The Centre for Internet and Society
http://editors.cis-india.org
These are the search results for the query, showing results 21 to 35.
WikiWars - A report
http://editors.cis-india.org/research/conferences/conference-blogs/wwrep
<b>The Centre for Internet and Society, Bangalore and the Institute of Network Cultures, Amsterdam, hosted WikiWars – an international event that brought together scholars, researchers, academics, artists and practitioners from various disciplines, to discuss the emergence and growth of Wikipedia and what it means for the information societies we inhabit. With participants from 15 countries making presentations about Wikipedia and the knowledge ecology within which it exists, the event saw a vigorous set of debates and discussions as questions about education, pedagogy, language, access, geography, resistance, art and subversion were raised by the presenters. The 2 day event marked the beginning of the process that hopes to produce the first critical reader – Critical Point of View (CPOV) - that collects key resources for research and inquiry around Wikipedia.</b>
<p style="text-align: justify;">The
debates around Wikipedia, the de facto dynamic knowledge production system
online, are very fairly divided into two competing camps. There is a group of
people who swear by Wikipedia – celebrating its democratic processes of
knowledge production, ease of access, and the de-canonisation of knowledge to
produce the ‘WikiWay’; And then there is a group of people who swear at
Wikipedia – raising concerns over authenticity, reliability, vulgarisation of
knowledge and the de-hierarchisation of knowledge systems that Wikipedia seems
to embody. The debates between the two groups are often passionate and situated
in wildly speculative and often personal interests and investments in Wikipedia
and the Web 2.0 Information Revolution that it seems to be a symptom of. The
debates also play out in various international locations, most of them relying
on personal anecdotes, experiences and half hearted data that does not stand
the tests of rigour.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">WikiWars,
then, concentrated on things which are about Wikipedia but also not about Wikipedia.
In many ways, as Geert Lovink, the Director of INC suggested, WikiWars was a
recognition of the fact that Wikipedia has come of age and can now be
systematically and philosophically examined as a work in progress that has
long-term implications about our future. It was the ambition of the Editorial
team (consisting of Geert Lovink, Sabine Nerdeer, Nathaniel Tkacz, Johanna
Niyesito, Sunil Abraham and Nishant Shah) to veer away from the recognised
battle-lines drawn in, around and about Wikipedia, and instead examine the
fault-lines that run under many of our assumptions, prejudices and imaginations
of Wikipedia. And Wikiwars, through careful screening and invested interests,
became one of the first platforms in the world to initiate a critical discourse
on Wikipedia, seeking to engage with its histories, it contemporary
manifestations and practices, and the futures that it seeks to inhabit.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">The
different presentations brought in located debates, theoretical and
philosophical concepts and personal experiences to build frameworks that
explain and contextualise Wikipedia as one of the most contested spaces online.
The eight panels across two days dealt with four major thematic areas which
need to be summarised in brief:</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;" class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst">1. <strong><u>Education, Pedagogy and
Knowledge:</u></strong> At the very basis of Wikipedia (and
other structures like it) is the question of knowledge production, the
possibility of using it as an educational tool and the potentials it has for
introducing new pedagogies and learning practices in and outside of institutionalised
education. Presenters from various disciplines engaged with these questions in
interesting ways.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;" class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst"> </p>
<p style="text-align: justify;" class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle">Usha
Raman from Teacher Plus in Hyderabad, brought in the question of primary
education, the need for teacher training programmes and the ways by which
infrastructure development needs to be thought through when talking of
Wikipedia and education in the Indian context. The
necessity of locating Wikipedia in a much larger debates on learning were also
echoed by Noopur Rawal and Srikeit Tadepalli, students from Christ University
who brought their experience of Wikipedia and the expectations from classroom
education and learning in their presentation. </p>
<p style="text-align: justify;" class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle"> </p>
<p style="text-align: justify;" class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle">In
the same field, but from a different approach, a panel examined Wikipedia as a site to critique
Western Knowledge production systems. Stian Haklev and Johanna Niyesito
concentrated on the questions of language and knowledge production. Haklev made
an impassioned argument deconstructing the utopian idea of Wikipedia’s
multilingual dreams and instead made a call for recognising the black-holes
when it comes to non-English production and consumption of knowledge on
Wikipedia. He further explored the implications that linguistic imbalance has
on the very governance structure of Wikipedia and its communities. Niyesito
challenged the ‘global’ and ‘cosmopolitan’ image that Wikipedia has built for
itself and posited the idea of Wikipedia as a translingual space where
different languages and cultures negotiate common understandings and processes
of producing knowledge. HanTeng
Liao explored knowledge production through the market economy of key-words to
see how the linguistic biases of search engines that harvest these keywords,
determines the access and visibility of different Wikipedia pages.</p>
<strong><u>Resistance, Diversity
and Representation:</u></strong> While these questions were present as
undercurrents to most of the presentations at WikWars, they were perhaps most
fiercely present in the debates that followed the presentations by Eric Ilya
Lee (Academia Sinica, Taiwan), YiPing Tsou (National Central University,
Taiwan), William Beutler and Eric Zimmerman (IDC, Israel).
<p> </p>
<p style="text-align: justify;" class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle">For
Lee and Tsou, the responses to the Chinese language Wikipedia from popular
media and personal experiences, were demonstrative of the fact that the lack of
diverse means of representation and participation lead to a strong resistance
of Wikipedia in Taiwan. Beutler
looked at the heavily contested editorial space and policies of Wikipedia to
make a point about how lack of effective governance systems based on
mutual tolerance and diversity lead to
stressful and often traumatic experiences for users who might not be
represented through the mainstream ideas and
ideologies of an English speaking populace.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;" class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle">Zimmerman
took a startling position, calling for a regime of attribution and dissolving
the pseudonymous structures of knowledge production in Wikipedia in order to
build designs of trust and verification into the system, thus leading to better
and more credible research tools and representations.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;" class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle">The
tone of debates was altered with presentations by Mark Graham (Oxford Research
Institute) and the team of artists Nathaniel Stern and Scott Kildal, the team
responsible for the Wikipedia Art Project. Graham
showed the complexity of visualising space and how the production of space (or
physical geography) on Wikipedia often reflects the virtual density of access
and presence online. Showing a nuanced set of images that help mapping these
new geographies for a richer diversity and representation, Graham showed how
systems like Wikipedia ‘cannot know what they cannot know’ despite the reliance
on the wisdom of crowds.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;" class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle">Stern
and Kildall, in giving an account of their project which used Wikipedia’s
policies to undermine and challenge it, show how the institutionalisation of a
space and its ‘canonisation’ can quickly lead to a new set of problems where
the space becomes the very thing it had set itself against.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;" class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle"> </p>
<p style="text-align: justify;" class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle">3. <strong><u>Politics of Free, Open
and Exclusion:</u></strong> The rhetoric of free and open have been
built into all popular discourses around Wikipedia. However, the presentations
at WikiWars showed that these need to be taken with at least a pinch of salt
and further examined for what they signify. Alok
Nandi of Architempo made a dramatic and creative revisit of these guiding
principles of Wikipedia. He showed how an inquiry into rituals of
participation, distortion and access on Wikipedia can promote, not merely
looking at the politics of exclusion but also at the politics of inclusion and
the problems therein.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;" class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle"> </p>
<p style="text-align: justify;" class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle">Dror
Kamir’s evocative narrative of ‘Your side, my side and Wikipedia’ illustrated
how the question of boundaries, of knowledges, of facts and truths get
distorted as language, community, nationality, etc. come into play in recording
and documenting knowledge on Wikipedia. Concentrating on conflict zones in the
Middle East, he talked about the lack and perhaps the impossibility of
producing neutrality the way in which Wikipedia demands of its users. These
ideas resonated with the propositions that ShunLing Chen from Harvard had
floated in the opening panel to explore the ‘boundary work’ of Wikipedia and
how it defines and produces itself in relation to external forces and
controversies. These
discussions on the politics of presence, absence, inclusion and exclusion were
further layered by presentations by Linda Gross, Elad Weider, Heather Ford and
Nathaniel Tkacz who produced a critique of the Free and Open, taking a
cautionary step away from accepting these as inherently good.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;" class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle"> </p>
<p style="text-align: justify;" class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle">While
Gross explored the structure of egalitarianism that Wikipedia builds for
itself, Ford presented an analysis of the licensing regimes of the knowledge
produced within Wikipedia and the problems they pose to traditional knowledges
and non-mainstream information. Weider,
trained as a lawyer, critiqued the neo-liberal discourse around Wikipedia and
tried to correlate the communities with markets. Tkacz’s historical overview of
Free and Open, resulted in a compelling inquiry into the very structures that
inform the shape and functioning of objects like Wikipedia.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Twitter:
#WikiWars <a href="http://twitter.com/wikiwars">http://twitter.com/wikiwars</a>
and <a href="http://www.twitter.com/jackerhack/wikiwars">www.<strong>twitter</strong>.com/jackerhack/<strong>wikiwars</strong></a><cite></cite></p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Flickr:
<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/30479432@N03/sets/72157623193288710/">http://www.flickr.com/photos/30479432@N03/sets/72157623193288710/</a></p>
<p>
CPOV blog : <a href="http://networkcultures.org/wpmu/cpov/">http://networkcultures.org/wpmu/cpov/</a></p>
<p> </p>
<p>The videos fom the Wikiwars event are embedded below:</p>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHM_HIA"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHM_QoA"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHM_RgA"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHM_z4A"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHN2T4A"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHN2gMA"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHN2iUA"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHN2z0A"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHN3C4A"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHN3QYA"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHN3QYA"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHOgCwA"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHOgGgA"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHOgiUA"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHOqA4A"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHOqxYA"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHOrhIA"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHOrm4A"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHOrycA"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHOzEoA"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHQoxAA"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHQo3MA"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHSrGAA"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHSsTcA"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHToz8A"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHUuGIA"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHUuTIA"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHUugsA"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHUvW8A"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHUvk8A"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHVuwwA"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHdpxMA"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHdz3IA"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHd0DMA"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHd0iYA"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHf4nkA"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHf404A"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHf43AA"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHf5EIA"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHf5zYA"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHghjkA"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHgh0EA"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHgiAIA"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHgiFcA"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHgiUMA"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHgijUA"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHgjjIA"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHgjyAA"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHgjzwA"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHgj1QA"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHgkCQA"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHgkE8A"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHgkHEA"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHgkTcA"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHg3n8A"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHg3zgA"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHg4GIA"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHg5ykA"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHg52gA"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHhjUEA"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHhr04A"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHhsAcA"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHh10oA"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHh114A"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHh%2B0AA"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHh%2B2EA"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHh_AcA"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHh_A8A"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHh_lQA"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHh_w4A"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHjmiIA"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHjnHEA"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHjuxkA"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHjuzwA"></embed>
<embed height="250" width="250" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHjvRUA"></embed>
<embed height="270" width="320" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://blip.tv/play/AYHj4kEA"></embed>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/research/conferences/conference-blogs/wwrep'>http://editors.cis-india.org/research/conferences/conference-blogs/wwrep</a>
</p>
No publishernishantDigital GovernanceWikipediaFeaturedCyberculturesWorkshopCPOV2010-10-06T11:21:56ZBlog EntryCPOV : Wikipedia Research Initiative
http://editors.cis-india.org/research/conferences/conference-blogs/cpov
<b>The Second event, towards building the Critical Point of View Reader on Wikipedia, brings a range of scholars, practitioners, theorists and activists to critically reflect on the state of Wikipedia in our contemporary Information Societies. Organised in Amsterdam, Netherlands, by the Institute of Network Cultures, in collaboration with the Centre for Internet and Society, Bangalore, the event builds on the debates and discussions initiated at the WikiWars that launched off the knowledge network in Bangalore in January 2010. Follow the Live Tweets at #CPOV</b>
<p>Second international conference of the <em>CPOV Wikipedia Research
Initiative</em> :: March 26-27, 2010 :: OBA (Public Library Amsterdam,
next to Amsterdam central station), Oosterdokskade 143, Amsterdam.</p>
<p>Wikipedia is at the brink of becoming the de facto global reference
of dynamic knowledge. The heated debates over its accuracy, anonymity,
trust, vandalism and expertise only seem to fuel further growth of
Wikipedia and its user base. Apart from leaving its modern counterparts
Britannica and Encarta in the dust, such scale and breadth places
Wikipedia on par with such historical milestones as Pliny the Elder’s
Naturalis Historia, the Ming Dynasty’s Wen-hsien ta- ch’ eng, and the
key work of French Enlightenment, the Encyclopedie. <span id="more-10604"></span>The multilingual Wikipedia as digital
collaborative and fluid knowledge production platform might be said to
be the most visible and successful example of the migration of FLOSS
(Free/ Libre/ Open Source Software) principles into mainstream culture.
However, such celebration should contain critical insights, informed by
the changing realities of the Internet at large and the Wikipedia
project in particular.</p>
<p>The CPOV Research Initiative was founded from the urge to stimulate
critical Wikipedia research: quantitative and qualitative research that
could benefit both the wide user-base and the active Wikipedia community
itself. On top of this, Wikipedia offers critical insights into the
contemporary status of knowledge, its organizing principles, function,
and impact; its production styles, mechanisms for conflict resolution
and power (re-)constitution. The overarching research agenda is at once a
philosophical, epistemological and theoretical investigation of
knowledge artifacts, cultural production and social relations, and an
empirical investigation of the specific phenomenon of the Wikipedia.</p>
<p>Conference Themes: Wiki Theory, Encyclopedia Histories, Wiki Art,
Wikipedia Analytics, Designing Debate and Global Issues and Outlooks.</p>
<p>Follow the live tweets on http://twitter.com/#search?q=%23CPOV</p>
<p>Confirmed speakers: Florian Cramer (DE/NL), Andrew Famiglietti (UK),
Stuart Geiger (USA), Hendrik-Jan Grievink (NL), Charles van den Heuvel
(NL), Jeanette Hofmann (DE), Athina Karatzogianni (UK), Scott Kildall
(USA), Patrick Lichty (USA), Hans Varghese Mathews (IN), Teemu Mikkonen
(FI), Mayo Fuster Morell (IT), Mathieu O’Neil (AU), Felipe Ortega (ES),
Dan O’Sullivan (UK), Joseph Reagle (USA), Ramón Reichert (AU), Richard
Rogers (USA/NL), Alan Shapiro (USA/DE), Maja van der Velden (NL/NO),
Gérard Wormser (FR).</p>
<p>Editorial team: Sabine Niederer and Geert Lovink (Amsterdam), Nishant
Shah and Sunil Abraham (Bangalore), Johanna Niesyto (Siegen), Nathaniel
Tkacz (Melbourne). Project manager CPOV Amsterdam: Margreet Riphagen.
