Centre for Internet and Society

Workshop for Web Developers on Web Accessibility

royson — 2011-08-23T22:52:40Z

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

Piracy

royson — 2009-01-26T10:23:49Z

Context

Loss of civil liberties as a result of increased and indiscriminate enforcement activities by State and private bodies.
Conflation of piracy with concepts such as terrorism, child pornography and drug trafficking which prevents legitimate off-line and online sharing and growth of P2P technologies.
Long term social impact of sizable section of the citizenry that views themselves as operating outside the law.

Research Agenda

Analyse different acts that are considered piracy from legal, enforcement, corporate and general public perspectives. Document changes in the definition of piracy over time in different contexts. Interrogate the double standards employed by corporations, film industry using case-studies such as T-Series, YouTube/torrent leaks, etc.
Study the prevalence of piracy in different regions of the world, market segments, technologies and sections of society. Document the social, cultural, technological and economic repercussions of these increased levels of piracy. For example: a) understanding how piracy contribute to increased consumer choice; b) examining the correlation between P2P and piracy-based distribution and enhancement of reputation and growth in market share of individual artists, bands and small companies.
Document the contribution of pirates to the development of cutting edge technologies and pushing of the limits of end-user experience. Analysing different techniques for movie, book, television, software and music piracy employed by individuals and industries.
Identify and document various factors which contribute to high level of piracy in developing countries. Design and propose strategies and policy positions such as: parallel imports, compulsory licensing, media surcharge and open licenses to reduce levels of copyright infringement.
Document and analyze various methods and methodologies for studying and tracking piracy. For example aggregation and consolidation of P2P statistics by companies such as Big Champagne. Provide technical strategies for those engaged in legitimate sharing to protect their privacy and civil rights against surveillance technologies.
Studying national and regional laws that governs copyright infringement and propose changes that protect Access to Knowledge. Examining case law for trends, including analysis of the kinds of punishments which are prescribed for copyright infringement.
Documenting due procedure for enforcement against individuals and organizations? Analyzing the legal validity of evidence submitted by enforcement agencies for different forms of alleged off-line and online copyright infringement.
Document and analyse the attention paid by developing country policy makers to piracy in different markets and technologies. Identify and monitor state agencies engaged in tracking piracy and undertaking enforcement activities?
How do citizens justify acts of piracy? How do they view themselves and others as criminals?
Document the correlation between high speed Internet connections and peer-to-peer file sharing programmes and illegal and legal sharing of knowledge.

Resources

Music industry ‘should embrace illegal websites’

Causes of illegal music product’s existence

Creativity policy pits internet providers against pirates

Piracy is good?

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/about/substantive-areas/new-pedagogies/piracy

Family

royson — 2009-02-06T09:09:06Z

Context

Contemporary public discourse around new Internet technologies carries with it the legacy of the forbidden, the dirty and the desired, which marked the arrival of internet in India. There is an ‘ecology of fear’ that technology feeds into; producing for us reinforced figures of illegality, of danger and of caution. From underage children accessing unmoderated, unpoliced pornographic material on the world wide web to the anonymous strangers influencing young adults into dangerous situations; from identity theft to extremely violent ‘deaths’ in simulated reality games; from disintegrating and dysfunctional families to corruption of youth and degeneration of values; from Orkut deaths’to MMS Scandals, internet technologies have always been mired with moral panic, redefinition of the notions of decency, obscenity and culture in public discourse in India.

So prevalent are these narratives of techno-terror that they inform our interactions with digital technologies and spaces to create resistance and suspicion. It is necessary that such narratives are deconstructed and the paranoia and anxiety that surrounds internet technologies, especially in the context of the family and the personal – the building blocks of sustained development and communities – need to be dismantled and mapped accurately. Responsible research that situates itself ethically and politically to deal with questions of danger, anxiety or threat on digital spaces and helping the larger public in engaging with questions and issues without giving in to the ecology of fear.

