Centre for Internet and Society

How Technology Is and Isn't Helping Fight Corruption in India

praskrishna — 2013-06-05T06:43:43Z

I recently sat down with Sunil Abraham, the founder and executive director of the Center for Internet & Society (CIS) in Bangalore to talk about the center, and his views on the role of technology and openness in politics and society.

The blog post by David Eaves was published in Techpresident on May 28, 2013. Sunil Abraham was interviewed by the author.

Abraham, who founded the CIS in 2008, has been active in the open source and technology space for almost two decades, constantly balancing research and theory, with a strong desire to get his hands dirty and actually make things happen. Prior to starting CIS he held both a Sarai FLOSS fellowship and Ashoka fellowship in which he explored the democratic potential of the Internet. However, before this he worked as a social entrepreneur and free software advocate, founding Mahiti, a company that implemented free software solutions for volunteer organizations. The company continues to thrive today employing over 50 engineers.

Today the Center for Internet and Society serves as a non-profit think tank and advocacy organization that research and explores policy options on freedom of expression, privacy, accessibility for persons with disabilities, access to knowledge and IPR reform, and openness. Over the past five years it has seen its influence grow as it becomes increasingly recognized for its expertise and critical view, within both government and the media, in India.

For part of the conversation I asked Abraham his thoughts on I Paid a Bribe, a website launched in August 2010 that allows users to report when and where they were asked to pay a bribe to a public official.

What follows is a fascinating critique of not just I Paid a Bribe but the UID (biometric ID program being rolled out across India):

Sunil Abraham:

The first complication with I Paid A Bribe is it is a quantitative approach to the problem.

Second, it assumes that those reporting the bribes are honest and don't have any other agendas.

Third, it also depends on the novelty effect. People can get bored when there is no feedback. The loop is not closed. To close the loop, some of the things that go on with anonymous reporting cannot happen, and to close the loop it almost needs to become a paralegal infrastructure. It has to talk to law enforcement and people have to be arrested, prosecuted and put away. To really address a problem like that is complex.

So it fails at each of those challenges.

The real challenge in India is high-ticket bribes that happen at the top of the pyramid. And those bribes are done in a very sophisticated fashion. Ordinarily minds cannot understand those transactions. Take the 2G spectrum scam. [the 2G spectrum scam was a significant scandal in India involving a shortfall of hundreds of millions of dollars in the licenses fees Indian telecom companies were supposed to pay the government for their 2G cellphone spectrum licenses. It is believed that officials were paid off so that lower license fees could be paid]. People still don't know what was the bribe and who paid who the bribe. Nobody knows! There are now 8 or 9 books on the scam and none of these books will tell you who did what. There are lots of charts about where money flowed but what component of that was the bribe and what component of that was legit … why none of these money trails link back to the primary accused … nobody can explain.

[And the big challenge with these high-ticket bribes is that…] The rate of evolution in corruption keeps pace with the rate of innovation in anti-corruption. It will always innovate and modify to protect itself against new approaches.

There are many honest people in government, otherwise this country would be in tatters! If everyone in government was corrupt … but what the system does is almost assume everyone within government is corrupt but that everyone outside of government is innocent. But this is not true at all.

The government represents a sample of the population, so if half the population is corrupt then half the people in government will probably be corrupt, it is not dramatically different. So how does one prevent potential witch hunts or the waste of law enforcement resources following false leads?

With the novelty effect – it feels very difficult to maintain the volume [of complaints] and make grand claims like place "A" is more corrupt than place "B". After some time there will be regional difference and the data will no longer even sound credible to the people involved and its credible will collapse. There is no easy answer this.

So the most effective use of technology in fighting corruption [in India] has been in sting operations.

There you go after high value targets, you don't go after petty corruption at the bottom of the pyramid. You use a competent team, people that know the technology and know the evidentiary value of the technology in a court, you work within the immunity afforded by law to media organizations. Then you build a proper case. Unfortunately the last case that strikes at the heart of corruption in India – the corporate post – you saw how it was crushed by mainstream media because it was not run by a main stream media outfit. And the enemies were too big: the banks that are money laundering. And all banks are money laundering. This is the most fundamental problem to address really because when the bulk of society is outside the tax bracket or the bulk of their transactions are outside the tax bracket then you have normalized criminal behavior in society. It means it is accepted that the average person will engage in tax reduction or tax avoidance. Those type of really high ticket targets – and there are ways to use technology to address issues like this – it needs champions. What "I Paid a Bribe" is trying to do is say that a particular configuration of technology is going to be the solution and that the crowd will address its own problem. This is the assumption there.