Research intern: Juliana Brunello. Production intern: Serena Westra.</p>
<p>The CPOV conference in Amsterdam will be the second conference of the
CPOV Wikipedia Research Initiative. The launch of the initiative took
place in Bangalore India, with the conference WikiWars in January 2010.
After the first two events, the CPOV organization will work on
producing a reader, to be launched early 2011. For more information or
submitting a <a href="http://networkcultures.org/wpmu/cpov/reader">reader</a>
contribution.</p>
<p>Buy your ticket <a href="http://networkcultures.org/wpmu/cpov/practical-info/tickets/">online</a>
(with iDeal), or register by sending an email to: info (at)
networkcultures.org. One day ticket: €25, students and OBA members:
€12,50. Full conference pass (2 days): €40, students and OBA members:
25.</p>
<p>Organized by the Institute of Network Cultures Amsterdam, in
cooperation with the Centre for Internet and Society in Bangalore,
India.</p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/research/conferences/conference-blogs/cpov'>http://editors.cis-india.org/research/conferences/conference-blogs/cpov</a>
</p>
No publishernishantConferenceOpen StandardsDigital ActivismDigital GovernanceDigital AccessPublic AccountabilityResearchFeatured2011-08-23T02:52:25ZBlog EntryCritical Point of View: Videos
http://editors.cis-india.org/research/conferences/conference-blogs/cpovvid
<b>The Second event for the Critical Point of View reader on Wikipedia was held in Amsterdam, by the Institute of Network Cultures and the Centre for Internet and Society. A wide range of scholars, academics, researchers, practitioners, artists and users came together to discuss questions on design, analytics, access, education, theory, art, history and processes of knowledge production. The videos for the full event are now available for free viewing and dissemination.</b>
<pre>These are the links to the videos of all the talks for the CPoV Conference
in Amsterdam - Enjoy!
SESSION 1
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://vimeo.com/10605801">http://vimeo.com/10605801</a> Ramon Reichert (AT)
Rethinking Wikipedia: Power, Knowledge and the Technologies of the Self
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://vimeo.com/10606220">http://vimeo.com/10606220</a> Jeanette Hofmann (DE)
Wikipedia between Emancipation and Self-Regulation
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://vimeo.com/10606547">http://vimeo.com/10606547</a> Mathieu O’Neil
(AU) The Critique of Law in Free Online Projects
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://vimeo.com/10696489">http://vimeo.com/10696489</a> Gerard Wormser(FR)
The Knowledge Bar
SESSION 2
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://vimeo.com/10607993">http://vimeo.com/10607993</a> Joseph Reagle (USA)
Wikipedia and Encyclopedic Anxiety
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://vimeo.com/10608291">http://vimeo.com/10608291</a> Charles van den Heuvel (NL)
Authoritative Annotations, Encyclopedia Universalis Mundaneum, Wikipedia
and the Stanford Encycloped
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://vimeo.com/10697853">http://vimeo.com/10697853</a> Dan O’Sullivan (UK)
An Encyclopedia for the Times: Thoughts on Wikipedia from a His- torical
Perspective
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://vimeo.com/10699949">http://vimeo.com/10699949</a> Alan Shapiro (USA/DE)
Gustave Flaubert Laughs at Wikipedia
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.vimeo.com/10607690">http://www.vimeo.com/10607690</a> Discussion session 2 Encyclopedia Histories
Moderaror: Nathaniel Tkacz
Speakers: Joseph Reagle, Charles van den Heuvel, Dan O'Sullivan, Alan Shapiro
SESSION 3
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.vimeo.com/10701587">http://www.vimeo.com/10701587</a> Hendrik-Jan Grievink (NL)
Wiki Loves Art
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.vimeo.com/10702729">http://www.vimeo.com/10702729</a> Scott Kildall (USA)
Wikipedia Art: Citation as Performative Act
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://vimeo.com/10741921">http://vimeo.com/10741921</a> Patrick Lichty (USA)
Social Media, Cultural Scaffolds, and Molecular Hegemonies. Musings on
Anarchic Media, WIKIs, and De-territorialized Art
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.vimeo.com/10607690">http://www.vimeo.com/10607690</a> Discussion session 3 Wiki Art
Moderator: Rachel Somers Miles
Speakers: Hendrik-Jan Grievink, Scott Kildall, Patrick Lichty
SESSION 4
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://vimeo.com/10747211">http://vimeo.com/10747211</a> Felipe Ortega (ES)
New Trends in the Evolution of Wikipedia
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://vimeo.com/10748335">http://vimeo.com/10748335</a> Stuart Geiger (USA)
Bot Politics: The Domination, Subversion, and Negotiation of Code in
Wikipedia
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://vimeo.com/10748727">http://vimeo.com/10748727</a> Hans Varghese Mathews (IN)
Clustering the Contributors to a Wikipedia Page
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://vimeo.com/10748888">http://vimeo.com/10748888</a> Esther Weltevrede (NL) and Erik Borra (BE/NL)
Controversy Analysis with Wikipedia
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.vimeo.com/10749027">http://www.vimeo.com/10749027</a> Discussion session 4 Wiki Analytics
Moderator: NIshant Shah
Speakers: Felipe Ortega, Stuart Geiger, Hans Varghese Mathews, Esther
Weltevrede & Erik Borra
SESSION 5
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://vimeo.com/10750350">http://vimeo.com/10750350</a> Lawrence Liang (IN)
Wikipedia and the authority of knowledge
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://vimeo.com/10750495">http://vimeo.com/10750495</a> Teemu Mikkonen (FI)
Kosovo War on Wikipedia, Tracing the Conflict and Concensus on the
Wikipedia Talk pages
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://vimeo.com/10799887">http://vimeo.com/10799887</a> Andrew Famiglietti (USA)
Negotiating the Neutral Point of View: Politics and the Moral Economy of
Wikipedia
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://vimeo.com/10772241">http://vimeo.com/10772241</a> Florian Cramer(DE/NL)
The German WikiWars and the limits of objectivism
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.vimeo.com/10799600">http://www.vimeo.com/10799600</a> Discussion session 5 Designing Debate
Moderator: Caroline Nevejan
Speakers: Lawrence Liang, Teemu Mikkonen, Andrew Famiglietti, Florian Cramer
SESSION 6
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://vimeo.com/10772313">http://vimeo.com/10772313</a> Mayo Fuster Morell (IT)
Wikimedia Governance: The Role of the Wikimedia Foundation and the Form
and Geopolitics of its Internationalization
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://vimeo.com/10800562">http://vimeo.com/10800562</a> Athina Karatzogianni (UK)
Wikipedia’s Impact on the Global Power-Knowledge Hierarchies
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://vimeo.com/10800100">http://vimeo.com/10800100</a> Maja van der Velden (NL/NO)
When Knowledges Meet: Database Design and the Performance of Knowledge
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://vimeo.com/10800206">http://vimeo.com/10800206</a> Amit Basole (IN)
Knowledge Satyagraha: Towards a People’s Knowledge Movement
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.vimeo.com/10800354">http://www.vimeo.com/10800354</a> Discussion session 6 Global Issues and Outlooks
Moderator: Johanna Niesyto
Speakers: Mayo Fuster Morell, Athina Karatzogianni, Maja van der Velden,
Amit Basole
</pre>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/research/conferences/conference-blogs/cpovvid'>http://editors.cis-india.org/research/conferences/conference-blogs/cpovvid</a>
</p>
No publishernishantConferenceArtFeaturedCyberculturesCommunitiesCPOV2010-04-20T20:04:31ZBlog EntryLocating Internets: Histories of the Internet(s) in India — Research Training and Curriculum Workshop: Call for Participation
http://editors.cis-india.org/research/conferences/conference-blogs/workshop
<b>Deadline for submission: 26th July 2011-06-08;
When: 19th - 22nd August, 2011;
Where: Centre for Environmental Planning and Technology (CEPT) University, Ahmedabad;
Organised by: Centre for Internet and Society, Bangalore and CEPT University, Ahmedabad.
Please Note: Travel support is only available for domestic travel within India.</b>
<p>LOCATING INTERNETS is an innovative, multi-disciplinary, workshop that engages with some of the most crucial debates around Internet and Society within academic scholarship, discourse and practice in India. It explores Where, When, How and What has changed with the emergence of Internet and Digital Technologies in the country. The Internet is not a singular monolithic entity but is articulated in various forms – sometimes materially, through accessing the web; at others, through our experiences; and yet others through imaginations of policy and law. Internets have become a part of our everyday practice, from museums and archives, to school and university programmes, living rooms and public spaces, relationships and our bodily lived realities. It becomes necessary to reconfigure our existing concepts, frameworks and ideas to make sense of the rapidly digitising world around us. The Internet is no longer contained in niche disciplines or specialised everyday practices. LOCATING INTERNETS invites scholars, teachers, researchers, advanced research students and educationalists from any discipline to learn and discuss how to ask new questions and design innovative curricula in their discipline by introducing concepts and ideas from path-breaking research in India.</p>
<p>Comprised of training, public lectures, open discussion spaces, and hands-on curriculum building exercises, this workshop will introduce the participants to contemporary debates, help them articulate concerns and problems from their own research and practice, and build knowledge clusters to develop innovative and open curricula which can be implemented in interdisciplinary undergraduate spaces in the country. It showcases the research outputs produced by the Centre for Internet and Society’s Researchers @ Work Programme, and brings together nine researchers to talk about alternative histories, processes, and bodies of the Internets, and how they can be integrated into mainstream pedagogic practices and teaching environments.</p>
<h3>Knowledge Clusters for the Workshop</h3>
<p>LOCATING INTERNETS is designed innovatively to accommodate for various intellectual and practice based needs of the participants. While the aim is to introduce the participants to a wide interdisciplinary range of scholarship, we also hope to address particular disciplinary and scholarly concerns of the participants. The workshop is further divided into three knowledge clusters which help the participants to focus their energies and ideas in the course of the four days.</p>
<ul><li><strong>Bridging the Gap</strong>: This workshop seeks to break away from the utopian public discourse of the Internets as a-historical and completely dis-attached from existing technology ecologies in the country. This knowledge cluster intends to produce frameworks that help us contextualize the contemporary internet policy, discourse and practice within larger geo-political and socio-historical flows and continuities in Modern India. The first cluster chartsdifferent pre-histories of the Internets, mapping the continuities and ruptures through philosophy of techno-science, archiving practices, and electronifcation of governments,to develop new technology-society perspectives.</li><li><strong>Paradigms of Practice</strong>:One of the biggest concerns about Internet studies in India and other similar developed contexts is the object oriented approach that looks largely at specific usages, access, infrastructure, etc. However, it is necessary to understand that the Internet is not merely a tool or a gadget. The growth of Internets produces systemic changes at the level of process and thought. The technologies often get appropriated for governance both by the state and the civil society, producing new processes and dissonances which need to be charted. The second cluster looks at certain contemporary processes that the digital and Internet technologies change drastically in order to recalibrate the relationship between the state, the market and the citizen.</li><li><strong>Feet on the Ground</strong>: The third cluster looks at contemporary practices of the Internet to understand the recent histories of movements, activism and cultural practices online. It offers an innovative way of understanding the physical objects and bodies that undergo dramatic transitions as digital technologies become pervasive, persuasive and ubiquitous. It draws upon historical discourse, everyday practices and cultural performances to form new ways of formulating and articulating the shapes and forms of social and cultural structures.</li></ul>
<h3>Workshop Outcomes</h3>
<p>The participants are expected to engage with issue of Internet and it various systemic processes through their own disciplinary interests. Apart from lectures and orientation sessions, the participants will actively work on their own project ideas during the period in groups and will be guided by experts. The final outcome of the workshops would be curriculum for undergraduate and graduate teaching space of various disciplines in the country.</p>
<h3>Participation Guidelines</h3>
<p>LOCATING INTERNETS is now accepting submissions from interested participants in the following format:</p>
<ol><li>Name:</li><li>Institutional affiliation and title:</li><li>Address:</li><li>Email address:</li><li>Phone number:</li><li>A brief resume of work experience (max. 350 words)</li><li>Statement of interest (max. 350 words)</li><li>Key concerns you want to address in the Internet and Society field (max. 350 words)</li><li>Identification with one Knowledge-cluster of the workshop and a proposal for integrating it in your research/teaching practice (max. 500 words)</li><li>Current interface with technologies in your pedagogic practices (max. 350 words)</li><li>Additional information or relevant hyperlinks you might want to add (Max. 10 lines)<br /></li></ol>
<pre>Notes:</pre>
<ul><li>Submissions will be accepted only from participants in India, as attachments in .doc, .docx or .odt formats at <a class="external-link" href="mailto:locatinginternets@cis-india.org">locatingInternets@cis-india.org</a></li><li>Submissions made beyond 26th July 2011 may not be considered for participation. <br /></li><li>Submissions will be scrutinized by the organisers and selected participants will be informed by the 30th July 2011, about their participation.</li><li>Selected participants will be required to make their own travel arrangements to the workshop. A 2nd A.C. train return fare will be reimbursed to the participants. Shared accommodation and selected meals will be provided at the workshop.</li><li>A limited number of air-fare reimbursements will be available to participants in extraordinary circumstances. All travel support is only available for domestic travel in the country.<br /></li></ul>
<p><strong>Chairs</strong>: Nishant Shah, Director-Research, Centre for Internet and Society Bangalore;</p>
<p>Pratyush Shankar, Associate Professor & Head of Undergraduate Program, Faculty of Architecture, CEPT University</p>
<p><strong>Supported by</strong>: Kusuma Foundation, Hyderabad</p>
<p><strong>Experts</strong>:Anja Kovacs, Arun Menon, Asha Achuthan, Ashish Rajadhykasha, Aparna Balachandran, Namita Malhotra, Nithin Manayath, Nithya Vasudevan, Pratyush Shankar, Rochelle Pinto and Zainab Bawa</p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/research/conferences/conference-blogs/workshop'>http://editors.cis-india.org/research/conferences/conference-blogs/workshop</a>
</p>
No publisherpraskrishnaDevelopmentGamingDigital ActivismDigital GovernanceResearchCISRAWFeaturedCyberculturesarchivesNew PedagogiesWorkshopIT Cities2011-07-21T06:00:39ZBlog EntryBig Data and Positive Social Change in the Developing World: A White Paper for Practitioners and Researchers
http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/big-data-and-positive-social-change-in-developing-world
<b>I was a part of a working group writing a white paper on big data and social change, over the last six months. This white paper was produced by a group of activists, researchers and data experts who met at the Rockefeller Foundation’s Bellagio Centre to discuss the question of whether, and how, big data is becoming a resource for positive social change in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs).</b>
<hr />
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Bellagio Big Data Workshop Participants. (2014). “Big data and positive social change in the developing world: A white paper for practitioners and researchers.” Oxford: Oxford Internet Institute. Available online: <a class="external-link" href="http://ssrn.com/abstract=2491555">http://ssrn.com/abstract=2491555</a>.</p>