Research Agenda

The techno-narratives that accompany digital globalisation have altered the fabric of family, interpersonal relationships and communities. People respond to and relate to each other and the world around them differently. How do we look at technologies of information and communication as central to this changing shape of family and society? How do we look at the potentials of these technologies to connect people in new ways as the older forms of communication and relationship are lost?
As spaces of anonymous interactions increase within the digital world, how do we create new signs and symbols of caution to ensure safety, especially for people who are still younger in years or uninitiated, without curbing the freedom for others?
Are there successful models of sustainable community development and interpersonal relationships which can be constructed to decrease the gaps between people?
Can we mobilise the digital communities and forums towards larger concerns and socially responsible action? In times of crises, different online groups have come together to work towards specific causes. Is it possible to channelise the collective power of the internet towards a long term and sustained plan?
As the digital world expands its horizons, what are the new pedagogic practices which can be utilised towards a larger social good? How do we expand the social resources by translating them online?
How do we educate the digital natives, not only about the instrumentality and usage of internet technologies but also in thinking through the power and agency that these technologies inherit? How do we reflect on the digital family as the new unit for imagining the community, the society and the nation?

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/about/substantive-areas/new-pedagogies/family

ICT4D

royson — 2009-01-26T08:37:11Z

Context

The pervasive growth of ICTs in all developmental sectors (education, health, economic development, environment, human rights and governance) has given rise to many new untapped opportunities. But many new divides and inequalities have also emerged, accompanied by newer forms of discrimination, oppression and manipulation by individual and institutional elites.
India has been home to many ICT4D endeavours, such as Bhoomi, Grameen Gyan Abhiyan, ITC eChoupal, and the M.S. Swaminathan Research Foundation. While Internet technologies enable greater participation by weaker sections of society in the market place and in the process of governance, they still face many challenges (financial, environmental, infrastructural, technical, social and political) in fully realizing the emancipatory potential of the Internet.

Research Agenda

Investigate, document and analyse the socio-economic and other consequences of ICT4D projects. Research innovations in technology for enhancing usability, human-machine interfaces, process re-engineering etc.
Research new pedagogic techniques using ICTs. Conduct comparative analysis of devices and applications which enable inclusive education, affordable and viable solutions for computer and Internet access to all students, irrespective of economic status, development or geography. Enable teachers and academicians with evidence of effective use of technology for improving the quality of teaching. Propose mechanisms to streamline public exams and board exams so as to provide greater transparency, clarity, homogeneity and fairness into the entire examination system. Document the use of Internet technologies in administrative and procedural activities of academic institutions.
Evaluate and suggest possible improvements to “information activism” by various social groups and networks representing women, the poor, Dalits, tribals, sexual minorities, the disabled and illiterate persons etc. For example – farmsubsidy.org and theyworkforyou.com
Explore technologies and systemic changes that improve the accessibility, accountability and transparency of the government e-governance efforts. For example – data-mining of e-governance data, watchdog.net
Explore and extend use of ICTs in efforts to protect the environment, such as green mapping, collaborative monitoring of climate change, distributed monitoring of rainfall etc.
Document and design ways in which ICTs can help to streamline the health care systems in villages, by using health indicators to monitor and track immunizations, epidemics etc.
Document the use of ICT in protecting human rights—especially women, children, disabled persons, sex workers, ethnic groups, sexual minorities, etc. Understand how Dalits and tribals establish their identity on the Internet.
Interrogate and question the rationale for sustainability of ICT4D projects in far flung areas. Design and propose new models for sustainability for connectivity and access to knowledge.
Investigate the role for Internet and ICTs in the implementation of the National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, and the Right to Information Act.
Examine the role of ICT in providing banking services to the “unbanked.” Document the use of Internet and ICT by micro-finance and micro-credit organizations and networks.
Examine the role of Internet and ICTs in enabling the participation of small farmers, artisans and cooperatives in local, national, regional and international markets. Contribute to the development and use of technologies like fair trade systems, price information systems and mechanisms for consolidated buying and selling.
Document the role played by the Internet and ICTs in formal and informal remittance flows from expatriates and from migrant labourers in cities.

References

ICT for education magazine http://www.ictforeducation.co.uk/
UNESCO - ICT in education

ICT at work in microfinance in Asia

Farmers use ICT to get better rates

Benefits of ICT applications to Farmers with an emphasis on transaction costs - experiences from India

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/about/substantive-areas/public-accountability/ict4d

Open Standards

royson — 2009-02-06T08:57:18Z

Research Agenda

Documenting and analysing the development impact and total cost of ownership of open/closed/semi-closed standards being used, considered or mandated by different markets (public/private, state/national, rural/urban). Examining the degree of compliance to these standards, for example, review of e-governance websites and review of cybercafé infrastructure.
Documenting and analysing standard setting in national and at international fora (process, participants, submissions and conclusions). Correlating market and government adoption of various standards and its impact on competition, price control and technology penetration.
Collecting, archiving and standards for Indic language computing (keyboard layouts, encoding, fonts) and development (glossaries, message catalogues, dictionaries and thesauruses) perspective. Proposing solutions for various technical roadblocks that prevent large scale adoption of standards in Indic language computing. Designing algorithm and prototypes for converters between legacy standards and contemporary open standards.
Auditing e-governance infrastructure and services for adherence to accessibility related open standards. Design migration plans for infrastructure and services that do not adhere to globally accepted open standards.

