, healthcare, and government services, as well as many commercial applications.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The Supreme Court could also uphold contractual obligations, by discriminating against actual transgressors in the 2G spectrum allocation, while rehabilitating those who operated within the law.</p>
<hr />
<p>[<a href="#fr*" name="fn*">*</a>].<a class="external-link" href="http://supremecourtofindia.nic.in/outtoday/op27092012.pdf">http://supremecourtofindia.nic.in/outtoday/op27092012.pdf</a></p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='https://cis-india.org/telecom/blog/organizing-india-blogspot-october-11-2012-shyam-ponappa-the-supreme-court-delivers'>https://cis-india.org/telecom/blog/organizing-india-blogspot-october-11-2012-shyam-ponappa-the-supreme-court-delivers</a>
</p>
No publisherShyam PonappaTelecomFeatured2012-12-21T09:57:57ZBlog EntryAnalysing Latest List of Blocked Sites (Communalism & Rioting Edition)
https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/analysing-blocked-sites-riots-communalism
<b>Pranesh Prakash does preliminary analysis on a leaked list of the websites blocked from August 18, 2012 till August 21, 2012 by the Indian government.</b>
<hr />
<p><b>Note</b>: This post will be updated as more analysis is done. Last update: 23:59 on August 22, 2012. This is being shared under a <a href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/">Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial licence</a>.</p>
<hr />
<img src="https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/oimg?key=0AqefbzxbW_b_dE5rTG9XbkRab0cxWFdoOEgyN01YcWc&oid=1&zx=dskyfic7thzd" />
<hr />
<h2><b>How many items have been blocked?</b></h2>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">There are a total of 309 specific items (those being URLs, Twitter accounts, img tags, blog posts, blogs, and a handful of websites) that have been blocked. This number is meaningless at one level, given that it doesn't differentiate between the blocking of an entire website (with dozens or hundreds of web pages) from the blocking of a single webpage. However, given that very few websites have been blocked at the domain-level, that number is still reasonably useful.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Please also note, we currently only have information related to what telecom companies and Internet Service Providers (ISPs) were asked to block till August 21, 2012. We do not have information on what individual web services have been asked to remove. That might take the total count much higher.</p>
<h2><b>Why have these been blocked?</b></h2>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">As far as I could determine, all of the blocked items have content (mostly videos and images have been targeted, but also some writings) that are related to communal issues and rioting. (Please note: I am not calling the content itself "communal" or "incitement to rioting", just that the content relates to communal issues and rioting.) This has been done in the context of the recent riots in Assam, Mumbai, UP, and the mass movement of people from Bangalore.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">There were reports of parody Twitter accounts having been blocked. Preliminary analysis on the basis of available data show that parody Twitter accounts and satire sites have <i>not</i> been targetted solely for being satirical. For instance, very popular parody Twitter accounts, such as @DrYumYumSingh are not on any of the four orders circulated by the Department of Telecom. (I have no information on whether such parody accounts are being taken up directly with Twitter or not: just that they aren't being blocked at the ISP-level. Media reports indicate <a href="http://goo.gl/GI9jP">six accounts have been taken up with Twitter</a> for being similar to the Prime Minister's Office's account.)</p>
<h2><b>Are the blocks legitimate?</b></h2>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The goodness of the government's intentions seem, quite clearly in my estimation, to be unquestionable. Yet, even with the best intentions, there might be procedural illegalities and over-censorship.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">There are circumstances in which freedom of speech and expression may legitimately be limited. The circumstances that existed in Bangalore could justifiably result in legitimate limitations on freedom of speech. For instance, I believe that temporary curbs — such as temporarily limiting SMSes & MMSes to a maximum of five each fifteen minutes for a period of two days — would have been helpful.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">However it is unclear whether the government has exercised its powers responsibly in this circumstance. The blocking of many of the items on that list are legally questionable and morally indefensible, even while a some of the items ought, in my estimation, to be removed.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">If the government has blocked these sites under s.69A of the Information Technology Act ("Power to Issue Directions for Blocking for Public Access of Any Information through any Computer Resource"), the persons and intermediaries hosting the content should have been notified provided 48 hours to respond (under Rule 8 of the Information Technology (Procedure and Safeguards for Blocking for Access of Information by Public) Rules 2009). Even if the emergency provision (Rule 9) was used, the block issued on August 18, 2012, should have been introduced before the "Committee for Examination of Request" by August 20, 2012 (i.e., within 48 hours), and that committee should have notified the persons and intermediaries hosting the content.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Importantly, even though many of the items on that list are repugnant and do deserve (in my opinion) to be removed, ordering ISPs to block them is largely ineffectual. The people and companies hosting the material should have been asked to remove it, instead of ordering Internet service providers (ISPs) to block them. All larger sites have clear content removal policies, and encouraging communal tensions and hate speech generally wouldn't be tolerated. That this can be done without resort to the dreadful Intermediary Guidelines Rules (which were passed last year) shows that those Rules are unnecessary. It is our belief that <a href="https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/constitutional-analysis-of-intermediaries-guidelines-rules">those Rules are also unconstitutional</a>.</p>
<h2><b>Are there any egregious mistakes?</b></h2>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Yes, there are numerous such examples of egregious mistakes.</p>
<ol>
<li style="text-align: justify; ">Most importantly, some even <b>people and posts debunking rumours have been blocked</b>.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify; ">Some of the Twitter accounts are of prominent people who write for the mainstream media, and who have written similar content offline. If their online content is being complained about, their offline content should be complained about too.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify; ">Quite a number of the links include articles published and reports broadcast in the mainstream media (including a Times Now report, a Telegraph picture gallery, etc.), and in print, making the blocks suspect. Only the online content seems to have been targeted for censorship.</li>
</ol>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">There are numerous mistakes and inconsistencies that make blocking pointless and ineffectual.</p>
<ol>
<li>Some of the items are not even web addresses (e.g., a few HTML img tags were included).</li>
<li style="text-align: justify; ">Some of the items they have tried to block do not even exist (e.g., one of the Wikipedia URLs).</li>
<li style="text-align: justify; ">An entire domain was blocked on Sunday, and a single post on that domain was blocked on Monday.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify; ">For some Facebook pages, the secure version (https://facebook.com/...) is listed, for others the non-secure version (http://facebook.com/...) is listed.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify; ">For some YouTube videos, the 'base' URL of YouTube videos is blocked, but for other the URL with various parameters (like the "&related=" parameter) is blocked. That means that even nominally 'blocked' videos will be freely accessible.</li>
</ol>
<p>All in all, it is clear that the list was not compiled with sufficient care.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Despite a clear warning by the DIT that "above URLs only" should be blocked, and not "the main websites like www.facebook.com, www.youtube.com, www.twitter.com, etc.", it has been seen that some ISPs (like Airtel) <a href="http://www.labnol.org/india/india-blocks-youtube/25028/">have gone overboard in their blocking</a>.</p>
<h2><b>Why haven't you put up the whole list?</b></h2>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Given the sensitivity of the issue, we felt it would be premature to share the whole list. However, we strongly believe that transparency should be an integral part of all censorship. Hence, this analysis is an attempt to provide some much-needed transparency. We intend to make the entire list public soon, though. (Given how porous such information is, it is likely that someone else will procure the list, and release it sooner than us.)</p>
<h2><b>Why can I still access many items that are supposed to be blocked?</b></h2>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">One must keep in mind that fresh orders have been issued on a day-by-day basis, that there are numerous mistakes in the list making it difficult to apply (some of these mistakes have been mentioned above), and the fact that that this order has to be implemented by hundreds of ISPs.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Your ISP probably has not have got around to enforcing the blocks yet. At the time of this writing, most ISPs don't seem to be blocking yet. This analysis is based on the orders sent around to ISPs, and not on the basis of actual testing of how many of these have actually been blocked by Airtel, BSNL, Tata, etc.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Additionally, if you are using Twitter through a client (on your desktop, mobile, etc.) instead of the web interface, you will not notice any of the Twitter-related blocks.</p>
<h2><b>So you are fine with censorship?</b></h2>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">No. I believe that in some cases, the government has the legal authority to censor. Yet, exercising that legal authority is usually not productive, and in fact there are other, better ways of limiting the harms caused by speech and information than censorship. Limiting speech might even prove harmful in situations like these, if it ends up restricting people's ability to debunk false rumours. In a separate blog post (to be put up soon), I am examining how all of the government's responses have been flawed both legally and from the perspective of achieving the desired end.</p>
<h2><b>So what should the government have done?</b></h2>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Given that the majority of the information it is targeting is on Facebook, Youtube, and Twitter, the government could have chosen to fight <i>alongside</i> those services to get content removed expeditiously, rather than fight <i>against</i> them. (There are <a href="http://www.firstpost.com/videos/govt-to-use-social-media-to-prevent-misuse-of-technology-sibal-426231.html">some indications</a> that the government might be working with these services, but it certainly isn't doing enough.)</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">For instance, it could have asked all of them to expedite their complaints mechanism for a few days, by ensuring that the complaints mechanism is run 24x7 and that they respond quickly to any complaint submitted about communal incitement, spreading of panic, etc. This does not need the passing of an order under any law, but requires good public relations skills and a desire not to treat internet services as enemies. The government could have encouraged regular users to flag false rumours and hate speech on these sites. On such occasions, social networking sites should step up and provide all lawful assistance that the government may require. They should also be more communicative in terms of the help they are providing to the government to curtail panic-inducing rumours and hate speech. (Such measures should largely be reactive, not proactive, to ensure legitimate speech doesn't get curtailed.)</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The best antidote for the rumours that spread far and wide and caused a mass movement of people from Bangalore to the North-Eastern states would have been clear debunking of those rumours. Mass outreach to people in the North-East (very often the worried parents) and in Bangalore using SMSes and social media, debunking the very specific allegations and rumours that were floating around, would have been welcome. However, almost no government officials actually used social media platforms to reach out to people to debunk false information and reassure them. Even a Canadian interning in our organization got a reassuring SMS from the Canadian government.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">It is indeed a pity that the government <a href="https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/resources/citizen-engagement-framework-for-e-governance-projects-and-framework-and-guidelines-for-use-of-social-media-by-government-agencies">notified a social media engagement policy today</a>, when the need for it was so very apparent all of the past week.</p>
<h2><b>And what of all this talk of cybersecurity failure and cyber-wars?</b></h2>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Cybersecurity is indeed a cause of concern for India, but only charlatans and the ignorant would make any connection between India's cybersecurity and recent events. The role of Pakistan deserves a few words. Not many Pakistani websites / webpages have been blocked by the Indian government. Two of the Pakistani webpages that have been blocked are actually pages that debunk the fake images that have been doing the rounds in Pakistan for at least the past month. Even Indian websites <a href="http://kafila.org">like Kafila</a> have noted these fake images long ago, and <a href="http://kafila.org/2012/08/05/national-contestation-not-religion-responsible-for-the-plight-of-myanmars-rohingyas-ayesha-siddiqa/">Ayesha Siddiqa wrote about this on August 5, 2012</a>, and <a href="http://kafila.org/2012/08/13/how-to-start-a-riot-out-of-facebook-yousuf-saeed/">Yousuf Saeed wrote about it on August 13, 2012</a>. Even while material that may have been uploaded from Pakistan, it seems highly unlikely they were targeted at an Indian audience, rather than a Pakistani or global one.</p>
<table class="listing">
<tbody>
<tr>
<th>Domain</th><th>Total Number of Entries</th><th>Tuesday, August 21, 2012</th><th>Monday, August 20, 2012</th><th>Sunday, August 19, 2012</th><th>Saturday, August 18, 2012</th>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>ABC.net.au</td>
<td style="text-align: right; "><b>1</b></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">1</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>AlJazeera.com</td>
<td style="text-align: right; "><b>4</b></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">4</td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>AllVoices.com</td>
<td style="text-align: right; "><b>1</b></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">1</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>WN.com</td>
<td style="text-align: right; "><b>1</b></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">1</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><b>AtjehCyber.net</b></td>
<td style="text-align: right; "><b>1</b></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">1</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>BDCBurma.org</td>
<td style="text-align: right; "><b>1</b></td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">1</td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Bhaskar.com</td>
<td style="text-align: right; "><b>1</b></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">1</td>
<td><br /></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Blogspot.com</td>
<td style="text-align: right; "><b>4</b></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">3</td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">1</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Blogspot.in</td>
<td style="text-align: right; "><b>7</b></td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">1</td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">3</td>
<td><br /></td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">3</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Catholic.org</td>
<td style="text-align: right; "><b>1</b></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">1</td>
<td><br /></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>CentreRight.in</td>
<td style="text-align: right; "><b>2</b></td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">2</td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>ColumnPK.com</td>
<td style="text-align: right; "><b>1</b></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">1</td>
<td><br /></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Defence.pk</td>
<td style="text-align: right; "><b>4</b></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">2</td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">1</td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">1</td>
</tr>
<tr style="text-align: right; ">
<td style="text-align: left; ">EthioMuslimsMedia.com</td>
<td style="text-align: right; "><b>1</b></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td>1</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Facebook.com (HTTP)</td>
<td style="text-align: right; "><b>75</b></td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">36</td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">7</td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">18</td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">14</td>
</tr>
<tr style="text-align: right; ">
<td style="text-align: left; ">Facebook.com (HTTPS)</td>
<td style="text-align: right; "><b>27</b></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td>3</td>
<td>23</td>
<td>1</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Farazahmed.com</td>
<td style="text-align: right; "><b>5</b></td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">1</td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">4</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Firstpost.com</td>
<td style="text-align: right; "><b>2</b></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">1</td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">1</td>
<td><br /></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>HaindavaKerelam.com</td>
<td style="text-align: right; "><b>1</b></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">1</td>
<td><br /></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>HiddenHarmonies.org</td>
<td style="text-align: right; "><b>1</b></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td>1</td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><b>HinduJagruti.org</b></td>
<td style="text-align: right; "><b>2</b></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">1</td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">1</td>
<td><br /></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Hotklix.com</td>
<td style="text-align: right; "><b>1</b></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">1</td>
<td><br /></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>HumanRights-Iran.ir</td>
<td style="text-align: right; "><b>2</b></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">2</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Intichat.com</td>
<td style="text-align: right; "><b>1</b></td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">1</td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Irrawady.org</td>
<td style="text-align: right; "><b>1</b></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">1</td>
<td><br /></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>IslamabadTimesOnline.com</td>
<td style="text-align: right; "><b>1</b></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">1</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Issuu.com</td>
<td style="text-align: right; "><b>1</b></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">1</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><b>JafriaNews.com</b></td>
<td style="text-align: right; "><b>1</b></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">1</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>JihadWatch.org</td>
<td style="text-align: right; "><b>2</b></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">2</td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>KavkazCenter</td>
<td style="text-align: right; "><b>1</b></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">1</td>
<td><br /></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>MwmJawan.com</td>
<td style="text-align: right; "><b>1</b></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">1</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>My.Opera.com</td>
<td style="text-align: right; "><b>1</b></td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">1</td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Njuice.com</td>
<td style="text-align: right; "><b>1</b></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">1</td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>OnIslam.net</td>
<td style="text-align: right; "><b>1</b></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">1</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>PakAlertPress.com</td>
<td style="text-align: right; "><b>1</b></td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">1</td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Plus.Google.com</td>
<td style="text-align: right; "><b>4</b></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">4</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Reddit.com</td>
<td style="text-align: right; "><b>1</b></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">1</td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Rina.in</td>
<td style="text-align: right; "><b>1</b></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">1</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>SandeepWeb.com</td>
<td style="text-align: right; "><b>1</b></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">1</td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>SEAYouthSaySo.com</td>
<td style="text-align: right; "><b>1</b></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">1</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Sheikyermami.com</td>
<td style="text-align: right; "><b>1</b></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">1</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>StormFront.org</td>
<td style="text-align: right; "><b>1</b></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">1</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Telegraph.co.uk</td>
<td style="text-align: right; "><b>1</b></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">1</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>TheDailyNewsEgypt.com</td>
<td style="text-align: right; "><b>1</b></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">1</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>TheFaultLines.com</td>
<td style="text-align: right; "><b>1</b></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">1</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>ThePetitionSite.com</td>
<td style="text-align: right; "><b>1</b></td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">1</td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><b>TheUnity.org</b></td>
<td style="text-align: right; "><b>1</b></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">1</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>TimesofIndia.Indiatimes.com <br /></td>
<td style="text-align: right; "><b>1</b></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">1</td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>TimesOfUmmah.com</td>
<td style="text-align: right; "><b>1</b></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">1</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Tribune.com.pk</td>
<td style="text-align: right; "><b>1</b></td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">1</td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Twitter.com (HTTP)</td>
<td style="text-align: right; "><b>1</b></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">1</td>
<td><br /></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Twitter.com (HTTPS)</td>
<td style="text-align: right; "><b>11</b></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">1</td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">10</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Twitter account</td>
<td style="text-align: right; "><b>18</b></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">16</td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">2</td>
<td><br /></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>TwoCircles.net</td>
<td style="text-align: right; "><b>2</b></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">2</td>
<td><br /></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Typepad.com</td>
<td style="text-align: right; "><b>1</b></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">1</td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Vidiov.info</td>
<td style="text-align: right; "><b>1</b></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">1</td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Wikipedia.org</td>
<td style="text-align: right; "><b>3</b></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">3</td>
<td><br /></td>
</tr>
<tr style="text-align: right; ">
<td style="text-align: left; ">Wordpress.com</td>
<td style="text-align: right; "><b>8</b></td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">1</td>
<td>3</td>
<td>2</td>
<td>2</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>YouTube.com</td>
<td style="text-align: right; "><b>85</b></td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">18</td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">39</td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">14</td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">14</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>YouTu.be</td>
<td style="text-align: right; "><b>1</b></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td><br /></td>
<td style="text-align: right; ">1</td>
