Centre for Internet and Society

Relevance of Bhagabat Tungi in the evolution of Odia language from Buddha era to digital age

praskrishna — 2014-05-06T07:09:41Z

The Intellects, a Delhi based organisation of Odia intellectuals, and Shree Jagannath Mandir and Odisha Art and Cultural Center co-organized an event in New Delhi on April 20, 2014.

Subhashish Panigrahi participated in this event and gave a talk about "Re-modelling Bhagabata Tungi in the present context of a digital society". About 600 Odias attended the progremme, including Dr Anita Panda, Prof Saudamini Barik, Jayaram Samal, Indubhushan Lenka, Odia Radio founder Sitanshu Mohapatra, journalist Asit Ranjan Mishra, OdishaDiary (www.orissadiary.com) founder Prachee Naik, Rashmi Ranjan Parida, The Intellects members Sangram Dhar, Smrutidhara Rout, Anasuya Sahoo, Aditya Mohanty, Nirmal Dhal, Sanjaya Parida, Pankajamala Sarangi, Premanda Swain, lawyer Sanjeeb Kumar Mohanty and Tarun Samantray.

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/news/relevance-of-bhagabat-tungi-in-evolution-of-odia-language

release

praskrishna — 2012-08-21T09:44:44Z

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/home-images/release.jpg

Relative Fifty

praskrishna — 2014-04-22T10:24:17Z

Relative Fifty

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/home-images/copy_of_FiftyMostFrequentlyUsedWords.png

Relative

praskrishna — 2014-04-22T10:53:07Z

Relative

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/home-images/Relative.png

Rejoinder to Annexure 8

praskrishna — 2015-11-21T07:39:26Z

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/a2k/blogs/rejoinder-to-annexure-8

Regulation, misuse concerns still dog DNA profiling bill

praskrishna — 2015-09-13T08:32:48Z

Experts fear such data could be used for non-forensic purposes and are concerned about the vast powers to be vested in proposed DNA profiling board.

The article by Nikita Mehta was published in Livemint on July 29, 2015. Sunil Abraham gave his inputs.

A bill aimed at creating a DNA database of offenders, slated for introduction in the monsoon session of Parliament, has been criticized by experts who fear that such information could be used for non-forensic purposes and are concerned about the vast powers sought to vested in a proposed DNA profiling board.

Despite changes made by the Department of Biotechnology, the final draft of the Human DNA Profiling Bill 2015 has drawn flak from the Centre for Internet and Society (CIS), a non-profit group that works on policy issues.

The bill seeks Parliament’s approval for plans to create a DNA bank of various offenders in order to prevent repeat offences and to regulate the process by defining infrastructure, training, qualifications, facilities and legalities.

The government says that conducting DNA analysis involves working with sensitive information which, if misused, can cause harm to a person or to society. There is, thus, a need to restrict the use of DNA profiles through an Act of Parliament only for lawful purposes of establishing someone’s identity in a criminal or civil case and for other specified purposes.

The bill seeks to establish standards for laboratories, staff qualifications, training, proficiency testing, collection of body substances, custody trail from collection to reporting and a data bank with policies of use and access to information, its retention and deletion.

The offences for which the database can be maintained range from criminal and civil offences to paternity disputes.

“We need this bill because there are so many unresolved cases. A judge can use this data as material evidence and speedy justice can be served,” said M.K. Bhan, former secretary of the department of biotechnology. “Tremendous amount of effort has been taken to consult all possible parties and the bill has been drafted and redrafted over the years,” Bhan added.

In its note of dissent, CIS raised objections about DNA profiling and DNA samples being used for identifying victims of accidents or disasters, for missing persons and in civil disputes. It also objected to the creation and maintenance of a population statistics databank that is to be used, as prescribed, for the purposes of identification.

“One problem is accuracy. Unlike comparisons between digital signatures which can either have matches or no matches, biometric signatures will have a level of accuracy, so there can be a few false matches. Hence unnecessary widening of the data will reduce the accuracy of this system,” said Sunil Abraham, executive director at CIS.

CIS further noted that a DNA Profiling Board proposed by the bill will have vast powers, including those of authorizing procedures for DNA profiling for civil and criminal investigation, drawing up a list of instances for the application of human DNA profiling and undertaking any other activity which in the opinion of the Board advances the purposes of the Act. The DNA Profiling Board will consist of eminent scientists, administrators and law enforcement officers who will administer and carry out other functions assigned to it under the Act.