Intervention Agenda

Provide feedback to the open standards policy document to be published by the Ministry of Information and Communication Technology.
Advocate that all Government-to-citizen interfaces are based on open standards to ensure that citizens don’t have purchase or pirate software in order to interact with the government.
Advocate for the adoption of European Union-IDABC style Government Interoperability Frameworks (GIF) including national definitions of “open standards” that are FOSS friendly.
Advocate that all Government-to-Citizen interfaces adhere to accessibility related open standards to ensure use by disabled, illiterate, neo-literate and aged citizens.
Advocate for technology- and vendor-neutral tenders which mandate the use of open standards where appropriate for government ICT purchases.
Advocate the use of open standards for the purposes of archiving, media-monitoring, dissemination of research inputs/outputs and Right to Information/Freedom of Information activities by publicly-funded organisations.

Resources

Roadmap for Open ICT Ecosystems – Berkman Centre for Internet and Society
Research outputs of the Government Interoperability Framework (GIF) Project managed by Asia Pacific Development Information Programme – United Nations Development Programme (UNDP-APDIP)
Noooxml.org – Campaign against OOXML
Consortium.info – Website managed by Andrew Updegrove
Open Video Bill of Rights
Dynamic Coalition for Open Standards – Internet Governance Forum

Open Access

Context

Most research and knowledge generation in India (and elsewhere) happens owing to public funding. As new knowledge is built on what is already known, open and free access to what is already known will speed up generation of new knowledge. That is why funding agencies such as the research councils and the Wellcome Trust in the UK, and NIH and the Howard Hughes Medical Institute in the USA have mandated open access for research they support. The Faculty of Arts and Science and the Faculty of Law at Harvard University and the professors at the School of Education at Stanford University have adopted a mandate for making all their research publications open access.

In India open access is picking up rather slowly. About a hundred Indian journals are open access journals—actually hybrid journals with the print version earning subscription revenue and the online version given away free—and there are about 35 open access archives. Only one institution—NIT, Rourkela—has mandated open access for faculty research publications.

India has an excellent open educational resource programme, NPTEL, jointly managed by the IITs and IISc, in which lectures by first rate teachers (delivered at the IITs and IISc) are filmed and made available in three formats: web, video and YouTube. This programme is supported by the Ministry of HRD.

Intervention Agenda

We need to design and implement a focused open access advocacy programme. It should have two components: top down and bottom up. While generally bottom up programmes reaching out to the grassroots are a better approach, in India we may have to use the top down approach as well (as we are still hierarchical and feudal).
The top down part should address the science advisers (there are two of them, PSA and SAC), the secretaries and senior technocrats in the Ministries and Departments relevant to S&T (DST, DSIR, DBT, Earth Sciences, DAE, DRDO, ISRO, CSIR, ICAR, ICMR, etc.), Chairmen of UGC, AICTE, the Indian Medical Council, the Minister of S&T, and parliamentarians.
The bottom-up part should focus on publishing researchers (professors, readers, post-docs, PhD students, chairpersons of department, deans, librarians, vice chancellors, etc., in universities; research scientists and directors in research laboratories; editors of research journals; and academies and professional societies).
We need to promote the setting up of interoperable institutional open access archives.
We need to promote open access journals. Many Indian journals are published by professional societies and research institutions.
We need to facilitate training programmes for setting up and running institutional archives and for converting journals into open access journals. Expertise for conducting such training is available at IISc-NCSI, NIC, ISI-DRTC, etc. If need be, we could even help organize training programmes with experts from elsewhere (e.g. University of Southampton for the institutional archives part and the Open Journal System or Bioline International for the OA journal part).
There is widespread misunderstanding about authors' rights. By and large Indian researchers give away copyright to journal publishers. They just sign blindly on the dotted line in the copyright agreement form sent by the publisher. We should launch a campaign to persuade authors to use an addendum (readily available from ARL and Science Commons). We should also talk to funding agencies and heads of institutions about the need to retain copyright to work performed in India with public funding.
We should identify organizations that are likely to support our programmes and plan joint programmes/ projects. For example, we can work with the Society for Scientific Values, New Delhi, in creating awareness on copyright related issues. We can work closely with IISc-NCSI on training programmes.
We can institute some awards to recognize meritorious contributions to the promotion of open access.
In the West many studies have been carried out to demonstrate that open access helps improve visibility and citability. We can carry out similar studies in India.
We can promote science evaluation methods using open access data (Google Scholar, for example).