<td><br /></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th>Totals</th><th style="text-align: right; ">309</th><th style="text-align: right; ">65</th><th style="text-align: right; ">88</th><th style="text-align: right; ">80</th><th style="text-align: right; ">75</th>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p>The analysis has been cross-posted/quoted in the following places:</p>
<ol>
<li><a class="external-link" href="http://www.livemint.com/2012/09/04231942/Need-a-standard-strategy-to-de.html">LiveMint</a> (September 4, 2012)</li>
<li><a href="https://cis-india.org/news/www-the-hindu-aug-26-v-sridhar-regulating-the-internet-by-fiat" class="external-link">The Hindu</a> (August 26, 2012)</li>
<li><a class="external-link" href="http://blogs.wsj.com/indiarealtime/2012/08/25/opinion-indias-clumsy-twitter-gamble/">Wall Street Journal</a> (August 25, 2012)</li>
<li><a href="https://cis-india.org/news/tech2-in-com-som-isps-block-wordpress-domain-across-india" class="external-link">tech 2</a> (August 25, 2012)</li>
<li><a href="https://cis-india.org/news/www-china-post-aug-24-2012-india-threatens-action-against-twitter-for-ethnic-violence-rumors" class="external-link">China Post</a> (August 25, 2012)</li>
<li><a class="external-link" href="http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article3812819.ece">The Hindu</a> (August 24, 2012)</li>
<li><a class="external-link" href="http://www.livemint.com/2012/08/23210529/How-ISPs-block-websites-and-wh.html?atype=tp">LiveMint</a> (August 24, 2012)</li>
<li><a class="external-link" href="http://globalvoicesonline.org/2012/08/24/india-strong-reactions-to-social-media-censorship/">Global Voices</a> (August 24, 2012)</li>
<li><a href="https://cis-india.org/news/in-reuters-com-david-lalmalsawma-aug-24-2012-indias-social-media-crackdown-reveals-clumsy-govt-machinery" class="external-link">Reuters</a> (August 24, 2012)</li>
<li><a class="external-link" href="http://bit.ly/PZN75N">Outlook</a> (August 23, 2012)</li>
<li><a class="external-link" href="http://www.firstpost.com/tech/epic-fail-how-india-compiled-its-banned-list-of-websites-427522.html">FirstPost.India</a> (August 23, 2012) </li>
<li><a class="external-link" href="http://ibnlive.in.com/news/haphazard-censorship-leaked-list-of-blocked-sites/284592-11.html">IBN Live</a> (August 23, 2012)</li>
<li><a class="external-link" href="http://newsclick.in/india/analysing-latest-list-blocked-sites-communalism-rioting-edition">News Click</a> (August 23, 2012)</li>
<li><a class="external-link" href="http://www.medianama.com/2012/08/223-india-internet-blocks/">Medianama</a> (August 23, 2012)</li>
<li><a class="external-link" href="http://kafila.org/2012/08/23/an-analysis-of-the-latest-round-of-internet-censorship-in-india-communalism-and-rioting-edition-pranesh-prakash/">KAFILA</a> (August 23, 2012)</li>
<li><a href="https://cis-india.org/news/www-ciol-com-aug-23-2012-blocked-websites" class="external-link">CIOL</a> (August 23, 2012)</li>
</ol>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/analysing-blocked-sites-riots-communalism'>https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/analysing-blocked-sites-riots-communalism</a>
</p>
No publisherpraneshIT ActSocial mediaFreedom of Speech and ExpressionInternet GovernanceFeaturedCensorship2012-09-06T11:52:47ZBlog EntryDeconstructing Digital Natives: Young People, Technology and the New Literacies
https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/young-people-technology-new-literacies
<b>Nishant Shah was invited to do a book review of a new anthology 'Deconstructing Digital Natives', edited by Michael Thomas. The review was published in Routledge's Journal of Children and Media on July 18, 2012. </b>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><em>Deconstructing Digital Natives: Young People, Technology and the New Literacies</em> is an anthology that revisits the debates and scholarship that have arisen around youth and technology in the last decade or so. It is a timely intervention that invites some of the most influential scholars who have contributed to and shaped the discourse around “digital natives” to come and revisit their original ideas from the last decade. The term “digital native” probably bears witness to the strident discourses that, more often than not, fall into the trap of exotically glorifying or despairingly vilifying young peoples’ engagement with digital technologies. As Buckingham points out in his foreword to the book, these conversations either take up the language of a “generation gap [that] entails a narrative of transformation and even of rupture, in which fundamental continuities between the past and the future have been destroyed” or they guise themselves in an “almost utopian view of technology—a fabulous story about technology liberating and empowering young people, enabling them to become global citizens, and to learn and communicate and create in free and unfettered ways” (p. ix). The essays seek a point of departure from these tried and tested arguments in order to provide a “balanced view” on the topic. And so we have a distinguished author list from the world of digital natives scholarship, coming together not only to ponder on their own contributions to the field and how those ideas need to be upgraded, but also to provide new contexts, concepts, and frameworks to understand who, or indeed, what, is a “digital native,” often in tension with their earlier work.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">In its ambition of revisiting existing debates and providing a “research-based approach by presenting empirical evidence and argument from international researchers in the field,” the book succeeds unevenly (p. xi). Despite its efforts to chart a point of departure, some of the essays end up falling into some usual traps. For example, despite the fact that the oldest digital natives are probably in their thirties, they are thought of as being young. They are defined only as “students” within formal learning institutions without looking at the radical potential of learning outside organized education, embedded in their everyday practices. The digital natives remain an object of research and the peer-to-peer structures that are supposed to shape them, but do not feature in the methodologies of researching them. This notwithstanding, the essays still offer a historical and social perspective on the debates around digital natives in certain developed pockets of the world.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">In the first section, “Reflecting on the Myth,” Thomas’ essay “Technology, Education and the Discourse of the Digital Native” introduces a tension between the techno-euphorists and the “digital luddites,” which replays itself through the rest of the contributions. While Thomas places himself between “technoevangelism” and “technoskepticism,” Prensky, who coined the term “Digital Natives” in 2001, then introduces to us a new binary of “digitally wise” and “digitally dumb” (p. 4). Prensky reviews the responses that his opposition of “digital natives” and “digital immigrants” have produced over the last decade and emphasizes that his coinage was at the level of a metaphor, and was not to be taken seriously. Prensky agrees that the earlier opposition might be discarded because it evokes too many simple responses based on skills with technology. Digital wisdom, for Prensky, is in the ways in which digital technologies enhance the human brain “to anticipate second- and third-order effects to which the unaided mind may be blind” as the world becomes too complex for the “unenhanced human brain” to cope with it (p. 23). Typically, Prensky’s argument creates a dichotomy of those who can (and will) and those who will be outside of this web of digital enhancements. His analysis tries to complicate the idea of human wisdom by looking at questions of ethics and agency, but the final formulations appear cliche´d, merely re-creating the older tensions rather than thinking through them. Jones’ following essay on the “Net Generation” is more persuasive, where he argues for dismissing the idea that “nature of certain technologies . . . <em>has affected the outlook of an entire age cohort</em> in advanced economies” and instead should unpack how “new technologies emerging with this generation have particular characteristics that <em>afford certain types of social engagement</em>” (p.42).</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">In the second section, titled “Perspectives,” the essays take up two different tones.The first is about looking at digital literacy, skill, and fluency in everyday practices of digital natives, and how they shape our contemporary and future sociopolitical and cultural landscapes. Banaji, in exploring the EU Civic Web Project, echoes Jones’ ideas. The presumptions within education about an entire generation as “born with technologies” has consequences in the field of civic action, where programs for citizen action are designed with expectations that the young people will have core digital competencies and literacy. She does not push that argument further, but in her study of the two Scottish e-initiatives, one can see the promise of a radical reconstruction of civic engagement movements, where the young participants are not going to be satisfied as mere participators, and will demand a space for their voice to be heard.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Takahashi’s essay on the <em>oyaubibunka</em> (“thumb culture”) mobile generations in Japan stands alone in its analysis of an Asian context—though many might argue that Japan, with its developed economy, can hardly be counted as a typically “Asian” perspective. Takahashi is rooted, both in practice and discourse, in youth and technology in Japan, where the youth often experience close-knit community experiences through mobile interfaces, in their otherwise alienated modern habitats. Almost as a response to Turkle’s Alone Together (2011), Takahashi shows how collaborative and cocreation cultures ranging from the mobile novels on Mixi to everyday interaction on Social Networking Systems is bringing in new kinds of social spaces of belonging. The essay, however, resists simply celebrating this space and works in complex ideas of freedom, control, risks, and the tensions between traditionalization and modernity in Japan.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Zimic and Dalin, writing from a similar heavily connected Nordic region, pose a different set of questions in their essay, “Actual and Perceived Online Participation Among Young People in Sweden.” For Zimic and Dalin, in a space where connectivity can be taken for granted, the further question to ask is not whether digital natives participate online or not, but whether they participate in ways that are expected of “a digital citizen in the information age” (p. 137). Through empirical data and case studies, the essay shows the different kinds of activities that youth engage with and also concludes that though engaging in civic issues is important to the young people’s sense of belonging to participatory cultures, using the Internet does not provide an “automatic guarantee” toward participation, and “assistance is required in order to engage them in relevant activities” (p. 148).</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">The second set of essays in this section all cluster around the digital native as a student. Locating the digital native within educational institutions, they look at the ways in which the ideas of learning, pedagogy and engagement with the text are changing with the rise of digital technologies. Levy and Michael look at two case studies involving students in Australian high schools, to “facilitate a deeper understanding of products and processes in multimodal text construction,” which they think is core to interactive communication technology literacy skills (p. 85). The data is rigorous and rich, but the conclusions are a bit of a disappointment: digital natives need to better manage their time and resources and they need to learn traditional skills in order to cope with their educational environment.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">The trend of an exciting hypothesis and conclusion, which do not necessarily leave you with anything more than what you already knew, continues in this section. Erstad sets out on a journey to see how digital literacy posits challenges to educating the digital generation and ends by suggesting that the digital divide should address questions of “how to navigate in the information jungle on the Internet, to create, to communicate, and so forth” (p. 114). Similarly, Kennedy and Judd want to unravel the mystery of why “students, who are so clearly familiar and apparently adept with Internet tools, are at times so poor at using the Internet academically” (p. 119). Through empirical research and interaction with students, they end up making an argument against the Googlization of everything (Vaidhyanathan, 2011), suggesting that “satisficing strategies” of information search, defined by a need for instant gratification and not looking beyond the first information sets, has produced “a generation of students that has grown up with Google [who] may over-value expediency when locating and selecting appropriate scholarly information” (p. 132). On similar trends, Levy proposes to question the assumption of whether all “young children are inherently ‘native’ users of digital technology” for implications on our future pedagogy within the new textual landscape (p. 152). The case studies and the frameworks built are interesting, but they reveal nothing more than the claim that the essay begins with by Marsh et al. (2005) and Bearne et al. (2007) that “young children are immersed in ‘digital practices’ from an early age and that they often develop skills in handling screen texts even when they are not exposed directly to computers at their own homes” (Levy, 2011, p. 163). The implication is clear: change our schools to accommodate for these new textual practices and help children capitalize on their digital competence and develop “digital wisdom.” But it is a recommendation that has been around for at least a decade, if not more.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">The third and concluding section of the book, “Beyond Digital Natives,” is possibly the most promising part of the book. Bennett and Maton seek to look beyond “nuanced versions of the idea” and move the debate on to firmer grounds of how the rise of the digital natives is going to affect the policies around educational technology” (p. 169). They engage with a body of work that is specifically oriented toward building empirical evidence-based frameworks for understanding the potential role of technology in education. With a fine conceptual tool that makes distinctions between access and usage, they systemically dismiss the “academic moral panic” that characterizes conversations around youth-technology-change.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">For Bennett and Maton, the object of inquiry is not the digital native but the body of discourse that surrounds this particular entity—and they make a plea for research rather than imaginings, showing how the influential work in the area has been plagued by unsupported claims, unevidenced observations, and futuristic imaginations, which paint a poetic picture of digital natives but offer very little in terms of furthering the argument. It is also noteworthy that they do not flinch from critiquing the colleagues who also feature in the same book, as an idealizing and homogenizing group that has shown “diversity rather than conformity” (p. 181).</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Palfrey and Gasser, whose <em>Born Digital</em> (2008) has been the guide for lay readers to understand the nuances and complexities of the area, in their essay, begin by acknowledging that “digital natives” is an awkward term. However, they argue, it is still a term that resonates deeply with parents and educators, and that this resonance should not be taken lightly by researchers. Their decision was to use this term, albeit with caution and discretion, strategically to refer to a small subset of young people and the gamut of relationships and engagements they have with digital technologies. The suggestion is to use the term and in every usage, look at the unevennesses and awkwardness it creates, thus actually unpacking an otherwise opaque relationship which is reduced to “usage” or “access.” Their concerns are more about the quality of information and access, infrastructure for critical literacy and digital fluency, and making legible these everyday practices to larger implications for a future that they posit is bright and hopeful.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><em>Deconstructing Digital Natives</em> is an interesting revisit of a term that has grown in different ways through the first decade of the new millennium. However, the book still remains located in the same geopolitics in which the early discourse of digital natives were grounded—developed, privileged locations where connectivity, affordability, and ubiquitous digital literacy are taken for granted—reminiscent of the frantic cries one hears in piracy markets in Bangkok, “same, same, but different.” The revisiting does not seem to feel the need to explore other contexts. A few essays talk about factoring in local and contextual information in understanding digital natives, but the scholarship reinforces the idea of how technologies shape and are shaped by identities in some parts of the world, and that these identities can be heralded as universally viable, with a little nuancing.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">The questions that have emerged in this discourse in the recent years, remain ignored. What does a digital native look like in the Global South? Can we have new concepts and frameworks which emerge from these contexts? Is it possible to produce accounts in languages and ideas that are embedded in everyday practices rather than forcing them to become legible in existing vocabularies? One would hope that the next book that deconstructs digital natives would also deconstruct the prejudices, presumptions, and methodological processes that are embedded in this field.</p>
<hr />
<p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>References</strong></p>
<ol>
<li>Bearne, E., Clark, C., Johnson, A., Manford, P., Motteram, M., & Wolsencroft, H. (2007). Reading on screen. Leicester: UKLA.</li>
<li>Marsh, J., Brookes, G., Hughes, J., Ritchie, L, Roberts, S., & Wright, K. (2005). <em>Digital beginnings: Young children’s use of popular culture, media and new technologies</em>. Sheffield: Literacy Research Centre, University of Sheffield.</li>
<li>Palfrey, J., & Gasser, U. (2008). <em>Born digital</em>. New York, NY: Basic Books.</li>
<li>Turkle, S. (2011). <em>Alone together: Why we expect more from technology and less from each other</em>, NY. New York: Basic Books.</li>
<li>Vaidhyanthan, S. (2011). <em>The Googlization of everything: (And why we should worry)</em>. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.</li>
<hr /></ol>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><span class="visualHighlight">Nishant Shah is the Director-Research at the Bangalore-based Centre for Internet and Society. He is the principal researcher for a Global South inquiry into digital natives and sociopolitical change, and recently edited four-volume book, Digital AlterNatives with a Cause?, which is available as a free download at <a href="https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/blog/dnbook" class="external-link">http://cis-india.org/digital-natives/blog/dnbook</a>. Correspondence to: Nishant Shah, Centre for Internet and Society, Bangalore, India. E-mail: nishant@cis-india.org</span></p>
<ul>
<li><span class="visualHighlight">Download the file (originally published by Taylor & Francis) <a href="https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/deconstructing-digital-natives" class="internal-link">here</a> [PDF, 66 Kb]</span></li></ul>
<ul>
<li><span class="visualHighlight">Read the original published by Taylor & Francis <a class="external-link" href="http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/17482798.2012.697661">here</a></span></li></ul>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/young-people-technology-new-literacies'>https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/young-people-technology-new-literacies</a>
</p>
No publishernishantFeaturedResearchers at WorkBook ReviewDigital Natives2015-04-24T11:51:06ZBlog EntryCitizen Activism the Past Decade
https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/citizen-activism-the-past-decade
<b>Call for Contributions to the ‘Digital Natives with a Cause?’ newsletter, ‘Citizen Activism the Past Decade’. Deadline: August 15, 2012.</b>
<p style="text-align: justify;">The past decade (2001 – 2011) has been marked by unprecedented democratic protests across the globe. Not only have citizens risen against autocratic regimes or systemic corruption, which is not unprecedented in itself, but also, a spark in one region inflamed solidarity among neighbouring nations to pick up the placards and march for change. Plenty has been written about the strategic deployment of social media, Web 2.0 platforms and Smart-gadgets by the digital natives (the youth and the old alike) to rewrite the rules of citizen activism.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">In this issue of the newsletter, we explore the mechanics of activism aided by media: web, social, digital, and traditional. What do we understand by a cause and how does it find resonance at the local and global platforms? Is the digital native a community player or a global citizen? How do digital natives connect, collaborate, mobilize and bring about their visions of change? The aim is to not establish or reinforce these dichotomies, if indeed they exist, but to understand the dimensions of the stage the digital natives operate on <em>and if that stage is a synecdoche for global youth-led civic action.</em> A case in point: <strong>‘Slut Walk’ </strong>moved from being a one-off march in Toronto to becoming a global movement and came full circle when small towns and cities across the world organized protest marches with a local ‘twist’.</p>
<h3 style="text-align: justify;">Topics that contributors can explore:</h3>
<ol></ol>
<ul>
<li>What do we understand by citizen activism? How has citizen activism changed over the last 10 years with the advent of new media tools?</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Youth as 'change agents'. Are protest movements youth oriented today? How are civil rights movements of the past decade different from the wave of movements that marked the 60s? (women's lib, LGBT rights, civil rights, disability rights). Explore the mechanics of organizing, mobilizing and measuring the success of a campaign in both the cases.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Participatory Politics and Web 2.0 | Value and power of the Network in effecting change | Mobilizing support and consensus within the network |studies on politically active youth using social media | digital natives as apathetic citizens | Is Slacktivism still a misunderstood term?</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Kony 2012 video campaign | interviews | what went wrong and what did they do right? | Rise of DIY activism | mechanics of digital activism | resources, tools and strategies</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Rise of the ‘Glocal’ (global with local resonance) cause | Slut Walk and Co – global protests inspiring local campaigns | Children of globalization with global stakes supporting local causes – how does this work?</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Role of new media as a vehicle for civic engagement | Are new media and traditional media mutually exclusive in influencing citizen action? | How are new media strategies deployed by citizens in comparison with traditional media engagement?</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Learning from past campaigns: citizen activism initiates and strategies in history that inspire modern campaigns (The ‘Walk to Work’ protest in Uganda protesting against fuel price hike and removal of subsidies is similar to Mahatma Gandhi’s <em>Dandi</em> <em>March</em> in pre-independence India to protest against Salt Tax).</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Finding commonalities in citizen activism across Asia, Africa and Middle East | Explore the citizen action campaigns that have shaped political discourse in the past decade | Explore some of the most successful youth action campaigns of the past decade </li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">How do we measure value, quality and success of campaigns? When does a protest officially end? Studies that explore the life-cycle of a protest or movement </li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">The future of activism: new technologies, new demography, new forms of engagement | art and activism | Gamification </li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Role of non-governmental organizations and civil society networks in fostering political change | collaboration between NGOs and social media activists / independent protesters</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">State and the empowered citizen | State response to protest | surveillance and censorship</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Technologies of protest</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Studying citizen activism | digital native research methodology to study citizen activism</li></ul>
<ol></ol>
<p style="text-align: justify;">To know more about the topics you can write about, please write to: <a class="external-link" href="http://mailtonilofar.ansh@gmail.com">nilofar.ansh@gmail.com</a> (Nilofar Ansher, Community Manager). Contributions can be in the form of essays, notes, commentaries, reviews (book or paper), dialogues and chat transcript, poems, sketches / graphics. Essay word count between 800-1,600 words. Send your entries along with a brief bio and a profile picture by August 15, 2012.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">View previous issues of the 'Digital Natives with a Cause?' newsletter here: <a href="https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/newsletter" class="external-link">http://cis-india.org/digital-natives/newsletter</a></p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/citizen-activism-the-past-decade'>https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/citizen-activism-the-past-decade</a>
</p>
No publisherNilofar AnsherFeaturedResearchers at WorkDigital Natives2015-04-24T11:52:44ZBlog EntryOverview and Concerns Regarding the Indian Draft DNA Profiling Act
https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/indian-draft-dna-profiling-act
<b>The Indian Code of Criminal Procedure was amended in 2005 to enable the collection of a host of medical details from accused persons upon their arrest. Section 53 of the Cr.PC provides that upon arrest, an accused person may be subjected to a medical examination if there are “reasonable grounds for believing” that such examination will afford evidence as to the crime.