“Usually when regulators are created, the mandate is extremely clear. In this bill it is quite vague and there should not be so many things left to the discretionary powers of the board,” said Abraham who was part of the consultation process for the bill. He added that a number of changes have been introduced to the bill, including reduction of powers of the board, tighter definitions and more privacy safeguards.

“Any regulatory system requires external auditing, that should be taken into view. Another issue that was being looked at was that the forensic system should be outside police jurisdiction as they may have vested interests,” Bhan said.

The CIS note pointed out that although the bill refers to security and privacy procedures that labs are to follow, these have been left to be drawn up and implemented by the proposed DNA Board.

“This proposal has been doing the rounds for years and I can vouch for the scientific infallibility of using DNA profiling for carrying out justice. That being said, the bill does not provide verifiable or implementable safeguards for misuse of this data and lack of accountability of public servants can cause serious jeopardy to the privacy of citizens,” said K.P.C. Gandhi, a forensic scientist and founder chairman at Truth Labs, an independent forensic science laboratory.

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/livemint-nikita-mehta-july-29-2015-regulation-misuse-concerns-still-dog-dna-profiling-bill

Regulation of OTT

praskrishna — 2015-05-09T10:39:51Z

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/telecom/blog/trai-response-paper.pdf

Regulating the Internet by fiat

praskrishna — 2012-08-26T10:13:03Z

The Union government’s move to ban or block 310 online entities is worrisome.

This article by V Sridhar was published in the Hindu on August 26, 2012. Pranesh Prakash is quoted.

The unprecedented spike in the velocity of hateful, offensive and blatantly communal online content earlier this month, which reinforced rumour mongering on the ground that resulted in the exodus of people from the northeast from several Indian cities has been a classic example of how new technologies can be harnessed for old vices. But just as disturbing has been the manner in which the government yielded to the old itch of censoring, banning or blocking content. Between August 18 and August 21, the Department of Telecommunications (DoT), in four separate directives issued to all Internet service licensees, asked them to “block access” to a total of 310 URLs (Unique Resource Locators).

Directing ISPs

The number of URLs blocked does not quite convey the extent of the banned content because the list includes instances of entire websites, a single Web page in some cases, videos posted on YouTube, Twitter handles, Facebook entries, or even instances of links that would take the browser to an img tag (an individual image that is linked to an HTML page). Although the directives clearly stated that the service providers should block only the specific URLs leading to the main sites such as YouTube, Facebook or Twitter.

Airtel, the leading telecom and Internet service provider, blocked youtu.be, the short URL that Twitter and Facebook users normally use for sharing images and videos. A perusal of the four orders clearly shows that Airtel overreacted. Although the service provider subsequently corrected the error, worries about arbitrary disruptions remain.

Pranesh Prakash, Programme Manager, Centre for Internet and Society (CIS), who did the first analysis of the resources that were pulled out of the Web, said the list was only partial, because they related only to the URLs that ISPs were asked to block, not what action would have been initiated against those offering Web services.

A ragtag list

Net activists, even those who do not have an absolutist notion of the right to free speech, have expressed deep reservations about the manner in which the government has blocked 310 URLs. Although Mr. Prakash, who is also a lawyer, believes that “temporary curbs” of freedom of expression, in situations such as the unprecedented situation earlier this month may be necessary, he argued that the government acted carelessly and in a kneejerk manner. “It is a ragtag list, prepared in a haphazard manner,” he told The Hindu.

Logically, the rules applicable to hate content ought to be the same whether the offence is in print or whether it appears as online content. Mr. Prakash pointed to the fact that official agencies such as the police have not gone after those responsible for the content posted in the blocked URLs, which shows that the government’s approach is not backed by a resolve to bring to book those responsible for spreading hate.

The ban-first, examine-later approach is wrong for three sets of reasons, argued Mr. Prakash. First, because there are what he characterises as “egregious mistakes”. Second, he doubts whether regulations prescribing due process of enforcing and reviewing the ban were indeed followed. Third, the government ought to have acted smarter, by using the same media to debunk the rumours that were swirling in several Indian cities but also in the northeast. Mr. Prakash pointed to the case of a Canadian intern working at the CIS who received an SMS from a Canadian government agency that asked her not to heed the rumours. Although the Bangalore police did issue an SMS asking people not to heed such rumours, it came well after the rumour mongering had passed its peak.