Resources

Bibliography of open access

http://oad.simmons.edu/oadwiki/Bibliography_of_open_access

Open Access News [a blog maintained by Prof. Peter Suber]

http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/fosblog.html

Open Access: Opportunities and Challenges, a Handbook, EUR 23459, European Commission Directorate General for Research, 2008.
The Imaginary Journal of Poetic Economics, a blog maintained by Heather Morrison. http://poeticeconomics.blogspot.com/
John Willinsky: The Access Principle: The Case for Open Access to Research and Scholarship (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, USA), 2005.
Open Access to Knowledge and Information: Scholarly Literature and Digital Library Initiatives – the South Asian Scenario, by Anup K Das (Unesco Regional Office, New Delhi), 2008.
Richard Poynder's series of interviews with open access experts, Open and Shut.
American Scientist Open Access Form (Listserv) moderated by Stevan Harnad.
Association of Research Libraries SPARC OA Forum
Writings of Stevan Harnad, Alma Swan, Barbara Kirsop, Leslie Chan

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/about/substantive-areas/public-accountability/open-standard

Free and Open Source Software

royson — 2009-01-26T08:04:12Z

Context

Lack of balance between proprietary software and FOSS in the market, educational sector and public sector.
Vendor lock-in of public data and infrastructure resulting in a dilution of citizen and consumer rights

Research Agenda

Document, summarize and analyse the participation divide (Gender, Rural/Urban, North/South) in production and consumption of FOSS by analysing code repositories, mailing list and discussion group archives, public URLs, etc. Case-studies of FOSS developers.
Aggregate, publicly archive and analyse academic curricula in various state and national school and college boards for vendor and technology neutrality.
Documenting the pedagogic impact, development impact, total cost of ownership and sustainability of e-learning and ICT4D projects based proprietary/open/mixed technologies. For instance, Friends in Kerala, and other such projects.
Designing and prototyping improved user interfaces and improvements to existing user interfaces. Pay particular attention to localization and internationalization issues related to Indic languages.
Documenting and designing best practices and processes for training, capacity-building, mentoring, testing and certification for FOSS developers from the global South. Looking at volunteer and corporate participation for example Apache in Sri Lanka.
Understand the similarities and differences between southern and northern Linux User Groups and Free Software User Groups.

Intervention Agenda

Provide feedback to the Open Source policy document to be published by the Ministry of Information and Communication Technology.
Support Free Software Foundation, Delhi Science Forum and others in the campaign against software patents—specifically deletion of “per se” in the Patent Act and related sections in the Indian Patent Office manual.
Advocate that software developed using public funds be licensed under an appropriate FOSS license. Advocate that e-governance software that directly impinges on the quality of citizenship stands public scrutiny.
Advocate for a vendor and technology neutral ICT curriculum in schools, colleges and universities.
Advocate that students participate in global projects for academic credits and all student work be archived on online code repositories. Advocate for local repositories in colleges and universities with insufficient access to the Internet.
Promote choice rather than mono-culture in public organisations, civil society and educational sector to ensure appropriate balance between innovation and access.

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/about/substantive-areas/public-accountability/free-and-open-source-softwar

Sexual Practices

royson — 2008-09-21T14:57:53Z

Context

One of the biggest crises that the digital worlds introduced was in debates around body, gender, and sexuality. Apart from the often demonised world of pornography and fundamental responses to sexual freedom, there have been various philosophical and practical issues that emerge with the cyberspaces.