</b>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The scope of this examination was expanded in 2005 to include “the examination of blood, blood-stains, semen, swabs in case of sexual offences, sputum and sweat, hair samples and finger nail clippings by the use of modern and scientific techniques including DNA profiling and such other tests which the registered medical practitioner thinks necessary in a particular case.”</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">In Thogorani Alias K. Damayanti v. State of Orissa and Ors, 2004 Cri. LJ 4003 (Ori), the Orissa High Court affirmed the legality of ordering a DNA test in criminal cases to ascertain the involvement of persons accused. Refusal to cooperate would result in an adverse inference drawn against the accused.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">After weighing the privacy concerns involved, the court laid down the following considerations as relevant before the DNA test could be ordered: “(i) the extent to which the accused may have participated in the commission of the crime; (ii) the gravity of the offence and the circumstances in which it is committed; (iii) age, physical and mental health of the accused to the extent they are known; (iv) whether there are less intrusive and practical ways of collecting evidence tending to confirm or disprove the involvement of the accused in the crime; (v) the reasons, if any, for the accused for refusing consent.” Id.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">In brief, the 2007 draft DNA Profiling Bill (hereinafter “Bill”) pending before parliament attempts to create an ambitious centralized DNA bank that would store DNA records of virtually anyone who comes within any proximity to the criminal justice system. Specifically, records are maintained of suspects, offenders, missing persons and “volunteers.” The schedule to the Bill contains an expansive list of both civil and criminal cases where DNA data can be collected including cases of abortion, paternity suits and organ transplant. In all fairness, the Bill contains provisions limiting access to and use of information contained in the database, and provides for the deletion of a person’s DNA profile upon their acquittal.</p>
<h2>2007 Draft DNA Profiling Bill</h2>
<h3>Preamble (§ 1)</h3>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Section 1 of the Bill sets out the broad policy objectives of its drafters. The most telling portion of § 1 states: “[DNA analysis] makes it possible to determine whether the source of origin of one body substance is identical to that of another, and further to establish the biological relationship, if any, between two individuals, living or dead without any doubt.” Bill, § 1 (emphasis added). Although it later makes mention of potential harms resulting from governmental misuse of genetic information technology, it is evident that the policy animating the Bill presupposes the objective infallibility of genetic analysis. This patent mistruth underpins the policy rationale for the Bill, and as such casts a long shadow over its substantive provisions. At the very least, it tells the reader (and perhaps one day the court) to broadly interpret the Bill’s language to favor DNA analysis as the privileged solution to investigational and prosecutorial needs.</p>
<h3>Definitions (§ 2)</h3>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">A number of the Bill’s definitions are overbroad, further expanding the scope of its later provisions. The “crime scene index” is defined to include “DNA profiles from forensic material found . . . on or within the body of any person, on anything, or at any place, associated with the commission of a specified offence.” Id., § 2(1)(vii) et seq. A “specified offence” is defined as any of a number of more serious crimes, “or any other offence specified in the Schedule [to the Bill].” The so-called “Schedule,” tucked neatly on page 34 of the Bill’s 35 pages, lists a hodgepodge of various crimes from rape, to “offences relating to dowry,” defamation, and “unnatural 3 offenses.”<a href="#fn1" name="fr1">[1]</a> Taken together, the government is empowered to conduct genetic testing on almost anyone in any way connected with even minor infractions of the criminal law.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Furthermore, the crucial term “suspect” is defined as anyone “suspected of having committed an offence.” Id., § 2(1)(xxxvi). By intentionally leaving out the qualifier “specified,” the drafters’ intent is plain: to sweep within the Bill’s breadth all persons suspected of any crime whatsoever. And, accordingly, the Bill defines the “suspects index” to include “DNA profiles derived from forensic material lawfully taken from suspects.” Id., § 2(1)(xxxvix). It is hard to imagine anybody of subsequent regulation that could adequately circumscribe this manifest affront to personal privacy and bodily integrity.</p>
<h3>DNA Profiling Board (§§3 to 13)</h3>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The DNA Profiling Board (hereinafter “Board”) is responsible for administering and overseeing the Indian DNA database. §3 et seq. Among its several enumerated powers, the Board is charged with “recommend[ing] privacy protection statutes, regulations and practices relating to access to, or use of stored DNA samples or DNA analyses,” as well as “mak[ing] specific recommendations to . . . ensure the appropriate use and dissemination of DNA information [and] take any other necessary steps require to be taken to protect privacy.” §13(1)(xv) to (xvi). This provision is in lieu of any substantive principle limiting the scope of the legislation, which the bill otherwise lacks.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">This is a significant omission. As expressed in the preamble, the stated purpose of the Bill is “to enhance protection of people in the society and [the] administration of justice.” §1. Taken alone, this expresses only the government’s interest in the legislation, suggesting an ambiguously wide scope for its provisions. A substantive concept of individual privacy is required to counterbalance the interests of the government and provide protections for the equally vital privacy interests of the individual. As such, a limiting privacy principle should be included alongside the expressing in §1 of the government’s security interest. Without it, the Board will effectively have carte blanche with regard to what privacy protections are—or are not—adopted.</p>
<h3>Approval of Laboratories (§§14 to 18)</h3>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Sections 14 to 18 provide for the approval by the DNA Profiling Board of DNA laboratories that will process and analyze genetic material for eventual inclusion on the DNA database. Under §14, all laboratories must be approved in writing prior to processing or analyzing any genetic material. However, a conflicting provision appears in the next section, §15(2), which permits DNA laboratories in existence at the time the legislation is enacted to process or analyze DNA samples immediately, without first obtaining approval.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Either an oversight on the part of the drafters, or the product of overly-vague language, the result is that established genetic laboratories—including whatever genetic material or profiles they may already have for whatever reason—are in effect “grandfathered” into the system. The only review of these laboratories is the post hoc approval of the laboratory by the DNA profiling board. The potential for abuse and error that this conflict of provisions would be best addressed in keeping with the rule articulated in §14, i.e. correcting the language of §15(2) that allows for laboratories to be “grandfathered” into the system.</p>
<h3>Standards, Obligations of DNA Laboratory (§§19 to 28)</h3>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Chapter V, which concerns the obligations of and the standards to be observed by approved DNA laboratories, lacks adequate administrative provisions. For example, §22 requires that labs ensure “adequate security” to minimize contamination without providing for accountability in the event of contamination. Similarly, §28 provides for audits of DNA laboratories only, withholding from similar scrutiny of the DNA Profiling Board itself.</p>
<h3>National DNA Database (§§33 to 37)</h3>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">In addition on one national DNA database, the Bill sanctions the several Indian states to maintain their own DNA databases, provided these state-level databases forward copies of their content to the national database. Id., § 33(3). The national database is envisioned to comprise several sub-databases, each to contain the genetic information of a subset of persons/samples, namely: (1) unidentified crime scene samples, (2) samples taken from suspects, (3) samples taken from persons convicted or currently subject to prosecution for “subject offences,” (4) samples associated with missing persons, (5) samples taken from unidentified bodies, (6) samples taken from “volunteers,”<a href="#fn3" name="fr3">[3]</a> and finally (7) samples taken for reasons “as may be specified by regulations. Id., § 33(4) et seq. Putting to one side the breadth of persons subject to inclusion under subcategories (1) through (6), subsection (7) appears on its face to be a “catch all” provision, leaving one only to guess at the circumstances under which its specificities may be promulgated. Id.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">A close reading of § 33(6) strongly suggests that the agency <a href="#fn4" name="fr4">[4]</a>conducting conducting the forensic analyses and populating the DNA database shall retain the DNA samples thereafter. This section reads in relevant part:</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The DNA Data Bank shall contain . . . the following information, namely: (i) in the case of a profile in the offenders index, the identity of the person from whose body substance or body substances the profile was derived, and (ii) in case of all other profiles, the case reference number of the investigation associated with the body substance or body substances from which the profile was derived. Id., § 33(6).</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Rather than choose to link the DNA profile data to a specific offender or case, the drafters of the Bill instead like the “body substance or body substances” with that specific offender or case. Whether sloppy drafting or clever nuance, this provision elides the DNA profile with the DNA sample, injecting unneeded—and potentially harmful—ambiguity into the proposed law.</p>
<h3>Confidentiality, Access to DNA Profiles, Samples, and Records (§§ 38-44)</h3>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Further compounding this ambiguity, § 36 entitled “Access to Information” opens the door to much more than DNA profiles alone being kept on the government database. In all three of its subsections it purports to govern access to “the information” contained in the database, not “the DNA profiles” contained in the database. Id., § 36(1) et seq. Subsection 2 employs even broader language, covering “the information in the offenders’ index pertaining to a convict.” Id. Taken at face value, this provision of the Bill suggests that any and all sort of “information . . . pertaining to a convict” that might be derived from his or her DNA can be stored on the database. Even if prudential oversight provisions elsewhere in the Bill suggests a tightly-controlled techno-forensic apparatus, the overbroad construction of provisions such as §§ 33 and 36 raise significant questions about the wisdom of enacting the text in this form.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Two further provisions regarding access to the database warrant close scrutiny. First, §§ 39 and 40 purport to confer upon the police direct access to all of the information contained in the national DNA database. While administratively expedient, this arrangement opens up the possibility for misuse. A more prudent system would place the Board (or some administrative subordinate portion thereof) between the police and the content of the DNA database, with the latter having to make specific and particular requests to the former. This would minimize the risks inherent in the more expansive model of database access the bill currently envisions.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Second, and more concerning, § 41 permits the Data Bank Manager to grant access to the database to “any person or class of persons that the Data Bank Manager considers appropriate.” This is a sweeping provision. It vests in one individual the ability to permit almost anyone access to the DNA database—without administrative review or oversight of any kind. Taken together with the general lack of administrative safeguards in the bill, § 41 again places the government’s interest in investigating crime far above individual privacy rights.</p>
<h3>Omissions</h3>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Most notably, the bill specifically excludes a private cause of action for the unlawful collection of DNA, or for the unlawful storage of private information on the national DNA database. Nor does the bill grant an individual right to review one’s personal data contained on the database. Without these two key features, there is effectively no check against the unlawful collection, analysis, and storage of private genetic information on the database.</p>
<h3>Best Practices Analysis</h3>
<p><b>Collection of DNA</b></p>
<table class="listing">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="text-align: justify; ">With consent: only for a specific investigation (e.g. from a victim or for elimination purposes). Volunteers should not have information entered on a database</td>
<td style="text-align: justify; ">No provision</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td style="text-align: justify; ">Without consent: only from persons suspected of a crime for which DNA evidence is directly relevant i.e. a crime scene sample exists or is likely to exist. Or, broader categories?</td>
<td>No provision</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Requirement for an order by a court? Or allowed in other circumstances?</td>
<td>No provision</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Samples collected by police officers, or only medical professionals? Must take place in a secure location i.e. not on the street etc.</td>
<td>No provision</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Provision of information for all persons from whom DNA is taken</td>
<td>No provision</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td style="text-align: justify; ">Crime scenes should be promptly examined if DNA evidence is likely to be relevant, and quality assurance procedures must protect against contamination of evidence</td>
<td style="text-align: justify; ">No provision; regulated at discretion of DNA Profiling Board</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p><b>Analysis of DNA</b></p>
<table class="listing">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="text-align: justify; ">Should take place only in laboratories with quality assurance</td>
<td style="text-align: justify; ">Regulated at discretion of DNA Profiling Board</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td style="text-align: justify; ">Laboratories should be independent of police</td>
<td style="text-align: justify; ">No provision; regulated at discretion of DNA Profiling Board</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td style="text-align: justify; ">Profiling standards must be sufficient to minimise false matches occurring by chance. This must take account of increased likelihood of false matches in transboundary searches, and with relatives.</td>
<td style="text-align: justify; ">No provision; regulated at discretion of DNA Profiling Board</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p><b>Storage of DNA</b></p>
<table class="listing">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="text-align: justify; ">Data from convicted persons should be separate from others e.g. missing persons’ databases</td>
<td>Unclear</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td style="text-align: justify; ">Access to databases and samples must be restricted and there must be an independent and transparent system of governance, with regular information published e.g. annual reports, minutes of oversight meetings</td>
<td style="text-align: justify; ">Access to database at discretion of DNA Data Bank Manager</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td style="text-align: justify; ">Personal identification information should not be sent with samples to laboratories</td>
<td style="text-align: justify; ">No provision; regulated at discretion of DNA Profiling Board</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Any transfer of data e.g. from police station to lab or database, must be secure</td>
<td style="text-align: justify; ">No provision; regulated at discretion of DNA Profiling Board</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p><b>User Samples and Data</b></p>
<table class="listing">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="text-align: justify; ">Research uses should be restricted to anonymised verification of database performance (e.g. checking false matches etc.). Third party access to data for such purposes should be allowed, provided public information on research projects is published. There should be an ethics board.</td>
<td style="text-align: justify; ">No provision</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td style="text-align: justify; ">Research uses for other purposes e.g. health research, behavioural research should not be allowed.</td>
<td>No provision</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td style="text-align: justify; ">Uses should be restricted by law to solving crimes or identifying dead bodies/body parts. Identification of a person is not an acceptable use. Missing persons databases (if they exist) should be separate from police databases.</td>
<td style="text-align: left; ">Ambiguous provisions suggest much wider scope</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td style="text-align: justify; ">Familial searching should be restricted e.g. ordered by a court? Or not used? Or regulated for use in special cases?</td>
<td>No provision</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p><b>Destruction of DNA and Linked Datas</b></p>
<table class="listing">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="text-align: justify; ">DNA samples should be destroyed once the DNA profiles needed for identification purposes have been obtained from them, allowing for sufficient time for quality assurance, e.g. six months</td>
<td>DNA samples are retained</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>An automatic removals process is required for deletion of data from innocent persons. This must take place within a reasonable time of acquittal etc.</td>
<td>No provision</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td style="text-align: justify; ">There should be limits on retention of DNA profiles from persons convicted of minor crimes</td>
<td>No provision</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>There should be an appeals process against retention of data</td>
<td>No provision</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td style="text-align: justify; ">Linked data on other databases (e.g. police record of arrest, fingerprints) should be deleted at the same time as DNA database records</td>
<td>No provision</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td style="text-align: justify; ">Crime scene DNA evidence should be retained for as long as a reinvestigation might be needed (including to address miscarriages of justice)</td>
<td>DNA evidence permitted to be retained indefinitely</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p><b>Use in Court</b></p>
<table class="listing">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="text-align: justify; ">Individuals must have a right to have a second sample taken from them and reanalysed as a check</td>
<td>No provision</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td style="text-align: justify; ">Individuals must have a right to obtain re-analysis of crime scene forensic evidence in the event of appeal</td>
<td>No provision</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td style="text-align: justify; ">Expert evidence and statistics must not misrepresent the role and value of the DNA evidence in relation to the crime</td>
<td>No provision</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p><b>Other<br /></b></p>
<table class="listing">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="text-align: justify; ">Relevant safeguards must be proscribed by law and there should be appropriate penalties for abuse</td>
<td>No provision</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td style="text-align: justify; ">Impacts on children and other vulnerable persons (e.g. mentally ill) must be considered</td>
<td>No provision</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Potential for racial bias must be minimised</td>
<td>No provision</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<hr />
<p style="text-align: justify; ">[<a href="#fr1" name="fn1">1</a>]. No examples are given as to which unnatural offences are intended, leaving the reader wondering. Perhaps a DNA test of witchcraft?<br />[<a href="#fr2" name="fn2">2</a>]. Section 15(2) does mandate that such laboratories petition the DNA Profiling Board for approval within six months after the legislation is enacted.<br />[<a href="#fr3" name="fn3">3</a>].Per § (2)(1)(xxxxiii) of the Definitions, a “volunteer” is “a person who volunteers to undergo a DNA procedure.” The definition does not require that the “volunteer” be informed of the nature, purpose, or possible consequences of his generosity; nor is any such requirement specified elsewhere in the Bill.<br />[<a href="#fr4" name="fn4">4</a>].Or, as is laid out in great detail in §§ 14-32, at the privately-contracted forensics laboratory.</p>
<hr />
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Note: § is a symbol for 'section'.</p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/indian-draft-dna-profiling-act'>https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/indian-draft-dna-profiling-act</a>
</p>
No publisherGeneWatch UK & the Council for Responsible Genetics, USFeaturedInternet Governance2012-07-11T11:30:38ZBlog EntryThe Bots That Got Some Votes Home
https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/bots-got-some-votes-home
<b>Nilofar Ansher gives us some startling updates on the "Digital Natives Video Contest" voting results declared in May 2012, in this blog post.</b>
<p style="text-align: justify;">It was a hint of suspicion raised by one of our colleagues at the Centre for Internet & Society that spurred our Web Analytics team to check into the voting activity of the contest that was all about the ‘<a href="https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/vote-for-digital-natives" class="external-link">Everyday Digital Native</a>’. And while we acknowledged and celebrated the ‘digital’ in the native (users of technology), we forgot the human part that the digital has to engage with. Following weeks of deliberations, we now have conclusive evidence that points to irregularities in voting numbers of the Top 10 contestants. We are now staring at the elephant in the room: those innocuous little automated scripts we sweetly nicknamed, ‘bots’.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Internet bots, also known as web robots or simply bots, are software applications that run automated tasks over the Internet. Typically, bots perform tasks that are both simple and structurally repetitive, at a much higher rate than would be possible for a human alone. The largest use of bots is in web spidering, in which an automated script fetches, analyzes and files information from web servers at many times the speed of a human. Each server can have a file called robots.txt, containing rules for the spidering of that server that the bot is supposed to obey. In addition to their uses outlined above, bots may also be implemented where a response speed faster than that of humans is required (e.g., gaming bots and auction-site robots) or less commonly in situations where the emulation of human activity is required, for example chat bots (Source: Wikipedia).</p>
<h3>What irregularities?</h3>