<h2>Summary</h2>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Our working definition of big data includes, but is not limited to, sources such as social media, mobile phone use, digitally mediated transactions, the online news media, and administrative records. It can be categorised as data that is provided explicitly (e.g. social media feedback); data that is observed (e.g. mobile phone call records); and data that is inferred and derived by algorithms (for example social network structure or inflation rates). We defined four main areas where big data has potential for those interested in promoting positive social change: advocating and facilitating; describing and predicting; facilitating information exchange and promoting accountability and transparency.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">In terms of <span class="ff5">advocating and facilitating</span>,<span class="_0 _"> </span> we discussed ways in which volunteered data may <span class="_0 _"> </span>help organisations to open up new public spa<span class="_0 _"></span>ces for discussion and awareness<span class="_0 _"></span>-building; how both aggregating data and working across different databa<span class="_0 _"></span>ses can be tools for building awa<span class="_0 _"></span>reness, and howthe digital data commons can also configure new<span class="_0 _"></span><span class="ff5"> </span>communities and actions<span class="_0 _"></span> (sometimes serendipitously) through data science and aggregation. Finally, we also<span class="_0 _"></span> looked at the problem of overexposure and ho<span class="_0 _"></span>wactivists and organisations can<span class="_0 _"></span> protect themselves and hide their digital footprin<span class="_0 _"></span>ts. The challenges w<span class="ls2">e</span> identified in this area were how to interpret data<span class="_0 _"></span> correctly when supplementary information may b<span class="_0 _"></span>e lacking; organisational capacity constraints aro<span class="_0 _"></span>und processing and storing data,<span class="_0 _"></span> and issues around data dissemination, i.e. the pos<span class="_0 _"></span>sible negative consequences of inadvertently ide<span class="_0 _"></span>ntifying groups or individuals<span class="_0 _"></span>.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Next, we looked at the way big data can help describe and predict, functions which are particularly important in the academic, development and humanitarian areas of work where researchers can combine data into new dynamic, high-resolution datasets to detect new correlations and surface new questions. With data such as mobile phone data and Twitter analytics, understanding the data’s comprehensiveness, meaning and bias are the main challenges, accompanied by the problem of developing new and more comprehensive ethical systems to protect data subjects where data is observed rather than volunteered.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The next group of activities discussed was facilitating information exchange. We looked at mobile-based information services, where it is possible for a platform created around a particular aim (e.g. agricultural knowledge-building) to incorporate multiple feedback loops which feed into both research and action. The pitfalls include the technical challenge of developing a platform which is lean yet multifaceted in terms of its uses, and particularly making it reliably available to low-income users. This kind of platform, addressed by big data analytics, also offers new insights through data discovery and allows the provider to steer service provision according to users’ revealed needs and priorities.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Our last category for big data use was accountability and transparency, where organisations are using crowdsourcing methods to aggregate and analyse information in real time to establish new spaces for critical discussion, awareness and action. Flows of digital information can be managed to prioritise participation and feedback, provide a safe space to engage with policy decisions and expose abuse. The main challenges are how to keep sensitive information (and informants) safe while also exposing data and making authorities accountable; how to make the work sustainable without selling data, and how to establish feedback loops so that users remain involved in the work beyond an initial posting. In the crowdsourcing context, new challenges are also arising in terms of how to verify and moderate real-time flows of information, and how to make this process itself transparent.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Finally, we also discussed the relationship between big and open data. Open data can be seen as a system of governance and a knowledge commons, whereas big data does not by its nature involve the idea of the commons, so we leaned toward the term ‘opening data’, i.e. processes which could apply to commercially generated as much as public-sector datasets. It is also important to understand where to prioritise opening, and where this may exclude people who are not using the ‘right’ technologies: for example, analogue methods (e.g. nailing a local authority budget to a town hall door every month) may be more open than ‘open’ digital data that’s available online.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Our discussion surfaced many questions to do with representation and meaning: must datasets be interpreted by people with local knowledge? For researchers to get access to data that is fully representative, do we need a data commons? How are data proprietors engaging with the power dynamics and inequalities in the research field, and how can civil society engage with the private sector on its own terms if data access is skewed towards elites? We also looked at issues of privacy and risk: do we need a contextual risk perspective rather than a single set of standards? What is the role of local knowledge in protecting data subjects, and what kinds of institutions and practices are necessary? We concluded that there is a case to be made for building a data commons for private/public data, and for setting up new and more appropriate ethical guidelines to deal with big data, since aggregating, linking and merging data present new kinds of privacy risk. In particular, organisations advocating for opening datasets must admit the limitations of anonymisation, which is currently being ascribed more power to protect data subjects than it merits in the era of big data.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Our analysis makes a strong case that it is time for civil society groups in particular to become part of the conversation about the power of data. These groups are the connectors between individuals and governments, corporations and governance institutions, and have the potential to promote big data analysis that is locally driven and rooted. Civil society groups are also crucially important but currently underrepresented in debates about privacy and the rights of technology users, and civil society as a whole has a responsibility for building critical awareness of the ways big data is being used to sort, categorise and intervene in LMICs by corporations, governments and other actors. Big data is shaping up to be one of the key battlefields of our era, incorporating many of the issues civil society activists worldwide have been working on for decades. We hope that this paper can inform organisations and<br />individuals as to where their particular interests may gain traction in the debate, and what their contribution may look like.</p>
<hr />
<p><b><a class="external-link" href="http://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/big-data-and-positive-social-change.pdf">Click to download the full white paper here</a></b>. (PDF, 1.95 Mb)</p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/big-data-and-positive-social-change-in-developing-world'>http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/big-data-and-positive-social-change-in-developing-world</a>
</p>
No publishernishantBig DataPrivacyInternet GovernanceFeaturedOpennessHomepage2014-10-01T03:52:35ZBlog EntryAn Analysis of the Cases Filed under Section 46 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 for Adjudication in the State of Maharashtra
http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/analysis-of-cases-filed-under-sec-48-it-act-for-adjudication-maharashtra
<b>This is a brief review of some of the cases related to privacy filed under section 46 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 ("the Act") seeking adjudication for alleged contraventions of the Act in the State of Maharashtra. </b>
<h3>Background</h3>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Section 46 of the Act grants the Central Government the power to appoint an adjudicating officer to hold an enquiry to adjudge, upon complaints being filed before that adjudicating officer, contraventions of the Act. The adjudicating officer may be of the Central Government or of the State Government [see section 46(1) of the Act], must have field experience with information technology and law [see section 46(3) of the Act] and exercises jurisdiction over claims for damages up to `5,00,00,000 [see section 46(1A) of the Act]. For the purpose of adjudication, the officer is vested with certain powers of a civil court [see section 46(5) of the Act] and must follow basic principles of natural justice while conducting adjudications [see section 46(2) of the Act]. Hence, the adjudicating officer appointed under section 46 is a quasi-judicial authority.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">In addition, the quasi-judicial adjudicating officer may impose penalties, thereby vesting him with some of the powers of a criminal court [see section 46(2) of the Act], and award compensation, the quantum of which is to be determined after taking into account factors including unfair advantage, loss and repeat offences [see section 47 of the Act]. The adjudicating officer may impose penalties for any of the offences described in section 43, section 44 and section 45 of the Act; and, further, may award compensation for losses suffered as a result of contraventions of section 43 and section 43A. The text of these sections is reproduced in the Schedule below. Further law as to the appointment of the adjudicating officer and the procedure attendant on all adjudications was made by Information Technology (Qualification and Experience of Adjudicating Officers and the Manner of Holding Enquiry) Rules, 2003.<a href="#fn1" name="fr1">[1]</a></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">It is clear that the adjudicating officer is vested with significant judicial powers, including the power to enforce certain criminal penalties, and is an important quasi-judicial authority.</p>
<h3 style="text-align: justify; ">Excursus</h3>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">At the outset, it is important to understand the distinction between compensation and damages. Compensation is a sum of money awarded by a civil court, before or along with the primary decree, to indemnify a person for injury or loss. It is usually awarded to a person who has a suffered a monetary loss as a result of the acts or omissions of another party. Its quantification is usually guided by principles of equity. [See <i>Shantilal Mangaldas</i> AIR 1969 SC 634 and <i>Ranbir Kumar Arora</i> AIR 1983 P&H 431]. On the hand, damages are punitive and, in addition to restoring an indemnitee to wholeness, may be imposed to deter an offender, punish exemplary offences, and recover consequential losses, amongst other objectives. Damages that are punitive, while not judicially popular in India, are usually imposed by a criminal court in common law jurisdictions. They are distinct from civil and equitable actions. [See the seminal case of <i>The Owners of the Steamship Mediana</i> [1900] AC 113 (HL)].</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Unfortunately, section 46 of the Act uses the terms “damage”, “injury” and “compensation” interchangeably without regard for the long and rich jurisprudence that finds them to be different concepts.</p>
<h3 style="text-align: justify; ">The Cases related to Privacy</h3>
<p>In the State of Maharashtra, there have been a total of 47 cases filed under section 46 of the Act. Of these, 33 cases have been disposed of by the Adjudicating Officer and 14 are currently pending disposal. <a href="#fn2" name="fr2">[2]</a> At least three of these cases before the Adjudicating Officer deal with issues related to privacy of communications and personal data. They are:</p>
<table class="plain">
<tbody>
<tr>
<th>Case Title</th><th>Forum</th><th>Date</th>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
<p><i>Vinod Kaushik</i> v. <i>Madhvika Joshi</i></p>
</td>
<td>Shri Rajesh Aggarwal<br />Adjudicating Officer, <i>ex-officio Secretary</i>, IT<br />Government of Maharashtra</td>
<td>10.10.2011</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><i>Amit D. Patwardhan</i> v. <i>Rud India Chains</i></td>
<td>Shri Rajesh Aggarwal<br />Adjudicating Officer, <i>ex-officio</i><br />Secretary, IT<br />Government of Maharashtra</td>
<td>15.04.2013</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><i>Nirmalkumar Bagherwal</i> v. <i>Minal Bagherwal</i></td>
<td>Shri Rajesh Aggarwal<br />Adjudicating Officer, <i>ex-officio Secretary</i>, IT<br />Government of Maharashtra<br /></td>
<td>26.08.2013</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">In all three cases the Adjudicating Officer was called upon to determine and penalise unauthorised access to personal data of the complainants. In the <i>Vinod Kaushik</i> case, the complainants’ emails and chat sessions were accessed, copied and made available to the police for legal proceedings without the permission of the complainants. In the <i>Amit Patwardhan</i> and <i>Nirmalkumar Bagherwal</i> cases, the complainants’ financial information in the form of bank account statements were obtained from their respective banks without their consent and used against them in legal proceedings.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The <i>Vinod Kaushik</i> complaint was filed in 2010 for privacy violations committed between 2008 and 2009. The complaint was made against the complainant’s daughter-in-law – the respondent, who was estranged from her husband, the complainant’s son. The respondent had, independent of the proceedings before the Adjudicating Officer, instituted criminal proceedings alleging cruelty and dowry-related harassment against her estranged husband and the complainant. To support some of the claims made in the criminal proceedings, the respondent accessed the email accounts of her estranged husband and the complainant and printed copies of certain communications, both emails and chat transcripts. The complaint to the Adjudicating Officer was made in relation to these emails and chat transcripts that were obtained without the consent and knowledge of the complainant and his son. On 09.08.2010, the then Adjudicating Officer dismissed the complaint after finding that, owing to the marriage between the respondent and the complainant’s son, there was a relation of mutual trust between them that resulted in the complainant and his son consensually sharing their email account passwords with the respondent. This ruling was appealed to the Cyber Appellate Tribunal (<b>"CyAT"</b>) which, in a decision of 29.06.2011, found irregularities in the complainant’s son’s privity to the proceedings and remanded the complaint to the Adjudicating Officer for re-adjudication. The re-adjudication, which was conducted by Shri Rajesh Aggarwal as Adjudicating Officer, resulted in a final order of 10.10.2011 (<b>"the final order"</b>) that is the subject of this analysis. The final order found that the respondent had violated the privacy of the complainant and his son by her unauthorised access of their email accounts and sharing of their private communications. However, the Adjudicating Officer found that the intent of the unauthorised access – to obtain evidence to support a criminal proceeding – was mitigatory and hence ordered the respondent to pay only a small token amount in compensation, not to the complainants but instead to the State Treasury. The Delhi High Court, which was moved in appeal because the CyAT was non-functional, upheld the final order in its decision of 27.01.2012.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The <i>Amit Patwardhan</i> complaint was filed against the complainant’s ex-employer – the respondent, for illegally obtaining copies of the complainant’s bank account statement. The complainant had left the employ of the respondent to work with a competing business company but not before colluding with the competing business company and diverting the respondent’s customers to them. For redress, the respondent filed suit for a decree of compensation and lead the complainant’s bank statements in evidence to prove unlawful gratification. Since the bank statements were obtained electronically by the respondent without the complainant’s consent, the jurisdiction of the Adjudicating Officer was invoked. In his order of 15.04.2013, Shri Rajesh Aggarwal, the Adjudicating Officer, found that the respondent had, by unlawfully obtaining the complainant’s bank account statements which constitute sensitive personal data, violated the complainant’s privacy. The Adjudicating Officer astutely applied the equitable doctrine of clean hands to deny compensation to the complainant; however, because the complainant’s bank was not a party to the complaint, the Adjudicating Officer was unable to make a ruling on the lack of action by the bank to protect the sensitive personal data of its depositors.