Different disciplines have embraced the digital spaces as spaces of reflection, research and political mobilisation around questions of gendered sexual practices. The digital interactions have also led to new forms of sexual interaction and practices which have found some academic attention. It is necessary to disassociate questions of sexuality and sexual practices from notions of obscenity or demonised public discourse.

Contemporary scholarly work from gender and sexuality theorists and practitioners engages with how the traditional notions of what it means to be human, to be gendered and to appropriate sexuality, have been challenged by the virtual worlds. As we move towards a post-human existence, the fixed structures that were used to definitively define the normal, the regulated, the contained and the chastised, get deconstructed. Within such a fluid world where relative norms and normative relativity are a way of being, it is imperative to focus on questions of gender and sexuality as they get mediated, constructed and inflected by new digital cyberspaces.

Research Agenda

How do different gendered and sexual minorities find their voice, agency and ability for political mobilisation through the cyberspaces?
What are the prejudices and discriminations that internet technologies inherit despite their avowed neutral nature and potential for larger inclusivity?
What are the challenges that the new digital technologies pose to our understanding of what it means to be human, to be gendered, and to be sexual?
As digital sexuality becomes a part of our larger techno-narratives, what are the spaces of liberation and celebration that it opens up for the individual?
How do we escape the populist media sensationalism around cyberspace and sexual practices to engage more fruitfully with the new paradigms and practices that emerge with digital interactions?
As we move from representation to simulation, how do varied sexual practices offer new pedagogic ways of understanding the body and its social dynamics?
What is being sought in the demonization and horror that gets constructed around cyberspaces and sexuality?
In the post-human world, how do we understand questions of sexual practices? How do we gender these new narratives and forms that emerge in digital spaces? What are the aesthetics and politics of online sexual practices and how do they help us re-think existing notions of human sexuality?
What are the political mobilisations that challenge the normative world of sexuality? How do processes of regulation, monitoring and governance get inflected by introducing questions of sexual practices online?

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/about/substantive-areas/digital-pluralism/sexual-practices

Digital and Participation divide

royson — 2008-09-21T14:57:53Z

Context

Basic infrastructural and logistic problems like power supply, connectivity and lack of physical access that hinder the growth of the Internet.
Existing and new forms of divides that are exacerbated or arise from Internet related technologies. For example - caste, class, gender, language, literacy and disability.
The high cost of technologies, shortage of suitable human resource and lack of a good support eco-system.
Large number of languages in use makes it difficult to ensure equal and unhindered access to digital resources.

Research Agenda

Analyse the various barriers to access faced by developing countries and gauge the extent to which they hinder participation of various segments of society?
Monitor state of connectivity in different parts of India and document tried and tested best-practices and affordable/appropriate technologies for different rural and remote environments.
Investigating the factors responsible for the varying degrees and quality of digital participation amongst different sections of society, such as students, women, distinct religious and ethnic groups, disabled groups, illiterate persons, elderly persons and so on
Analyse the linguistic dimension of digital and participation divide in India and evaluating systems and content based on Indic languages.
Monitor and track nascent Internet based technologies which could contribute significantly improving access and participation in the Information Society. Identify potential or existing barriers and problems that accompany these new technologies.
Extending Dana Boyd’s work and trying to extrapolate it in the Indian context; examining how factors such as caste, class, religion, gender, economic status and disability affect or shape discussions on various social networking sites, blogosphere, mailing lists and discussion forums and studying inter and intra community interaction over the net.
Studying the role of ICT in shaping the new generation and new culture resulting from digital interaction.
Exploring resources which would enhance participation in various areas, such as the increased availability of e-material (including both quantitative and qualitative increase) for ensuring more participation from the student and academic community.
Documenting the role played by cybercafés especially in villages, small towns and district headquarters in increasing participation and local content generation.

Intervention Agenda

Support initiatives that give voice to the disempowered by providing scholarships to bloggers and other participants in Web 2.0 technologies. Examples include: Cyber Mohalla, Wikipedia, and Rising Voices.
Work with Universities, libraries and academic institutions for the creation of digital libraries, institutional repositories, and digitization facilities.
Organize and support BarCamps, face-to-face conferences, and bloggers’ meetings to discuss and address different participation divides.
Support institutions like the NAB which work towards facilitating computer access for disadvantaged sections of society.