That is very different than saying that the solution is never technology, the solution is always people and we need people to drive this, and ethical institutions that are created by these people to drive this. Than what your story of change automatically takes for granted is every time the technology innovates around your current technology fix your going to innovate also. With the other narrative since your technology configuration IS your solution then somehow you hold it sacrosanct and you assume that the corruption is never going to innovate around your fix.

David Eaves: So I think the hope of I Paid a Bribe - right or wrong - was that you could have a radically scaling solution…

Abraham:

If you are going after high-ticket forms of corruption you have to be sophisticated. If you are going after low ticket, bottom of the pyramid forms of corruption you may not have to be.

Take the UID project (biometric ID).

In order to crack bottom of the pyramid corruption, one way to do this is by using biometrics so that the actual recipient who IS supposed to get subsidy or welfare actually gets the subsidy or welfare. But if you just think that through you realize there are so many problems with that.

When the intended beneficiary goes to collect he could be told there is no connectivity, or there is no electricity, or even if the authentication system answered a yes he could be told it was in fact a no. Or even if the authentication system answers a yes he could be given half his entitlement instead of his full entitlement.

And even if the authentication system says yes he may have not been eligible in the first place but could be a local elite who is taking the entitlement.

But on the other hand if we had a system through which there was necessary disclosure of everybody receiving the entitlement and their details were published on a public notice board in the village… then people in the village themselves could tell if those people were the right people to get these subsidies. The local media could come and inspect this, civil society organizations could inspect this. So it is the government becoming more transparent to the citizen rather than the other way around, which with the UID is what happens – the citizen becomes more transparent to the state.

Technology has to be configured in a very careful way at each stage in order to address different types of corruption, and each of those specific technologic choices you make can either increase corruption or decrease corruption or increase the power asymmetry or make it more equitable.

Eaves:So what are the conditions in which I Paid a Bribe might work more effectively?

Abraham:

It might be that I Paid a Bribe only allows for one type of participation. If you look at other forms of commons based peer production projects. I think they offer many types of contributions to the project. So if through the examination of a particular government budget a platform identifies all the public works that are going to be constructed using that budget and then allows state or town or even a locality to monitor the progress on those works then it allows for contributions that are necessarily antagonistic but it also allows for contributions that are antagonistic. So it allows for a conversation with a much more diverse set of people participating.

With I Paid a Bribe, because they want the scale they have taken the simplification very seriously. And it is a light touch transaction – which means once you register a bribe you can more or less forget about it. I think other peer production projects, even Wikipedia, once you start editing a particular page, you may develop an interest in that page. You can set a notification system that will notify you every time that page is edited. It is like the same story on a mailing list, that the rules that existed during the initial days when the mailing list was very small change and get more sophisticated as the mailing list scales. The technological solution has to grow to compliment the age of the community and the community has to be gardened very carefully to retain members. I Paid a Bribe risk ending up being a venting mechanism for the post bribe trauma moment. Which is fine! That is useful in of itself. But if your vision is more than that, if you want to have a movement which is an anti-corruption movement then it cannot be just be a venting mechanism for the anti-bribe trauma.

This is the complication. I'm not dismissing I Paid a Bribe. All I'm saying is, in order to build a community and take it along with you, you cannot keep anything sacred. Not your technological configuration, not how you message, address and bring people into the community, not even your target community – that might change – so it is just like the challenge we have in growing Wikipedia in India. If you were that simple we would the same solution for the different language wikipedias and we would do one homogenous thing across the nation. But the Kannada Wikipedia has only seven active editors, as does the Punjabi Wikipedia, the Hindi Wikipedia has hundreds of editors but they don't like each other and they don't meet in real life. Very unlike the Maleren Wikipedia. So the strategy that needs to be employed is very different for each of these communities. There is almost an automatic tension between simple, scalable and authentic bottom up movement forces.