<p style="text-align: justify;">You would see how a script or bot would have played a role in ‘automating’ the votes for a video. The Top 10 videos received a combined voting number of 20,000+. The discrepancy occurs at the juncture where the votes polled on the front end (the webpage where the contestant video was visible to the public) did not match with the number of hits the page received on the backend (this is the analytics part). For instance, the top polled video has some few thousand votes more than the number of people who actually visited our CIS website in the same duration. This prompted a review of the logs and the possible “hand” of a nonhuman agent acting on its human creator’s command to drive up the votes.</p>
<h3>How was this done? The Technicalities</h3>
<p>The following graph shows the extremely high level of voting requests just before the closing date (March 31, 2012). This would not be extraordinary except for the fact that two or three entries had an exceptionally higher vote count relative to their page views as per the analytics statistics.</p>
<p><img src="https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/video-contest/scripted-voting-report/quickhist_march_april.png" alt="null" class="image-inline" title="Voting requests by date" /></p>
<h3>Analysis of the voting against the http requests for the voting link against page views</h3>
<div>
<table class="vertical listing">
<tbody>
<tr style="text-align: center;">
<th>
<p>Entry</p>
</th>
<th>Actual Votes Recorded (1)<br /></th>
<th>Direct http requests to votes (2)<br /></th>
<th>http requests for normal page view access (3)<br /></th>
<th>Recommended adjusted vote count (4)<br /></th>
</tr>
<tr style="text-align: right;">
<td>
<p><a href="https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/video-contest/entries/digital-media-dance" class="internal-link">Digital Dance</a></p>
</td>
<td>268</td>
<td>448</td>
<td>198</td>
<td><span class="visualHighlight">198</span></td>
</tr>
<tr style="text-align: right;">
<td>
<p><a href="https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/video-contest/entries/big-stories-small-towns" class="internal-link">Big Stories, Small Town</a></p>
</td>
<td>3</td>
<td>10</td>
<td>112</td>
<td>3</td>
</tr>
<tr style="text-align: right;">
<td>
<p><a href="https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/video-contest/entries/digital-natives-contest/entries/connecting-souls-bridging-dreams" class="internal-link">Connecting Souls, Bridging Dreams</a></p>
</td>
<td>1113</td>
<td>2018</td>
<td>1685</td>
<td>1113</td>
</tr>
<tr style="text-align: right;">
<td>
<p><a href="https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/video-contest/entries/finalist-summary/deployed" class="internal-link">Deployed</a></p>
</td>
<td>191</td>
<td>479</td>
<td>195</td>
<td>191</td>
</tr>
<tr style="text-align: right;">
<td>
<p class="internal-link"><a href="https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/video-contest/entries/from-the-wild-into-the-digital-world" class="internal-link">From The Wild Into The Digital World</a></p>
</td>
<td>10317</td>
<td>11880</td>
<td>810</td>
<td><span class="visualHighlight">810</span></td>
</tr>
<tr style="text-align: right;">
<td>
<p><a href="https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/video-contest/entries/i-am-a-ghetto-digital-native" class="internal-link">I Am A Ghetto Digital Native</a></p>
</td>
<td>321</td>
<td>365</td>
<td>844</td>
<td>321</td>
</tr>
<tr style="text-align: right;">
<td>
<p><a href="https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/video-contest/entries/life-in-the-city-slums" class="internal-link">Life in the City Slums</a></p>
</td>
<td>13</td>
<td>18</td>
<td>94</td>
<td>13</td>
</tr>
<tr style="text-align: right;">
<td>
<p><a href="https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/video-contest/entries/who-is-a-digital-native" class="internal-link">Digital Natives</a></p>
</td>
<td>111</td>
<td>328</td>
<td>102</td>
<td><span class="visualHighlight">102</span></td>
</tr>
<tr style="text-align: right;">
<td>
<p><a href="https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/video-contest/entries/with-no-distinction" class="internal-link">With No Distinction</a></p>
</td>
<td>369</td>
<td>557</td>
<td>1232</td>
<td>369</td>
</tr>
<tr style="text-align: right;">
<td>
<p><a href="https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/video-contest/entries/digital-coverage-in-a-digital-world" class="internal-link">Digital Coverage in a Digital World</a></p>
</td>
<td>9622</td>
<td>13650</td>
<td>181</td>
<td><span class="visualHighlight">181</span></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<h3></h3>
<span class="internal-link"> </span>
<ol>
<li style="text-align: justify;">These are the public votes displayed on the contestant’s page through the thumbs up icon</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">These are http requests to the voting link against each video when the user clicked on the thumbs up icon.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">These are http requests which are collectively related to the video page (page view). A normal human user would browse through a page first, which downloads some other urls, such as the HTML for the page, JavaScript, images, and so on. A normal vote request would be included collectively. A direct http request to the voting link on the other hand does not do this, and only makes a specific request to vote without downloading the other parts that make up the page.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">A normal human vote count should be the same or less than the number of page views. Only three videos highlighted show abnormal behaviour and it is recommended these be adjusted to the page view counts.</li></ol>
<h3>Are you saying contestants cheated?</h3>
<p style="text-align: justify;">While the use of programming scripts to accrue votes is no new tactic and we should, in fact, have a more robust mechanism to monitor such activity during a contest, we cannot prove the culpability of the human agents. The contestants might be innocent actors with overzealous friends or colleagues who ran the voting scripts. As of now, since there is no way to ascertain their part in this irregularity, it’s best we give them the benefit of the doubt. What comes through loud and clear is that once you do away with the scripted votes, four contestants still manage to have enough votes to maintain their positions in the final five. In the fifth position, we now have a contestant from the top ten finalists, who has secured the requisite votes (after vote adjustment) to propel him into the final five.</p>
<h3>Recommendation</h3>
<p style="text-align: justify;">‘Digital Dance’ (Cijo Abraham), ‘From the Wild into the Digital World’ (John Musila) and ‘Digital Coverage in a Digital World’ (T.J. Burks) had additional vote url counts than page views. It is recommended that the total votes for these videos be adjusted to the page view counts, and not the actual vote counts as displayed on their individual web pages (thumbs up icon) during the voting period.</p>
<p>The rankings of the adjusted voting would now read as:</p>
<ol>
<li>Connecting Souls, Bridging Dreams – Marie Jude Bendiola (1113)</li>
<li>From The Wild Into The Digital World - John Musila (810)</li>
<li>With No Distinction - T.J. K. M. (369)</li>
<li>I Am A Ghetto Digital Native – MJ (321)</li>
<li>Digital Dance – Cijo Abraham (198)</li></ol>
<h3>Transparency at CIS</h3>
<p style="text-align: justify;">‘The Digital Natives with a Cause?’ research inquiry is shaped around concerns of transparency, equity and community accountability. In our research methods as well as in outputs of the different activities, we have always maintained a complete transparency of decision making processes as well as in depending upon the incredible people we work with to help us learn, grow and reflect openly on the concerns that we have been engaged with. We strive to follow this method and in publishing these statistics, we want to ensure that there is complete transparency about the votes that were accrued and how the final winners were selected. We also take this opportunity as a learning experience to re-think the question of the non-human actors in our networks and further about the nature of participation and reputation online. We hope that the publishing of these results will help answer any inquiries on how the process unfolded.</p>
<h3>View Logs and Source Code</h3>
<ul>
<li><a href="https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/video-contest/scripted-voting-report/logs-during-voting-period" class="external-link">All logs from the web server for this period</a> (24.7MB) Identical IPs are from caching server.</li>
<li><a class="external-link" href="http://www.cis-india.org/digital-natives/video-contest/scripted-voting-report/main.R">R script to evaluate data for table</a></li></ul>
<h3>What next?</h3>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Since we spotted the error in time, we haven’t disbursed the prize money of EUR 500 to each of the Top 5 contestants. They will now receive the prize along with a chance to participate in the Digital Native workshop-cum-Webinar, slated to be held in July 2012. The top 10 videos will be showcased in this event.</p>
</div>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/bots-got-some-votes-home'>https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/bots-got-some-votes-home</a>
</p>
No publisherNilofar AnsherFeaturedResearchers at WorkDigital Natives2015-04-24T11:56:10ZBlog EntryHyper-connected, Hyper-lonely?
https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/hyper-connected-hyper-lonely
<b>The Digital Natives newsletter, part of the 'Digital Natives with a Cause?' project, invites contributions to its April-May 2012 double issue. </b>
<p>The April issue puts the spotlight on an emerging trope in society and media: the more connected we are to our gadgets, peer network and social media, the lonelier we feel. The debate, which traces its opening volley to Sherry Turkle's book 'Alone Together', will look at the recurrent media commentary that points to pop-surveys, anecdotes from psychologists, and conscientious academics who talk about increasing isolation among heavy gadget users. Since our gadgets are more often than not net enabled, it doesn't take a giant leap to infer that people who spend a lot of time online count themselves as part of the Lonely Hearts Club. Is loneliness a peculiarly modern phenomenon? <br />Editor: Shobha Vadrevu </p>
<p>In the May issue, we look at a technology that was considered sci-fi a decade ago, but is now the next best thing since our Smartphones: Augmented Reality. How do scientists and geeks go about augmenting our reality? How inspirational have movies (remember Minority Report) been in engaging imagination with what is commonplace and common sense? Does Google Glass excite you or scare you senseless? Would you still make distinctions between the virtual world and the real one? <br />Editor: Nilofar Ansher </p>
<p>We invite short pieces, lengthy reflections, haikus and verses, cartoons, graphics, videos, and other forms of creative expressions for both the issues. Deadline: June 21, 2012. For more information, email: <a class="external-link" href="mailto:nilofar.ansh@gmail.com">nilofar.ansh@gmail.com</a></p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/hyper-connected-hyper-lonely'>https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/hyper-connected-hyper-lonely</a>
</p>
No publisherNilofar AnsherFeaturedResearchers at WorkDigital Natives2015-04-24T11:57:46ZBlog EntryAnalysis of the Copyright (Amendment) Bill 2012
https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/analysis-copyright-amendment-bill-2012
<b>There are some welcome provisions in the Copyright (Amendment) Bill 2012, and some worrisome provisions. Pranesh Prakash examines five positive changes, four negative ones, and notes the several missed opportunities. The larger concern, though, is that many important issues have not been addressed by these amendments, and how copyright policy is made without evidence and often out of touch with contemporary realities of the digital era.</b>
<p>The <a class="external-link" href="http://164.100.24.219/BillsTexts/RSBillTexts/PassedRajyaSabha/copy-E.pdf">Copyright (Amendment) Bill 2012</a> has been passed by both Houses of Parliament, and will become law as soon as the President gives her assent and it is published in the Gazette of India. While we celebrate the passage of some progressive amendments to the Copyright Act, 1957 — including an excellent exception for persons with disabilities — we must keep in mind that there are some regressive amendments as well. In this blog post, I will try to highlight those provisions of the amendment that have not received much public attention (unlike the issue of lyricists’ and composers’ ‘right to royalty’).</p>
<h2>Welcome Changes</h2>
<h3>Provisions for Persons with Disabilities</h3>
<p>India now has amongst the most progressive exception for persons with disabilities, alongside countries like Chile. Under the amendments, sections 51(1)(zb) and 31B carve out exceptions and limitations for persons with disabilities. Earlier s.52(1)(zb) dealt only with formats that were “special designed only for the use of persons suffering from visual, aural, or other disabilities”. Thanks to a campaign mounted by disability rights groups and public interest groups such as CIS, it now covers “any accessible format”. Section 52(1)(zb) allows any person to facilitate access by persons with disabilities to copyrighted works without any payment of compensation to the copyright holder, and any organization working the benefit of persons with disabilities to do so as long as it is done on a non-profit basis and with reasonable steps being taken to prevent entry of reproductions of the copyrighted work into the mainstream. Even for-profit businesses are allowed to do so if they obtain a compulsory licence on a work-by-work basis, and pay the royalties fixed by the Copyright Board. The onerousness of this provision puts its utility into question, and this won’t disappear unless the expression “work” in s.31B is read to include a class of works.</p>
<p>Given that the Delhi High Court has — wrongly and <a class="external-link" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Per_incuriam">per incuriam</a>, since it did not refer to s.14(a)(ii) as it was amended in 1994 — held parallel importation to be barred by the Copyright Act, it was important for Parliament to clarify that the Copyright Act in fact follows international exhaustion. Without this, even if any person can facilitate access for persons with disabilities to copyrighted works, those works are restricted to those that are circulated in India. Given that not many books are converted into accessible formats in India (not to mention the costs of doing so), and given the much larger budgets for book conversion in the developed world, this is truly restrictive.</p>
<h3>Extension of Fair Dealing to All Works</h3>
<p>The law earlier dealt with fair dealing rights with regard to “literary, dramatic, musical or artistic works”. Now it covers all works (except software), in effect covering sound recordings and video as well. This will help make personal copies of songs and films, to make copies for research, to use film clips in classrooms, etc.</p>
<h3>Creative Commons, Open Licensing Get a Boost</h3>
<p>The little-known s.21 of the Copyright Act, which deals with the right of authors to relinquish copyright, has been amended. While earlier one could only relinquish parts of one’s copyright by submitting a form to the Registrar of Copyrights, now a simple public notice suffices. Additionally, s.30 of the Act, which required licences to be in writing and signed, now only requires it to be in writing. This puts Creative Commons, the GNU Public Licence, and other open licensing models, on a much surer footing in India.</p>
<h3>Physical Libraries Should Celebrate, Perhaps Virtual Libraries Too</h3>
<p>Everywhere that the word “hire” occurs (except s.51, curiously), the word “commercial rental” has been substituted. This has been done, seemingly, to bring India in conformance with the WIPO Copyright Treaty (WCT) and the WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty (WPPT). The welcome side-effect of this is that the legality of lending by non-profit public libraries has been clarified. The amendment states:</p>
<p class="discreet">"2(1)(fa) “commercial rental” does not include the rental, lease or lending of a lawfully acquired copy of a computer programme, sound recording, visual recording or cinematograph film for non-profit purposes by a non-profit library or non-profit educational institution."</p>
<p>Even after this, the overwhelming majority of the ‘video lending libraries’ that you see in Indian cities and towns continue to remain illegal.</p>
<p>Another welcome provision is the amended s.52(1)(n), which now allows “non-commercial public libraries” to store an electronic copy of a work if it already has a physical copy of the work. However, given that this provision says that the storage shall be “for preservation”, it seems limited. However, libraries might be able to use this — in conjunction with the fact that under s.14 of the Copyright Act lending rights of authors is limited to “commercial rental” and s.51(b) only covers lending of “infringing copies” — to argue that they can legally scan and lend electronic copies of works in the same manner that they lend physical copies. Whether this argument would succeed is unclear. Thus, India has not boldly gone where the European Commission is treading with talks of a European Digital Library Project, or where scholars in the US are headed with the Digital Public Library of America. But we might have gone there quietly. Thus, this amendment might help foster an Indian <a class="external-link" href="http://internetarchive.org/">Internet Archive</a>, or help spread the idea of the <a class="external-link" href="http://openlibrary.org/">Open Library</a> in India.</p>
<p>On a final note, different phrases are used to refer to libraries in the amendment. In s.2(1)(fa), it talks about "non-profit library"; in s.52(1)(n) and (o), it refers to "non-commercial public library"; and in s.52(1)(zb), it talks of "library or archives", but s.52(1)(zb) also requires that the works be made available on a "non-profit basis". The differentiation, if any, that is sought to be drawn between these is unclear.</p>
<h3>Limited Protection to Some Internet Intermediaries</h3>
<p>There are two new provisions, s.52(1)(b) and 52(1)(c), which provide some degree of protection to 'transient or incidental' storage of a work or performance. Section 52(1)(b) allows for "the transient or incidental storage of a work or performance purely in the technical process of electronic transmission or communication to the public", hence applying primarily to Internet Service Providers (ISPs), VPN providers, etc. Section 52(1)(c) allows for "transient or incidental storage of a work or performance for the purpose of providing electronic links, access or integration, where such links, access or integration has not been expressly prohibited by the right holder, unless the person responsible is aware or has reasonable grounds for believing that such storage is of an infringing copy". This seems to make it applicable primarily to search engines, with other kinds of online services being covered or not covered depending on one’s interpretation of the word 'incidental'.</p>
<h3>Compulsory Licensing Now Applies to Foreign Works Also</h3>
<p>Sections 31 ("compulsory licence in works withheld from public") and 31A ("compulsory licence in unpublished Indian works") used to apply to Indian works. Now they apply to all works, whether Indian or not (and now s.31A is about "compulsory licence in unpublished or published works", mainly orphan works). This is a welcome amendment, making foreign works capable of being licensed compulsorily in case it is published elsewhere but withheld in India. Given how onerous our compulsory licensing sections are, especially sections 32 and 32A (which deal with translations, and with literary, scientific or artistic works), it is not a surprise that they have not been used even once. However, given the modifications to s.31 and s.31A, we might just see those starting to be used by publishers, and not just radio broadcasters.</p>
<h2>Worrisome Changes</h2>
<h3>Term of Copyright for Photographs Nearly Doubled</h3>
<p>The term of copyright for photographs has now gone from sixty years from publication to sixty years from the death of the photographer. This would mean that copyright in a photograph clicked today (2012) by a 20 year old who dies at the 80 will only expire on January 1, 2133. This applies not only to artistic photographs, to all photographs because copyright is an opt-out system, not an opt-in system. Quite obviously, most photoshopping is illegal under copyright law.</p>
<p>This has two problems. First, there was no case made out for why this term needed to be increased. No socio-economic report was commissioned on the effects of such a term increase. This clause was not even examined by the Parliamentary Standing Committee. While the WCT requires a ‘life + 50′ years term for photographs, we are not signatories to the WCT, and hence have no obligation to enforce this. We are signatories to the Berne Convention and the TRIPS Agreement, which require a copyright term of 25 years for photographs. Instead, we have gone even above the WCT requirement and provide a life + 60 years term.</p>
<p>The second problem is that it is easier to say when a photograph was published than to say who the photographer was and when that photographer died. Even when you are the subject of a photograph, the copyright in the photograph belongs to the photographer. Unless a photograph was made under commission or the photographer assigned copyright to you, you do not own the copyright in the photographs. (Thanks to <a href="http://deviantlight.blogspot.com">Bipin Aspatwar</a>, for pointing out a mistake in an earlier version, with "employment" and "commission" being treated differently.) This will most definitely harm projects like Wikipedia, and other projects that aim at archiving and making historical photographs available publicly, since it is difficult to say whether the copyright in a photograph still persists.</p>
<h3>Cover Versions Made More Difficult: Kolaveri Di Singers Remain Criminals</h3>
<p>The present amendments have brought about the following changes, which make it more difficult to produce cover versions:</p>
<ol>
<li> Time period after which a cover version can be made has increased from 2 years to 5 years.</li>
<li>Requirement of same medium as the original. So if the original is on a cassette, the cover cannot be released on a CD.</li>
<li>Payment has to be made in advance, and for a minimum of 50000 copies. This can be lowered by Copyright Board having regard to unpopular dialects.</li>
<li>While earlier it was prohibited to mislead the public (i.e., pretend the cover was the original, or endorsed by the original artists), now cover versions are not allowed to "contain the name or depict in any way any performer of an earlier sound recording of the same work or any cinematograph film in which such sound recording was incorporated".</li>
<li>All cover versions must state that they are cover versions.</li>
<li>No alterations are allowed from the original song, and alteration is qualified as ‘alteration in the literary or musical work’. So no imaginative covers in which the lyrics are changed or in which the music is reworked are allowed without the copyright owners’ permission. Only note-for-note and word-for-word covers are allowed.</li>
<li>Alterations were allowed if they were "reasonably necessary for the adaptation of the work" now they are only allowed if it is "technically necessary for the purpose of making of the sound recording".</li>
</ol>
<p>This ignores present-day realities. Kolaveri Di was covered numerous times without permission, and each one of those illegal acts helped spread its popularity. The singers and producers of those unlicensed versions could be jailed under the current India Copyright Act, which allows even non-commercial copyright infringers to be put behind bars. Film producers and music companies want both the audience reach that comes from less stringent copyright laws (and things like cover versions), as well as the ability to prosecute that same behaviour at will. It is indeed ironic that T-Series, the company that broke HMV’s stranglehold over the Indian recording market thanks to cover versions, is itself one of the main movers behind ever-more stringent copyright laws.</p>
<h3>Digital Locks Now Provided Legal Protection Without Accountability</h3>
<p>As I have covered the issue of Technological Protection Measures (TPM) and Rights Management Information (RMI), which are ‘digital locks’ also known as Digital Rights Management (DRM), <a href="https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/tpm-copyright-amendment" class="external-link">in great detail earlier</a>, I won’t repeat the arguments at length. Very briefly:</p>
<ol>