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The <i>Nirmalkumar Bagherwal</i> complaint bears a few similarities to the preceding two cases. Like the <i>Vinod Kaushik</i> matter, the issue concerned the manner in which a wife, estranged but still legally married, accessed electronic records of personal data of the complainants; and, like the <i>Amit Patwardhan</i> matter, the object of the privacy violation was the bank account statements of the complainants that constitute sensitive personal data. The respondent was the estranged wife of one of the complainants who, along with his complainant father, managed the third complainant company. To support her claim for maintenance from the complainant and his family in an independent legal proceeding, the respondent obtained certain bank account statements of the complainants without their consent and, possibly, with the collusion of the respondent bank. After reviewing relevant law from the European Union and the United States, and observant of relevant sectoral regulations applicable in India including the relevant Master Circular of the Reserve Bank of India, and further noting preceding consumer case law on the subject, the Adjudicating Officer issued an order on 26.08.2013. The order found that the complainant’s right to privacy was violated by both the respondents but, while determining the quantum of compensation, distinguished between the respondents in respect of the degree of liability; the respondent wife was ordered to pay a token compensation amount while the respondent bank was ordered to pay higher compensation to each of the three complainants individually.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The high quality of each of the three orders bears specific mention. Despite the superb quality of the judgments of the Indian higher judiciary in the decades after independence, the overall quality of judgment-writing appears to have declined. <a href="#fn3" name="fr3">[3]</a> In the last decade, several Indian judges have called for higher standards of judgment writing from their fellow judges. <a href="#fn4" name="fr4">[4]</a> In this background, it is notable that Shri Rajesh Aggarwal, despite not being a member of the judiciary, has delivered well-reasoned, articulate and clear orders that are cognisant of legal issues and also easily understandable to a non-legal reader.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">In each of these cases, the Adjudicating Officer has successfully navigated around the fact that none of the primary parties were interacting and transacting at arm’s length. In the <i>Vinod Kaushik</i> and <i>Nirmalkumar Bagherwal</i> matters, the primary parties were estranged but still legally married partners and in the <i>Amit Patwardhan</i> matter the parties were in an employer-employee relationship. The first Adjudicating Officer in the <i>Vinod Kaushik</i> matter failed, in his order of 09.08.2010, to appreciate that the individual communications of individual persons were privileged by an expectation of privacy, regardless of their relationship. Hence, despite acknowledging that the marital partners in that matter were in conflict with each other, and despite being told by one party that the other party’s access to those private communications was made without consent, the Adjudicating Officer allowed his non-judicial opinion of marriage to influence his order. This mistake was corrected when the matter was remanded for re-adjudication. In the re-adjudication, the new Adjudicating Officer correctly noted that the respondent wife could have chosen to approach the police or a court to follow the proper investigative procedure for accessing emails and other private communications of another person and that her unauthorised use of the complainant’s passwords amounted to a violation of their privacy.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Popular conceptions of different types of relationships may affect the (quasi) judicial imagination of privacy. In comparison to the <i>Vinod Kaushik</i> matter, the <i>Nirmalkumar Bagherwal</i> and <i>Amit Patwardhan</i> matters both dealt with unauthorised access to bank account statements, by a wife and by an ex-employer respectively. In any event, the same Adjudicating Officer presided over all three matters and correctly found that the facts in all three matters admitted to contraventions of the privacy of the complainants. The conjecture as to whether the first Adjudicating Officer in the <i>Vinod Kaushik</i> matter would have applied the same standard of family unity to unauthorised access of bank account statements by an estranged wife who was seeking maintenance remains untested. However, the reliance placed on the decision of the Delhi State Consumer Protection Commission in the matter of <i>Rupa Mahajan Pahwa,</i> <a href="#fn5" name="fr5">[5]</a> where the Commission found that unauthorised access to a bank pass book by an estranged husband violated the privacy of the wife, would suggest that judges clothe financial information with a standard of privacy higher than that given to emails.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Emails are a form of electronic communication. The <i>PUCL</i> case (Supreme Court of India, 1996)<a href="#fn6" name="fr6">[6]</a> while it did not explicitly deal with the standard of protection accorded to emails, held that personal communications were protected by an individual right to privacy that emanated from the protection of personal liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Following the <i>Maneka Gandhi</i> case (Supreme Court of India, 1978)<a href="#fn7" name="fr7">[7]</a></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">it is settled that persons may be deprived of their personal liberty only by a just, fair and reasonable procedure established by law. As a result, interceptions of private communications that are protected by Article 21 may only be conducted in pursuance of such a procedure. This procedure exists in the form of the Information Technology (Procedure and Safeguards for Interception, Monitoring and Decryption of Information) Rules, 2009 that came into effect on 27 October 2009 (<b>"the Interception Rules"</b>). The Interception Rules set out a regime for accessing private emails in certain conditions. The powers and procedure of Section 91 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (<b>"CrPC")</b> may also apply to obtain data at rest, such as emails stored in an inbox or sent-mail folder.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Finally, the orders of the Adjudicating Officer reveal a well-reasoned and progressive understanding of the law and principles relating to the quantification of compensation. By choosing to impose larger amounts of compensation on the bank that violated the privacy of the complainant in the <i>Nirmalkumar Bagherwal</i> matter, the Adjudicating Officer has indicated that the institutions that hold sensitive personal data, such as financial information, are subject to a higher duty of care in relation of it. But, most importantly, the act of imposing monetary compensation of privacy violations is a step forward because, for the first time in India, it recognises that privacy violations are civil wrongs or injuries that demand compensation.</p>
<hr />
<p style="text-align: justify; ">[<a href="#fr1" name="fn1">1</a>]. These Rules were issued <i>vide</i> GSR 220(E), dated 17 March 2003 and published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part II, Section 3(i). These Rules can be accessed here – <a href="http://it.maharashtra.gov.in/PDF/Qual_ExpAdjudicatingOfficer_Manner_of_Holding_Enquiry_Rules.PDF">http://it.maharashtra.gov.in/PDF/Qual_ExpAdjudicatingOfficer_Manner_of_Holding_Enquiry_Rules.PDF</a> (visited on 30 September 2013).</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr2" name="fn2">2</a>]. These cases and statistics may be viewed here – <a href="http://it.maharashtra.gov.in/1089/IT-Act-Judgements">http://it.maharashtra.gov.in/1089/IT-Act-Judgements</a> (visited on 30 September 2013).</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">[<a href="#fr3" name="fn3">3</a>]. See generally, Upendra Baxi “"The Fair Name of Justice": The Memorable Voyage of Chief Justice Chandrachud” in <i>A Chandrachud Reader</i> (Justice V. S. Deshpande ed., Delhi: Documentation Centre <i>etc.</i>, 1985) and, Rajeev Dhavan, "Judging the Judges" in <i>Judges and the Judicial Power: Essays in Honour of Justice V. R. Krishna Iyer</i> (Rajeev Dhavan and Salman Khurshid eds., London: Sweet & Maxwell, 1985).</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">[<a href="#fr4" name="fn4">4</a>]. See generally, Justice B.G .Harindranath, <i>Art of Writing Judgments</i> (Bangalore: Karnataka Judicial Academy, 2004); Justice T .S. Sivagnanam, <i>The Salient Features of the Art of Writing Orders and Judgments</i> (Chennai: Tamil Nadu State Judicial Academy, 2010); and, Justice Sunil Ambwani, “Writing Judgments: Comparative Models” Presentation at the National Judicial Academy, Bhopal (2006) available here – <a href="http://districtcourtallahabad.up.nic.in/articles/writing%20judgment.pdf">http://districtcourtallahabad.up.nic.in/articles/writing%20judgment.pdf</a> (visited on 29 Sep 2013).</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">[<a href="#fr5" name="fn5">5</a>]. Appeal No. FA-2008/659 of the Delhi State Consumer Protection Commission, decided on 16 October 2008.</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr6" name="fn6">6</a>]. (1997) 1 SCC 301.</p>
<p>[<a href="#fr7" name="fn7">7</a>]. (1978) 1 SCC 248.</p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/analysis-of-cases-filed-under-sec-48-it-act-for-adjudication-maharashtra'>http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/analysis-of-cases-filed-under-sec-48-it-act-for-adjudication-maharashtra</a>
</p>
No publisherbhairavFeaturedInternet GovernancePrivacy2013-10-01T15:29:46ZBlog EntryNet Neutrality Resources
http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/resources/net-neutrality-resources
<b>Submissions by the Centre for Internet and Society to TRAI and DoT, 2015-2017.</b>
<p> </p>
<ul>
<li><a href="http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/resources/net-neutrality/2015-06-29_PositionPaperonNetNeutralityinIndia" class="external-link">Submission for TRAI Consultation on Regulatory Framework for Over-the-Top Services</a> (June 29, 2015)</li>
<li><a href="http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/resources/net-neutrality/2016-01-07_cis_trai-submission_differential-pricing" class="external-link">Submission to TRAI Consultation on Differential Pricing</a> (January 7, 2016)</li>
<li><a href="http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/resources/net-neutrality/2016-01-14_cis_trai-counter-comments_differential-pricing" class="external-link">Counter Comments to TRAI on Differential Pricing</a> (January 14, 2016)</li>
<li><a href="http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/resources/net-neutrality/trai-consultation-on-differential-pricing-for-data-services-post-open-house-discussion-submission" class="external-link">TRAI Consultation on Differential Pricing for Data Services: Post-Open House Discussion Submission</a> (January 25, 2016)</li>
<li><a class="external-link" href="http://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/cis-submission-trai-consultation-free-data">Submission to TRAI Consultation on Free Data</a> (June 30, 2016)</li>
<li><a class="external-link" href="http://cis-india.org/telecom/blog/cis-submission-to-trai-consultation-on-proliferation-of-broadband-through-public-wifi-networks">Submission to TRAI Consultation on Proliferation of Broadband through Public WiFi Networks</a> (August 28, 2016)</li>
<li><a class="external-link" href="http://cis-india.org/telecom/blog/cis-submission-trai-note-on-interoperable-scalable-public-wifi">Submission to TRAI Consultation Note on Model for Nation-wide Interoperable and Scalable Public Wi-Fi Networks</a> (December 12, 2016)</li>
<li><a class="external-link" href="http://cis-india.org/internet-governance/files/cis-trai-submission-on-net-neutrality">Submission to TRAI Consultation on Net Neutrality</a> (April 18, 2017)</li></ul>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/resources/net-neutrality-resources'>http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/resources/net-neutrality-resources</a>
</p>
No publisherpraskrishnaFeaturedHomepageNet NeutralityInternet Governance2017-04-22T09:11:21ZPageAnalysis of Aadhaar Act in the Context of A.P. Shah Committee Principles
http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/analysis-of-aadhaar-act-in-context-of-shah-committee-principles
<b>Whilst there are a number of controversies relating to the Aadhaar Act including the fact that it was introduced in a manner so as to circumvent the majority of the opposition in the upper house of the Parliament and that it was rushed through the Lok Sabha in a mere eight days, in this paper we shall discuss the substantial aspects of the Act in relation to privacy concerns which have been raised by a number of experts. In October 2012, the Group of Experts on Privacy constituted by the Planning Commission under the chairmanship of Justice AP Shah Committee submitted its report which listed nine principles of privacy which all legislations, especially those dealing with personal should adhere to. In this paper, we shall discuss how the Aadhaar Act fares vis-à-vis these nine principles.</b>
<p> </p>
<h2>Introduction</h2>
<p>The Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and Other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Act, 2016 (the “Aadhaar Act”) was introduced in the Lok Sabha (lower house of the Parliament) by Minister of Finance, Mr. Arun Jaitley, in on March 3, 2016, and was passed by the Lok Sabha on March 11, 2016. It was sent back by the Rajya Sabha with suggestions but the Lok Sabha rejected those suggestions, which means that the Act is now deemed to have been passed by both houses as it was originally introduced as a Money Bill. Whilst there are a number of controversies relating to the Aadhaar Act including the fact that it was introduced in a manner so as to circumvent the majority of the opposition in the upper house of the Parliament and that it was rushed through the Lok Sabha in a mere eight days, in this paper we shall discuss the substantial aspects of the Act in relation to privacy concerns which have been raised by a number of experts. In October 2012, the Group of Experts on Privacy constituted by the Planning Commission under the chairmanship of Justice AP Shah Committee submitted its report which listed nine principles of privacy which all legislations, especially those dealing with personal should adhere to. In this paper, we shall discuss how the Aadhaar Act fares vis-à-vis these nine principles.</p>
<p>In order for the reader to better understand the frame of reference on which we shall analyse the Aadhaar Act, the nine principles contained in the report of the Group of Experts on Privacy are explained in brief below:</p>
<ul><li><strong>Principle 1: Notice</strong> - Does the legislation/regulation require that entities governed by the Act give simple to understand notice of its information practices to all individuals, in clear and concise language, before any personal information is collected from them.</li>
<li><strong>Principle 2: Choice and Consent</strong> - Does the legislation/regulation require that entities governed under the Act provide the individual with the option to opt in/opt out of providing their personal information.</li>
<li><strong>Principle 3: Collection Limitation</strong> - Does the legislation/regulation require that entities governed under the Act collect personal information from individuals only as is necessary for a purpose identified.</li>
<li><strong>Principle 4: Purpose Limitation</strong> - Does the legislation/regulation require that personal data collected and processed by entities governed by the Act be adequate and relevant to the purposes for which they are processed.</li>
<li><strong>Principle 5: Access and Correction</strong> - Does the legislation/regulation allow individuals: access to personal information about them held by an entity governed by the Act; the ability to seek correction, amendments, or deletion of such information where it is inaccurate, etc.</li>
<li><strong>Principle 6: Disclosure</strong> - Does the legislation ensure that information is only disclosed to third parties after notice and informed consent is obtained. Is disclosure allowed for law enforcement purposes done in accordance with laws in force.</li>
<li><strong>Principle 7: Security</strong> - Does the legislation/regulation ensure that information that is collected and processed under that Act, is done so in a manner that protects against loss, unauthorized access, destruction, etc.</li>
<li><strong>Principle 8: Openness</strong> - Does the legislation/regulation require that any entity processing data take all necessary steps to implement practices, procedures, policies and systems in a manner proportional to the scale, scope, and sensitivity to the data that is collected and processed and is this information made available to all individuals in an intelligible form, using clear and plain language?</li>
<li><strong>Principle 9: Accountability</strong> - Does the legislation/regulation provide for measures that ensure compliance of the privacy principles? This would include measures such as mechanisms to implement privacy policies; including tools, training, and education; and external and internal audits.</li></ul>
<p> </p>
<h2>Analysis of the Aadhaar Act</h2>
<p>The Aadhaar Act has been brought about to give legislative backing to the most ambitious individual identity programme in the world which aims to provide a unique identity number to the entire population of India. The rationale behind this scheme is to correctly identify the beneficiaries of government schemes and subsidies so that leakages in government subsidies may be reduced. In furtherance of this rationale the Aadhaar Act gives the Unique Identification Authority of India (“UIDAI”) the power to enroll individuals by collecting their demographic and biometric information and issuing an Aadhaar number to them. Below is an analysis of the Act based on the privacy principles enumerated I the A.P. Shah Committee Report.</p>