So as the number of bribes reported on I Paid a Bribe increase – what do you do to ensure that the quality of those reports gets better? And how do you move people from being anonymous reporters to the system to becoming more and more identified? How does a senior cohort of the community get created? I don't know – these things may exist but I don't see it from the outside.

Look at the different in other peer production projects. The brand of the individual and the attribution afforded to each individual is quite explicit and public. I Paid a Bribe is mostly anonymous although I think some of them choose to be public.

Eaves: And you need to feel incredibly confident in your personal security and status to be public in I Paid a Bribe.

Abraham:

Exactly.

This post has been corrected to fix a transcription error. Sunil Abraham said the Kannada Wikipedia has only seven active editors.

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/news/techpresident-david-eaves-may-28-2013-how-technology-is-and-isnt-helping-fight-corruption-in-india

Sweden 'must raise its net freedom profile'

praskrishna — 2013-07-02T09:57:51Z

While promoting internet freedom is a policy priority for Swedish Foreign Minister Carl Bildt, Sweden's efforts remain largely unknown, according a new report that concludes Sweden needs to do more to raise its global profile as a leader on the issue.

The article by David Landes was published in "The Local" on May 30, 2013. Pranesh Prakash is quoted.

Last week, Bildt and his colleagues at Sweden's Ministry of Foreign Affairs welcomed hundreds of delegates to the Stockholm Internet Forum to discuss what Sweden considers one of the "great global issues of the future".

"Our aim is clear: to create an international, inclusive platform for constructive discussions on the importance of internet freedom for development," Bildt told conference attendees in Stockholm last week.

"We will work to connect the unconnected to an open, secure internet that drives innovation and growth, and that contributes to better democracy and the enjoyment of free speech."

But while Bildt's message was clear to everyone in the audience in Stockholm, a report released on Wednesday suggested that Sweden has so far failed to adequately explain its commitment to internet freedom to a wider audience.

"Sweden does a lot right already, but we are too unknown. We're a small player. So we need to work with others to raise our profile," United Minds analyst Paul Alacron, one of the authors of the report, told The Local.

The report, Freedom and Development on the Internet, was published by the Swedish Institute, together with the United Minds opinion research firm, and is designed to give a qualitative view of internet freedom in six countries, as well as insights into Sweden's perceived importance for the issue.

In-depth interviews with 18 internet experts and activists in Russia, Pakistan, India, China, the United States, and Egypt revealed that there is a demand for Sweden's expertise on internet freedom, but that awareness of what Sweden has to offer is limited.

"If you ask a regular Chinese, most would probably think that the United States is the best role model [for internet freedom]. Most Chinese don't know anything about Sweden," one Chinese blogger is quoted as saying in the report.

Meanwhile, Pranesh Prakash from the Centre for Internet and Society in India, said Sweden could better leverage its strong reputation to help promote internet freedom.

"If the Americans push an issue, many go against it simply because they're behind it. If Sweden takes up the same proposal, the chances are greater that the debate will be about the proposal itself," he said in the report.

According to report co-author Javeria Rizvi Kabani of the Swedish Institute, Sweden has kept a low profile in part due to safety considerations for activists who have participated in exchange programmes organized by the Swedish Institute.

"The safety of those in the of human rights defenders and net activist networks we've created over the last few years and who have visited Sweden always comes first. So we've focused on that rather than Sweden's profile on these issues," she told The Local.

The low-profile approach is nothing new for Sweden, she added.

"We have been very strong in recent years in foreign aid and supporting the process of democratization around the world, but unlike other countries, we haven't put 'brand Sweden' next to that work," Rizvi Kabani explained.

While Sweden is generally recognized as a country that promotes transparency and the freedom of information, the report revealed that the ongoing case involving Sweden's attempts to extradite WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has dented some people's belief that Sweden is committed to internet freedom.

"The trial of Julian Assange makes Sweden's relationship with the issue of internet freedom complicated," Egyptian journalist Nasry Esmat said in the report.

"I'm aware that the accusations against Assange pertain to something completely different, but that makes Sweden appear like a country that doesn't support WikiLeaks."

The report also pointed to a "troublesome development" in some countries whereby regimes are trying to exert more control over the internet and the spread of information.

According to Alacron, such developments, while concerning, are simply one more argument for why Sweden needs to raise its profile as a staunch supporter of internet freedom.