<li>It is unclear that anyone has been demanding the grant of legal protection to DRMs in India, and We have no obligation under any international treaties to do so. It is not clear how DRM will help authors and artists, but it is clear how it will harm users.</li>
<li>While the TPM and RMI provisions are much more balanced than the equivalent provisions in laws like the US’s Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMC), that isn’t saying much. Importantly, while users are given certain rights to break the digital locks, they are helpless if they aren’t also provided the technological means of doing so. Simply put: music and movie companies have rights to place digital locks, and under some limited circumstances users have the right to break them. But if the locks are difficult to break, the users have no choice but to live with the lock, despite having a legal right.</li>
</ol>
<h3>Removal of Parallel Importation</h3>
<p>In past blog posts I have covered <a href="https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/parallel-importation-of-books" class="external-link">why allowing parallel imports makes sense in India</a>. And as explained above, the Delhi High Court acted per incuriam when holding that the Copyright Act does not allow parallel importation. The Copyright Act only prohibits import of infringing copies of a work, and a copy of a book that has been legally sold in a foreign country is not an “infringing copy”. The government was set to introduce a provision making it clear that parallel importation was allowed. The Parliamentary Standing Committee heard objections to this proposal from a foreign publishers’ association, but decided to recommend the retention of the clause. Still, due to pressure from a few publishing companies whose business relies on monopolies over importation of works into India, the government has decided to delete the provision. However, thankfully, the HRD Minister, Kapil Sibal, has assured both houses of Parliament that he will move a further amendment if an<a class="external-link" href="http://www.ncaer.org/"> NCAER</a> report he has commissioned (which will be out by August or September) recommends the introduction of parallel imports.</p>
<h3>Expansion of Moral Rights Without Safeguards</h3>
<p>Changes have been made to author’s moral rights (and performer’s moral rights have been introduced) but these have been made without adequate safeguards. The changes might allow the legal heir of an author, artist, etc., to object to ‘distortion, mutilation, modification, or other act’ of her ancestors work even when the ancestor might not have. By this amendment, this right continues in perpetuity, even after the original creator dies and even after the work enters into the public domain. It seems Indian policymakers had not heard of <a class="external-link" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_James_Joyce">Stephen Joyce</a>, the grandson of James Joyce, who has “brought numerous lawsuits or threats of legal action against scholars, biographers and artists attempting to quote from Joyce’s literary work or personal correspondence”. Quoting from his Wikipedia page:</p>
<p class="callout">In 2004, Stephen threatened legal action against the Irish government when the Rejoyce Dublin 2004 festival proposed public reading of excerpts of Ulysses on Bloomsday. In 1988 Stephen Joyce burnt a collection of letters written by Lucia Joyce, his aunt. In 1989 he forced Brenda Maddox to delete a postscript concerning Lucia from her biography Nora: The Real Life of Molly Bloom. After 1995 Stephen announced no permissions would be granted to quote from his grandfather’s work. Libraries holding letters by Joyce were unable to show them without permission. Versions of his work online were disallowed. Stephen claimed to be protecting his grandfather’s and families reputation, but would sometimes grant permission to use material in exchange for fees that were often "extortionate".</p>
<p>Because in countries like the UK and Canada the works of James Joyce are now in the public domain, Stephen Joyce can no longer restrict apply such conditions. However now, in India, despite James Joyce’s works being in the public domain, Stephen Joyce’s indefensible demands may well carry legal weight.</p>
<h3>Backdoor Censorship</h3>
<p>As noted above, the provision that safeguard Internet intermediaries (like search engines) is very limited. However, that provision has an extensive removal provision:</p>
<p class="callout">Provided that if the person responsible for the storage of the copy has received a written complaint from the owner of copyright in the work, complaining that such transient or incidental storage is an infringement, such person responsible for the storage shall refrain from facilitating such access for a period of twenty-one days or till he receives an order from the competent court refraining from facilitating access and in case no such order is received before the expiry of such period of twenty-one days, he may continue to provide the facility of such access;</p>
<p>There are two things to be noted here. First, that without proof (or negative consequences for false complaints) the service provider is mandated to prevent access to the copy for 21 day. Second, after the elapsing of 21 days, the service provider may 'put back' the content, but is not mandated to do so. This would allow people to file multiple frivolous complaints against any kind of material, even falsely (since there is no penalty for false compalaints), and keep some material permanently censored.</p>
<h2>Missed Opportunities</h2>
<h3>Fair Dealing Guidelines, Criminal Provisions, Government Works, and Other Missed Opportunities</h3>
<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 has not touched upon any of the following, which we believe are very important changes that are required to be made.</p>
<ul>
<li> Criminal provisions: 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>Fair dealing guidelines: 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, but would act as a more general framework for those cases which are not covered by the specific exceptions.</li>
<li>Government works: 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 could simply allow for “the reproduction, communication to the public, or publication of any government work” as being non-infringing uses.</li>
<li>Copyright terms: 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>Educational exceptions: The exceptions for education still do not fully embrace distance and digital education.</li>
<li>Communication to the public: No clear definition is given of what constitute a ‘public’, and no distinction is drawn between commercial and non-commercial ‘public’ communication.</li>
<li>Internet intermediaries: 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. Importantly, after the terrible judgment passed by Justice Manmohan Singh of the Delhi High Court in the Super Cassettes v. Myspace case, any website hosting user-generated content is vulnerable to payment of hefty damages even if it removes content speedily on the basis of complaints.</li>
</ul>
<h2>Amendments Not Examined</h2>
<p>For the sake of brevity, I have not examined the major changes that have been made with regard to copyright societies, lyricists and composers, and statutory licensing for broadcasters, all of which have received considerable attention by copyright experts elsewhere, nor have I examined many minor amendments.</p>
<h2>A Note on the Parliamentary Process</h2>
<p>Much of the discussions around the Copyright Act have been around the rights of composers and lyricists vis-à-vis producers. As this has been covered elsewhere, I won’t comment much on it, other than to say that it is quite unfortunate that the trees are lost for the forest. It is indeed a good thing that lyricists and composers are being provided additional protection against producers who are usually in a more advantageous bargaining position. This fact came out well in both houses of Parliament during the debate on the Copyright Bill.<br /><br />However, the mechanism of providing this protection — by preventing assignment of “the right to receive royalties”, though the “right to receive royalties” is never mentioned as a separate right anywhere else in the Copyright Act — was not critically examined by any of the MPs who spoke. What about the unintended consequences of such an amendment? Might this not lead to new contracts where instead of lump-sums, lyricists and music composers might instead be asked to bear the risk of not earning anything at all unless the film is profitable? What about a situation where a producer asks a lyricist to first assign all rights (including royalty rights) to her heirs and then enters into a contract with those heirs? The law, unfortunately at times, revolves around words used by the legislature and not just the intent of the legislature. While one cannot predict which way the amendment will go, one would have expected better discussions around this in Parliament.</p>
<p>Much of the discussion (in both <a class="external-link" href="http://164.100.47.5/newdebate/225/17052012/Fullday.pdf">the Rajya Sabha</a> and <a class="external-link" href="http://164.100.47.132/newdebate/15/10/22052012/Fullday.pdf">the Lok Sabha</a>) was rhetoric about the wonders of famous Indian songwriters and music composers and the abject penury in which some not-so-famous ones live, and there was very little discussion about the actual merits of the content of the Bill in terms of how this problem will be overcome. A few MPs did deal with issues of substance. Some asked the HRD Minister tough questions about the Statement of Objects and Reasons noting that amendments have been brought about to comply with the WCT and WPPT which were “adopted … by consensus”, even though this is false as India is not a signatory to the WCT and WPPT. MP P. Rajeeve further raised the issue of parallel imports and that of there being no public demand for including TPM in the Act, but that being a reaction to the US’s flawed Special 301 reports. Many, however, spoke about issues such as the non-award of the Bharat Ratna to Bhupen Hazarika, about the need to tackle plagiarism, and how the real wealth of a country is not material wealth but intellectual wealth.</p>
<p>This preponderance of rhetoric over content is not new when it comes to copyright policy in India. In 1991, when an amendment was presented to increase term of copyright in all works by ten years (from expiring 50 years from the author’s death to 60 years post-mortem), the vast majority of the Parliamentarians who stood up to speak on the issue waxed eloquent about the greatness of Rabindranath Tagore (whose works were about to lapse into the public domain), and how we must protect his works. Little did they reflect that extending copyright — for all works, whether by Tagore or not — will not help ‘protect’ the great Bengali artist, but would only make his (and all) works costlier for 10 additional years. Good-quality and cheaper editions of Tagore’s works are more easily available post-2001 (when his copyright finally lapsed) than before, since companies like Rupa could produce cheap editions without seeking a licence from Visva Bharati. And last I checked Tagore’s works have not been sullied by them having passed into the public domain in 2001.</p>
<p>Further, one could find outright mistakes in the assertions of Parliamentarians. In both Houses, DMK MPs raised objections with regard to parallel importation being allowed in the Bill — only in the version of the Bill they were debating, parallel importation was not being allowed. One MP stated that “statutory licensing provisions like these are not found anywhere else in the world”. This is incorrect, given that there are extensive statutory licensing provision in countries like the United States, covering a variety of situations, from transmission of sound recordings over Internet radio to secondary transmission of the over-the-air programming.</p>
<p>Unfortunately, though that MP did not raise this issue, there is a larger problem that underlies copyright policymaking in India, and that is the fact that there is no impartial evidence gathered and no proper studies that are done before making of policies. We have no equivalent of the Hargreaves Report or the Gowers Report, or the studies by the Productivity Council in Australia or the New Zealand government study of parallel importation.</p>
<p>There was no economic analysis conducted of the effect of the increase in copyright term for photographs. We have evidence from elsewhere that copyright terms <a class="external-link" href="http://williampatry.blogspot.in/2007/07/statute-of-anne-too-generous-by-half.html">are already</a> <a class="external-link" href="http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2024588">too long</a>, and all increases in term are what economists refer to as <a class="external-link" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deadweight_loss">deadweight losses</a>. There is no justification whatsoever for increasing term of copyright for photographs, since India is not even a signatory to the WCT (which requires this term increase). In fact, we have lost precious negotiation space internationally since in bilateral trade agreements we have been asked to bring our laws in compliance with the WCT, and we have asked for other conditions in return. By unilaterally bringing ourselves in compliance with WCT, we have lost important bargaining power.</p>
<h2>Users and Smaller Creators Left Out of Discussions</h2>
<p>Thankfully, the Parliamentary Standing Committee went into these minutiae in greater detail. Though, as I have noted elsewhere, the Parliamentary Standing Committee did not invite any non-industry groups for deposition before it, other than the disability rights groups which had campaigned really hard. So while changes that would affect libraries were included, not a single librarian was called by the Standing Committee. Despite comments having been submitted <a href="https://cis-india.org/a2k/publications/copyright-bill-submission" class="external-link">to the Standing Committee on behalf of 22 civil society organizations</a>, none of those organizations were asked to depose. Importantly, non-industry users of copyrighted materials — consumers, historians, teachers, students, documentary film-makers, RTI activists, independent publishers, and people like you and I — are not seen as legitimate interested parties in the copyright debate. This is amply clear from the the fact that only one MP each in the two houses of Parliament raised the issue of users’ rights at all.</p>
<h2>Concluding Thoughts</h2>
<p>What stands out most from this process of amendment of the copyright law, which has been going on since 2006, is how out-of-touch the law is with current cultural practices. Most instances of photoshopping are illegal. Goodbye Lolcats. Cover versions (for which payments have to be made) have to wait for five years. Goodbye Kolaveri Di. Do you own the jokes you e-mail to others, and have you taken licences for quoting older e-mails in your replies? Goodbye e-mail. The strict laws of copyright, with a limited set of exceptions, just do not fit the digital era where everything digital transaction results in a bytes being copied. We need to take a much more thoughtful approach to rationalizing copyright: introduction of general fair dealing guidelines, reduction of copyright term, decriminalization of non-commercial infringement, and other such measures. If we don’t take such measures soon, we will all have to be prepared to be treated as criminals for all our lives. Breaking copyright law shouldn’t be as easy as breathing, yet thanks to outdated laws, it is.</p>
<p><a class="external-link" href="http://infojustice.org/archives/26243">This was reposted in infojustice.org on May 25, 2012</a></p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/analysis-copyright-amendment-bill-2012'>https://cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/analysis-copyright-amendment-bill-2012</a>
</p>
No publisherpraneshAccess to KnowledgeFair DealingsPiracyIntellectual Property RightsEconomicsIntermediary LiabilityFeaturedTechnological Protection Measures2013-11-12T14:13:04ZBlog EntryIntermediary Liability in India: Chilling Effects on Free Expression on the Internet
https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/chilling-effects-on-free-expression-on-internet
<b>The Centre for Internet & Society in partnership with Google India conducted the Google Policy Fellowship 2011. This was offered for the first time in Asia Pacific as well as in India. Rishabh Dara was selected as a Fellow and researched upon issues relating to freedom of expression. The results of the paper demonstrate that the ‘Information Technology (Intermediaries Guidelines) Rules 2011’ notified by the Government of India on April 11, 2011 have a chilling effect on free expression.</b>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Intermediaries are widely recognised as essential cogs in the wheel of exercising the right to freedom of expression on the Internet. Most major jurisdictions around the world have introduced legislations for limiting intermediary liability in order to ensure that this wheel does not stop spinning. With the 2008 amendment of the Information Technology Act 2000, India joined the bandwagon and established a ‘notice and takedown’ regime for limiting intermediary liability.<br /><br />On the 11th of April 2011, the Government of India notified the ‘Information Technology (Intermediaries Guidelines) Rules 2011’ that prescribe, amongst other things, guidelines for administration of takedowns by intermediaries. The Rules have been criticised extensively by both the national and the international media. The media has projected that the Rules, contrary to the objective of promoting free expression, seem to encourage privately administered injunctions to censor and chill free expression. On the other hand, the Government has responded through press releases and assured that the Rules in their current form do not violate the principle of freedom of expression or allow the government to regulate content.<br /><br />This study has been conducted with the objective of determining whether the criteria, procedure and safeguards for administration of the takedowns as prescribed by the Rules lead to a chilling effect on online free expression. In the course of the study, takedown notices were sent to a sample comprising of 7 prominent intermediaries and their response to the notices was documented. Different policy factors were permuted in the takedown notices in order to understand at what points in the process of takedown, free expression is being chilled.<br /><br />The results of the paper clearly demonstrate that the Rules indeed have a chilling effect on free expression. Specifically, the Rules create uncertainty in the criteria and procedure for administering the takedown thereby inducing the intermediaries to err on the side of caution and over-comply with takedown notices in order to limit their liability; and as a result suppress legitimate expressions. Additionally, the Rules do not establish sufficient safeguards to prevent misuse and abuse of the takedown process to suppress legitimate expressions.<br /><br />Of the 7 intermediaries to which takedown notices were sent, 6 intermediaries over-complied with the notices, despite the apparent flaws in them. From the responses to the takedown notices, it can be reasonably presumed that not all intermediaries have sufficient legal competence or resources to deliberate on the legality of an expression. Even if such intermediary has sufficient legal competence, it has a tendency to prioritize the allocation of its legal resources according to the commercial importance of impugned expressions. Further, if such subjective determination is required to be done in a limited timeframe and in the absence of adequate facts and circumstances, the intermediary mechanically (without application of mind or proper judgement) complies with the takedown notice.<br /><br />The results also demonstrate that the Rules are procedurally flawed as they ignore all elements of natural justice. The third party provider of information whose expression is censored is not informed about the takedown, let alone given an opportunity to be heard before or after the takedown. There is also no recourse to have the removed information put-back or restored. The intermediary is under no obligation to provide a reasoned decision for rejecting or accepting a takedown notice.</p>
<p>The Rules in their current form clearly tilt the takedown mechanism in favour of the complainant and adversely against the creator of expression.</p>
<table class="plain">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>The research highlights the need to:<br />
<ul>
<li> increase the safeguards against misuse of the privately administered takedown regime</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>reduce the uncertainty in the criteria for administering the takedown</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li> reduce the uncertainty in the procedure for administering the takedown</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li> include various elements of natural justice in the procedure for administering the takedown</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>replace the requirement for subjective legal determination by intermediaries with an objective test</li>
</ul>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p><a href="https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/intermediary-liability-in-india.pdf" class="internal-link" title="Intermediary Liability in India">Click</a> to download the report [PDF, 406 Kb]</p>
<hr />
<h3>Appendix 2</h3>
<ul>
<li><a href="https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/intermediary-liability-and-foe-executive-summary.pdf" class="internal-link">Intermediary Liability and Freedom of Expression — Executive Summary</a> (PDF, 263 Kb)</li>
<li><a href="https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/counter-proposal-by-cis-draft-it-intermediary-due-diligence-and-information-removal-rules-2012.odt" class="internal-link">Counter-proposal by the Centre for Internet and Society: Draft Information Technology (Intermediary Due Diligence and Information Removal) Rules, 2012</a> (Open Office Document, 231 Kb)</li>
<li><a href="https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/counter-proposal-by-cis-draft-it-intermediary-due-diligence-and-information-removal-rules-2012.pdf" class="internal-link">Counter-proposal by the Centre for Internet and Society: Draft Information Technology (Intermediary Due Diligence and Information Removal) Rules, 2012</a> (PDF, 422 Kb)</li>
</ul>
<hr />
<p>The above documents have been sent to:</p>
<ol>
<li>Shri Kapil Sibal, Minister of Human Resource Development and Minister of Communications and Information Technology</li>
<li>Shri Milind Murli Deora, Minister of State of Communications and Information Technology</li>
<li>Shri Sachin Pilot, Minister of State, Ministry of Communications and Information Technology</li>
<li>Dr. Anita Bhatnagar, Joint Secretary, Department of Electronics & Information Technology, Ministry of Communications & Information Technology</li>
<li>Dr. Ajay Kumar, Joint Secretary, Department of Electronics & Information Technology, Ministry of Communications & Information Technology</li>
<li>Dr. Gulshan Rai, Scientist G & Group Coordinator, Director General, ICERT, Controller Of Certifying, Authorities and Head of Division, Cyber Appellate Tribunal </li>
</ol>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/chilling-effects-on-free-expression-on-internet'>https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/chilling-effects-on-free-expression-on-internet</a>
</p>
No publisherRishabh DaraFreedom of Speech and ExpressionPublic AccountabilityInternet GovernanceResearchFeaturedIntermediary LiabilityCensorship2012-12-14T10:22:24ZBlog EntryThe All India Privacy Symposium: Conference Report
https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/all-india-privacy-delhi-report
<b>Privacy India, the Centre for Internet and Society and Society in Action Group, with support from the International Development Research Centre, Privacy International and Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative had organised the All India Privacy Symposium at the India International Centre in New Delhi, on February 4, 2012. Natasha Vaz reports about the event.</b>
<p>The symposium was organized around five thematic panel discussions:<br />
Panel 1: Privacy and Transparency<br />
Panel 2: Privacy and E-Governance Initiatives<br />
Panel 3: Privacy and National Security<br />
Panel 4: Privacy and Banking<br />
Panel 5: Privacy and Health</p>
<h2>Introduction</h2>
<p>Elonnai Hickok (Policy Advocate, Privacy India) introduced the
objectives of Privacy India. The primary objectives were to raise
national awareness about privacy, do an in-depth study of privacy in
India and provide feedback on the proposed ‘Right to Privacy’ Bill.