“I generally believe that the government must exercise utmost caution in censoring,” said Mr. Prakash. He pointed out that in the list were sites and people who had done nothing to promote hate. He refered to the case of Amit Paranjpe, whose twitter handles were blocked. “If you go through his timeline, you will not find anything that is communal at all,” Mr. Prakash says. “I do not think the government acted responsibly by going after material that is not directly inflammatory, or contributes to the state of panic,” he argued. “I do not doubt the motives of the government, because I see that the overwhelming majority of the material it has blocked is stuff that has something to do with communalism or rioting, whether it is as reportage or as material that contributes to tension,” he observed. He also did not think the government used the crisis as an excuse to put down politically dissenting voices, which was what happened last October (critical references to Sonia Gandhi were removed then).

Cyber terror?

Significantly, the list of blocked domains did not match the government’s claim that a lot of the hate content were in the form of images with misleading captions, most of which came from Pakistan. Mr. Prakash pointed out that many of these images had “been floating around” in Pakistan for at least a month before the rumours hit their peak in mid-August. He noted that within Pakistan there had been debates about the authenticity of these images. “In fact, the reportage and the countering of the reportage in the Pakistani media has been much more sophisticated than in India,” he observed. Significantly, the debate was not even targeted at the Indian audience, but to Pakistani or a global audience. “This debunks the notion some sections of the media have propagated, that this is about cyber war or cyber terrorism,” he says. “I have not seen evidence that India has been targeted from Pakistan,” he observed.

Lack of transparency

It has also been done without abiding by the procedures that are clearly laid down. Mr. Prakash pointed out, the provisions of the Information Technology Act require that “persons or intermediaries” blocked ought to have been given an opportunity to explain their position within 48 hours. He doubted that this had been followed. Moreover, he argued that the people or companies hosting the offensive content, not the ISPs, ought to have been asked to remove them. After all, most of the large and popular intermediaries have clearly laid down conditions of usage, he said.

The lack of transparency in the manner in which the government blocked these websites — even if it is accepted that the content was hateful, abhorrent and aimed at stirring social tension — is worrisome because it sets a precedent for unchecked use of power, without proper sanction. Nor was it a smart way of addressing an innovatively virulent way of spreading chaos. While the government’s use of the sledgehammer may have got it out of the immediate crisis it found itself in, it may have fewer friends when faced with a similar outbreak later.

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/news/www-the-hindu-aug-26-v-sridhar-regulating-the-internet-by-fiat

Regulating Social Media: Unrealistic, Impossible, Necessary?

praskrishna — 2013-04-30T16:50:13Z

The Press Council of India Chairperson Justice Markandey Katju calls for regulating social media, saying it will prevent offensive material coming into the public domain. But is it really necessary to regulate the social media? If yes, is it possible to do it?

This was published by NDTV on April 11, 2013.

NDTV aired a discussion by Ashwin S Kumar, Co-editor, Columnist, The Unreal Times; Kunal Majumder, Assitant Editor, Tehelka.com and Pranesh Prakash, Policy Director, Centre for Internet and Society on April 11, 2013 in response to Justice Katju's comments on bringing 'social media' under the Press Council of India.

Pranesh Prakash laid out four brief points:

'Social media' allows coffee house discussion and toilet wall scrawls to seem like print publications, but it's a mistake to treat it the same way we do print publications. The UK is now planning on using prosecutorial flexibility to refrain from prosecuting simple offensive speech on social media.
The same laws should apply online as they do offline (but how the apply, can differ), and that is currently the case. Most content-related offences in the IPC, etc., are offences online as well as offline.
Editors and journalists exist for most print publications and broadcast programmes, while that isn't true for most 'social media'. So guidelines applicable to the press mostly won't be applicable online.
Electronic publications (like Medianama, The Daily Dish, Huffington Post) which consider themselves engaged in a journalistic venture present a special problem that we do need to have a public conversation about.

Video

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/news/ndtv-video-april-11-2013-the-social-network-regulating-social-media-unrealistic-impossible-necessary

Registration under FCRA

praskrishna — 2014-07-10T05:51:37Z

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/registration-under-fcra.pdf

Regional Open Data Agenda-Setting Workshop 2015

praskrishna — 2015-02-07T10:14:12Z

Open Data Lab Jakarta Web Foundation hosted this workshop from February 4 to 6, 2015. Sunil Abraham was a speaker.

Priorities, opportunities and challenges for securing developmental outcomes from (open) data driven approaches vary across continents. It is important for the agenda for research and development in each region to be set, owned and driven from within that region. We are therefore convening a meeting of 1520 regional stakeholders with either strong open data, T/A and/or sectoral expertise.