"Sweden has an important role to play. That's very clear," he said.

"Knowledge and understanding about Sweden may be rather low, but at the same time there are high expectations for what Sweden can do. The conditions are ripe, therefore, for Sweden to play an even more important role in these issues."

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/news/the-local-may-30-2013-sweden-must-raise-its-net-freedom-profile

Telugu Wikipedia Meet-up @ CIS

praskrishna — 2013-08-19T06:53:03Z

The Centre for Internet and Society is hosting a meet-up on June 2, 2013 in its office in Bangalore, from 3 p.m. to 6 p.m. All are cordially invited.

Click to read the full details on Wikipedia

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/news/telugu-wikipedia-meetup-at-cis

Towards a Global Network of Internet and Society Centres

praskrishna — 2013-06-05T07:29:43Z

This event was held in Istanbul by Bilgi University as part of the collaboration on Global Network of Interdisciplinary Internet and Society Research Centres.

Chinmayi Arun spoke on the Internet Governance panel at the conference on 'ICT, Law and Innovation: Recent Developments, Challenges, and Lessons Learned'.

Institute on Internet and Society

praskrishna — 2013-11-20T05:52:02Z

The Centre for Internet and Society, Bangalore is pleased to announce the Institute for Internet and Society to be held in Bangalore from June 8 to June 14, 2013 at the Golden Palms Resort, Bangalore.

With financial support and visionary guidance from the Ford Foundation, this initiative represents an important opportunity to bring together various stakeholders in a neutral forum and share ideas. The week-long residential institute will cover topics surrounding the internet and society.

Course Content

History of the Internet (This session will cover brief history of the Internet, its early stages and growth. It will also cover origins of internet in India and its impact on the Indian GDP. It will also focus on hot topics/debates surrounding the Internet).
Internet Technologies and Infrastructure (The session infrastructure, purpose and function of an ISP, advantages and disadvantages of different modes of Internet access).
E-Governance (This session will cover the various e-governance initiatives).
Principles and Values of the Internet (This session will cover various principles that underpinned the creation of the Internet, the threats they face and the need for a truly “open internet”).
Ownership and Management (This session will cover ownership and market distribution).
Internet Activism (This session will deal with various initiatives which have successfully used the Internet to build movements and campaigns).

Institute Highlights

Guest Lectures by Experts & CIS Staff
Interactive Panel Discussions
Case Studies
Surveys
Breakout Sessions
Demonstrations
Product Walkthroughs
Networking Opportunities and much more…

At the end of the week long residential course, attendees will have:

Acquisition of knowledge on Internet in the Indian society.
Appreciation of the role of community and other stakeholders in issues surrounding the Internet.
Creation of a starting point for improved communication of research findings, innovations, information and new technologies in Internet to evolve a community comprising academicians and policy makers.
Appreciation of the need to bridge the gap between policy and implementation.

Agenda

Saturday, June 8, 2013

Timings	Topics for Discussion
09:30 11:00	INTRODUCTION Dr. Ravina Aggarwal & Dr. Nirmita Narasimhan
11:00 11:30	Tea / Coffee Break
11:30 13:00	HISTORY AND GROWTH OF INTERNET IN INDIA Madan Mohan Rao (This session will deal with the advent of the internet and its growth in India).
13:00 14:00	Lunch Break
14:00 15:30	DOMESTIC BODIES AND MECHANISMS Pranesh Prakash (This session will give an overview of the roles, which different government bodies play in regulating the Internet).
15:30 16:00	Tea / Coffee Break
16:00 17:30	EMERGING TRENDS IN INTERNET USAGE IN INDIA Nandini C and Vir Kamal Chopra (This session will cover key trends and issues with regard to internet usage in India).
20:00 22:00	Dinner