<h3>Collection Limitation</h3>
<p><strong>Collection of Biometric and Demographic Information:</strong> The Aadhaar Act entitles every “resident”
<strong>[1]</strong> to obtain an Aadhaar number by submitting his/her biometric (photograph, finger print, Iris scan) and demographic information (name, date of birth, address <strong>[2]</strong>) <strong>[3]</strong>. It must be noted that the Act leaves scope for further information to be included in the collection process if so specified by regulations. It must be noted that although the Act specifically provides what information can be collected, it does not specifically prohibit the collection of further information. This becomes relevant because it makes it possible for enrolling agencies to collect extra information relating to individuals without any legal implications of such act.</p>
<p><strong>Authentication Records:</strong> The UIDAI is mandated to maintain authentication records for a period which is yet to be specified (and shall be specified in the regulations) but it cannot collect or keep any information regarding the purpose for which the authentication request was made <strong>[4]</strong>.</p>
<p><strong>Unauthorized Collection:</strong> Any person who in not authorized to collect information under the Act, and pretends that he is authorized to do so, shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years or with a fine which may extend to Rs. 10,000/- or both. In case of companies the maximum fine amount would be increased to Rs. 10,00,000/- <strong>[5]</strong>. It must be noted that the section, as it is currently worded seems to criminalize the act of impersonation of authorized individuals and the actual collection of information is not required to complete this offence. It is not clear if this section will apply if a person who is authorized to collect information under the Act in general, collects some information that he/she is not authorized to collect.</p>
<h3>Notice</h3>
<p><strong>Notice during Collection:</strong> The Aadhaar Act requires that the agencies enrolling people for distribution of Aadhaar numbers should give people notice regarding: (a) the manner in which the information shall be used; (b) the nature of recipients with whom the information is intended to be shared during authentication; and (c) the existence of a right to access information, the procedure for making requests for such access, and details of the person or department in-charge to whom such requests can be made <strong>[6]</strong>. A failure to comply with this requirement will make the agency liable for imprisonment of upto 3 years or a fine of Rs. 10,000/- or both. In case of companies the maximum fine amount would be increased to Rs. 10,00,000/- <strong>[7]</strong>. It must be noted that the Act leaves the manner of giving such notice in the realm of regulations and does not specify how this notice is to be provided, which leaves important specifics to the realm of the executive.</p>
<p><strong>Notice during Authentication:</strong> The Aadhaar Act requires that authenticating agencies shall give information to the individuals whose information is to be authenticated regarding (a) the nature of information that may be shared upon authentication; (b) the uses to which the information received during authentication may be put by the requesting entity; and (c) alternatives to submission of identity information to the requesting entity <strong>[8]</strong>. A failure to comply with this requirement will make the agency liable for imprisonment of upto 3 years or a fine of Rs. 10,000/- or both. In case of companies the maximum fine amount would be increased to Rs. 10,00,000/- <strong>[9]</strong>. Just as in the case of notice during collection, the manner in which the notice is required to be given is left to regulations leaving an unclear picture as to how comprehensive, accessible, and frequent this notice must be.</p>
<h3>Access and Correction</h3>
<p><strong>Updating Information:</strong> The Aadhaar Act give the UIDAI the power to require residents to update their demographic and biometric information from time to time so as to maintain its accuracy <strong>[10]</strong>.</p>
<p><strong>Access to Information:</strong> The Aadhaar Act provides that Aadhaar number holders may request the UIDAI to provide access to their identity information expect their core biometric information <strong>[11]</strong>. It is not clear why access to the core biometric information <strong>[12]</strong> is not provided to an individual. Further, since section 6 seems to place the responsibility of updation and accuracy of biometric information on the individual, it is not clear how a person is supposed to know that the biometric information contained in the database has changed if he/she does not have access to the same. It may also be noted that the Aadhaar Act provides only for a request to the UIDAI for access to the information and does not make access to the information a right of the individual, this would mean that it would be entirely upon the discretion of the UIDAI to refuse to grant access to the information once a request has been made.</p>
<p><strong>Alteration of Information:</strong> The Aadhaar Act gives individuals the right to request the UIDAI to alter their demographic if the same is incorrect or has changed and biometric information if it is lost or has changed. Upon receipt of such a request, if the UIDAI is satisfied, then it may make the necessary alteration and inform the individual accordingly. The Act also provides that no identity information in the Central database shall be altered except as provided in the regulations <strong>[13]</strong>. This section provides for alteration of identity information but only in the circumstances given in the section, for example demographic information cannot be changed if it has been lost, similarly biometric information cannot be changed if it is inaccurate. Further, the section does not give a right to the individual to get the information altered but only entitles him/her to request the UIDAI to make a change and the final decision is left to the “satisfaction” of the UIDAI.</p>
<p><strong>Access to Authentication Record:</strong> Every individual is given the right to obtain his/her authentication record in a manner to be specified by regulations. [14]</p>
<h3>Disclosure</h3>
<p><strong>Sharing during Authentication:</strong> The UIDAI is entitled to reply to any authentication query with a positive, negative or any other response which may be appropriate and may share identity information except core biometric information with the requesting entity <strong>[15]</strong>. The language in this provision is ambiguous and it is unclear what 'identity information' may be shared and why it would be necessary to share such information as Aadhaar is meant to be only a means of authentication so as to remove duplication.</p>
<p><strong>Potential Disclosure during Maintenance of CIDR:</strong> The UIDAI has been given the power to appoint any one or more entities to establish and maintain the Central Identities Data Repository (CIDR) <strong>[16]</strong>. If a private entity is involved in the maintenance and establishment of the CIDR it can be presumed that there is the possibilty that they would, to some degree, have access to the information stored in the CIDR, yet there are no clear standards in the Act regarding this potential access. And the process for appointing such entities. The fact that the UIDAI has been given the freedom to appoint an outside entity to maintain a sensitive asset such as the CIDR raises security concerns.</p>
<p><strong>Restriction on Sharing Information:</strong> The Aadhaar Act creates a blanket prohibition on the usage of core biometric information for any purpose other than generation of Aadhaar numbers and also prohibits its sharing for any reason whatsoever <strong>[17]</strong>. Other identity information is allowed to be shared in the manner specified under the Act or as may be specified in the regulations <strong>[18]</strong>. The Act further provides that the requesting entities shall not disclose the identity information except with the prior consent of the individual to whom the information relates <strong>[19]</strong>. There is also a prohibition on publicly displaying Aadhaar number or core biometric information except as specified by regulations <strong>[20]</strong>. Officers or the UIDAI or the employees of the agencies employed to maintain the CIDR are prohibited from revealing the information stored in the CIDR or authentication record to anyone <strong>[21]</strong>. It is not clear why an exception has been carved out and what circumstances would require publicly displaying Aadhaar numbers and core biometric information, especially since the reasons for which such important information may be displayed has been left up to regulations which have relatively less oversight. The section also provides the requesting entities with an option to further disclose information if they take consent of the individuals. This may lead to a situation where a requesting entity, perhaps the of an essential service, may take the consent of the individual to disclose his/her information in a standard form contract, without the option of saying no to such a request. It may lead to situations where the option is between giving consent to disclosure or denial or service altogether. For this reason it is necessary that there should be an opt in and opt out provision wherever a requesting entity has the power to ask for disclosure of information, so that people are not coerced into giving consent.</p>
<p><strong>Disclosure in Specific Cases:</strong> The prohibition on disclosure of information (except for core biometric information) does not apply in case of any disclosure made pursuant to an order of a court not below that of a District Judge <strong>[22]</strong>. There is another exception to the prohibition on disclosure of information (including core biometric information) in the interest of national security if so directed by an officer not below the rank of a Joint Secretary to the Government of India specially authorised in this behalf by an order of the Central Government. Before any such direction can take effect, it will be reviewed by an oversight committee consisting of the Cabinet Secretary and the Secretaries to the Government of India in the Department of Legal Affairs and the Department of Electronics and Information Technology. Any such direction shall be valid for a period of three months and may be extended by another three months after the review by the Oversight Committee <strong>[23]</strong>. Although this provision has been criticized, and rightly so, for the lack of accountability since the entire process is being handled within the executive and there is no independent oversight, however it must be mentioned that the level of oversight provided here is similar to that provided to interception requests, which involve a much graver if not the same level of invasion of privacy.</p>
<p><strong>Penalty for Disclosure:</strong> Any person who intentionally and in an unauthorized manner discloses, transmits, copies or otherwise disseminates any identity information collected in the course of enrolment or authentication shall be punishable with imprisonment of upto 3 years or a fine of Rs. 10,000/- or both. In case of companies the maximum fine amount would be increased to Rs. 10,00,000/ <strong>[24]</strong>. Further any person who intentionally and in an unathorised manner, accesses information in the CIDR <strong>[25]</strong>, downloads, copies or extracts any data from the CIDR <strong>[26]</strong>, or reveals or shares or distributes any identity information, shall be punishable with imprisonment of upto 3 years and a fine of not less than Rs. 10,00,000/-.</p>
<h3>Consent</h3>
<p><strong>Consent for Authentication:</strong> A requesting entity has to take the consent of the individual before collecting his/her identity information for the purposes of authentication and also has to inform the individual of the alternatives to submission of the identity information <strong>[27]</strong>. Although this provision requires entities to take consent from the individuals before collecting information for authentication, however how useful this requirement of consent would be, still remains to be seen. There may be instances where a requesting entity may take the consent of the individual in a standard form contract, without the individual realizing what he/she is consenting to.</p>
<p><strong>Note:</strong> The Aadhaar Act provides no requirement or standard for the form of consent that must be taken during enrollment. This is significant as it is the point at which individuals are providing raw biometric material and during previous enrollment, has been a point of weakness as the consent taken is an enabler to function creep as it allows the UIDAI to share information with engaged in delivery of welfare services <strong>[28]</strong>.</p>
<h3>Purpose</h3>
<p><strong>Use of Information:</strong> The authenticating entities are allowed to use the identity information only for the purpose of submission to the CIDR for authentication <strong>[29]</strong>. Further, the Act specifies that identity information available with a requesting entity shall not be used for any purpose other than that specified to the individual at the time of submitting the information for authentication <strong>[30]</strong>. The Act also provides that any authentication entity which uses the information for any purpose not already specified will be liable to punishment of imprisonment of upto 3 years or a fine of Rs. 10,000/- or both. In case of companies the maximum fine amount would be increased to Rs. 10,00,000/ <strong>[31]</strong>.</p>
<h3>Security</h3>
<p><strong>Security and Confidentiality of Information:</strong> It is the responsibility of the UIDAI to ensure the security and confidentiality of the identity and authentication information and it is required to take all necessary action to ensure that the information in the CIDR is protected against unauthorized access, use or disclosure and against accidental or intentional destruction, loss or damage <strong>[32]</strong>. The UIDAI is required to adopt and implement appropriate technical and organisational security measures and also ensure that its contractors do the same <strong>[33]</strong>. It is also required to ensure that the agreements entered into with its contractors impose the same conditions as are imposed on the UIDAI under the Act and that they shall act only upon the instructions of the UIDAI <strong>[34]</strong>.</p>
<p><strong>Biometric Information to be Electronic Record:</strong> The biometric information collected by the UIDAI has been deemed to be an “electronic record” as well as “sensitive personal data or information”, which would mean that in addition to the provisions of the Aadhaar Act, the provisions contained in the Information Technology Act, 2000 will also apply to such information <strong>[35]</strong>. It must be noted that while the Act lays down the principle that UIDAI is required to ensure the saecurity of the information, it does not lay down any guidelines as to the minimum security standards to be implemented by the Authority. However, through this section the legislature has linked the security standards contained in the IT Act to the information contained in this Act. While this is a clean way of dealing with the issue, some people may argue that the extremely sensitive nature of the information contained in the CIDR requires the standards for security to be much stricter than those provided in the IT Act. However, a perusal of Rule 8 of the Information Technology (Reasonable security practices and procedures and sensitive personal data or information) Rules, 2011 shows that the Rules themselves provide that the standard of security must be commensurate with the information assets being protected. It would thus seem that the Act provides enough room to protect such important information, but perhaps leaves too much room for interpretation for such an important issue.</p>
<p><strong>Penalty for Unauthorised Access:</strong> Apart from the security provisions included in the legislation, the Aadhaar Act also provides for punishment of imprisonment of upto 3 years and a fine which shall not be less than Rs. 10,00,000/-, in case of the following offences:</p>
<ol><li>introduction of any virus or other computer contaminant in the CIDR <strong>[36]</strong>;</li>
<li>causing damage to the data in the CIDR <strong>[37]</strong>;</li>
<li>disruption of access to the CIDR <strong>[38]</strong>;</li>
<li>denial of access to any person who is authorised to access the CIDR <strong>[39]</strong>;</li>
<li>destruction, deletion or alteration of any information stored in any removable storage media or in the CIDR or diminishing its value or utility or affecting it injuriously by any means <strong>[40]</strong>;</li>
<li>stealing, concealing, destroying or altering any computer source code used by the Authority with an intention to cause damage <strong>[41]</strong>.</li></ol>
<p>Further, unauthorized usage or tampering with the data in the CIDR or in any removable storage medium with the intent of modifying information relating to Aadhaar number holder or discovering any information thereof, is also punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to 3 years and also a fine which may extend to Rs. 10,000/- <strong>[42]</strong>.</p>
<h3>Accountability</h3>
<p><strong>Inspections and Audits:</strong> One of the functions listed in the powers and functions of the UIDAI is the power to call for information and records, conduct inspections, inquiries and audit of the operations of the CIDR, Registrars, enrolling agencies and other agencies appointed under the Aadhaar Act <strong>[43]</strong>.</p>