Resources

The New Digital Divide - Media Literacy

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/about/substantive-areas/digital-pluralism/digital-and-participation-divide

Censorship

royson — 2008-09-21T14:57:53Z

Context

The histories of technology in general and the internet technologies in particular, are riddled with debates of censorship, freedom of speech and expression, and the rise and fall of various political movements around the same. The history of cyberspaces in India has given rise to dense debates which have emerged in the popular as well as the academic spheres.

Moreover, with the State’s outsourcing of digital technologies and responsibilities to the corporate sector through the increasing public-private partnerships, there are several agencies of censorship which were not so visible or authoritative in the history of technology. There has been a severe demonisation and criminalisation of the ICTs, by State and other proto-Statist organisations who have, in its brief history, demanded extreme censorship, boycotting, banning and blocking of various cyberspaces.

A narrative of the critical moments of demands for and attempts at censoring cyberspaces, brings to the fore extremely intriguing questions about the relationship between language, power, expression and freedom. The issue of censorship touches, perhaps the most widely, different aspects of human behaviour and living—from consumption to sexuality to interpersonal relationships to practices of the self. It has become imperative to unpack the sheer inertia that censorship as a force imposes on the dynamic and often transient world of cyberspaces and the way the inherent anarchism and fluidity of the digital cyberspaces challenge the existing legislation, regulation and debates around censorship and freedom.

Research Agenda

In the fluid and decentralised mammoth nature of cyberspaces, what is the need and value of censorship? What does censorship enable and what does it bring to attention?
Instead of focusing merely upon the act of censorship, can we look at the larger contexts and crises, and the censorship as a critical symptom of the same?
Within digital narratives, where the sense of the text, the author, the body and the self are all conflated, can we look upon censorship, not only as a restrictive force but also a creative force that shapes and enables certain kinds of practices and ideas?
What are the objects of censorship online? How do these objects get created?
The cyberspaces have long been celebrated as spaces of free speech and a site where the new public spheres can be traced. How do we understand censorship in relation to this popular idea? What are the invisible and often hidden forms of censorship that are a part of being online? Can we go beyond censorship on content and look at the very modalities of technology and the regulation that surrounds it?
Censorship is geared towards a very specific ideal. How do we deconstruct the various attempts by the State and other State-like agencies at censorship, to look at the aspirations and objectives of censorship? What are the many freedoms that acts of censorship online are seeking to curtail and shape?
With the onus of making meaning and consumption being transferred to the individual user online, the traditional notions of censorship as emerging from limited centralised sources are lost. How do we reconceptualise censorship in its many forms as a part of digital inter-personal relationships and transactions? What happens when the citizen becomes, not only an object of censorship but also an enfranchised source of censorship? How do such communities and networks of censorship operate and proliferate?

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/about/substantive-areas/digital-pluralism/censorship

Communities and Movements

royson — 2008-09-21T14:57:53Z

Context

One of the most significant contributions of ICTs is the way they have been able to generate new forms of viral networking, political mobilisation and expression around the world. From flash mobs that register protest in their playfulness to the online petitions and campaigns which have changed governments and established new forms of justice; from spontaneous groups that have come together around political causes to large communities that have gathered in times of crises; from teenagers networking for artistic expression to older citizens forming community watches, the digital spaces have seen unprecedented emergence of communities and movements.

Often, these movements or communities are dismissed as fads or recreation and the political potential or motivation is rendered invisible. The flash mobs were looked upon as just having fun, without realising how powerful they can be for public participation and protest. The social networking systems, before they became the hot hubs of business and economic networking, were discarded as merely a way of dating for young people. There has been much criticism from traditional media reportage and popular discourses (both a symptom of incomplete understanding or technophobia) of these movements and communities.

Moreover, when looked from the lens of pre-digital social communities and political movements, these digital forms often fail to be recognised for what they are and are overlooked as fashion trends. It is necessary to revisit these forms of networking, participation and expression to explore the potentials and possibilities that they offer. In theory, in the very manifestation of these forms, in the work of artists and academics, there is a huge wealth of experimenting with the possibility of the different spaces of internet. A probe into analysing the events of the past and looking at the possibilities of the future would serve to be very fruitful in understanding the interactive cyberspaces and the role they play in mediating the world around us.