Sunday, June 9, 2013

Timings	Topics for Discussion
09:30 11:00	WIRED TECHNOLOGIES Dr. Nadeem Akhtar (This session will deal with the various technologies involved in establishing a wired connection to the internet).
11:00 11:30	Tea / Coffee Break
11:30 13:00	WIRELESS TECHNOLOGIES Michael Ginguld (This session will deal with the various technologies involved in establishing a wireless connection to the internet).
13:00 14:00	Lunch Break
14:00 15:30	BUILDING KNOWLEDGE BASES AND PLATFORMS VIA MASS COLLABORATION ON THE INTERNET Vishnu Vardhan T (This session will deal with the various online knowledge bases and platforms with special emphasis on Wikipedia).
15:30 16:00	Tea / Coffee Break
16:00 17:30	AFFORDABLE DEVICES AND INTERNET ACCESS IN INDIA Ravikiran Annaswamy (This session will deal with affordable devices and their role in increasing internet access in India).
20:00 22:00	Dinner

Monday, June 10, 2013

Timings	Topics for Discussion
09:30 11:00	HOW INTERNET WORKS? Dr. Nadeem Akhtar (This session will deal with various technologies related to the backbone of the internet).
11:00 11:30	Tea/Coffee Break
11:30 13:00	ASSIGNMENT
13.00 14.00	Lunch Break
14:00 18:00	OFFSITE / FIELD VISIT
20:00 22:00	Dinner

Tuesday, June 11, 2013

Timings	Topics for Discussion
09:30 11:00	UNIVERSAL ACCESS Archana Gulati (This session will cover an overview of universal access and universal service).
11:00 11:30	Tea/Coffee Break
11:30 13:00	FREE AND OPEN INTERNET Pranesh Prakash (This session will cover fundamental rights to freedom of speech and expression, reasonable restrictions on freedom of speech in context of internet access in India).
13.00 14.00	Lunch Break
14:00 15:30	OPENNESS Pranesh Prakash and Sunil Abraham (This session will cover issues related to openness and access to the internet).
15:30 16:00	Tea / Coffee Break
16:00 17:30	OPEN CONTENT Professor Subbiah Arunahalam (This session will discuss open access to content and its implications on internet access).
17:30 18:30	QUICK TALK: COPYRIGHT LAW AND ACCESS Pranesh Prakash (This short session will deal with implications of copyright law on internet access).
20.00 22.00	Dinner

Wednesday, June 12, 2013

Timings	Topics for Discussion
09:30 11:00	PRIVACY ON THE INTERNET IN INDIA Elonnai Hickok and Sunil Abraham (This session will discuss online privacy, data protection, use of encryption, value of anonymity online, UID, etc).
11:00 11:30	Tea/Coffee Break
11:30 13:00	E-ACCESSIBILITY BASICS Dr. Nirmita Narasimhan (This session will deal with key requirements for making internet accessible for persons with disabilities).
13.00 14.00	Lunch Break
14:00 15:30	INTERNATIONAL BODIES AND MECHANISM Tulika Pandey and Gaurab Raj Upadhyay (This session will deal with various international bodies and multi-stakeholder processes involved in formulation of internet related policies).
15:30 16:00	Tea / Coffee Break
16:00 17:00	E-GOVERNANCE Sunil Abraham (This session will deal with e-Governance strategies and relevant initiatives).
20.00 22.00	Dinner

Thursday, June 13, 2013

Timings	Topics for Discussion
09:30 11:00	GLOBAL HISTORY OF THE INTERNET Dr. Nishant Shah (Inception of internet and the main events which led to the growth of the internet).
11:00 11:30	Tea/Coffee Break
11:30 13:00	STRATEGIES FOR POLICY INTERVENTION Chakshu Roy (This session will look at various ways in which policy intervention can be made and the various factors necessary to successfully engage in policy forums).
13.00 14.00	Lunch Break
14:00 15:30	PROFILE OF INTERNET SERVICE PROVIDERS Satyen Gupta (This session will discuss profiles of various ISPs and their share in the market).
15:30 16:00	Tea / Coffee Break
16:00 17:30	COMPETITION IN THE MARKET Helani Galpaya (This session will discuss structure and competition in the broadband market, wireless market, etc).
20.00 22.00	Dinner

Friday, June 14, 2013

Timings	Topics for Discussion
09:30 11:00	LEVERAGING INTERNET FOR ACTIVISM Ananth Guruswamy (This session will look at various initiatives which have used the internet to build successful movements and campaigns).
11:00 11:30	Tea/Coffee Break
11:30 13:00	“INTERNET ACCESS” ACTIVISM Parminder Jeet Singh (This session will discuss how people can contribute to initiatives for improving internet access).
13.00 14.00	Lunch Break
14:00 15:30	ENSURING ACCESS TO THE INTERNET A K Bharghava (This session will discuss strategies to enhance access to the internet in India with special focus on National Optical Fibre Network).
15:30 16:00	Tea / Coffee Break
16:00 17:30	Winding Up