<p><strong>Grievance Redressal:</strong> Another function of the UIDAI is to set up facilitation centres and grievance redressal mechanisms for redressal of grievances of individuals, Registrars, enrolling agencies and other service providers <strong>[44]</strong>. It must be said here that considering the importance that the government has given to and intends to give to Aadhaar in the future, an essential task such as grievance redressal should not be left entirely to the discretion of the UIDAI and some grievance redressal mechanism should be incorporated into the Act itself.</p>
<h3>Openness</h3>
<p>There does not seem to be any provision in the Aadhaar Act which requires the UIDAI to make its privacy policies and procedure available to the public in general even though the UIDAI has the responsibility to maintain the security and confidentiality of the information.</p>
<p> </p>
<h2>Endnotes</h2>
<p><strong>[1]</strong> A resident is defined as any person who has resided in India for a period of atleasy 182 days in the previous 12 months.</p>
<p><strong>[2]</strong> It has been specified that demographic information will not include race, religion, caste, tribe, ethnicity, language, records of entitlement, income or medical history.</p>
<p><strong>[3]</strong> Section 3(1) of the Aadhaar Act.</p>
<p><strong>[4]</strong> Section 32(1) and 32(3) of the Aadhaar Act.</p>
<p><strong>[5]</strong> Section 36 of the Aadhaar Act.</p>
<p><strong>[6]</strong> Section 3(2) of the Aadhaar Act.</p>
<p><strong>[7]</strong> Section 41 of the Aadhaar Act.</p>
<p><strong>[8]</strong> Section 8(3) of the Aadhaar Act.</p>
<p><strong>[9]</strong> Section 41 of the Aadhaar Act.</p>
<p><strong>[10]</strong> Section 6 of the Aadhaar Act.</p>
<p><strong>[11]</strong> Section 28, <em>proviso</em> of the Aadhaar Act.</p>
<p><strong>[12]</strong> Core biometric information is defined as fingerprints, iris scan or other biological attributes which may be specified by regulations.</p>
<p><strong>[13]</strong> Section 31 of the Aadhaar Act.</p>
<p><strong>[14]</strong> Section 32(2) of the Aadhaar Act.</p>
<p><strong>[15]</strong> Section 8(4) of the Aadhaar Act.</p>
<p><strong>[16]</strong> Section 10 of the Aadhaar Act.</p>
<p><strong>[17]</strong> Section 29(1) of the Aadhaar Act.</p>
<p><strong>[18]</strong> Section 29(2) of the Aadhaar Act.</p>
<p><strong>[19]</strong> Section 29(3)(b) of the Aadhaar Act.</p>
<p><strong>[20]</strong> Section 29(4) of the Aadhaar Act.</p>
<p><strong>[21]</strong> Section 28(5) of the Aadhaar Act.</p>
<p><strong>[22]</strong> Section 33(1) of the Aadhaar Act.</p>
<p><strong>[23]</strong> Section 33(2) of the Aadhaar Act.</p>
<p><strong>[24]</strong> Section 37 of the Aadhaar Act.</p>
<p><strong>[25]</strong> Section 38(a) of the Aadhaar Act.</p>
<p><strong>[26]</strong> Section 38(b) of the Aadhaar Act.</p>
<p><strong>[27]</strong> Section 8(2)(a) and (c) of the Aadhaar Act.</p>
<p><strong>[28]</strong> For example, see: <a href="http://www.karnataka.gov.in/aadhaar/Downloads/Application%20form%20-%20English.pdf">http://www.karnataka.gov.in/aadhaar/Downloads /Application%20form%20-%20English.pdf</a>.</p>
<p><strong>[29]</strong> Section 8(2)(b) of the Aadhaar Act.</p>
<p><strong>[30]</strong> Section 29(3)(a) of the Aadhaar Act.</p>
<p><strong>[31]</strong> Section 37 of the Aadhaar Act.</p>
<p><strong>[32]</strong> Section 28(1), (2) and (3) of the Aadhaar Act.</p>
<p><strong>[33]</strong> Section 28(4)(a) and (b) of the Aadhaar Act.</p>
<p><strong>[34]</strong> Section 28(4)(c) of the Aadhaar Act.</p>
<p><strong>[35]</strong> Section 30 of the Aadhaar Act.</p>
<p><strong>[36]</strong> Section 38(c) of the Aadhaar Act.</p>
<p><strong>[37]</strong> Section 38(d) of the Aadhaar Act.</p>
<p><strong>[38]</strong> Section 38(e) of the Aadhaar Act.</p>
<p><strong>[39]</strong> Section 38(f) of the Aadhaar Act.</p>
<p><strong>[40]</strong> Section 38(h) of the Aadhaar Act.</p>
<p><strong>[41]</strong> Section 38(i) of the Aadhaar Act.</p>
<p><strong>[42]</strong> Section 39 of the Aadhaar Act.</p>
<p><strong>[43]</strong> Section 23(2)(l) of the Aadhaar Act.</p>
<p><strong>[44]</strong> Section 23(2)(s) of the Aadhaar Act.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/analysis-of-aadhaar-act-in-context-of-shah-committee-principles'>http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/analysis-of-aadhaar-act-in-context-of-shah-committee-principles</a>
</p>
No publisherVipul KharbandaBig DataPrivacyInternet GovernanceFeaturedDigital IndiaAadhaarBiometricsHomepage2016-03-17T19:43:53ZBlog EntryMaking Voices Heard: Privacy, Inclusivity, and Accessibility of Voice Interfaces in India
http://editors.cis-india.org/raw/making-voices-heard-project-announcement
<b>We believe that voice interfaces have the potential to democratise the use of internet by addressing barriers such as accessibility concerns, lack of abilities of reading and writing on digital text interfaces, and lack of options for people to interact with digital devices in their own languages. Through the Making Voice Heard Project supported by Mozilla Corporation, we will examine the current landscape of voice interfaces in India.</b>
<p> </p>
<img src="https://raw.githubusercontent.com/cis-india/website/master/img/CIS_Mozilla_MakingVoicesHeard_ProjectAnnouncement_01.jpg" alt="null" width="30%" /> <img src="https://raw.githubusercontent.com/cis-india/website/master/img/CIS_Mozilla_MakingVoicesHeard_ProjectAnnouncement_02.jpg" alt="null" width="30%" /> <img src="https://raw.githubusercontent.com/cis-india/website/master/img/CIS_Mozilla_MakingVoicesHeard_ProjectAnnouncement_03.jpg" alt="null" width="30%" />
<p> </p>
<h4>Download the project announcement cards (shown above): <a href="https://raw.githubusercontent.com/cis-india/website/master/img/CIS_Mozilla_MakingVoicesHeard_ProjectAnnouncement_01.jpg" target="_blank">Card 01</a>, <a href="https://raw.githubusercontent.com/cis-india/website/master/img/CIS_Mozilla_MakingVoicesHeard_ProjectAnnouncement_02.jpg" target="_blank">Card 02</a>, and <a href="https://raw.githubusercontent.com/cis-india/website/master/img/CIS_Mozilla_MakingVoicesHeard_ProjectAnnouncement_03.jpg" target="_blank">Card 03</a></h4>
<hr />
<h3>Making Voices Heard: Project Announcement</h3>
<p>Although voice enabled interfaces are being deployed there is a need to understand how they are beneficial, and what have been important knowledge gaps and challenges in their development, adoption, use, and regulation. Through the Making Voice Heard Project <a href="https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2019/07/05/mozillas-latest-research-grants-prioritizing-research-for-the-internet/" target="_blank">supported by Mozilla Corporation</a>, we will be examining the current landscape of voice interfaces in India, and seek to address the following questions:</p>
<ul>
<li>What is the broad (sectoral and functional) typology of available voice interfaces in Indian languages? How widely are these voice interfaces (in Indian languages) used, and what barriers prevent their further adoption and use?<br /><br /></li>
<li>What are concerns related to privacy and data protection that emerge with the growth of voice interfaces? What kind of protocols for data processing may need to be built into the design of these interfaces?<br /><br /></li>
<li>How accessible are these interfaces for persons with disabilities (PWDs)? What kinds of accessibility features, especially for Indian languages, may need to be developed to ensure effective use of voice technologies by PWDs?<br /><br /></li>
<li>Where do challenges in these three areas intersect? For instance, is compromising on users’ privacy, including weak or missing data protection regulations, required to create comprehensive speech datasets that may help develop better accessibility features, and address linguistic barriers?</li></ul>
<p>In order to approach these questions we have begun mapping the various developers and users of voice interfaces in India. In the next stage of the process we will be looking at these interfaces through the lens of privacy, language, accessibility, and design. In order to add to the mapping and questions, we will be conducting interviews and workshops with users, developers, designers and researchers of voice interfaces in India, including the <a href="https://voice.mozilla.org/en" target="_blank">Common Voice</a> team at Mozilla.</p>
<p>We hereby invite researchers, developers and designers of voice interfaces to speak to us and help inform the study. You may contact Shweta Mohandas at shweta@cis-india.org.</p>
<p><em>- Shweta Mohandas, Saumyaa Naidu, Puthiya Purayil Sneha, and Sumandro Chattapadhyay (project team)</em></p>
<p> </p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/raw/making-voices-heard-project-announcement'>http://editors.cis-india.org/raw/making-voices-heard-project-announcement</a>
</p>
No publishershwetaVoice User InterfaceLanguagePrivacyAccessibilityResearchVoice Assisted InterfaceFeaturedResearchers at WorkMaking Voices Heard2019-12-18T12:10:05ZBlog EntryInternet Shutdown Stories
http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/internet-shutdown-stories
<b>The Centre for Internet & Society (CIS) has published a collection of stories of the impact of internet shutdowns on people's lives in the country. This book seeks to give a glimpse into the lives of those directly affected by these internet shutdown experiments. When seen in a larger context, we hope that the stories in this book also demonstrate that access to the internet and freedom of speech is not just about an individual’s rights, but are also required for the collective good. This is a project funded by Facebook and MacArthur Foundation, and the stories were provided by 101 Reporters. Case studies from the states of Jammu & Kashmir, Haryana, Rajasthan, Gujarat, Telangana, West Bengal, Tripura, Manipur, Nagaland, and Uttar Pradesh have been highlighted in this compilation.</b>
<p> </p>
<h4>Read the report here: <a class="external-link" href="https://cis-india.org/internet-shutdown-stories/at_download/file">Download</a> (PDF)</h4>
<p>The report is shared under Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International license.</p>
<h4>Edited by Debasmita Haldar, Ambika Tandon, and Swaraj Barooah</h4>
<h4>Print Design by Saumyaa Naidu</h4>
<h4>Advisor: Nikhil Pahwa, Founder and Editor at <a href="https://www.medianama.com/" target="_blank">MediaNama</a></h4>
<hr />
<h2>Foreword</h2>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Aside from the waves of innovation that the digital revolution brought with it, the ever increasing pervasiveness of the internet has had a tremendous impact on empowerment and freedoms in society. We are seeing unprecedented levels of access to information, along with a democratization of the means of creation, production and dissemination of information to anyone with an internet connection. This in turn has greatly amplified, and in many cases even created the ability, particularly for those traditionally left in the margins, to more meaningfully participate in their global as well as local societies. Recognising the significance of the internet to the freedom of expression as well as for the development and exercising of human rights more broadly, the United Nations Human Rights Council unanimously passed a resolution confirming internet access being a fundamental human right.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Simultaneously however, we are seeing Indian states discover and experiment with their power to clamp down on these new modes of communication for a variety of reasons, ranging from the ill-intentioned to the ill-informed. An internet shutdown tracker maintained by the Software Freedom Law Centre, shows that the number of shutdowns in India is increasing every year, with 70 shutdowns reported in 2017,and 45 shutdowns already <a class="external-link" href="https://internetshutdowns.in/">reported from 1st Jan, 2018 to 4th May, 2018</a>. These shutdowns also come at a significant economic cost. A 2016 <a class="external-link" href="http://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/intenet-shutdowns-v-3.pdf">Brookings report</a> estimates that India faced a loss of about $968 million due to internet shutdowns. However, the democratic harms we have been accruing are more difficult to quantify and demonstrate.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">This book seeks to give a glimpse into the lives of those directly affected by these internet shutdown experiments. From Jammu and Kashmir to Telangana, from Gujarat to Nagaland, we have collected 30 stories from across the country for an up-close look at how the everyday lives of common citizens have been impacted by internet shutdowns and website blocks. From CRPF members posted in Srinagar who use the internet to connect with their family, to students who have been cut off from education resources for competitive exams; from the disruptions in day to day life brought about by non-functional bank services in Darjeeling, to stock brokers in Ahmedabad who faced costly slowdowns; the idea of a Digital India is facing severe setbacks with these continuously increasing internet shutdowns.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">When seen in a larger context, we hope that the stories in this book also demonstrate that access to the internet and freedom of speech is not just about an individual’s rights, but are also required for the collective good. The diversity of perspectives and activities that a healthy democracy demands is not met by the versioning of dominant narratives, but by allowing for, if not directly encouraging, the voices and activities of the unheard, oppressed and marginalised. We hope that in the telling of these personal stories of the day-to-day of people affected by such internet shutdowns, this book joins in the effort to position the dehumanized internet kill switches more aptly as dangers to democracy.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>Sunil Abraham</strong><br />Executive Director<br />The Centre for Internet and Society</p>
<p> </p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/internet-shutdown-stories'>http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/internet-shutdown-stories</a>
</p>
No publisherambikaFeaturedHomepageInternet GovernanceCensorship2019-09-03T09:57:40ZBlog EntryNew Contexts and Sites of Humanities Practice in the Digital (Paper)
http://editors.cis-india.org/raw/new-contexts-and-sites-of-humanities-practice-in-the-digital-paper
<b>The ubiquitous presence of the ‘digital’ over the couple of decades has brought with it several important changes in interdisciplinary forms of research and knowledge production. Particularly in the arts and humanities, the role of digital technologies and internet has always been a rather contentious one, with more debate spurred now due to the growth of fields like humanities computing, digital humanities (henceforth DH) and cultural analytics. Even as these fields signal several shifts in scholarship, pedagogy and practice, portending a futuristic imagination of the role of technology in academia and practice on the one hand, they also reflect continuing challenges related to the digital divide, and more specifically politics around the growth and sustenance of the humanities disciplines. A specific criticism within more recent debates around the origin story of DH in fact, has been its Anglo-American framing, drawing upon a history in humanities computing and textual studies, and located within a larger neoliberal imagination of the university and academia. While this has been met with resistance from across different spaces, thus calling for more diversity and representation in the discourse, it is also reflective of the need to trace and contextualize more local forms of practice and pedagogy in the digital as efforts to address these global concerns. This essay by Puthiya Purayil Sneha draws upon excerpts from a study on the field of DH and related practices in India, to outline the diverse contexts of humanities practice with the advent of the digital and explore the developing discourse around DH in the Indian context.</b>
<p> </p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">This essay was published in <a href="http://iias.ac.in/ojs/index.php/summerhill/article/view/116" target="_blank">Vol 22 No 1 (2016): SummerHill</a>, Indian Institute of Advanced Study, Shimla. Edited by Dr. Bindu Menon. Download the essay <a href="http://iias.ac.in/ojs/index.php/summerhill/article/view/116/99" target="_blank">here</a> (PDF).</p>
<hr />
<h3><strong>Abstract</strong></h3>