Research Agenda

Is it possible to understand the many fads – some, often, short-lived – on the internet as symptoms of something larger, all sharing certain characteristic features in their aspirations and objectives?
How do we understand politics online? How do we characterise the new digital public sphere and the politics of participation online?
As digital spaces increasingly employ ‘edutainment’ in their pedagogic practices, how do we conflate aesthetics and politics to understand movements and communities online?
How do we explore, hypothesise and test the potentials of the new communities and movements which have mushroomed in the digital spaces? Can we coordinate or orchestrate (Like Bill Wysek coordinated the first flash-mob) models we think of as important, towards particular objectives?
Can these different forms be a part of our pedagogic and research practices? For example, Jeremy Hussinger’s ‘Lessons in Second Life’ series of lectures and essays, provides ample reflection on different political and philosophical issues by analysing the texts and interactions on Second Life.
Can we identify the participants within such communities and movements, as moving towards a new notion of the public and what it means to be a digital native? What are the threats and possible redundancies in such spaces and how do we address them?
Is it possible to utilise these existing networks and interactions to create more cohesive and sustainable forms of interaction and community formation?

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/about/substantive-areas/new-pedagogies/communities-and-movements

Intellectual Property Rights and Trade

royson — 2008-09-21T14:57:53Z

Context

Increasing expansion, propertisation and commoditisation of intellectual property rights, leading to a loss of balance that IPRs are meant to reflect.
Increasing instances where IPRs policies and practices conflict with innovation, equitable access, and freedom of speech.
Unrealistic and inappropriate application of traditional notions of IP to the digital world, where content and medium are often distinct, leading to transitory RAM copies being considered copies, etc.
Increasing tensions between IP and propagation of materials over the Internet, criminalization of every-day actions of ordinary citizens.
Increasing tendency of IP protectionists to call upon access and copy restriction technologies to intermediate digital consumption of IP, displacing notions of fair dealings, exceptions and limitations etc.
Lack of transparency in international negotiations on IP enforcement, and increasing pressures on developing countries to sign IP treaties by using strong-arm tactics (often as a precondition to trade).
Uncritical (or unwilling) adoption of maximalist IP regimes by developing nations as part of asymmetric negotiation for market access or subsidies.
Lack of critical understanding of the role IPR plays in different stages of an industry’s or nation's growth, and an unwillingness to look at deteriorative effects of IPR, such as chilling of technological advancement especially in industries with the incremental advancement model
Unwillingness of governments and industry to explore questions of “negative IP” spaces.
Lack of understanding in judges, lawmakers, and the general public of the meaning, purpose and impact of intellectual property rights.

Research Agenda

Questioning and re-imagination of the philosophical underpinnings of IPRs, to make them more consistent with a framework of equitable access to knowledge, more in line with actual practices of cultural production, and less restrictive of free speech.
Analysing the differences between digital and non-digital frameworks from the viewpoint of copyright, and examining the need and possibilities for a nuanced approach to “copying” in a world where everything is a copy.
Studying the forms of traditional knowledge protection being adopted by various countries, and especially the use of technology in doing so. Understanding the tensions between access to knowledge commons and protection of traditional knowledge and traditional cultural expressions.
Questioning the dominant IPR regime from a constitutional perspective of free speech, and seeing if there is any additional protection to be gained from that constitutional right.
Questioning the dominant IPR regime from the constitutional perspective of competition law and supporting the research agenda of competition commissions in developing countries.
Questioning the dominant IPR regime from the constitutional perspective of tax law and documenting the systemic avoidance of taxation by IP rights-holders.
Contributing to the research agenda of activists interested in a WIPO treaty on minimum exceptions and limitations to copyright law especially from the perspective of disabled, aged and illiterate citizens.
Monitoring the IP policies in various states (both written, like the TK policy in Kerala, and otherwise) and analysing them to see if they promote equitable access and innovation.
Researching issues rising from “common carrier” status for ISPs and online service providers in order to mitigate ISP liability, surveillance, bandwidth shaping, etc.
Collecting information on negative IP spaces, to understand what leads to such fundamentally different approaches to innovation, and raising questions as to whether such spaces (e.g., the fashion industry) are actually embracing IP.
Monitoring, analysing and articulating civil society responses to bilateral and multi-lateral trade agreements that would affect access to knowledge in developing countries.
Unpacking and analysing the Bayh-Dole model being adopted by various countries (and under consideration in India), to see whether it spurs innovation or results in public funds being used to enrich private parties.
Exploring issues of IP rights in personal data, such as that held in various networking sites, etc.