Speakers

A.K Bhargava
A. K. Bhargava is a Telecom Engineer with more than 35 yrs of experience in various fields of Telecommunication, Installation, Operation, Maintenance, Software and Management. Prior to joining BBNL as Director (Operations), he was working as Executive Director (Wireless Services) with Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Limited (MTNL) Delhi.
Ananth Guruswamy
Ananth Guruswamy is the director of Amnesty International India. Previouly, he was the Programme Director at Green Peace. Ananth joined Greenpeace India in 2001 at its very beginning and played a key role in moulding Greenpeace India into one of the leading stakeholders in the NGO sector in India.
Archana Gulati
An Indian Civil Service Officer, she has worked as a Universal Service Policy Expert with respect to Access to ICTs for Persons with Disabilities for the International Telecommunications Union. She also successfully pioneered the e-government system in her previous posting as Joint Controller Communication Accounts, Department of Telecommunications (DoT). At present she is posted as the Financial Advisor with the National Disaster Management Authority of India.
Chakshu Roy
Chakshu Roy heads technology initiatives at PRS Legislative Research (PRS), New Delhi. PRS is a unique initiative that provides non-partisan analysis to all Members of Parliament in India. Chakshu is developing a comprehensive technology strategy to engage large sections of the population in the policy process. He has conceptualised and developed India’s only online database of all state laws. Chakshu has conducted capacity-building workshops for over 1000 journalists on tracking the work of legislators.
Elonnai Hickok
Elonnai Hickok works as a Programme Manager at the Centre for Internet and Society. Her main areas of work are Privacy and Data Security.
Gaurab Raj Upadhaya
Gaurab has a long record of volunteerism and commitment to the Asia Pacific Internet Community. Gaurab is one of the 14 global Trusted Community Representatives who cryptographically sign the root of the domain name system in ICANN Root DNSSEC Key ceremonies. In 2001, he was the founder of the Nepal Internet Exchange (NPIX), the first IX in the South-Asian region.
Helani Galpaya
Helani Galpaya is the Chief Executive Officer at LIRNEasia. She holds a Masters in Technology and Policy from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and a Bachelor’s in Computer Science from Mount Holyoke College, USA.
Dr. Madan Mohan Rao
Dr. Madan Mohan Rao is the research director at the Asian Media Information and Communication Centre. He is the editor of a three book series: “The Asia Pacific Internet Handbook”, “The Knowledge Management Chronicles” and “AfroDotEdu”.
Michael Ginguld
Michael Ginguld is the Chief Executive Officer at AirJaldi. He has more than 15 years of experience working with ICT, community and rural development projects in India, Indonesia, Cambodia, Nepal, and Israel.
Dr. Nadeem Akhtar
Dr. Nadeem Akhtar is currently working as Principal Research Engineer at the Centre of Excellence in Wireless Technology (CEWiT). He leads the network layer research team at CEWiT and also represents CEWiT at 3GPP Radio Access Networks Working Group meetings. His research interests lie in the field of mobile and broadband wireless access technologies. Dr. Akhtar is a member of IEEE Standards Association and ITU-APT Foundation of India.
Nandini. C
Nandini. C is a Research Associate with IT for Change (www.itforchange.net), and is part of a team that is engaged in research studies in the area of gender and ICTs, democratic governance and ICTs, and the political economy of the information society. She holds a Masters in Urban and Rural Community Development from the Tata Institute of Social Sciences, Mumbai.
Dr. Nirmita Narasimhan
Dr. Nirmita Narasimhan is a Policy Director at Centre for Internet and Society and works on policy research and advocacy related to IP reform and technology access for persons with disabilities.
Dr. Nishant Shah