Privacy India has reviewed case laws, legislations, including the
upcoming policy and conducted state-level privacy workshops and
consultations across India in Kolkata, Bangalore, Ahmedabad, Guwahati,
Chennai, and Mumbai. India like the rest of the world is answering some
fundamental questions about the powers of the government and citizen’s
rights and complications that arise from emerging technologies. Through
our research we have come to understand that privacy varies across
cultures and contexts, and there is no one concept of privacy but
instead several distinct core notions that serve as complex duties,
claims and obligations. </p>
<h2>Privacy and Transparency</h2>
<p>Panelists: Ponnurangam K, (Assistant Professor, IIIT New Delhi), ),
Chitra Ahanthem (Journalist, Imphal), Nikhil Dey (Social & Political
Activist), Deepak Maheshwari (Director, Corporate Affairs, Microsoft),
Gus Hosein (Executive Director, Privacy International, UK), and Prashant
Bhushan, (Senior Advocate, Supreme Court of India).<br />
Moderator: Sunil Abraham (Executive Director, Centre for Internet and Society, Bangalore) <br />
Poster: Srishti Goyal (Law Student, NUJS)</p>
<p>Srishti Goyal provided the general contours, privacy protections,
limits to privacy and loopholes of policy relating to transparency and
privacy, specifically analyzing the Right to Information Act, Public
Interest Disclosures Act, and the Official Secrets Act.</p>
<p>Nikhil Dey commented on the interaction between the right to privacy
and the right to information (RTI). He referred to Gopal Gandhi, the
former Governor of West Bengal, “we must ensure that tools like the UID
must help the citizen watch every move of government; not allow the
government watch every move of the citizen.” Currently, the RTI and the
UID stand on contrary sides of the information debate. A privacy law
could allow for a backdoor to curb RTI. So, utmost care has to be taken
while drafting legislation with respect to right to privacy.</p>
<table class="plain">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td align="center"><img src="https://cis-india.org/home-images/1.JPG/image_preview" alt="p1" class="image-inline image-inline" title="p1" /></td>
<td>Data and information has leaked furiously in India and it has leaked
to the powerful. A person who is in a position of power can access
private information irrespective of any laws in place to safeguard
privacy. It is necessary to look at the power dynamics, which exists in
the society before formulating legislation on right to privacy.
According to Nikhil Dey, there should be different standards of privacy
with respect to public servants. A citizen should be entitled to
information related to funds, functions and functionaries. The main
problem arises while defining the private space of a public servant or
functionaries.<br /><br />The RTI Act has failed to address the legal protection for the right
to privacy. Perhaps, rules regarding privacy can be added to the Act. It
can be defined by answering the questions: (i) what is ‘personal
information’? (ii) what is it’s relation to public activity or public
interest? (iii) what is the unwarranted invasion of the privacy of an
individual? and (iv) what is the larger public good? Expanding on these
four points can provide greater legal protection for the right to
privacy. <br /></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p>Gus Hosein described the intersection and interaction of the right to
information and the right to privacy. He referred to a petition filed by
Privacy International requesting information on the expenses of members
of parliament. Privacy and transparency of the government are
compatible in the public interest. Gross abuse of the public funds by
MPs was revealed by this particular petition such as pornography or
cleaning of moats of MPs homes. Privacy advocates are supporters of RTI,
however, it cannot be denied that there is no tension between
transparency and privacy. In order chalk out the differences, there is a
need of a legal framework. According to Gus Hosein, in many countries
the government office that deals with right to information also deals
with cases related to right to privacy.</p>
<p>Mumbai and New Delhi police have started using social media very
aggressively, encouraging citizens to take photographs of traffic
violations and upload them to Facebook or Twitter. In reference to this,
Ponnurangam described the perceptions of privacy and if it agreed or
conflicted with his research findings. Ponnurangam has empirically
explored the awareness and perspective of privacy in India with respect
to other countries. He conducted a privacy survey in Hyderabad, Chennai
and Mumbai. People are very comfortable in posting pictures of others
committing a traffic violation or running a red light. Ironically, many
people have posted pictures of police officers committing a traffic
violation such as not wearing a helmet or running a red light.<br />
<br />
Chitra Ahanthem described the barriers and challenges of using RTI in
Manipur. There are more than 40 armed militia groups, which are banned
by the central and state government. The central government provides
economic packages for the development of the north-east region. However,
the state government officials and armed groups pocket the economic
packages. These armed groups have imposed a ban on RTI. Furthermore,
Manipur is a very small community. If people try and access information
through RTI they risk getting threatened by the Panchayat members and
being ostracized from the community or their clan. <br />
<br />
People are apprehensive about filing RTI because they believe that these
procedures are costly and the police and government may also get
involved. Officials use the privacy plea to avoid giving out
information. Since certain information are private and not in the public
domain, government officials, use the defense of privacy to hide
information. In addition, the police brutality prevalent in the area
deters people to even have interactions with government officials. <br />
<br />
According to Deepak Maheshwari, the open data initiative is a subset
within the larger context of open information. There is an onus on the
government to publish information, which is in the public domain. As a
result, one does not necessarily have to go through the entire process
of filing an RTI to get information, which is already there in the
public domain. Moreover, if it is freely available in public domain,
then one can anonymously access such information; this further
strengthens the privacy aspects of requesting information and
facilitating anonymity with respect to access to such information in the
public domain. It has also to be noted that it is not sufficient to put
data out in the public domain but it should also disclose the basis of
the data for example, if there is representation of a data on a pie
chart, the data which was used to arrive at the pie chart should also be
available in the public domain. The main intention of releasing data to
the public domain or having open data standards should not only be to
provide access to such data but also should be in such a fashion so as
to enable people to use the data for multiple purposes.</p>
<p>Prashant Bhushan noted that one of the grounds for withholding
information in the RTI Act is privacy. An RTI officer can disclose
personal information if he feels that larger public interest warrants
the disclosure, even if it is personal information, which has no
relationship to public activity or interest. This raises the important
question, “what constitutes personal information?” He referred to the
Radia Tapes controversy. Ratan Tata has filed a petition in the Supreme
Court on the grounds that the Nira Radia tapes contained personal
information and that the release of these tapes into the public domain
violated his privacy. The Centre for Public Interest Litigation has
filed a counter petition on the grounds that the nature of the
conversations was not personal but in relation to public activity. They
were between a lobbyist and bureaucrats, journalists and ministers.
Prashant Bhushan stressed the importance of releasing these tapes into
the public domain to show glimpses of all kinds of fixing, deal-making
and show how the whole ruling establishment functions. It is absurd for
Ratan Tata to claim that this is an invasion of privacy. Lastly, he felt
when drafting a privacy law, clearly defining and distinguishing
personal information and public is extremely important.</p>
<p>One of the interesting comments made during the panel was on the
assumption that data is transparent. Transparency can be staged;
questions have to be asked around whether the word is itself
transparent.</p>
<h2>Privacy and E-Governance Initiatives</h2>
<p>Panelists: Anant Maringanti, (Independent Social Researcher), Usha
Ramanathan, (Advocate & Social Activist), Gus Hosein, (Executive
Director, Privacy International, UK), Apar Gupta, (Advocate, Supreme
Court of India), and Elida Kristine Undrum Jacobsen (Doctoral
Researcher, The Peace Research Institute Oslo).<br />
Moderator: Sudhir Krishnaswamy (Centre for Law and Policy Research)<br />
Poster: Adrija Das (Law Student, NUJS)</p>
<p>Adrija Das discussed the legal provision relating to identity
projects and e-governance initiatives in India. The objective of any
e-governance project is to increase efficiency and accessibility of
public services. However, a major problem that arises is the linkage of
the data results in the creation of a central database, accessible by
every department of the government. Furthermore, implementing data
protection and security standards are very expensive.</p>
<p>Sudhir Krishnaswamy highlighted the default assumptions surrounding
e-governance initiatives: e-governance initiatives solve governance
problems, increase efficiency, increase transparency and increase
accountability. It is important to analyze the problems that arise from
e-governance initiatives, such as privacy. </p>
<table class="plain">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>Usha Ramanathan described the increased number and vastness of
e-governance initiatives such as UID, NPR, IT Rules and NATGRID. There
are also many burdens on privacy that emanate from the introduction and
existence of electronic data management systems. Electronic data
management systems have allowed state to collect, store and use personal
information of individual. Currently, the DNA Profiling Bill is pending
before the Parliament. It is important to question the purpose and need
for the government to collect such personal information. It is also to
be noted that, there are certain laws such as Collection of Statistics
Act, 2008 that penalize individuals if they do not comply with the
information requests of the government.</td>
<td><img src="https://cis-india.org/home-images/Usha.JPG/image_preview" title="Usha" height="124" width="148" alt="Usha" class="image-inline image-inline" /></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p>Anant Maringanti discussed the limitations of data sharing that once
existed. Currently, data can move across space in a very short time. He
analyzed the state and market rationalities involved in e-governance
initiatives, which raise the question “who can access data and at what
price?”. Data may seem to be innocent or neutral, but data in the hands
of wrong people becomes very crucial due to abuse and misuse. For
example, Andhra Pradesh was praised as the model state for UID
implementation. However, during the process of collecting data for UID a
company bought personal information and sold the data to third parties.<br />
<br />
Apar Gupta discussed the dilemmas of e-governance. Generally information
in the form of an electronic record is presumed to be authentic. The
data which government collects is most often inaccurate and wrong. So
the digital identity of a person can be totally different from the real
identity of that particular person. The process for correcting such
information is also very inconvenient and sometimes impossible. <br />
Under the evidence law any electronic evidence is presumed to be
authentic and admissible as evidence. The Bombay High Court decided a
case involving the authenticity of a telephone bill generated by a
machine. The judgment said that since it is being generated by a
machine, through and automated process, there is no need to challenge
the authenticity of the document, it is presumed to true and authentic.
The main danger in such case is that one does away with the process of
law and attaches certain sanctity to the electronic record and evidence.
<br />
<br />
It should be also observed that how government maintains secrecy as to
the ways in which it collects data. For example, the Election Commission
has refused to disclose the functioning and design of electronic voting
machines. The reason given for such secrecy is that if such information
is put in the public domain then the electronic voting machines will be
vulnerable and can be tampered with. But we, who use the voting
machines, will never find out its vulnerabilities.</p>
<table class="plain">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>According to Gus Hosein, politicians generally have this wrong notion
that technology can solve complex administrative problems. Furthermore,
the industry is complicit; they indulge in anti-competitive market
practice to sell these technologies as a solution to problems. However,
such technology does not solve any problems rather it gives rise to
problems.<br /><br />Huge amount of government funds is associated with collection of
personal data but such data is rendered useless or rather misused,
because the government does not have clue as to how to use the data for
development and security purposes. The UK National Health Records
project estimated to cost around twelve to twenty billion pounds.
However, a survey carried out by a professor in University College
London showed that the hospital and other health institutions do not use
the information collected by the National Health Records. Similarly,
the UK Identity Card scheme was estimated to cost 1.3 billion pounds and
finally it was estimated to cost five billion pounds. The identity
cards are rendered obsolete, the sole department interested in the
identity card was the Home Office Department, no other department
intended on using it.<br /></td>
<td><img src="https://cis-india.org/home-images/Gus.JPG/image_preview" alt="Gus " class="image-inline image-inline" title="Gus " /></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p>Technology should be built in such a manner that it empowers the
individual. Technology should allow the individual to control his
identity and as well as access all kinds of information available to the
government and private bodies on that individual. <br />
<br />
According to Elida Kristine Undrum Jacobsen, technology is regarded in
this linear manner. It is increasingly being naturalized and as an
all-encompassing solution. The use of biometric systems in the UID
raises three areas of concern: power, value and social relationships. </p>
<table class="plain">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td><img src="https://cis-india.org/home-images/Elida.JPG/image_preview" alt="Elida" class="image-inline image-inline" title="Elida" /></td>
<td>With regards to power, there is a difference between providing
documentation and information for identification. However, problems
arise when the mode of identification becomes one’s body. It also leads
to absolute reliance on technology, if the machine says that this is an
individual’s identity then it is considered to be the absolute truth and
it does not matter even if the individual is someone else. It becomes
furthermore problematic with biometric system because it is generally
used for forensic purposes. <br /><br />The other component of UID or any national identification scheme is
the question of consent and its relationship to privacy. In the case of
UID project, people are totally unaware about how their information will
be used and what purposes can it be used or misused for. Therefore,
there is no informed consent when it comes to collection of biometric
data under the UID project. <br />
<br /></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p>On the issue of social value it is to be noted that the value of
efficiency becomes the most important value, which is valued. Many of
the UIDAI documents state that the UID will provide a transactional
identity. However, at the same time it takes away societal layers, which
is inherently part of one’s identity. In addition, it makes it possible
for the identity of a person to become a commodity to be sold. This
also means that the personal information has economic value and players
in the market such as insurance companies, banks can buy and sell the
information.<br />
<br />
When there is identification projects using biometrics it gives the
State a lot of power; the power to determine and dictate one’s identity
irrespective of the difference in real identity. Moreover, when such
identifications projects are carried out at a national level it also
gives rise to problem related to exclusion and inclusion of people or
various purposes. The classification of the society based on various
factors becomes easy and there is a huge risk involved with such
classification. </p>
<p>The issues, which came out from the Q&A session, were:</p>
<ul><li>The interplay between fairness and lawfulness in the context of
privacy and data collection. There has to be a question asked as to why
certain information is required by the State and how is it lawful. </li><li>In the neo-liberal era corporations are generally considered to be
private. This has to be questioned and furthermore the difference
between what is private and what is public. There are also concerns
about corporations increasingly collaborating with the State. Can it be
still considered as private?</li></ul>
<h2>Privacy and National Security</h2>
<p>Panelists: PK Hormis Tharakan (Former Chief of Research and Analysis
Wing, Government of India), Saikat Datta (Journalist), Menaka Guruswamy,
(Advocate, Supreme Court, New Delhi), Prasanth Sugathan, (Legal
Counsel, Software Freedom Law Center), and Oxblood Ruffin, (Cult of the
Dead Cow Security and Publishing Collective).<br />
Moderator: Danish Sheikh (Alternative Law Forum)<br />
Poster: Suchitra Menon (Law Student, NUJS) </p>
<p>Suchitra Menon discussed the legal provisions for national security
in relation to privacy. Specifically, she described the guidelines and
procedural safeguards with respect to phone tapping and interception of
communication decisional jurisprudence.</p>
<p>In the year 2000, the Information Technology Act (IT Act), 2000 was
enacted, this Act had under section 69 allowed the State to monitor and
intercept information through intermediaries. Prasanth Sugathan
described how the government has been trying to bypass the procedural
safeguard laid down by the Supreme Court in the PUCL case by using
Section 28 of the IT Act, 2000. The provision deals with certifying
authority for digital signatures. The certifying authority under the Act
also has the authority to investigate offences under the Act. The
provision mainly deals with digital signature but it is used by the
government to intercept communication without implementing the
procedural safeguards laid down for such interception. Furthermore, the
IT Rules which was notified by the government in April, 2007 allows the
government to intercept any communication with the help of the
intermediaries. The 2008 amendment to the IT Act was an after effect of
the 26/11 attacks in Mumbai. The legislation has become draconian since
then and privacy has been sacrificed to meet the ends of national
security.</p>
<p>Oxblood Ruffin read out his speech and the same is reproduced below.</p>
<p>“The online citizenry of any country is part of its national security
infrastructure. And the extent to which individual privacy rights are
protected will determine whether democracy continues to succeed, or
inches towards tyranny. The challenge then is to balance the legitimate
needs of the state to secure its sovereignty with protecting its most
valuable asset: The citizen.<br />
<br />
It has become trite to say that 9/11 changed everything. Yet it is as
true for the West as it is for the global South. 9/11 kick started the
downward spiral of individual privacy rights across the entire internet.
It also ushered in a false dichotomy of choice, that in choosing
between security and privacy, it was privacy that had adapted to the new
realities, or so we’ve been told.<br />
<br />
Let’s examine some of the fallacies of this argument.<br />
<br />
The false equation which many argue is that we must give up privacy to
ensure security. But no one argues the opposite. We needn’t balance the
costs of surveillance over privacy, because rarely banning a security
measure protects privacy. Rather, protecting privacy typically means
that government surveillance must be subjected to judicial oversight and
justification of the need to surveillance. In most cases privacy
protection will not diminish the state’s effectiveness to secure itself.<br />
<br />
The deference argument is that security advocates insist that the courts
should defer to elected officials when evaluating security measures.
But when the judiciary weighs privacy against surveillance, privacy
almost always loses. Unless the security measures are explored for
efficacy they will win every time, especially when the word terrorism is
invoked. The courts must take on a more active role to balance the
interests of the state and its citizens.<br />
<br />
For the war time argument security proponents argue that the war on
terror requires greater security and less privacy. But this argument is
backwards. During times of crisis the temptation is to make unnecessary
sacrifices in the name of security. In the United States, for example,
we saw that Japanese-American internment and the McCarthy-era witch-hunt
for communists was in vain. The greatest challenge for safeguarding
privacy comes during times when we are least inclined to protect it. We
must be willing to be coldly rational and not emotional during such
times.<br />
<br />
We are often told that if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to
fear. This is the most pervasive argument the average person hears. But
isn’t privacy a little like being naked? We might not be ashamed of our
bodies but we don’t walk around naked. Being online isn’t so different.