Resources

Copyright and Free Speech (Uma Suthersenan et al., eds., 2005)
EFF’s IP section. http://www.eff.org/issues/intellectual-property
Yochai Benkler, The Wealth of Networks (2006)
Jonathan Zittrain, The Future of the Internet and How to Stop It (2008)
Chris Anderson, The Long Tail
Jack Goldsmith & Tim Wu, Who Controls the Internet?
Madhavi Sunder, IP3, 59 Stanford L. Rev. 257 (2006)
Rethinking Commodification (Martha M. Ertman & Joan C. Williams eds., 2005)
Yochai Benkler, Siren Songs and Amish Children: Autonomy, Information, and Law, 76 New York U. L. Rev. 23 (2001)
Wendy J. Gordon, Copyright Norms and the Problem of Private Censorship, in Copyright and Free Speech: Comparative and International Analyses (Jonathan Griffiths & Uma Suthersanen, eds., 2005)
Yochai Benkler, Free as the Air to Common Use: First Amendment Constraints on Enclosure of the Public Domain, 74 New York U. L. Rev. 354 (1999)
Neil Weinstock Netanel, Copyright and a Democratic Civil Society, 106 Yale L.J. 283 (1996)
Margaret Jane Radin & Madhavi Sunder, Foreword: The Subject and Object of Commodification, in Rethinking Commodification (Martha M. Ertman & Joan C. Williams eds., 2005)
Madhavi Sunder, The Invention of Traditional Knowledge (U.C. Davis Legal Studies Research Paper No. 75, 2006), http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=890657

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/about/substantive-areas/public-accountability/int-ellectural.-property-right-and-trade

Surveillance

royson — 2008-09-21T14:57:53Z

Context

Technology and Surveillance have always been comfortable bed-partners. Each new technology has led to new and more ubiquitous form of surveillance practices premised on intensive data-mining and centralisation of data. In the age of Information Technologies, where Information is the new capital, Surveillance, as a theoretical concept and as practice takes on an unprecedented everydayness. The experience of the urban is necessarily one of being an object of surveillance. Everyday practices are now structured around models of surveillance—from CCTV in areas of consumption to physical surveillance at areas of transit—such that surveillance has become almost value neutral in its presence around us.

This overwhelming sense of being watched has led to two distinct forms of manifestation in the last four decades. The first is the sense of paranoia—the Big Brother syndrome—which has found many proponents lamenting the loss of privacy and the abduction of the personal by the State and the market. The second is in the anti-surveillance stance which demands either for an abolishing of the surveillance practices or for an ethical use of the data. While both these forms have their own merits, the debate and the stakes change considerably once we enter the digital domains.

Especially within the digital spaces, where ‘presence’, a ‘record of the presence’, and an archiving of the records are inescapable, surveillance becomes more than just a practice; it becomes an inescapable condition of being online. To be online is to leave traces, physical and digital, personal and pseudonymous. In such a case, instead of taking an either-or position around surveillance, we are now looking at what surveillance enables and what are the ways in which it mediates the complex mechanics of urban survival.

Research Agenda

What are the various forms of surveillance that we encounter in the digital world? How do we understand being subject to surveillance as a part of being online?
What are the ways to negotiate, mediate, and surpass the various forms of surveillance that are a part of cyberspaces? Who are the agents of surveillance?
What does surveillance enable for the different actors within a given space? For example, for the agent conducting the surveillance, it might be a question of collecting data. For the actor being watched, it might be a narrative condition where s/he can manifest him/her self in the process of surveillance. For the audience that becomes witness to the surveillance, a new set of relationships might emerge with the object being manifest and the practice of surveillance.
How does surveillance become a threat when it is especially conducted in the promotion of safety and security? What are the paradoxes it generates and how do we negotiate with them?
With the proliferation of portable media capture devices, what is the value of surveillance? What are the new forms of authorship that it creates? Can we look upon surveillance—the process of being watched, the knowledge of being watched, and the incessant historicisation of the present—as an aesthetic paradigm?

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/about/substantive-areas/digital-pluralism/surveillance

75

royson — 2009-02-26T12:36:03Z

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/accessibility/publications/workshop/DSC-4273.jpg

74

royson — 2009-02-26T12:34:35Z

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/accessibility/publications/workshop/DSC-4272.jpg

73

royson — 2009-02-26T12:33:14Z

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/accessibility/publications/workshop/DSC-4271.jpg