<p style="text-align: justify;">The last couple of decades have seen an increasing prevalence of digital technologies and internet in the study and practice of arts and humanities. With the growth of fields like humanities computing, digital humanities (henceforth DH) and cultural analytics, there has been a renewed interest in the increasing role of the ‘digital’ in interdisciplinary forms of research and knowledge production. DH in particular has become a field of much interest and debate in different parts of the world, including in India. Globally, in the last two decades, there have been several efforts to organize the discourse around this field which seeks to explore various intersections between humanities and digital methods, spaces and tools1. But DH also continues to remain a bone of contention, with several perspectives on what exactly constitutes its methodology and scope, and most importantly its epistemological stake.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">A specific criticism has been the Anglo-American framing of DH, located within a larger neoliberal imagination of the university and the higher education system at large. As a result, the connection of these two threads—a history of DH located in humanities computing and textual studies and its contextualization within the American university—is often represented as the history of DH. This has been met with resistance from several scholars and practitioners across the world calling for more global perspectives on the field. Drawing upon excerpts from a recently completed study on mapping the field of DH and related practices in India, this essay will attempt to outline the diverse contexts of humanities practice emerging with the digital turn, along with a reading of some of the global debates around DH to understand the discourse around the field in the Indian context.</p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/raw/new-contexts-and-sites-of-humanities-practice-in-the-digital-paper'>http://editors.cis-india.org/raw/new-contexts-and-sites-of-humanities-practice-in-the-digital-paper</a>
</p>
No publishersneha-ppDigital KnowledgeResearchFeaturedPublicationsDigital HumanitiesResearchers at Work2019-12-06T05:03:33ZBlog EntryICANN Diversity Analysis
http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/icann-diversity-analysis
<b>The by-laws of The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) state that it is a non-profit public-benefit corporation which is responsible at the overall level, for the coordination of the “global internet's systems of unique identifiers, and in particular to ensure the stable and secure operation of the internet's unique identifier systems”. As key stakeholders of ICANN are spread across the world, much of the communication discussing the work of ICANN takes place over email. This analysis of the diversity of participation at the ICANN processes, through a study of their mailing lists, was undertaken by Paul Kurian and Akriti Bopanna.</b>
<p> </p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">The by-laws of The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) state that it is a non-profit public-benefit corporation which is responsible at the overall level, for the coordination of the “global internet's systems of unique identifiers, and in particular to ensure the stable and secure operation of the internet's unique identifier systems”.<a href="#_ftn1"><sup><sup>[1]</sup></sup></a>Previously, this was overseen by the Internet Assigned Number Authority (IANA) under a US Government contract but in 2016, the oversight was handed over to ICANN, as a global multi-stakeholder body.<a href="#_ftn2"><sup><sup>[2]</sup></sup></a> Given the significance of the multistakeholder nature of ICANN, it is imperative that stakeholders continue to question and improve the inclusiveness of its processes. The current blog post seeks to focus on the diversity of participation at the ICANN process.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">As stakeholders are spread across the world, much of the communication discussing the work of ICANN takes place over email. Various [or X number of ] mailing lists inform members of ICANN activities and are used for discussions between them from policy advice to organizational building matters. Many of these lists are public and hence can be subscribed to by anyone and also can be viewed by non-members through the archives.</p>
<p>CIS analysed the five most active mailing lists amongst the working group mailing lists from January 2016 to May 2018, namely:</p>
<ol><li>Outreach & Engagement,</li>
<li>Technology,</li>
<li>At-Large Review 2015 - 2019,</li>
<li>IANA Transition & ICANN Accountability, and</li>
<li>Finance & Budget mailing lists.</li></ol>
<p style="text-align: justify;">We looked at the diversity among these active participants by focusing on their gender, stakeholder grouping and region. In order to arrive at the data, we referred to public records such as the Statement of Interests which members have to give to the Generic Names Supporting Organization(GNSO) Council if they want to participate in their working groups. We also used, where available, ICANN Wiki and the LinkedIn profiles of these participants. Given below are some of the observations we made subsequent to surveying the data. We acknowledge that there might be some inadvertent errors made in the categorization of these participants, but are of the opinion that our inference from the data would not be drastically affected by a few errors.</p>
<h4>The following findings were observed:</h4>
<ul>
<li>A total of 218 participants were present on the 5 mailing lists that were looked at.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Of these,, 92 were determined to be active participants (participants who had sent more than the median number of mails in their working group) out of which 75 were non-staff members. </li></ul>
<h4>Among the active non-staff participants:</h4>
<ul>
<li>Out of the 75 participants, <strong>56</strong> (<strong>74.7%</strong>) were male and <strong>19</strong> (<strong>25.3%</strong>) were female.<br /><img src="http://editors.cis-india.org/home-images/Gender.png" alt="null" class="image-inline" title="Gender" /><br /><br /><img src="http://editors.cis-india.org/home-images/StakeholderGroup.png" alt="null" class="image-inline" title="Stakeholder Group" /></li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><strong>57.3%</strong> were identified to be members of the industry and technological community and 1.3% were identified as government representatives. 8.0% were representatives from Academia, 25.3% represented civil society and the remaining 8.0% were from fields that were uncategorizable with respect to the above, but were related to law and consultancy.<br /><img src="http://editors.cis-india.org/home-images/Region.png" alt="null" class="image-inline" title="Region" /></li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Only 14.7% of the participants were from Asia while the majority belonged to Africa and then North America with 24% and 22.7% participation respectively</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">Within Asia, we identified only one active participant from China.</li></ul>
<h3>Concerns</h3>
<ul>
<li>The vast number of the people participating and as an extension, influencing ICANN work are male constituting three fourth of the participants.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">The mailing list are dominated by individuals from industry.. This coupled with the relative minority presence of the other stakeholders creates an environment where concerns emanating from other sections of the society could be overshadowed.</li>
<li>Only 14.7% of the participants were from Asia, which is concerning since 48.7% of internet users worldwide belong to Asia.<a href="#_ftn1"><sup><sup>[3]</sup></sup></a></li>
<li>China which has the world’s largest population of internet users (700 million people)<a href="#_ftn2"><sup><sup>[4]</sup></sup></a> had only one active participant on these mailing lists.</li></ul>
<p style="text-align: justify;">ICANN being a global multistakeholder organization should ideally have the number of representatives from each region be proportionate to the number of internet users in that region. In addition to this, participation of women on these mailing lists need to increase to ensure that there is inclusive contribution in the functioning of the organization. We did not come across any indication of participation of individuals of non binary genders.</p>
<hr align="left" size="1" width="100%" />
<p><a href="#_ftnref1"><sup><sup>[1]</sup></sup></a> https://cis-india.org/telecom/knowledge-repository-on-internet-access/icann</p>
<p><a href="#_ftnref2"><sup><sup>[2]</sup></sup></a> https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2016-10-01-en</p>
<p><a href="#_ftnref3"><sup><sup>[3]</sup></sup></a> https://www.internetworldstats.com/stats.htm</p>
<p><a href="#_ftnref4"><sup><sup>[4]</sup></sup></a> https://www.internetworldstats.com/stats3.htm</p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/icann-diversity-analysis'>http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/icann-diversity-analysis</a>
</p>
No publisherakritiICANNFeaturedHomepageInternet Governance2018-08-29T11:19:46ZBlog EntryMaking Voices Heard
http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/making-voices-heard
<b>We are happy to announce the launch of our final report on the study ‘Making Voices Heard: Privacy, Inclusivity, and Accessibility of Voice Interfaces in India. The study was undertaken with support from the Mozilla Corporation.</b>
<p style="text-align: center; "><img src="http://editors.cis-india.org/home-images/WebsiteHeader.jpg/@@images/8d8ed2a0-f0e4-44d7-8938-493b186402c5.jpeg" alt="Making Voices Heard" class="image-inline" title="Making Voices Heard" /></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">We believe that voice interfaces have the potential to democratise the use of the internet by addressing limitations related to reading and writing on digital text-only platforms and devices. This report examines the current landscape of voice interfaces in India, with a focus on concerns related to privacy and data protection, linguistic barriers, and accessibility for persons with disabilities (PwDs).</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The report features a visual mapping of 23 voice interfaces and technologies publicly available in India, along with a literature survey, a policy brief towards development and use of voice interfaces and a design brief documenting best practices and users’ needs, both with a focus on privacy, languages, and accessibility considerations, and a set of case studies on three voice technology platforms. <span>Read and download the full report <a class="external-link" href="http://voice.cis-india.org/">here</a></span></p>
<hr />
<h3>Credits</h3>
<p><strong>Research</strong>: Shweta Mohandas, Saumyaa Naidu, Deepika Nandagudi Srinivasa, Divya Pinheiro, and Sweta Bisht.</p>
<p><strong>Conceptualisation, Planning, and Research Inputs</strong>: Sumandro Chattapadhyay, and Puthiya Purayil Sneha.</p>
<p><strong>Illustration</strong>: Kruthika NS (Instagram @theworkplacedoodler). Website Design Saumyaa Naidu. Website Development Sumandro Chattapadhyay, and Pranav M Bidare.</p>
<p><strong>Review and Editing</strong>: Puthiya Purayil Sneha, Divyank Katira, Pranav M Bidare, Torsha Sarkar, Pallavi Bedi, and Divya Pinheiro.</p>
<p><strong>Copy Editing</strong>: The Clean Copy</p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/making-voices-heard'>http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/making-voices-heard</a>
</p>
No publishershwetaVoice User InterfacePrivacyAccessibilityInternet GovernanceResearchFeaturedHomepage2022-06-27T16:18:36ZBlog EntryDatafication of the Public Distribution System in India
http://editors.cis-india.org/raw/datafication-of-the-public-distribution-system-in-india
<b>In this study, we look into the datafication of social protection schemes with a special focus on the Public Distribution System in India. Proponents of datafication claim that the benefits will reach the right person and curb leakages through the automation and digitisation of all PDS processes. Aadhaar is the most important link in the datafication; supporters claim that it makes technology people-centric. This study looks at the status of PDS datafication and its impact on the delivery of the scheme in Chhattisgarh and Jharkhand. We also try to understand to what extent the stated objective of portability has been met and how far the challenges faced by the rights holders of the PDS have been resolved. </b>
<p>Read the full report <a href="http://editors.cis-india.org/raw/datafication-of-the-public-distribution-system-in-india-pdf" class="internal-link">here</a>.</p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/raw/datafication-of-the-public-distribution-system-in-india'>http://editors.cis-india.org/raw/datafication-of-the-public-distribution-system-in-india</a>
</p>
No publisherSameet PandaRAW ResearchFeaturedResearchers at WorkRAW Blog2024-02-12T12:07:40ZBlog EntryDeitY says 143 URLs have been Blocked in 2015; Procedure for Blocking Content Remains Opaque and in Urgent Need of Transparency Measures
http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/deity-says-143-urls-blocked-in-2015
<b>Across India on 30 December 2014, following an order issued by the Department of Telecom (DOT), Internet Service Providers (ISPs) blocked 32 websites including Vimeo, Dailymotion, GitHub and Pastebin.</b>
<p style="text-align: justify;">In February 2015, the Centre for Internet and Society (CIS) requested the Department of Electronics and Information Technology (DeitY) under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) to provide information clarifying the procedures for blocking in India. We have received a response from DeitY which may be <a href="http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/response-deity.clarifying-procedures-for-blocking.pdf" class="external-link">seen here</a>.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">In this post, I shall elaborate on this response from DeitY and highlight some of the accountability and transparency measures that the procedure needs. To stress the urgency of reform, I shall also touch upon two recent developments—the response from Ministry of Communication to questions raised in Parliament on the blocking procedures and the Supreme Court (SC) judgment in Shreya Singhal v. Union of India.</p>
<h2 style="text-align: justify;">Section 69A and the Blocking Rules</h2>
<p align="JUSTIFY" class="western">Section 69A of the Information Technology Act, 2008 (S69A hereinafter) grants powers to the central government to issue directions for blocking of access to any information through any computer resource. In other words, it allows the government to block any websites under certain grounds. The Government has notified rules laying down the procedure for blocking access online under the Procedure and Safeguards for Blocking for Access of Information by Public Rules, 2009 (Rules, 2009 hereinafter). CIS has produced a poster explaining the blocking procedure (<a href="http://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/blocking-websites.pdf/at_download/file">download PDF</a>, 2.037MB).</p>
<p align="JUSTIFY" class="western">There are <em>three key aspects</em> of the blocking rules that need to be kept under consideration:</p>
<h3 align="JUSTIFY" class="western">Officers and committees handling requests</h3>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>Designated Officer (DO)</strong> – Appointed by the Central government, officer not below the rank of Joint Secretary.<br /><strong>Nodal Officer (NO)</strong> – Appointed by organizations including Ministries or Departments of the State governments and Union Territories and any agency of the Central Government. <br /><strong>Intermediary contact</strong>–Appointed by every intermediary to receive and handle blocking directions from the DO.<br /><strong>Committee for Examination of Request (CER)</strong> – The request along with printed sample of alleged offending information is examined by the CER—committee with the DO serving as the Chairperson and representatives from Ministry of Law and Justice; Ministry of Home Affairs; Ministry of Information and Broadcasting and representative from the Indian Computer Emergency Response Team (CERT-In). The CER is responsible for examining each blocking request and makes recommendations including revoking blocking orders to the DO, which are taken into consideration for final approval of request for blocking by the Secretary, DOT. <br /><strong>Review Committee (RC) </strong>– Constituted under rule 419A of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1951, the RC includes the Cabinet Secretary, Secretary to the Government of India (Legal Affairs) and Secretary (Department of Telecom). The RC is mandated to meet at least once in 2 months and record its findings and has to validate that directions issued are in compliance with S69A(1).</p>
<h3 style="text-align: justify;">Provisions outlining the procedure for blocking</h3>