Dr. Nishant Shah is the Director-Research at CIS. He is a recipient of the Asia Scholarship Foundation's fellowship for comparative research at the Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies, Shanghai University, Shanghai, China. Nishant is a regular columnist with the Sunday Eye, the national edition of Indian Express, Delhi, GQ India and DML Central. He has authored/co-authored many peer-reviewed articles in several journals.
Parminder Jeet Singh
Parminder Jeet Singh is Executive Director of IT for Change. He was recently appointed as a member of Task Force set up by the Indian government on implementation of proactive disclosures provisions of the Right to Information Act. He was also associated with Department of IT's Sub-group on e-governance for the 12^th Five Year Plan. He recently authored a report on 'Community Knowledge Centers' for the Karnataka Knowledge Commission.
Pranesh Prakash
Pranesh Prakash is a Policy Director at CIS and works on policy research and advocacy around intersections of technology and law focusing on access to knowledge (primarily copyright reforms), promoting 'openness' (including open government data, open standards, open access, and free/libre/open source software), freedom of expression, privacy, and internet governance.
Ravikiran Annaswamy
Ravikiran Annaswamy is an entrepreneur learning to create the next big business. He is very excited about the opportunities at the cusp of social media, mobile Internet and Big Data. Currently, He is nurturing a unique concept called Teritree, which brings social shopping into mainstream business.He has vast experience of making successful telecom solutions for global markets, mainly in the area of Online Billing and Charging, OSS, Innovative 3G/4G applications, Media and Security Solutions.
Dr. Ravina Aggarwal
Dr. Ravina Aggarwal works on media issues in India from the Ford Foundation's New Delhi office. Her grant making advances issues of democratic expression and media access among marginalized communities. She holds the position of Programme Officer in Ford Foundation, India
Satyen Gupta
Satyen Gupta is a veteran in the field of telecommunications, drawing from his vast experience in telecom regulation as well as industry. Among other accomplishments, he was a member of the NGN Regulation review group of ITU and also worked as advisor with Telecom Regulatory Authority of India at the level of Additional Secretary and is heading the Converged Network Division dealing with regulatory, technical and economic aspects of Data Networks and Services.
Dr. Subbiah Arunachalam
Dr. Subbiah Arunachalam is a distinguished fellow at the Centre for Internet and Society. Improving information access both for scientists and for the rural poor; scientometrics, ICT-enabled development and open access are among his current research interests.
Sunil Abraham
Sunil Abraham is the Executive Director of the Centre for Internet and Society. He is also a social entrepreneur and Free Software advocate.
Tulika Pandey
Tulika Pandey is an Electronics and Telecommunications Engineer. She has been with the Government of India since 1992 and is currently Director with the Department of Information Technology, Ministry of Communications & Information Technology, Government of India. She is involved in implementation strategy and action plan formulations for wider reach of ICT facilitated benefits; Integration of appropriate technology interfaces between human and cyber world; Steering of Research and Development projects for development of contextual ICT technology, tool, applications and content.
Vir Kamal Chopra
Vir Kamal Chopra is currently the Sr. General Manager (QA) with BSNL at New Delhi. He started his career in teaching. He has played a vital role in providing telecommunication facilities and shaping BSNL and is also responsible for finalization of high value products which are purchased at the central level of BSNL. He is credited with introducing e-tendering for the first time at BSNL.
Vishnu Vardhan
Vishnu Vardhan is the Programme Director of the CIS-A2K Team which works with Wikipedians and also conducts workshops and meetups in order to build Wikipedia community for Indic languages.