Our virtual selves should be as covered as our real selves. It’s a form
of personal sovereignty. Being seen should require our consent, just as
in the real world. The state has no business taking up the role of
Peeping Tom.<br />
<br />
I firmly believe that the state has a right and a duty to secure itself.
And I equally believe that its citizens are entitled to those same
rights. Citizens are part of the national security infrastructure. They
conduct business; they share information; they are the benefactors of
democratic values. Privacy rights are what, amongst others, separate us
from the rule of tyrants. To protect them is to protect and preserve
democracy. It is a fight worth dying for, as so many have done before
us.</p>
<p>PK Hormis Tharakan discussed the importance of interception
communication in intelligence gathering. In the western liberal
democracies, restrictions of privacy were introduced for the
anti-terrorism campaigns and these measures are far restrictive than
what the Indian legislations contemplate. Preventive intelligence is a
major component in maintenance of national security and this
intelligence is generated and can be procured through interception. <br />
<br />
We do need laws to make sure that the power of interception is not
excessive or out of proportion. But the graver issue is that the
equipment used for interception of communication is freely available in
the market at a cheap price. This allows private citizens also to snoop
into others conversation. So, interception by civilians should be the
main concern.<br />
<br />
Menaka Guruswamy discussed the lack of regulation of Indian intelligence
agencies that creates burdens on privacy. When there is a conflict
between individual privacy and national security, the court will always
rule in favour of the national security. Public interest always takes
precedence over individual interest. <br />
<br />
When there is a claim right to privacy vis-à-vis national security,
generally these claims are characterized by dissent, chilling effects on
freedom of expression and government accountability. In India, privacy
is fragile and relatively a less justifiable right. Another challenge to
privacy is that, when communication is intercepted, which part of the
conversation can be considered to be private and which part cannot be
considered so.<br />
<br />
Saikat Datta described his experience of being under illegal
surveillance by an unauthorized intelligence agency. When a person is
under surveillance, he or she is already considered to be suspect. If
the State commits any mistake as to surveillance, carrying surveillance,
who is not at all a person of interest in such case upon discovery,
there is no penalty for such discrepancy.<br />
He warned of the dangers of excessive wiretapping, a practice that
currently generates such a “mountain” of information that anything with
real intelligence value tends to be ignored until it is too late, as
happened with the Mumbai bombings in 2008. It is clear that the Indian
government’s surveillance and interception programmes far exceed what is
necessary for legitimate law enforcement.<br />
<br />
The issues, which came during the Q&A session was:</p>
<ul><li>In case of national security vis-à-vis privacy in heavily
militarized zone, legislations such as Armed Forces Special Powers Act
actually give authority to the army to search and seizure on mere
suspicion? This amounts gross violation of privacy.</li></ul>
<h2>Privacy and Banking</h2>
<p>Panelists: M R Umarji, (Chief Legal Advisor, Indian Banks Associations), N A Vijayashankar, (Cyber Law Expert), Malavika Jayaram, (Advocate, Bangalore)<br />Moderator: Prashant Iyengar (Associate Professor, Jindal Law University)<br />Poster: Malavika Chandu (Law Student, NUJS)</p>
<p>Prashant Iyengar highlighted how privacy has been a central feature in banking and finance. Even before the notion of privacy came into existence, banks had developed an evolved notion of secrecy and confidentiality, which was fairly robust. Every legislation dealing with banking and finance generally have a clause related to privacy and confidentiality. It might seem that it would be easy to implement privacy in banking and finance given the long relationship between banking and secrecy and confidentiality. However, this is not the case in the contemporary times. Specifically, with the growth in issues related to national security, transparency and technology, the highly regarded notion of privacy seems to be slowly depleting.</p>
<p>Malavika Chandu described the data protection standards that govern the banking industry. As part of the know-you-customer guidelines, banks are required to provide the Reserve Bank with customer profiles and other identification information. Lastly, she described case laws in relation to privacy with respect to financial records.</p>
<table class="plain">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>N A Vijayashankar noted that the confidentiality and secrecy practices
in the banking sector emanate from the banker-customer relationship. In
the present context, secrecy and privacy maintained by the banks should
be analyzed from the perspective of the right of the customer to
safeguard his or her information from any third party. Generally, banks
and other financial institutions protect personal information as a fraud
control measure and not as duty to protect the privacy of a customer.<br /><br />There has been a paradigm shift in banking practices from traditional
banking practices to more efficient but less secure banking practice.
Some of the terms and conditions of internet banking are illegal and do
not stand the test of law. In contemporary times, banking institutions
use confidentiality to cover up problems and data breach rather than
protecting the customer. But the banks are not ready to disclose data
breach as it apprehends that it will result in public losing faith in
the system. The Reserve Bank of India, has recently notified that
protection which is provided to the customers in banking services should
also be extended to e-banking services. However, the banks have not
properly implemented this. <br /></td>
<td><img src="https://cis-india.org/home-images/Naavi.JPG/image_preview" alt="NA Vijayashankar" class="image-inline image-inline" title="NA Vijayashankar" /></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p>M R Umarji highlighted fourteen laws related to banking which carries confidentiality clauses. In India, public sector banks dominate the market. These banks are created under a statute and such statute governs them. Therefore, they are duty bound to maintain secrecy and confidentiality. Private banks and cooperative banks are not bound by any statute. They do not have any obligations to maintain secrecy, but they do strictly observe confidentiality as a form of banking practice. <br /><br />Banks are not allowed to reveal any personal information of an individual unless it is sought by some authority that has a legitimate right to claim such information. There has been a constant erosion of confidentiality due to various laws which empowers authorities to seek confidential information from the banks. Recently, in the light of the growing national security concerns, banks also have an obligation to report suspicious transactions. These have caused heavy burdens on right to privacy of an individual.<br /><br />Under the Right to Information Act, 2005 public sector banks are considered to be public authorities. By the virtue of the Statute, any person can access information from banks. For example, in a recent case an information officer directed Reserve Bank of India, to disclose Inspection Reports. These reports generally contain information regarding doubtful accounts, non-performing account, etc. There is a need that banks should be exempted from the Right to Information Act, 2005. Since they are not dealing with public funds there is no need to apply transparency law to the banks. <br /><br />Malavika Jayaram described the major conflicts and tensions with respect to privacy vis-à-vis banking and financial systems and financial data. Other privacy and transparency issues include: the publication of online tax information and income data. <br /><br />Surveillance is built in the design of banking system, so it is capable of tracking personal information and activity. There is a need to implement more privacy friendly and privacy by design systems in the banking sector. Customers are generally ignorant about privacy policies and this influences informed consent and furthermore marketing institution may influence customers to behave in a particular manner. In this context privacy by design becomes very important.<br /><br />Data minimization principles should be applied; since the more data collected the more there is a risk of data breach and misuse. In case of data retention it is necessary that person giving such data should know how much proportion of the data is being retained and for how long it is stored and also what is the scope of the data and for what purpose will it be used. <br /><br />Personal information and data, which was previously collected by the government, are gradually being outsourced to private bodies. On one hand it is a good thing that private sector get their technology and security measures right as compared to the government agencies but it comes with the risk that it can be sold out by private bodies as commodities in the market. Private bodies that are harvesting the data can also be forced by the government to disclose it under a particular law or statute without taking into consideration the consent of the individual whose personal information is sought for. <br /><br />There is multiplicity of documentation for identification, which makes transactions less efficient. This has attracted customers to more convenient systems such as one-access point systems, but people tend to forget the issues related to privacy, in using such a system. What is portrayed as efficient for the consumer is a tool for social control and who has access and authority to use such information. <br /><br />Often the reason given for collecting information is that it will help the service provider to combat fraud. However, studies have shown people more often fake situation rather than identity. The other concerns are that of sharing of information and lack of choice with respect to such sharing. There should be check as to sharing of personal information as the data belongs to the individual and not the bank or any other institution which requires furnishing personal information in lieu of services. This gives rise to a binary choice to the user; either the individual has to provide information to avail the service or else one cannot avail the services.</p>
<p>There is supposed to be market for privacy. The notion of personal information is subjective and varies from person to person. For example, one might be comfortable to share certain information. However, others might not be.<br /><br />The issues that came out of the Q&A sessions are:</p>
<ul><li>The default settings are generally put at the low protection settings. Unless the user is aware of the privacy protection setting, he or she is prone to breach of privacy. Should the default privacy setting be set to maximum security and option can be given to the user to change it according to his or her preference?</li><li>Is there any system in the banks, which allows the customers of bank to know about which all third parties the bank has shared his or her personal information with?</li></ul>
<h2>Health Privacy</h2>
<p>Panelists: K. K. Abraham, (President, Indian Network for People with HIV), Dr. B. S. Bedi, (Advisor, CDAC & Media Lab Asia), and Raman Chawla, (Senior Advocacy Officer, Lawyers Collective).<br />Moderator: Ashok Row Kavi (Journalist and LGBT Activist) <br />Poster: Danish Sheikh (Researcher, Alternative Law Forum)</p>
<p>Danish Sheikh outlined the possible health privacy violations. These included the disclosure of personal health information to third parties without consent, inadequate notification to a patient of a data breach, the purpose of collecting data is not specified and improper security standards, storage and disposal. The disclosure of personal health information has the potential to be embarrassing, stigmatizing or discriminatory. <br /><br />Subsequently, Danish Sheikh examined the status of sexual minorities’ vis-à-vis the privacy framework. Culling out some real life examples based on various studies, media reports and judgments from the Supreme Court and the High Courts of Delhi and Allahabad, he also described privacy violations committed by both individuals as well as state authorities. <br /><br />Ashok Row Kavi recounted how privacy was very contextual when debating section 377 in the LGBT community. The paradigm upon which they were going to fight the anti-sodomy law was that it was consenting sex between two adults in private space. However, this paradigm was not well received by women, as women did not see private space as safe space, due to domestic violence. Perceptions of privacy are very subjective and it differs from person to person.<br /><br />Raman Chawla recounted the history of the Draft HIV/AIDS Bill. In 2002, the need for law related to HIV/AIDS was realized in order to protect right to consent, right against discrimination and right to confidentiality of HIV patients. The bill was finalized in the year 2006. Alarmingly, it is yet to be tabled before the Parliament. <br /><br />The privacy provisions in the HIV bill clearly state that no person can be tested, treated or researched for HIV without the consent of the patient. It also casts that in a fiduciary relationship the health care provider must maintain confidentiality, however if the patient provides written consent then their status may be disclosed. The HIV condition of the patient can also revealed by the doctor if there is a court order demanding such disclosure. The doctor may disclose the status of the patient to his or her partner but he has to follow a particular protocol. The doctor should have sufficient belief that his or her partner is at risk of contracting HIV. The person who is infected will be asked for his/her views and counseled before his/her partner is informed. However, there are doubts as to the implementation and enforcement of this protocol.</p>
<p>Danish Sheikh outlined the possible health privacy violations. These included the disclosure of personal health information to third parties without consent, inadequate notification to a patient of a data breach, the purpose of collecting data is not specified and improper security standards, storage and disposal. The disclosure of personal health information has the potential to be embarrassing, stigmatizing or discriminatory. <br /><br />Subsequently, Danish Sheikh examined the status of sexual minorities’ vis-à-vis the privacy framework. Culling out some real life examples based on various studies, media reports and judgments from the Supreme Court and the High Courts of Delhi and Allahabad, he also described privacy violations committed by both individuals as well as state authorities. <br /><br />Ashok Row Kavi recounted how privacy was very contextual when debating section 377 in the LGBT community. The paradigm upon which they were going to fight the anti-sodomy law was that it was consenting sex between two adults in private space. However, this paradigm was not well received by women, as women did not see private space as safe space, due to domestic violence. Perceptions of privacy are very subjective and it differs from person to person.<br /><br />Raman Chawla recounted the history of the Draft HIV/AIDS Bill. In 2002, the need for law related to HIV/AIDS was realized in order to protect right to consent, right against discrimination and right to confidentiality of HIV patients. The bill was finalized in the year 2006. Alarmingly, it is yet to be tabled before the Parliament. <br /><br />The privacy provisions in the HIV bill clearly state that no person can be tested, treated or researched for HIV without the consent of the patient. It also casts that in a fiduciary relationship the health care provider must maintain confidentiality, however if the patient provides written consent then their status may be disclosed. The HIV condition of the patient can also revealed by the doctor if there is a court order demanding such disclosure. The doctor may disclose the status of the patient to his or her partner but he has to follow a particular protocol. The doctor should have sufficient belief that his or her partner is at risk of contracting HIV. The person who is infected will be asked for his/her views and counseled before his/her partner is informed. However, there are doubts as to the implementation and enforcement of this protocol.</p>
<p align="center"><img src="https://cis-india.org/home-images/AP.JPG/image_preview" alt="AI" class="image-inline image-inline" title="AI" /></p>
<h2>Conclusion</h2>
<p>Natasha Vaz (Policy Advocate, Privacy India) brought the symposium to a close by thanking the partners, the panelists, the moderators and the participants for their sincere efforts in making the All India Privacy Symposium a grand success. In India, a public discussion regarding privacy has been long over due. The symposium provided a platform for dialogue and building greater awareness around privacy issues in health, banking, national security, transparency and e-governance. Using our research, expert opinions, personal experiences, questions and comments various facets of privacy were explored.</p>
<hr />
<h2>Press Coverage</h2>
<p>The event was featured in the media as well:</p>
<ol><li><a class="external-link" href="http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2012-02-02/news/31017368_1_privacy-law-privacy-international-cis">India needs an independent privacy law, says NGO Privacy India</a>, Economic Times, February 2, 2012</li><li><a class="external-link" href="http://www.tehelka.com/story_main51.asp?filename=Ws060212Privacy.asp">New Bill to decide on individual’s right to privacy</a>, Tehelka, February 6, 2012 </li><li><a class="external-link" href="http://www.dnaindia.com/analysis/column_lack-of-strong-privacy-law-in-healthcare-a-big-worry_1649366">Lack of strong privacy law in healthcare a big worry</a>, Daily News & Analysis, February 13, 2012</li><li><a class="external-link" href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/privacy-concerns-grow-in-india/2012/01/26/gIQAyM0UmQ_story.html">Privacy concerns grow in India</a>, Washington Post, February 3, 2012</li></ol>
<hr />
<ul><li><a href="https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/privacy-symposium-agenda.pdf" class="internal-link" title="All India Privacy Symposium - Profiles & Speakers">Click </a>to download the Agenda and Profile of Speakers (PDF, 1642 Kb)</li></ul>
<ul><li><a href="https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/all-privacy-symposium.pdf" class="internal-link" title="All India Privacy Symposium (File)">Download the PDF</a> (555 Kb)</li><li><a href="https://cis-india.org/all-india-privacy-symposium-webcast" class="external-link">Follow the webcast of the event</a><br /></li></ul>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/all-india-privacy-delhi-report'>https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/all-india-privacy-delhi-report</a>
</p>
No publishernatashaFeaturedInternet GovernancePrivacy2012-04-30T05:16:41ZBlog EntryFraming the Digital AlterNatives
https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/framing-the-digital-alternatives
<b>They effect social change through social media, place their communities on the global map, and share spiritual connections with the digital world - meet the everyday digital native. </b>
<p>The Everyday Digital Native video contest has got its pulse on what makes youths from diverse socio-cultural backgrounds connect with one another in the global community – it’s an affinity for digital technologies and Web 2.0-mediated platforms coupled with a drive to spearhead social change. The contest invited people from around the world to make a video that would answer the question, ‘Who is the Everyday Digital Native’? The final videos received more than <del>20,000</del> 3,000 votes from the public and our top five winners emerged from across three continents!</p>
<p><a href="https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/framing-digital-alternatives" class="internal-link" title="Framing the Digital Alternatives">The Digital AlterNatives Featurette </a>(PDF, 2847 KB) is a peek into the minds of digital natives as citizen activists. The 10 featured interviews of the Digital Natives video contest finalists don't fit the stereotype of the Globalized Digital Native: Young Geeks apathetic to 'Saving the Planet'. Rather, these are affirmative citizens, young, middle aged and senior, who consider digital technology as second nature for use in personal, professional or socio-political capacities.</p>
<p>The 'Digital Natives with a Cause?' is a collaborative research-inquiry between The Centre for Internet & Society, India and HIVOS Knowledge Programme, the Netherlands into the field of youth, change and technology in the context of the Global South. The three-year research project has resulted in the four-book collective, 'Digital AlterNatives with a Cause?' published in 2011. Read more about the project <a href="https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/blog/dnbook" class="external-link">here</a></p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/framing-the-digital-alternatives'>https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/framing-the-digital-alternatives</a>
</p>
No publisherNilofar AnsherFeaturedWeb PoliticsResearchers at WorkDigital Natives2015-05-08T12:28:03ZBlog EntryVote for the Everyday Digital Native Video Contest!