Through an Outcome Mapping approach, the workshop will identify key issues to be addressed, and changes sought, both at a highlevel of creating solid foundations for open data impacts in the region, and at a practical level in particular sectors and countries. The workshop will emphasise the importance of an inclusive agenda for open data, and on ensuring the distribution of benefits from open data is equitable, and prodevelopment. It will also contribute to one of the Project’s overall goals of building towards the strengthening of a network of selfsustaining and southernowned organizations working on open data research and development, supported and coordinated by the Web Foundation’s Open Data Labs under the Open Data for Development Network.

The Regional Agenda Setting Workshop is conducted as part of the IDRC funded Harnessing Open Data to Achieve Development Results in Africa and Asia project and organized by the Web Foundation’s Open Data Lab Jakarta.

Objectives

Refine the selection of sectors to engage in and key issues to be addressed for creating solid foundations for open data impacts in the region, and at a practical level in particular sectors and countries.
Shape the design of CfPs, including sectors, countries and specific challenges, for a) sectoral scoping studies and b) labs action research projects to be conducted throughout the duration of the Project.
Build and foster relationships with strategic partners to expand and strengthen the network of organizations working on open data in the region4) Ensure that the agenda for open data research and development in each region is set, owned and driven from within that region.
Engage with stakeholders to act as mentors and advisors in the development and implementation of studies and action research projects conducted by partners with the support of the Jakarta Lab.

The outcomes of these workshops will also be fed into the Open Government Partnership Open Data Working Group, and where appropriate we will broker support for emerging leaders from Africa and Asia to engage in global open data conversations and action.

See more on the Open Data Labs website.

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/openness/news/region-open-data-workshop-2015

Region as Frame: Politics, Presence, Practice

praskrishna — 2014-09-09T09:26:50Z

IAMCR's 2014 conference will take place in Hyderabad, India from 15-19 July. The conference theme is Region as Frame: Politics, Presence, Practice. The event is organized by International Association for Media and Communication Research.

Sunil Abraham is a speaker in the following panels:

Governing Digital Spaces: Issues of Access, Privacy and Freedom (Friday, July 18, 2014, 11.00 - 12.30)
UNESCO panel debate (Friday, July 18, 2014, 12.30 - 14.00)
Special Session on Research Paths In and Outside of the Academy (Friday, July 18, 2014, 14.00 - 15.30)

Click to download the brochure of the event here (PDF 7.33 Mb)

Video

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/news/region-as-frame-politics-presence-practice

Region

praskrishna — 2018-07-16T14:23:00Z

Region

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/home-images/Region.png

Redirected to DEITY for Response to RTI

praskrishna — 2013-07-15T05:04:30Z

Ministry of Home Affairs redirected to the Department of Electronics and Communication Information to respond to the RTI filed by CIS regarding information on the officials and agencies authorized to intercept telephone messages in India.

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/redirected-to-deity.pdf

Recruitment Tracker: 21 students placed out of the 49 who sat for recruitment in Christ University’s School of Law, Class of 2012

praskrishna — 2012-06-18T08:45:53Z

The Class of 2012 at the School of Law, Christ University saw 21 students placed out of the 49 who sat for recruitment. The graduating class has a batch strength of 77 students. The batch saw 8 pre-placement offers, 4 students being accepted for LLM’s abroad and 3 students opting for litigation while 1 student opted to appear for the civil services examination.

Published by the Bar & Bench News Network on June 11, 2012

Pangea 3 was the biggest recruiter, bagging four students while Nishith Desai Associates, Murli & Co., Clutch Group and Prudent Insurance Brokers Private Limited hiring two students each. J. Sagar Associates, Linklegal, PXV Law Partners, BMR Advisors and Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Corporation picked up one student each.

The Centre for Internet and Society, human-rights organisation Justice and Care, Teach for India and the Freeland Wildlife Trust hired one student each. Out of the four students who have opted for a Masters programme, two will be going to the National University of Singapore and one each to Cornell University and George Washington University.

At the time of publication, the recruitment process for one student was currently under progress at J. Sagar Associates.

Name of the Company / Firm	Number of Students Recruited
Pangea3	4
Nishith Desai & Associates	2
Murli & Co.	2
Prudent Insurance Brokers	2
Clutch Group	2
BMR Advisors	1
J Sagar Associates	1
Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Corporation	1
PXV Law Partners	1
Link Legal	1
Freeland Wildlife Trust	1
Centre for Internet & Society	1
Justice and Care	1
Teach for India	1
TOTAL	21

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/news/recruitment-tracker-21-students-placed