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/telecom/knowledge-repository-on-internet-access/institute-on-internet-and-society

CIS Celebrates 5 Years: A Report in Prajavani

praskrishna — 2013-06-12T11:46:48Z

Prajavani published a report on the Centre for Internet and Society's 5 year celebrations organised in Bangalore on the final day, May 23, 2013. Dr. U.B. Pavanaja gave a talk on Kannada and IT.


Given below is the report published in Prajavani on May 24, 2013:

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/news/prajavani-may-24-2013-report-on-cis-celebrates-5-years

Burma to host first Internet freedom forum

praskrishna — 2013-06-05T07:10:38Z

Myanmar ICT Development Organisation (MIDO) will host “Myanmar Internet Freedom Forum” in Yangon from June 1-2. In the first forum of its kind in Burma, MIDO aims to raise awareness of Internet freedom in a country that has endured decades of media censorship.

Chan Myae Khine's post was published in Asian Correspondent on May 22, 2013. The Centre for Internet and Society will be joining local netizens and organisations for discussion.

In a country with a notoriously low Internet penetration rate, MIDO has been conducting Internet and communications technology (ICT) training in cities and remote areas “to empower citizens using ICT to address core development and poverty-reduction goals.” It is involved in BarCamps and government organized forums as well.

“As our organisation focuses on ICT4D and Internet Policy, Internet freedom is also a vital issue that we look on,” said Htaike Htaike Aung, Program Manager of MIDO.

The major goal of the Myanmar Internet Freedom Forum is to advocate for Internet freedom in Burma (Myanmar). “As the media and policy makers do not have awareness on Internet Governance Forum and its agenda, the issues have not been addressed and lack media attention,” said MIDO in its proposal submission. “Not having local resources on Internet Governance is also a cause for the lack of advocacy groups and campaigns.”

MIDO also aims to promote “access” and “digital rights” with a multi-stakeholderism approach involving government, journalists, bloggers, social media activists, netizens and international experts so that all voices are allowed and heard. Various topics such as Cyber Law, Digital Security, E-education and Netizen Empowerment will be discussed during panel discussions and breakout sessions at the event.

MIDO expects 300 attendees for Day 1 of the forum, when the Center for Internet and Society, the Thai Netizen Network and other regional groups will be joining local netizens and organisations for discussion. “For the government representatives, we’re still trying to get confirmation,” explained Htaike Htaike.

MIDO will invite about 20 netizens from around the country to join interested participants from Yangon to discuss how to effectively monitor Internet freedom on the second day of the forum. The aim is to establish a network to monitor and report on Internet censorship in Burma. MIDO hopes to publish Internet Censorship Index each year with help of the reports generated from the network.

With a 7% of Internet penetration rate, this is a problematic area in Burma, though there has been some progress and Internet business opportunities have begun to emerge. The Internet Freedom Forum, as an all-inclusive platform, has potential to bring necessary knowledge to the public, such as awareness of rights when accessing Internet and other privacy issues which are vital for new netizens.

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/news/asian-correspondent-chan-myae-khine-may-22-2013-burma-to-host-internet-freedom-forum

International Collaborations

praskrishna — 2013-05-23T04:49:43Z

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/accessibility/blog/accessibility-intl-collaborations.pdf

NVDA

praskrishna — 2013-05-23T04:45:15Z

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/accessibility/blog/nvda-e-speak.pdf

Comparative Analysis of DNA Profiling Legislations from Across the World (File)

praskrishna — 2013-05-23T04:17:51Z

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/comparative-analysis-dna-profiling-bill.xlsx

RAW Monographs

praskrishna — 2013-05-22T08:45:29Z

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/raw/digital-humanities/monograph-posters.pdf

Open Systems Interconnection Model

praskrishna — 2013-05-22T06:41:44Z

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/telecom/blog/osi-model.pdf

IPv4 and IPv6 - FAQs

praskrishna — 2013-05-22T06:20:33Z

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/ipv4-ipv6-faqs

CIS highlights changes ushered in by the Internet

praskrishna — 2013-05-22T06:06:44Z

As part of its fifth anniversary celebrations, the Centre for Internet and Society (CIS) has organised an exhibition showcasing its accomplishments, besides a series of talks by experts on the changes ushered in by the Internet. The exhibition will remain open till Thursday.

The article was published in the Hindu on May 22, 2013.

On Wednesday, a talk will be held at 6 p.m. on “Cyber security, privacy and surveillance”. Also, Laird Brown, strategic planner and writer, and Purba Sarkar, associate producer with the cyber security film project, will make presentations on cyber security.

The valedictory will have talks by Kannada writer Chandrashekar Kambar on “Kannada in modern era”, while member of Kannada Software Committee U.B. Pavanja will speak on “From palm leaf to tablet”. This will be followed by a Carnatic music programme by Nirmita Narasimha. The CIS has also invited the public to be its auditors by displaying its account books and contracts, which shows how it has spent the Rs. 13.13 crore received from donors. The exhibition is open from 10 a.m. to 8 p.m.

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/news/the-hindu-may-22-2013-cis-highlights-changes-ushered-in-by-the-internet

India's Internet Growth & Challenges

praskrishna — 2013-05-22T05:37:28Z

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/indias-internet-growth-challenges