https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/vote-for-digital-natives
<b>The Centre for Internet & Society and Hivos are super excited to present the final videos in the Everyday Digital Native Video Contest. We invite readers to vote for the TOP 5 Videos. The finalists will each win EUR500! Voting closes March 31, 2012</b>
<h2>Who’s the Everyday Digital Native? This global video contest has the answer</h2>
<p><em>They effect social change through social media, place their
communities on the global map, and share a spiritual connection with the
digital world - Meet the Everyday Digital Native</em></p>
<p>The Everyday Digital Native video contest has got its pulse on what
makes youths from diverse socio-cultural backgrounds connect with one
another in the global community – it’s an affinity for digital
technologies and Web 2.0-mediated platforms coupled with a drive to
spearhead social change. The contest invited people from around the
world to make a video that would answer the question, ‘Who is the
Everyday Digital Native?’. Following a jury-based selection process, the
final videos are now online and open for public voting.</p>
<p>Run by the Bangalore-based Centre for Internet & Society (CIS)
with the support of Dutch NGO HIVOS, the contest will see the top five
videos with the most votes declared winners on April 1, 2012. The 12
finalists in the video, who come from different parts of the globe, are
each vying for the top prize of USD 500 and a chance to have their
shorts screened in a film screening and panel discussion hosted by CIS. <br /><br />Referring
to the theme of the contest, Dr Nishant Shah, Director of Research and
Co-founder of the Centre, says that the contest aims at highlighting the
alternative users of digital technologies. These are people who are
often not accounted for either in mainstream discourses of changemakers
or in academic biopics on digital natives. “The 12 video proposals show
that the everyday digital native does not wake up in the morning and
think, ‘hmmm today I will change the world’. And yet, in their everyday
lives, when they see the possibility of producing a change in their
immediate environments, they turn to the digital to find networks that
can start a change”, says Shah. <br /><br />Apart from the top five public
selections, the jury members will be instrumental in picking their two
favorites among the finalists. Talking about the range of ideas that
participants sent in jury member Leon Tan, a media-art historian,
cultural theorist and psychoanalyst based in Gothenburg, Sweden, says,
“The contest is an exciting project as it has the potential to portray
the lives of digital natives from different corners of the world. The
generosity of the contestants in creating video proposals is commendable
as is the range of ideas suggested. The ideas address both the
opportunities and risks of what we might call digital life.” <br /><br />Adds
Shashwati Talukdar, a filmmaker and jury member from India, “It was
really interesting to see how different all the proposals were. Some of
them were taking the notion of digital native as a personal one and some
were very clearly political and sought an intervention in the real
world. Dutch digital media artist and jury member Jeroen van Loon refers
to a proposal from the USA where the participant wanted to explore the
possibility of unplugging from his digital life. “It’s very interesting
how digital natives question their own world. The proposals are good
examples of how technology and culture constantly change each other. We
can learn a lot from the global digital natives.” </p>
<p><a href="https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/video-contest" class="external-link">Profiles of the finalists and their videos can be viewed here</a>.</p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/vote-for-digital-natives'>https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/vote-for-digital-natives</a>
</p>
No publisherpraskrishnaVideoFeaturedResearchers at WorkDigital Natives2015-05-08T12:32:00ZBlog EntryWeb Accessibility Policy Making: An International Perspective
https://cis-india.org/accessibility/web-accessibility-policy-making-an-international-perspective
<b>G3ict and CIS are pleased to announce the publication of a new, improved edition of the Web Accessibility Policy Making: An International Perspective. The report published in cooperation with the Hans Foundation provides an updated synopsis of the many policies that governments have implemented around the world to ensure that the Internet and websites are accessible to persons with disabilities. </b>
<p>The report contains a Foreword by Axel Leblois, Founder and Executive Director of G3ict, an introduction and studies from countries like Australia, Canada, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Japan, South Korea, New Zealand, Philippines, Portugal, Sweden, Thailand, United Kingdom, United States, and the European Union. The report contains contributions from Prashanth Ramadas, Asma Tajuddin, G Aravind, Katie Reisner, Sucharita Narasimhan, Bama Balakrishnan and Nirmita Narasimhan. Axel Leblois, Donal Rice, Immaculada Placienca Porrero, Kevin Carey, Licia Sbattella and Sunil Abraham are the expert reviewers.</p>
<h2>Foreword by Axel Leblois</h2>
<p>This third edition of our joint report with CIS “WEB ACCESSIBILITY POLICY MAKING: AN INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVE” provides an updated synopsis of the many policies that governments have implemented around the world to ensure that the Internet and web sites are accessible to persons with disabilities. With 153 countries parties to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities as of December 2011, an increasing number of governments are now in the midst of developing policies and programs to ensure that web sites and services under their jurisdictions are accessible.</p>
<p>Indeed, the Preamble of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities recognizes “the importance of accessibility to the physical, social, economic and cultural environment, to health and education and to information and communication, in enabling persons with disabilities to fully enjoy all human rights and fundamental freedoms”. Its article 9 stipulates that: “To enable persons with disabilities to live independently and participate fully in all aspects of life, States Parties shall take appropriate measures to ensure to persons with disabilities access, on an equal basis with others, to the physical environment, to transportation, to information and communications, including information and communications technologies and systems” (1). It further specifies that “State Parties shall also take appropriate measures to … Promote access for persons with disabilities to new information and communications technologies and systems, including the Internet” (2.g).</p>
<p>There is therefore no doubt that all State Parties have an obligation to act upon those commitments. However, as this report demonstrates it clearly, web accessibility policies and their levels of enforcement vary considerably among countries with some common denominators such as the compliance with the W3C – WAI guidelines on web accessibility.</p>
<p>G3ict and CIS hope that this new, improved edition, which will now be available in print as well as in electronic format, will help accelerate the development of web accessibility policies and programs around the world. We want to express our sincere appreciation to Nirmita Narasimhan, programme manager at CIS and editor of the G3ict Publications and Reports for her dedication to this report which would not have been made possible without her incredible work and motivation as Disability Advocate.</p>
<p><a href="https://cis-india.org/accessibility/web-accessibility.pdf" class="internal-link" title="Web Accessibility Policy Making">Download a PDF of the Web Accessibility Policy Making here</a> [335 KB]</p>
<p><a href="https://cis-india.org/accessibility/daisy-file" class="internal-link" title="Web Accessibility (Daisy) File">Download the Daisy File</a> [23412 KB]</p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='https://cis-india.org/accessibility/web-accessibility-policy-making-an-international-perspective'>https://cis-india.org/accessibility/web-accessibility-policy-making-an-international-perspective</a>
</p>
No publishernirmitaFeaturedAccessibilityAccess to Knowledge2012-09-25T05:33:25ZBlog EntryDigital Natives Video Contest
https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/video-contest/digital-natives-contest
<b>The Everyday Digital Native Video Contest has its top five winners through public voting.</b>
<p>
<object classid="clsid:d27cdb6e-ae6d-11cf-96b8-444553540000" codebase="http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=6,0,40,0" height="354" width="510">
<param name="src" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/fVa8zg2_wA8"><embed height="354" width="510" src="http://www.youtube.com/v/fVa8zg2_wA8" type="application/x-shockwave-flash"></embed>
</object></p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>A Day in the Life of a Digital Native: </strong>Story scripted, shot and edited by Leandra (Cole) Flor. The video is an extension of Cole's photo essay "Mirror Exercises" conceptualized for 'Digital AlterNatives with a Cause' Book 1 <em>To Be</em>. <a href="https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/blog/dnbook1/at_download/file">Download the book.</a></p>
<table class="listing">
<tbody>
<tr>
<th><img src="https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/video-contest/winners-pictures/MarieJudeBendiolaWinner.jpg" alt="null" title="" width="103" height="142" /></th>
<th><img src="https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/video-contest/winners-pictures/TJKMwinner.jpg" alt="null" title="" width="103" height="142" /></th>
<th><img src="https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/video-contest/winners-pictures/TJBurkswinner.jpg" alt="null" title="" width="103" height="142" /></th>
<th><img src="https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/video-contest/winners-pictures/JohnMusilaKiberawinner.jpg" alt="null" title="" width="103" height="142" /></th>
<th><img src="https://cis-india.org/home-images/mj.png/@@images/f52feb88-f69d-4482-b019-881fdf8af7c3.png" title="mj" height="138" width="102" alt="null" class="image-inline" /><br /></th>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Top 5 winners of the Digital Native video contest selected through public votes. From left to right: Marie Jude Bendiola, T.J. KM, Thomas Burks, John Musila and MJ.</p>
<p><strong> </strong></p>
<hr />
<p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>The Jury Prize for Two Best Videos goes to John Musila (Kenya) and Marie Jude Bendiola (Singapore)! Congratulations to all winners. The Top 5 winners win the grand prize of EUR 500 each!</strong></p>
<h3><strong>Our Top 10 contestants: Click on their profile to watch their videos<br /></strong></h3>
<table class="listing">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td align="center"><img src="https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/video-contest/winners-pictures/MarieJudeBendiolaWinner.jpg" alt="null" title="" width="103" height="142" /><br /></td>
<td style="text-align: justify;"><strong>Marie Jude Bendiola</strong><br />I come from a third world country where technology seemed to be hard to reach back in the 90s; especially by the not-so-privileged. As we progressed, technology has not only become ubiquitous (in malls, various institutions and technological hubs) but also, it has come to be used by the common man. My video will answer how technology bridges the gap between dreams and reality. It will be a fusion of documentary and re-enactment of real life events and dramas.<br /><a href="https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/video-contest/entries/connecting-souls-bridging-dreams" class="external-link">Read More</a><br /></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="center"><img src="https://cis-india.org/home-images/cijoaj2003.jpg/image_preview" title="Cijo" height="142" width="103" alt="Cijo" class="image-inline image-inline" /></td>
<td style="text-align: justify;"><strong>Cijo Abraham Mani</strong><br />The power of digital media will be presented to audience with the help of showing tweet-a-thon panel discussions, blood aid tweets getting spread, etc. <br /><a href="https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/video-contest/entries/digital-media-dance" class="external-link">Read More</a><br /></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="center"><img src="https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/video-contest/winners-pictures/TJKMwinner.jpg" title="" height="142" width="103" alt="null" class="image-inline" /><br /></td>
<td style="text-align: justify;"><strong>TJ K.M.</strong><br />My video explores the spiritual aspect of digital technology and how rather than getting in the way of our spiritual expression, it is actually bringing us face to face with it, if only we choose to look. The video will be a mixture of live action and stop motion animation/puppetry where digital devices take on a transcendent character similar to nature spirits in various cultures. I plan to investigate the tendency to exclude digital devices and technology from being categorized alongside nature as if it is somehow exempt from or superior to this category. Using symbolism and motifs from various cultures such as the Native American Hopi, Balinese Hinduism and Japanese Shintoism, my video will create a world where the technology we use daily is viewed not just as a means for socio-cultural exchange and communication but is available for the nurturing of our souls if we so choose.<br /><a href="https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/video-contest/entries/with-no-distinction" class="external-link">Read More</a><br /></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="center"><img src="https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/video-contest/winners-pictures/TJBurkswinner.jpg" title="" height="142" width="103" alt="null" class="image-inline" /><br /></td>
<td style="text-align: justify;"><strong>Thomas Burks<br /></strong>We have a small production company in Birmingham, Alabama. I was hired on a year ago to do film and commercials for them as they expand into advertising and video coverage of events. We only have about 3 employees including myself, working out of our homes. We recently acquired a space to open a studio and retail location downtown where we live. We use Facebook, blogs, and viral marketing all the time to get our name out there. Our account executive is constantly monitoring our Facebook for client orders and bookings. We are beginning to use twitter to provide information more fluidly to people. We believe this might be a year of growth for our small company, as we are becoming able to provide much higher quality content. We're fully digital; constantly updating our websites and blogs, and I believe we would be able to tell a great digital story. We submit numerous small films and skits; we cover awesome concerts, and rely so heavily on the digital world to show our content. That will be the gist of our video.<a href="https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/video-contest/entries/alternate-visions-accessing-leisure-through-interfaces" class="external-link"></a><br /><a href="https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/video-contest/digital-natives-video-contest/entries/digital-coverage-in-a-digital-world" class="external-link">Read More</a><br /></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="center"><img src="https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/video-contest/winners-pictures/JohnMusilaKiberawinner.jpg" title="" height="142" width="103" alt="null" class="image-inline" /><br /></td>
<td style="text-align: justify;"><strong>John Musila<br /></strong>Map Kibera Trust is an organization based in Kenya’s Kibera slums. Using digital gadgets and technology, they have transformed the community by placing it on the map as it was only seen as forest when viewed on a map. They also film stories around the community and share them with the world on their YouTube channel and other social networks like Facebook and Twitter. Through this they have been able to highlight and raise awareness about the challenges the community faces. Our video would show Kibera’s role in bringing about change.<a href="https://cis-india.org/author/kiberanewsnetwork" class="external-link"></a><br /><a href="https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/video-contest/entries/from-the-wild-into-the-digital-world" class="external-link">Read More</a><br /></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="center"><img src="https://cis-india.org/home-images/Andres.jpg/image_preview" title="Andres" height="142" width="103" alt="Andres" class="image-inline image-inline" /></td>
<td style="text-align: justify;"><strong>Andrés Felipe Arias Palma<br /></strong>I think many people are digital natives unknowingly. Being a digital native is a relationship with activism and society, not as they initially thought. It was a condition of being born in specific times and external factors. In the video, I will interview people about who and what is a digital native? How to use the Internet? What are the advantages and disadvantages for society where everything is run with the power of the Internet?<br /><a href="https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/video-contest/entries/who-is-a-digital-native" class="external-link">Read More</a><br /></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="center"><img src="https://cis-india.org/home-images/martingpotter.jpg/image_preview" title="Martin" height="142" width="103" alt="Martin" class="image-inline image-inline" /></td>
<td style="text-align: justify;"><strong>Martin Potter<br /></strong>Over a period of nearly four years, moving across small towns in Australia and South East Asia, I have seen the most extraordinary innovations at a local community level. My video will focus on these local stories with global impact. I am pursuing a PhD in participatory media and this will lend a uniquely academic perspective on the concept of collaboration, community life and innovation.<br /><a href="https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/video-contest/entries/big-stories-small-towns" class="external-link">Read More</a><br /></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="center"><img src="https://cis-india.org/home-images/rajasekaran.jpg/image_preview" title="Rajasekaran" height="142" width="103" alt="Rajasekaran" class="image-inline image-inline" /></td>
<td style="text-align: justify;"><strong>E. James Rajasekaran</strong><br />I live in the temple town of Madurai in the south Indian state of Tamil Nadu. I am a social worker and the plight of people living in slims is something that my NGO is closely associated with. My video will bring out the efforts of the people who live in the slums of Madurai.<br /><a href="https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/video-contest/entries/life-in-the-city-slums" class="external-link">Read More</a><br /></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="center"><img src="https://cis-india.org/home-images/anan.jpg/image_preview" title="Anand" height="142" width="103" alt="Anand" class="image-inline image-inline" /></td>
<td style="text-align: justify;"><strong>Anand Jha<br /></strong>Bangalore is home to a lot of technology start-ups. A lot of geeks, who find it limiting to work for corporations, are driving a very open source-oriented, frugally-built and extremely demanding culture. While their products are standing at the bleeding edge of technology, their personal lives too are constantly driven on the edge, every launch being a make or break day for them. The project would aim at capturing their stories, their frustration and motivation, looking at the possibilities of Indian software scene moving beyond the services and back-end office culture into a more risk prone but more passionate business of technology.<br /><a href="https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/video-contest/entries/deployed" class="external-link">Read More</a><br /></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="center"><img src="https://cis-india.org/home-images/mj.png/@@images/f52feb88-f69d-4482-b019-881fdf8af7c3.png" title="mj" height="138" width="102" alt="null" class="image-inline" /></td>
<td>
<dl>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>MJ</strong><br />As a digital native living in a developing country, I have carried out a series of both online and offline projects, which have always striven to benefit Zimbabweans in a number of ways since 2000. These projects have greatly increased my interactions with computers. I might say, I got married to a computer in 2000 when I bought my first PC; in a way, my relationship with my computer is intimate. Even though this computer I bought is an old 386 machine made obsolete by the faster Pentium III models, this did not change my love for the computer. My video will focus on a dream-like moment of my digital life.</p>
<p><a href="https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/video-contest/entries/i-am-a-ghetto-digital-native" class="internal-link">Read more</a></p>
</dl>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<h3>Jury Members</h3>
<table class="listing">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="text-align: justify;"><strong>Shashwati Talukdar</strong><br /> Shashwati Talukdar grew up in India where her engagement with theatre and sculpture led to filmmaking, and a Masters degree from the AJ Kidwai Mass Communication Research Center in Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi. She developed an interest in American Avant-Garde film and eventually got an MFA in Film and Media Arts from Temple University, Philadelphia (1999). Her work covers a wide range of forms, including documentary, narrative and experimental. Her work has shown at venues including the Margaret Mead Festival, Berlin, Institute of Contemporary Art in Philadelphia, Kiasma Museum of Art and the Whitney Biennial. She has been supported by entities including the Asian Cine Fund in Busan, the Jerome Foundation, New York State Council on the Arts among others.</td>
<td><img src="https://cis-india.org/home-images/ShashwatiTalukdar.jpg/image_preview" style="float: right;" title="Shashwati" height="115" width="98" alt="Shashwati" class="image-inline image-inline" /></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td style="text-align: justify;"><strong>Leon Tan</strong><br /> Leon Tan, PhD, is a media-art historian, cultural theorist and psychoanalyst based in Gothenburg, Sweden. He has written on art, media, globalization and copyright in journals such as CTheory and Ephemera, and curated media-art projects and art symposia in international sites such as KHOJ International Artists’ Association (New Delhi, 2011), ISEA (Singapore, 2008) and Digital Arts Week (Zurich, 2007). He is currently researching media-art practices in India, and networked museums as an expanded field of cultural memory making.</td>
<td><img src="https://cis-india.org/home-images/LeonTan.jpg/image_preview" style="float: right;" title="Leon Tan" height="142" width="103" alt="Leon Tan" class="image-inline image-inline" /></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td style="text-align: justify;"><strong>Jeroen van Loon</strong><br /> Jeroen, digital media artist, investigates the (non-) impact of digital technology on our lives. For two months he went analogue, refrained from connecting to the World Wide Web, and communicated through his Analogue Blog. He is currently working on Life Needs Internet in which he travels around the world and collects people's personal handwritten internet stories.</td>
<td><img src="https://cis-india.org/home-images/JeroenvanLoon.jpg/image_preview" style="float: right;" title="Jeroen" height="128" width="106" alt="Jeroen" class="image-inline image-inline" /></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td style="text-align: justify;"><strong>Becky Band Jain</strong><br /> Becky Band Jain is a non-profit communications specialist and blogs on everything from technology to psychology and culture. She spent the last five years living in India and she’s now based in New York. She’s a dedicated yoga and meditation practitioner and is passionate about ICTD and new media.</td>
<td><img src="https://cis-india.org/home-images/BeckyBandJain.jpg/image_preview" style="float: right;" title="Becky" height="134" width="107" alt="Becky" class="image-inline image-inline" /></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td style="text-align: justify;"><strong>Namita A. Malhotra</strong><br /> Namita A. Malhotra is a legal researcher and media practitioner and a core member of Alternative Law Forum in Bangalore, India. Her areas of interest are image, technology, media and law, and her work takes the form of interdisciplinary research, video and film making and exploring possibilities of recombining material, practice and discipline. She is also a founder member of Pad.ma (Public Access Digital Media Archive) which is a densely annotated online video archive.</td>
<td><img src="https://cis-india.org/home-images/NamitaMalhotra.jpg/image_preview" style="float: right;" title="Namita" height="156" width="104" alt="null" /></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p>Share this page on:</p>
<table class="invisible">
<tbody>
<tr>
<th><a class="external-link" href="http://www.facebook.com/"><img src="https://cis-india.org/home-images/Fshare.jpg/image_icon" title="Facebook" height="20" width="42" alt="Facebook" class="image-inline" /></a></th>
<th><a class="external-link" href="http://twitter.com/"><img src="https://cis-india.org/home-images/Twitter.jpg/image_icon" title="Twitter" height="24" width="24" alt="Twitter" class="image-inline" /></a></th>
<th><a class="external-link" href="http://www.youtube.com/"><img src="https://cis-india.org/home-images/youtube.jpg/image_icon" title="YouTube" height="23" width="23" alt="YouTube" class="image-inline" /></a></th>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/video-contest/digital-natives-contest'>https://cis-india.org/digital-natives/video-contest/digital-natives-contest</a>
</p>
No publisherpraskrishnaVideoFeaturedResearchers at WorkDigital Natives2015-05-08T12:35:27ZBlog Entry