<p>Rules 6, 9 and 10 create three distinct blocking procedures, which must commence within 7 days of the DO receiving the request.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">a) Rule 6 lays out the first procedure, under which any person may approach the NO and request blocking, alternatively, the NO may also raise a blocking request. After the NO of the approached Ministry or Department of the State governments and Union Territories and/or any agency of the Central Government, is satisfied of the validity of the request they forward it to the DO. Requests when not sent through the NO of any organization, must be approved by Chief Secretary of the State or Union Territory or the Advisor to the Administrator of the Union Territory, before being sent to the DO.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">The DO upon receiving the request places, must acknowledge receipt within 24 four hours and places the request along with printed copy of alleged information for validation by the CER. The DO also, must make reasonable efforts to identify the person or intermediary hosting the information, and having identified them issue a notice asking them to appear and submit their reply and clarifications before the committee at a specified date and time, within forty eight hours of the receipt of notice.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Foreign entities hosting the information are also informed and the CER gives it recommendations after hearing from the intermediary or the person has clarified their position and even if there is no representation by the same and after examining if the request falls within the scope outlined under S69A(1). The blocking directions are issued by the Secretary (DeitY), after the DO forwards the request and the CER recommendations. If approval is granted the DO directs the relevant intermediary or person to block the alleged information.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;" class="western">b) Rule 9 outlines a procedure wherein, under emergency circumstances, and after the DO has established the necessity and expediency to block alleged information submits recommendations in writing to the Secretary, DeitY. The Secretary, upon being satisfied by the justification for, and necessity of, and expediency to block information may issue an blocking directions as an interim measure and must record the reasons for doing so in writing.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;" class="western">Under such circumstances, the intermediary and person hosting information is not given the opportunity of a hearing. Nevertheless, the DO is required to place the request before the CER within forty eight hours of issuing of directions for interim blocking. Only upon receiving the final recommendations from the committee can the Secretary pass a final order approving the request. If the request for blocking is not approved then the interim order passed earlier is revoked, and the intermediary or identified person should be directed to unblock the information for public access.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;" class="western">c) Rule 10 outlines the process when an order is issued by the courts in India. The DO upon receipt of the court order for blocking of information submits it to the Secretary, DeitY and initiates action as directed by the courts.</p>
<h3 style="text-align: justify;" class="western">Confidentiality clause</h3>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Rule 16 mandates confidentiality regarding all requests and actions taken thereof, which renders any requests received by the NO and the DO, recommendations made by the DO or the CER and any written reasons for blocking or revoking blocking requests outside the purview of public scrutiny. More detail on the officers and committees that enforce the blocking rules and procedure can be found <a href="http://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/is-india2019s-website-blocking-law-constitutional-2013-i-law-procedure">here</a>.</p>
<h2>Response on blocking from the Ministry of Communication and Information Technology</h2>
<p style="text-align: justify;">The response to our RTI from E-Security and Cyber Law Group is timely, given the recent clarification from the Ministry of Communication and Information Technology to a number of questions, raised by parliamentarian Shri Avinash Pande in the Rajya Sabha. The questions had been raised in reference to the Emergency blocking order under IT Act, the current status of the Central Monitoring System, Data Privacy law and Net Neutrality. The Centre for Communication Governance (CCG), National Law University New Delhi have extracted a set of 6 questions and you can read the full article <a href="https://ccgnludelhi.wordpress.com/2015/04/24/governments-response-to-fundamental-questions-regarding-the-internet-in-india/">here</a>.</p>
<p align="JUSTIFY" class="western">The governments response as quoted by CCG, clarifies under rule 9—the Government has issued directions for emergency blocking of <em>a total number of 216 URLs from 1st January, 2014 till date </em>and that <em>a total of 255 URLs were blocked in 2014 and no URLs has been blocked in 2015 (till 31 March 2015)</em> under S69A through the Committee constituted under the rules therein. Further, a total of 2091 URLs and 143 URLs were blocked in order to comply with the directions of the competent courts of India in 2014 and 2015 (till 31 March 2015) respectively. The government also clarified that the CER, had recommended not to block 19 URLs in the meetings held between 1<sup>st</sup><sup> </sup>January 2014 upto till date and so far, two orders have been issued to revoke 251 blocked URLs from 1st January 2014 till date. Besides, CERT-In received requests for blocking of objectionable content from individuals and organisations, and these were forwarded to the concerned websites for appropriate action, however the response did not specify the number of requests.</p>
<p align="JUSTIFY" class="western">We have prepared a table explaining the information released by the government and to highlight the inconsistency in their response.</p>
<table class="grid listing">
<colgroup> <col width="331"> <col width="90"> <col width="91"> <col width="119"> </colgroup>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2">
<p align="LEFT"><strong>Applicable rule and procedure outlined under the Blocking Rules</strong></p>
</td>
<td colspan="3">
<p align="CENTER"><strong>Number of websites</strong></p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
<p align="CENTER"><em>2014</em></p>
</td>
<td>
<p align="CENTER"><em>2015</em></p>
</td>
<td>
<p align="CENTER"><em>Total</em></p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
<p align="LEFT">Rule 6 - Blocking requests from NO and others</p>
</td>
<td>
<p align="CENTER">255</p>
</td>
<td>
<p align="CENTER">None</p>
</td>
<td>
<p align="CENTER">255</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
<p align="LEFT">Rule 9 - Blocking under emergency circumstances</p>
</td>
<td>
<p align="CENTER">-</p>
</td>
<td>
<p align="CENTER">-</p>
</td>
<td>
<p align="CENTER">216</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
<p align="LEFT">Rule 10 - Blocking orders from Court</p>
</td>
<td>
<p align="CENTER">2091</p>
</td>
<td>
<p align="CENTER">143</p>
</td>
<td>
<p align="CENTER">2234</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
<p align="LEFT">Requests from individuals and orgs forwarded to CERT-In</p>
</td>
<td>
<p align="CENTER">-</p>
</td>
<td>
<p align="CENTER">-</p>
</td>
<td>
<p align="CENTER">-</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
<p align="LEFT">Recommendations to not block by CER</p>
</td>
<td>
<p align="CENTER">-</p>
</td>
<td>
<p align="CENTER">-</p>
</td>
<td>
<p align="CENTER">19</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
<p align="LEFT">Number of blocking requests revoked</p>
</td>
<td>
<p align="CENTER">-</p>
</td>
<td>
<p align="CENTER">-</p>
</td>
<td>
<p align="CENTER">251</p>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p>In a <a href="http://sflc.in/deity-says-2341-urls-were-blocked-in-2014-refuses-to-reveal-more/">response </a>to an RTI filed by the Software Freedom Law Centre, DeitY said that 708 URLs were blocked in 2012, 1,349 URLs in 2013, and 2,341 URLs in 2014.</p>
<h2>Shreya Singhal v. Union of India</h2>
<p style="text-align: justify;">In its recent judgment, the SC of India upheld the constitutionality of 69A, stating that it was a narrowly-drawn provision with adequate safeguards. The constitutional challenge on behalf of the People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) considered the manner in which the blocking is done and the arguments focused on the secrecy present in blocking.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">The rules may indicate that there is a requirement to identify and contact the originator of information, though as an expert <a href="http://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/but-what-about-section-69a/">has pointed out</a>, there is no evidence of this in practice. The court has stressed the importance of a written order so that writ petitions may be filed under Article 226 of the Constitution. In doing so, the court seems to have assumed that the originator or intermediary is informed, and therefore held the view that any procedural inconsistencies may be challenged through writ petitions. However, this recourse is rendered ineffective not only due to procedural constraints, but also because of the confidentiality clause. The opaqueness through rule 16 severely reigns in the recourse that may be given to the originator and the intermediary. While the court notes that rule 16 requiring confidentality was argued to be unconstitutional, it does not state its opinion on this question in the judgment. One expert, holds the <a href="https://indconlawphil.wordpress.com/2015/03/25/the-supreme-courts-it-act-judgment-and-secret-blocking/">view</a> that this, by implication, requires that requests cannot be confidential. However, such a reading down of rule 16 is yet to be tested.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Further, Sunil Abraham has <a href="http://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/economic-and-political-weekly-sunil-abraham-april-11-2015-shreya-singhal-and-66a">pointed</a> out, “block orders are unevenly implemented by ISPs making it impossible for anyone to independently monitor and reach a conclusion whether an internet resource is inaccessible as a result of a S69A block order or due to a network anomaly.” As there are no comprehensive list of blocked websites or of the legal orders through which they are blocked exists, the public has to rely on media reports and filing RTI requests to understand the censorship regime in India. CIS has previously <a href="http://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/analysing-blocked-sites-riots-communalism">analysed</a> the leaked block lists and lists received as responses to RTI requests which have revealed that the block orders are full of errors and blocking of entire platforms and not just specific links has taken place.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">While the state has the power of blocking content, doing so in secrecy and without judical scrutiny, mark deficiencies that remain in the procedure outlined under the provisions of the blocking rules . The Court could read down rule 16 except for a really narrow set of exceptions, and in not doing so, perhaps has overlooked the opportunities for reform in the existing system. The blocking of 32 websites, is an example of the opaqueness of the system of blocking orders, and where the safeguards assumed by the SC are often not observed such as there being no access to the recommendations that were made by the CER, or towards the revocation of the blocking orders subsequently. CIS filed the RTI to try and understand the grounds for blocking and related procedures and the response has thrown up some issues that must need urgent attention.</p>
<h2>Response to RTI filed by CIS</h2>
<p align="JUSTIFY" class="western">Our first question sought clarification on the websites blocked on 30<sup>th</sup><sup> </sup>December 2014 and the response received from DeitY, E-Security and Cyber Law Group reveals that the websites had been blocked as “they were being used to post information related to ISIS using the resources provided by these websites”. The response also clarifies that the directions to block were issued on <em>18-12-2014 and as of 09-01-2015</em>, after obtaining an undertaking from website owners, stating their compliance with the Government and Indian laws, the sites were unblocked.</p>
<p align="JUSTIFY" class="western">It is not clear if ATS, Mumbai had been intercepting communication or if someone reported these websites. If the ATS was indeed intercepting communication, then as per the rules, the RC should be informed and their recommendations sought. It is unclear, if this was the case and the response evokes the confidentiality clause under rule 16 for not divulging further details. Based on our reading of the rules, court orders should be accessible to the public and without copies of requests and complaints received and knowledge of which organization raised them, there can be no appeal or recourse available to the intermediary or even the general public.</p>
<p align="JUSTIFY" class="western">We also asked for a list of all requests for blocking of information that had been received by the DO between January 2013 and January 2015, including the copies of all files that had accepted or rejected. We also specifically, asked for a list of requests under rule 9. The response from DeitY stated that since January 1, 2015 to March 31, 2015 directions to block 143 URLs had been issued based on court orders. The response completely overlooks our request for information, covering the 2 year time period. It also does not cover all types of blocking orders under rule 6 and rule 9, nor the requests that are forwarded to CERT-In, as we have gauged from the ministry's response to the Parliament. Contrary to the SC's assumption of contacting the orginator of information, it is also clear from DeitY's response that only the websites had been contacted and the letter states that the “websites replied only after blocking of objectionable content”. </p>
<p align="JUSTIFY" class="western">Further, seeking clarification on the functioning of the CER, we asked for the recent composition of members and the dates and copies of the minutes of all meetings including copies of the recommendations made by them. The response merely quotes rule 7 as the reference for the composition and does not provide any names or other details. We ascertain that as per the DeitY website Shri B.J. Srinath, Scientist-G/GC is the appointed Designated Officer, however this needs confirmation. While we are already aware of the structure of the CER which representatives and appointed public officers are guiding the examination of requests remains unclear. Presently, there are 3 Joint Secretaries appointed under the Ministry of Law and Justice, the Home Ministry has appointed 19, while 3 are appointed under the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting. Further, it is not clear which grade of scientist would be appointed to this committee from CERT-In as the rules do not specify this. While the government has clarified in their answer to Parliament that the committee had recommended not to block 19 URLs in the meetings held between 1st January 2014 to till date, it is remains unclear who is taking these decisions to block and revoke blocked URLs. The response from DeitY specifies that the CER has met six times between 2014 and March 2015, however stops short on sharing any further information or copies of files on complaints and recommendations of the CER, citing rule 16.</p>
<p align="JUSTIFY" class="western">Finally, answering our question on the composition of the RC the letter merely highlights the provision providing for the composition under 419A of the Indian Telegraph Rules, 1951. The response clarifies that so far, the RC has met once on 7th December, 2013 under the Chairmanship of the Cabinet Secretary, Department of Legal Affaits and Secretary, DOT. Our request for minutes of meetings and copies of orders and findings of the RC is denied by simply stating that “minutes are not available”. Under 419A, any directions for interception of any message or class of messages under sub-section (2) of Section 5 of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 issued by the competent authority shall contain reasons for such direction and a copy of such order shall be forwarded to the concerned RC within a period of seven working days. Given that the RC has met just once since 2013, it is unclear if the RC is not functioning or if the interception of messages is being guided through other procedures. Further, we do not yet know details or have any records of revocation orders or notices sent to intermediary contacts. This restricts the citizens’ right to receive information and DeitY should work to make these available for the public.</p>
<p align="JUSTIFY" class="western">Given the response to our RTI, the Ministry's response to Parliament and the SC judgment we recommend the following steps be taken by the DeitY to ensure that we create a procedure that is just, accountable and follows the rule of law.</p>
<p align="JUSTIFY" class="western">The revocation of rule 16 needs urgent clarification for two reasons:</p>
<ol>
<li>Under Section 22 of the RTI Act provisions thereof, override all conflicting provisions in any other legislation.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;">In upholding the constitutionality of S69A the SC cites the requirement of reasons behind blocking orders to be recorded in writing, so that they may be challenged by means of writ petitions filed under <a href="http://indiankanoon.org/doc/1712542/">A</a><a href="http://indiankanoon.org/doc/1712542/">rticle 226</a> of the Constitution of India.</li></ol>
<p style="text-align: justify;">If the blocking orders or the meetings of the CER and RC that consider the reasons in the orders are to remain shrouded in secrecy and unavailable through RTI requests, filing writ petitions challenging these decisions will not be possible, rendering this very important safeguard for the protection of online free speech and expression infructuous. In summation, the need for comprehensive legislative reform remains in the blocking procedures and the government should act to address the pressing need for transparency and accountability. Not only does opacity curtial the strengths of democracy it also impedes good governance. We have filed an RTI seeking a comprehensive account of the blocking procedure, functioning of committees from 2009-2015 and we shall publish any information that we may receive.</p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/deity-says-143-urls-blocked-in-2015'>http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/deity-says-143-urls-blocked-in-2015</a>
</p>
No publisherjyotiCensorshipFreedom of Speech and ExpressionRTIIntermediary LiabilityAccountabilityFeatured69AInternet GovernanceChilling EffectTransparencyHomepageBlocking2015-04-30T07:37:40ZBlog Entry